Archiv der Kategorie: ESG

Climate investment research picture of storm and sun by Marlene Bitzer from Pixabay

Climate investment research: Researchpost #121

Climate investment research: 11x new research on digital productivity, crimes, ESG fees, green home bias, disclosure, infrastructure, brown news, ECB impact, shareholder engagement, and public-private deals

Social and ecological research

Digital productivity limits: Digitalisation and productivity: gamechanger or sideshow? by Robert Anderton, Vasco Botelho, Paul Reimers as of March 9th, 2023 (#26): „We use a large balance sheet panel dataset comprising more than 19 million European firm-level observations … the firm that exhibits on average a higher share of investment in digital technologies will exhibit a faster rate of TFP (Soe: total factor productivity) growth … Digitalisation does not seem to have relatively stronger impacts on the productivity of frontier firms compared to laggards, nor does it help to turn laggards into frontier firms. … Digital technologies … seem more like a sideshow for most firms, who attempt to be increasingly digital but are not able to adequately reap its productivity gains” (abstract).

Pollution leads to crimes: Symptom or Culprit? Social Media, Air Pollution, and Violence by Xinming Du as of March 9th, 2023 (#6): „… Together with higher air pollution, I find more aggressive behaviors both online and offline, as well as worse health outcomes near refineries. A one standard deviation increase in surrounding VOCs (Sö: volatile organic compounds) leads to 0.16 more hate crimes against Black people and 0.23 more hospital visits per thousand people each day. … On days with pollution spikes, surrounding areas see 30% more offensive and racist tweets and 12% more crimes; those geographically distant but socially networked regions also see offensive and racist tweets increase by 3% and more crimes by 4.5% …” (abstract).

Responsible and climate investment research

Higher ESG fees: Capitalists or fiduciary conscious agents? ESG mutual fund fees and investor sophistication by Wei Wei and Anna (Ania) Zalewska as of March 16th, 2023 (#19): “We use a sample of 2,055 U.S. equity mutual funds … and find that fund families do exploit retail ESG investor’s low performance sensitivity when setting fees of ESG funds. In contrast, we find no evidence of such practices in the sample of institutional funds. Moreover, we find that the exploitative fee setting practices observed in the retail sample are driven by marketing fees and not by operating fees“ (abstract).

Advert for German investors: “Sponsor” my research by investing in and/or recommending my article 9 mutual fund. The fund focuses on social SDGs and midcaps, uses separate E, S and G best-in-universe minimum ratings and broad shareholder engagement. The fund typically scores very well in sustainability rankings, e.g. see this free new tool, and the performance is relatively good: FutureVest Equity Sustainable Development Goals R – DE000A2P37T6 – A2P37T, see also Artikel 9 Fonds: Kleine Änderungen mit großen Wirkungen? – (prof-soehnholz.com)

… continue on page 2 (# indicates the number of SSRN downloads on March 16th, 2023):

Molehills as picture for green cover investments

Green cover investments: Researchpost #120

Green cover investments: 10x new research on carbon offset accounting, green cover and fading green investments, greenium, divestment criticism, SDG benchmarks, and real estate inflation risk

Ecological research

Offset-Accounting: Accounting for carbon offsets – Establishing the foundation for carbon-trading markets by Robert S. Kaplan, Karthik Ramanna, and Marc Roston as of Feb. 28th, 2023 (#198): “Tackling climate change requires not only reducing GHG emissions but also removing GHG from the atmosphere. … But existing carbon-offset markets have been criticized for poor measurement practices and inadequate controls, resulting in transaction of products that do not materially sequester carbon. … we apply basic financial-accounting principles to develop an accurate and auditable framework for offset accounting. … rigorous accounting for emissions and offsets can improve and expand markets for impactful decarbonization” (abstract).

Responsible investment research: Green cover investments

Green cover investments? Do Investors Compensate for Unsustainable Consumption Using Sustainable Assets? by Emily Kormanyos as of Feb. 28th, 2023 (#61): “… high-footprint consumers seem to understand the environmental impacts of their consumption patterns, and aim to offset them by investing specifically in securities which have extremely low-emission profiles. I present additional evidence that investors use only these specific securities to offset their carbon-based emissions, whereas portfolios with high general ESG ratings do not exhibit such a relation to unsustainable consumption. … I show that Catholicism, historically tied to financial offsetting practices through the 15th and 16th-century letters of indulgence, is significantly and positively related to the sustainability profile of retail investor portfolios … Finally, I conduct a survey with 3,646 clients of the same bank that provided the administrative data analyzed in this paper, finding that the majority of investors underestimate their own carbon footprints from consumption. This underestimation increases systematically in the size of the survey participants’ real footprints …”  (p. 45/56).

Advert for German investors: “Sponsor” my research by investing in and/or recommending my article 9 mutual fund. The fund focuses on social SDGs and midcaps, uses separate E, S and G best-in-universe minimum ratings and broad shareholder engagement. The fund typically scores very well in sustainability rankings, e.g. see this free new tool, and the performance is relatively good: FutureVest Equity Sustainable Development Goals R – DE000A2P37T6 – A2P37T, see also Artikel 9 Fonds: Kleine Änderungen mit großen Wirkungen? – (prof-soehnholz.com)

… continue on page 2 (# indicates the number of SSRN downloads on March 13th, 2023):

Artikel 9 Fonds Bild eines Schmetterlings von Titus Staunton von Pixabay

Artikel 9 Fonds: Kleine Änderungen mit großen Wirkungen?

>50% Turnover aus unterschiedlichen Gründen

Mein Artikel 9 Fonds „FutureVest Equities Sustainable Development Goals R“ enthält nur die aus meiner Sicht nachhaltigsten 30 Aktien. Ich prüfe laufend, ob meine Nachhaltigkeitsanforderungen noch erfüllt werden. Im Jahr 2022 führte das zum Austausch von fünf Aktien. Einmal pro Jahr überprüfe ich, ob es auf Basis der gleichen Regeln noch nachhaltigere Aktien gibt. Das war Ende 2022 bei weiteren fünf Aktien der Fall. Drei weitere Unternehmen wurden aus dem Fonds eliminiert, weil sie Verluste über 50% erlitten und damit mein einziges „nicht-nachhaltiges“ Aktienauswahlkriterium verletzen.

Einmal pro Jahr prüfe ich zudem, ob ich meine Nachhaltigkeitsregeln weiter verschärfen kann. 2023 werden so nicht nur Unternehmen mit grausamen und kosmetischen Tierversuchen wie schon in den Vorjahren, sondern mit allen Arten von Tierversuchen ausgeschlossen. Ab Ende 2022 werden außerdem auch Aktivitäten mit genetisch manipulierten Organismen (GMO) komplett ausgeschlossen. Diese Regeländerungen führten zum Ausschluss weiterer 3 Unternehmen aus dem Portfolio.

Artikel 9 Fonds mit Midcapfokus und fast 100% Active Share

Letztes hat zum Ausschluss der meisten Pharmaunternehmen aus dem Fonds geführt. Diese Regeländerung war wohl auch ausschlaggebend für einige Kennzahlenveränderungen, die sich abgeleitet aus den Änderungen der Nachhaltigkeitsregeln ergeben.

So ist der Anteil an Gesundheitsaktien von 65% im Jahr 2022 auf 39% in 2023 gesunken. Im Gegenzug ist der Industrieanteil von 12% auf 31% gestiegen. Andere Branchen hatten 2022 einen Anteil von 23% und 2023 von 30%. Zum Vergleich: Der MSCI All Countries World Index hat aktuell ungefähr jeweils 11 bis 12% Industrie- und Gesundheitsanteile. Ich unterscheide aktuell die folgenden Gesundheitssegmente: Absicherung, Einrichtungen, Forschung, Geräte, Services, Technologie und Immobilien. Aus jedem dieser Segmente darf nur ein aus den USA zwei Unternehmen pro Land im Portfolio vertreten sein. Weil viele dieser Marktsegmente wenig international sind, sollte der Wettbewerb der Portfoliobestandteile untereinander relativ gering sein.

Ungewöhnlich ist auch die Fondsallokation zu verschiedenen Unternehmensgrößen, die 2023 0% (10% 2022) zu Megacaps, 19% (31%) zu Largecaps, 44% (33%) zu Midcaps, 29% (26%) zu Smallcaps und 7% (0%) zu Microcaps betrug.  Sie lag im Schnitt bei nur 7 Milliarden Euro (12 Mrd. Euro in 2022), bei der Vergleichsgruppe bei 34 Milliarden Euro und beim MSCI All Countries World Index bei 90 Milliarden Euro.

Insgesamt ist der Anteil amerikanischer Aktien im Fonds von 2022 auf 2023 von 41% auf 57% gestiegen. Dafür ist der Eurolandanteil von 23% auf nur noch 6% gesunken. Australien mit 13% (vorher 16%) und sonstige mit 24% (vorher 20%) sind dagegen weitgehen gleich allokiert. In Relation zu globalen aktiven Fonds mit flexiblen Kapitalisierungsanforderungen (Morningstar Peerproup) und dem Vergleichsindex ist die US-Allokation typisch, während die Australien- und die Eurolandallokationen ungewöhnlich sind.

Morningstar beziffert die sogenannte „Active share“ des Fonds, mit der Abweichungen vom Vergleichsindex gemessen wird auf fast 100%.

Artikel 9 Fonds mit Fokus auf Sozial-SDGs

Eines meiner wichtigsten Selektionskriterien ist SDG-Alignment. Nur etwa 10% der ungefähr 500 Aktien, die alle meine sonstigen Nachhaltigkeitsanforderungen erfüllen, sind aus meiner Sicht gut mit den SDG vereinbar. Das gilt vor allem für sogenannte Pure Plays, also auf ein Marktsegment fokussierte Unternehmen. Diesen ordne ich jeweils ein primäres SDG-Ziel zu. Im Oktober 2022 habe ich 18 Unternehmen dem Gesundheitsziel zugerechnet, 6 dem Infrastruktur-SDG und 6 weitere den SDGs nachhaltige Energie (3), Wasser (2) und menschenwürdige Arbeit (1). Im Februar 2023 ordne ich 12 Aktien dem Gesundheits-SDG, 5 menschenwürdiger Arbeit, 4 Infrastruktur, 3 Energieversorgung, und je 2 Industrie, nachhaltigen Städten und Wasser zu.  Infrastruktur umfasst Eisenbahn- und Telekommunikation und nachhaltige Städte öffentlichen Transport. Beide SDG sind damit sowohl ökologisch als auch sozial ausgerichtet. Insgesamt überwiegen in beiden Jahren damit die Sozial gegenüber den ökologischen Zielen.

Noch mehr Satellite-Charakter

Die Kennzahlenveränderungen sind Folgewirkungen der Verschärfung der Nachhaltigkeitsregeln und nicht aktiv gesteuert. Die Reduktion des Anteils des Gesundheitssektors finde ich aus Diversifikationsgründen positiv. Allerdings wird sie durch die Morningstaranalyse aus meiner Sicht überzeichnet, weil einige der Technologie- und sonstigen Aktien des aktuellen Portfolios durchaus dem Gesundheitssektor zurechnet werden können.

Auch die Kapitalisierungsreduktion ist positiv, weil sie die Überlappung meines Fonds mit anderen Core-Fonds und vielen anderen Nachhaltigkeitsfonds reduziert. Insgesamt ist mein Fonds so zu einem noch attraktiveren Ergänzung für viele Anlegerportfolios geworden ist, ohne dass der Charakter als Midcaporientierter Fonds mit Sozialfokus sich geändert hat.

Defensive Performance des Artikel 9 Fonds

Obwohl der Artikel 9 Fonds mit nur 30 Aktien und einem hohen Gesundheitsanteil wenig diversifiziert erscheint, hat er gut und vor allem defensiv performt. In den guten Aktienmarktphasen zu Ende 2022 und zu Anfang 2023 brachte der Fonds nur geringere Renditen als der allgemeine Aktienmarkt. Dafür hat er in 2022 mit -8,6% relativ gesehen sehr gut rentiert.  Damit liegt er wie schon sein Modellportfoliovorläufer mit dem Startjahr 2017 (Global Equities ESG SDG Portfolio, vgl. www.soehnholzesg.com) bei der Rendite auf dem Niveau des breiten Aktienmarktes bei erheblich geringerem Risiko.

Quellen: Länderallokation Monega, alle anderen Allokationen von Morningstar von Oktober 2022 und Ende Januar 2023

Weiterführende Links: www.futurevest.fund inklusive Nachhaltigkeitsdetails und aktuell Artikel 9 Fonds: Sind 50% Turnover ok? – Responsible Investment Research Blog (prof-soehnholz.com) sowie Shareholder engagement: 21 science based theses and an action plan – (prof-soehnholz.com)

Disclaimer

Diese Unterlage ist von Soehnholz Asset Management GmbH erstellt worden. Die Erstellerin übernimmt keine Gewähr für die Richtigkeit, Vollständigkeit und/oder Aktualität der zur Verfügung gestellten Inhalte. Die Informationen unterliegen deutschem Recht und richten sich ausschließlich an Investoren, die ihren Wohnsitz in Deutschland haben. Sie sind nicht als Verkaufsangebot oder Aufforderung zur Abgabe eines Kauf- oder Zeichnungsangebots für Anteile des in dieser Unterlage dargestellten Fonds zu verstehen und ersetzen nicht eine anleger- und anlagegerechte Beratung. Anlageentscheidungen sollten nur auf der Grundlage der aktuellen gesetzlichen Verkaufsunterlagen (Wesentliche Anlegerinformationen, Verkaufsprospekt und – sofern verfügbar – Jahres- und Halbjahresbericht) getroffen werden, die auch die allein maßgeblichen Anlagebedingungen enthalten. Die Verkaufsunterlagen werden bei der Kapitalverwaltungsgesellschaft (Monega Kapitalanlagegesellschaft mbH), der Verwahrstelle (Kreissparkasse Köln) und den Vertriebspartnern zur kostenlosen Ausgabe bereitgehalten. Die Verkaufsunterlagen sind zudem im Internet unter www.monega.de erhältlich. Die in dieser Unterlage zur Verfügung gestellten Inhalte dienen lediglich der allgemeinen Information und stellen keine Beratung oder sonstige Empfehlung dar. Die Kapitalanlage ist stets mit Risiken verbunden und kann zum Verlust des eingesetzten Kapitals führen. Vor einer etwaigen Anlageentscheidung sollten Sie eingehend prüfen, ob die Anlage für Ihre individuelle Situation und Ihre persönlichen Ziele geeignet ist. Diese Unterlage enthält ggf. Informationen, die aus öffentlichen Quellen stammen, die die Erstellerin für verlässlich hält. Die Erstellerin übernimmt keine Gewähr oder Garantie für die Richtigkeit und/oder Vollständigkeit dieser Informationen. Die dargestellten Inhalte, insbesondere die Darstellung von Strategien sowie deren Chancen und Risiken, können sich im Zeitverlauf ändern. Einschätzungen und Bewertungen reflektieren die Meinung der Erstellerin zum Zeitpunkt der Erstellung und können sich jederzeit ändern. Es ist nicht beabsichtigt, diese Unterlage laufend oder überhaupt zu aktualisieren. Sie stellt nur eine unverbindliche Momentaufnahme dar.

Nachhaltige ETF-Portfolios

Nachhaltige ETF-Portfolios seit 2015: Vor- und Nachteile

Nachhaltige ETF-Portfolios: Ich der ESG ETF Portfoliopionier. Und immer wieder werde ich gefragt, warum ich so kritisch in Bezug auf nachhaltige ETFs bin. Hier sind meine wichtigsten Argumente:

ETF-Vorteile

+ ETFs sind regelbasiert und transparent

+ ETS sind günstig

+ Es werden immer mehr und nachhaltigere ETFs angeboten

+ Viele Vermittler und Vermögensverwalter mögen ETF

ETF-Nachteile

– ETFs sind meist an kapitalgewichteten Indizes orientiert und enthalten deshalb oft auch wenig-nachhaltige Branchen und Länder

– ETFs sind meist stark diversifiziert und enthalten deshalb in der Regel auch Wertpapiere von wenig nachhaltigen Emittenten

– Nachhaltige ETFs nutzen oft nur unvollständige Ausschlusskriterien und ESG-Selektionsregeln wie Best-in-Class statt Best-in-Universe und aggregierte statt separate ESG-Ratings

Ziel meiner ETF-Portfolios ist es, die Vorteile zu nutzen und die Nachteile so gut wie möglich zu reduzieren. Dazu biete ich Core und Satellite-Portfolios an, allerdings nur B2B, also für Vermögenverwalter und Vermittler.

ESG ETF Core Portfolios (Nachhaltige ETF-Portfolios)

  • Start Ende 2015 als ESG ETF-Portfolio
  • Konzeptionell möglichst nachhaltige ETFs: Start mit Socially Responsible Investment (SRI) ETFs und heute SRI PAB (Paris Aligned Benchmark) und andere, die anhand von separaten E, S und G Best-in-Universe Ratings selektiert werden
  • Angebot von Multi-Asset-, Aktien-, Anleihen-, Income- und risikogesteuerte ETF-Portfolios

SDG ETF Satellite Portfolios (Nachhaltige ETF-Portfolios)

  • Start 2019 als ETF-Portfolio mit Themen-ETFs, die möglichst im Einklang mit den nachhaltigen Entwicklungszielen der Vereinten Nationen (SDG) stehen wie erneuerbare Energien, Gesundheit, nachhaltige Ernährung und Infrastruktur
  • Keine ETFs mit mehr als 5% Allokationen zu unerwünschten Ländern wie China
  • ETF-Selektion mit separaten E, S und G Best-in-Universe sowie SDG-Ratings
  • Fokus auf ETFs aus kleinen und mittelgroßen Unternehmen, damit Überschneidungen mit Core-Portfolios möglichst vermieden werden
  • Angebot einer risikogesteuerten Variante

Core- und Satellite Portfolio-Vergleich

Das Multi-Asset Core-Portfolio enthält aktuell 6 ETFs von 5 Anbietern mit >3.000 Wertpapieren und kostet 0,21% p.a.. Das Satellite-Portfolio beinhaltet 9 ETFs von 5 Anbietern mit >1.000 Aktien zu Kosten von 0,42% p.a.. Damit sind die Portfolios stark risikogestreut und relativ günstig. Und die Performance war bisher typischerweise besser als die von traditionellen aktiv gemanagten Fonds und ähnlich wie die von traditionellen ETF-Portfolios. So spricht nur noch wenig für traditionelle ETF-Portfolios.

Nachhaltige ETF-Portfolios: Fazit

Mit direkten (Aktien-)Portfolios ist mehr mehr Nachhaltigkeit als mit ETFs möglich. Nach meiner eigenen Nachhaltigkeitsbewertung haben die Core-Portfolios einen Nachhaltigkeitsscore von 50% und die Satellite-Portfolios einen von 75% während direkte Aktienportfolios 100% erreichen können. Aber für alle Fans von diversifizieren Portfolios sind solche strengstmöglich nachhaltigen ETF-Portfolios sehr attraktiv. Meine Geschäftspartner und ihre privaten und Stiftungskunden scheinen jedenfalls zufrieden zu sein.

Weiterführende Informationen

Portfolioregeln, Hintergründe, Nachhaltigkeitspolitik etc: Das-Soehnholz-ESG-und-SDG-Portfoliobuch.pdf (soehnholzesg.com) und zum Beispiel Artikel 9 ETF-Portfolios bzw. PAB ETF-Portfolios sind attraktiv – Responsible Investment Research Blog (prof-soehnholz.com)

Performances: Soehnholz ESG (und „Historische Zeitreihen der Portfolios, ebenda) und letzter Blogpost dazu Soehnholz ESG 2021: Passive Allokationsportfolios und Deutsche ESG Aktien besonders gut – Responsible Investment Research Blog (prof-soehnholz.com)

Voting picture by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

ESG voting, climate WTP and more new research: Posting #119

ESG voting: 14x new research on corporate ESG nudges, 3x WTP for climate, ESG strategies, green bonds, greenwashing, ESG ratings, climate stress tests, bad award effects, mental accounting and PE issues

Social and ecological research: ESG voting

Corporate ESG nudges: Not Only for the Money: Nudging SMEs to Promote Environmental Sustainability by Manuel Grieder, Deborah Kistler, Felix Schlüter, and Jan Schmitz as of Feb. 9th, 2023 (#36): “This paper reports the results of a field experiment in Switzerland investigating behavioral economic interventions for promoting an environmental consulting program to SMEs. … The results indicate that loss frames are not more effective than gain frames. Unlike suggested by previous approaches, appealing to the environmental benefits of sustainability measures is just as effective as underlining the financial benefits for the SMEs. Evidence from two surveys with SME decision makers corroborates this latter result: SMEs indicate that personal motivations of owners or managers and long-term environmental impact—rather than potential financial benefits—are the most important factors determining whether they are willing to implement additional environmental sustainability measures” (abstract).

Some WTP: Willingness to Pay for Clean Air: Evidence from the UK Prepared by Giorgio Maarraoui, Walid Marrouch, Faten Saliba and Ada Wossink as of Feb. 23rd, 2023 (#10): “Our results show that 1 percent higher levels of NO2, PM10 and PM2.5 significantly decrease the odds of the log of happiness by 9, 9.5 and 10.7 percent respectively … Evaluated at the mean income level, households are willing to pay £62.5, £60 and £103 per month to abate 1 mikrogram/cubic meter of these pollutants respectively and remain equally happy, with urban dwellers paying less than this amount and highly educated individuals paying more than that (except for PM2.5)” … Our results show that 1 percent higher levels of NO2, PM10 and PM2.5 significantly decrease the odds of the log of happiness by 9, 9.5 and 10.7 percent respectively” (p. 24/25).

Advert for German investors: “Sponsor” my research by investing in and/or recommending my article 9 mutual fund. The fund focuses on social SDGs and midcaps, uses separate E, S and G best-in-universe minimum ratings and broad shareholder engagement. The fund typically scores very well in sustainability rankings, e.g. see this free new tool, and the performance is relatively good: FutureVest Equity Sustainable Development Goals R – DE000A2P37T6 – A2P37T, also see Artikel 9 Fonds: Sind 50% Turnover ok? – Responsible Investment Research Blog (prof-soehnholz.com)

… continue on page 2 (# indicates the number of SSRN downloads on March 2nd, 2023):

Critical ESG illustration with stethoscope on money picture by Gerd Altmann from Pixabay

Critical ESG and more: Researchposting 118

Critical ESG: 11x new research on tax avoidance, ESG deficits, corporate governance, green monetary policy, climate transition investing, shareholder engagement, inequality, factor investments, listed real estate, and ChatGPT by Alex Edmans, David Larcker, Martin Hoesli et al.

Unsocial multinationals: Global profit shifting, 1975–2019 by Ludvig Wier and Gabriel Zucman as of Nov. 29th, 2022 (#11): “This paper constructs time series of global profit shifting covering the 2015–19 period, during which major international efforts were implemented to curb profit shifting. We find that (i) multinational profits grew faster than global profits, (ii) the share of multinational profits booked in tax havens remained constant at around 37 per cent, and (iii) the fraction of global corporate tax revenue lost due to profit shifting rose from 9 to 10 per cent. We extend our time series back to 1975 and document a remarkable increase of multinational profits and global profit shifting from 1975 to 2019”. My comment: To strenghten communities (stakeholders), the reduction of profit shifting should be an attractive topic for shareholder ESG engagement

ESG investment research: Critical ESG

10 critical ESG theses: Applying Economics – Not Gut Feel – To ESG by Alex Edmans as of Feb. 21st, 2023 (#2754): “I identify how conventional thinking on ten key ESG issues is overturned when applying the insights of mainstream economics” (abstract): “1. Shareholder Value is Short-Termist (No, shareholder value is a long-term concept). 2. Shareholder Primacy Leads to an Exclusive Focus on Shareholder Value (No, shareholders have objectives other than shareholder value). 3. Sustainability Risks Increase the Cost of Capital (No, sustainability risks lower expected cash flows). 4. Sustainable Stocks Earn Higher Returns (No, sustainability may be priced in; tastes for sustainable stocks lead to lower returns). 5. Climate Risk is Investment Risk (No, climate risk is an unpriced externality). 6. A Company’s ESG Metrics Capture Its Impact on Society (No, partial equilibrium differs from general equilibrium). 7. More ESG Is Always Better (No, ESG exhibits diminishing returns and trade-offs exist). 8. More Investor Engagement Is Always Better (No, investors may be uninformed or undermine managerial initiative). 9. You Improve ESG Performance By Paying For ESG Performance (No, paying for some ESG dimensions will cause firms to underweight others). 10. Market Failures Justify Regulatory Intervention (No, regulatory intervention is only justified when market failure exceeds regulatory failure)“ (p. 4). My comment: I don’t detect any contradictions regarding my approach to invest as sustainable as possible considering exclusions, ESG and SDG factors and engagement, see e.g. Artikel 9 Fonds: Sind 50% Turnover ok? – Responsible Investment Research Blog (prof-soehnholz.com)

Advert for German investors: “Sponsor” my research by investing in and/or recommending my article 9 mutual fund. The fund focuses on social SDGs and midcaps, uses separate E, S and G best-in-universe minimum ratings and broad shareholder engagement. The fund typically scores very well in sustainability rankings, e.g. see this free new tool, and the performance is relatively good: FutureVest Equity Sustainable Development Goals R – DE000A2P37T6 – A2P37T

… continue on page 2 (# indicates the number of SSRN downloads on February 23rd, 2023):

Greenium research: Picture from Pixabay shows forest with sun in the background

Greenium research and more: Researchposting 117

Greenium research: 25x new research on green subsidies, nature investing, populism, financial crime, ESG regulation, climate agreements, ESG scandals, transition, institutional investors, greenium, CDS, green loans, voting, multi-assets, gold, commodities, real estate, and private equity

Social and ecological research

Good green subsidies? Environmental Subsidies to Mitigate Net-Zero Transition Costs by Eric Jondeau, Gregory Levieuge, Jean-Guillaume Sahuc, and Gauthier Vermandel as of Jan. 13th, 2023 (#298): “The implementation of a pure carbon tax policy to reduce CO2 emissions would result in substantial GDP losses because firms would divert resources to invest in environmental goods and services that are provided by an immature and low-competition sector. Mitigating the induced recession is possible through a massive subsidization of EGSS (Environmental Goods and Services Sector). By reducing labor costs for both entrants and incumbents operating in this sector, such a policy would accelerate its development and offer a large reduction in the selling price of abatement technologies. … Eventually, the GDP loss would be reduced from $266 trillion between 2019 and 2060 to $145 trillion. Importantly, reducing entry costs in EGSS would accelerate the transition and reduce the GDP loss mainly at the beginning of the transition” (p. 41/42).

More public spending? Nature as an asset class or public good? The economic case for increased public investment to achieve biodiversity targets by Katie Kedward, Sophus zu Ermgassen, Josh Ryan-Collins, and Sven Wunder as of Dec. 28th, 2022 (#671): “Financial instruments for attracting large-scale private finance into conservation often incur high transaction costs to ensure ecological effectiveness, which potentially conflict with institutional investors’ need for competitive returns, market efficiency, and investment scalability. … Strategies to mobilize investor involvement by using public funds to ‘de-risk’ nature investments may not be as promising as assumed, given the costly exercise required to render nature markets conventionally ‘investible’. … Public financing is often more suitable to incentivize the imminent bundled nature of ecosystem services provided” (abstract).

Money crimes (1): Financial Crime: A Literature Review by Monica Violeta Achim, Sorin Nicolae Borlea, Robert W. McGee, Gabriela-Mihaela Mureşan, Ioana Lavinia Safta (Plesa) and Viorela-Ligia Văidean as of Dec. 19th, 2022 (#52): “This chapter reviews the literature on some of the subfields of economic and financial crime. Among the topics discussed are tax evasion, bribery, money laundering and corruption in general. The determinants of financial crime are also identified. Several demographic variables are also examined to determine whether gender, age, education, income level, religion, geographic region, size of city, etc., are statistically significant. Nearly 150 studies are mentioned“.

Money crimes (2): Financial Crime: Conclusions and Recommendations by Monica Violeta Achim, Sorin Nicolae Borlea, Mihai Gaicu, Robert W. McGee, Gabriela-Mihaela Mureşan, and Viorela-Ligia Văidean as of Dec. 21st, 2022 (#14): “This chapter discusses the conclusions and recommendations resulting from the study. A series of infographs is included to summaries the results of the study …” (abstract).

Complex ESG compliance: EU Sustainable Finance: Complex Rules and Compliance Problems by Félix E. Mezzanotte as of Feb. 12th, 2023 (#100): “Complexity is first identified in MiFID II rules covering the legal definition of sustainability preferences and the suitability requirements applicable to asset managers and investment advisors. … complex rules have been found to promote noncompliance. The underlying rationale, supported by this article, is that complex rules amplify the compliance burdens faced by companies” (p. 2).

Advert for German investors: “Sponsor” my research by investing in and/or recommending my article 9 mutual fund. I focus on social SDGs and midcaps, use separate E, S and G best-in-universe minimum ratings and shareholder engagement. The fund typically scores very well in sustainability rankings, e.g. see this free new tool, and the performance is relatively good: FutureVest Equity Sustainable Development Goals R – DE000A2P37T6 – A2P37T

… continues on page 2 (# indicates the number of SSRN downloads on February 13th, 2023):

My engagementfocus with 3 topics

Shareholder engagement: 21 science based theses and an action plan

Preliminary remarks and shareholder engagement definition

Note: This shareholder engagement concept builds in part on analyses that I developed together with colleagues from the German Association for Financial Analysis and Asset Management (DVFA) as part of the Impact Expert Committee. It has been originally published on Feb. 8th and the chapter „engagement content“ has been expanded on Feb. 22nd, 2023).

My shareholder engagement definition: One or more investors (i.e. explicitly excluding non-investors such as media) seek to directly influence companies (i.e. excluding engagement with states and other organizations and excluding lobbying or other audiences). Voting at shareholder meetings (voting) may or may not be part of engagement. Engagement is typically not as comprehensive or long-term as trusteeship[1].

My engagement focus is sustainability, i.e. environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues. In the following, I list my engagement theses. I then describe my engagement policy and activities derived from them.

Advert for German investors: “Sponsor” my research by investing in and/or recommending my article 9 mutual fund. I focus on social SDGs and midcaps and use separate E, S and G best-in-universe minimum ratings. The fund typically scores very well in sustainability rankings, e.g. see this free new tool, and the performance is relatively good: FutureVest Equity Sustainable Development Goals R – DE000A2P37T6 – A2P37T

… continues on page 2:

Woodpecker as picture for beyond ESG research, picture by pixabay

Beyond ESG: Researchposting 116

Beyond ESG: 21x new research on bioenergy, CSR, carbon policy, greenium, ESG ratings, ecolabel, greentech, transition, fiduciaries, impact, activism, insiders, 1/n, SPACs, private equity and female founders by Timo Busch, Andreas Hoepner and many more

Social and ecological research

High bio-emissions: Emissions of Wood Pelletization and Solid Bioenergy Use in the United States by Huy Tran, Edie Juno, and Saravanan Arunachalam as of Dec. 27th, 2022 (#6): “… we find that this sector’s emissions could be potentially underestimated by a factor of two. Emissions from biomass-based facilities are on an average up to 2.8 times higher than their non-biomass counterpart per unit energy. Up to 2.3 million people live within 2km of a biomass facility, and who could be subject to adverse health impacts from their emissions. Overall, bioenergy sector contributes to about 3 – 17% of total emissions from all energy, i.e., electric and non-electric generating facilities in the U.S. In comparison to residential wood combustion, bioenergy sector emissions are lower in VOC, CO, NH3, and directly emitted PM2.5, but higher in NOX and SO2. We also review some drivers of bioenergy expansion, various feedstocks and technologies deployed with an emphasis on wood-based bioenergy and discuss their implications for future air quality and health impacts” (abstract).

Research overview: The Past and Future of Corporate Sustainability Research by Vanessa Burbano, Magali A. Delmas, and Manuel Jesus Cobo as of Oct. 13th, 2022 (#122): “… we present a comprehensive review of the field of corporate sustainability using a science mapping co-word bibliometric analysis. Through analysis of the co-occurrence of 25,701 keywords in 11,962 sustainability-related articles from 1994-2021, we identify and graphically illustrate the thematic and theoretical evolution of the field, in addition to emerging and waning research trends in the field. We characterize the most impactful articles of sustainability research in terms of disciplinary focus, topic of focus, dependent variable of focus, unit of analysis, and research method employed” (abstract).

Climate policy works: Carbon Policy Surprises and Stock Returns: Signals from Financial Markets by Martina Hengge, Ugo Panizza, and Richard Varghese as of Feb. 1st, 2023 (#18): “…. the creation of the EU Emissions Trading System (ETS) in 2005. This “cap and trade” scheme places a limit on the right to emit greenhouse gases and allows companies to trade emission allowances. … we show that regulatory surprises that result in an increase in carbon prices have a negative and statistically significant impact on stock returns, which increases with a firm’s carbon intensity. This negative relationship becomes even stronger when we drop firms in sectors which participate in the EU ETS, suggesting that investors price in transition risk stemming from the shift towards a low-carbon economy“ (p. 22).

Advert for German investors: “Sponsor” my research by investing in and/or recommending my article 9 mutual fund. I focus on social SDGs and midcaps and use separate E, S and G best-in-universe minimum ratings. The fund typically scores very well in sustainability rankings, e.g. this free new tool, and the performance is relatively good: FutureVest Equity Sustainable Development Goals R – DE000A2P37T6 – A2P37T

… continues on page 2 (# indicates the number of SSRN downloads on February 5th, 2023):

Several connected employees as picture for employee engagement

Stakeholder engagement and ESG (Special Edition Researchposting 115)

Stakeholder engagement: 18x (new) research on stakeholder engagement, human capital, employee activists, employee ESG surveys, ESG wage gap, CEO pay gap, customer alpha, CEO limits and more research which is important for my shareholder engagement activities (see e.g. my earlier blog posts Engagement test, Impact Investing mit Voting und Engagement? and Wrong ESG bonus math?).

Stakeholder engagement overview

Stakeholder engagement studies: Exploring the antecedents and consequences of firm-stakeholder engagement process: A systematic review of literature by Avinash Pratap Singh and Zillur Rahman as of Oct. 31st, 2022 (#16): “… we pursued the vast body of literature on firm-stakeholder engagement and comprehensively examined over 170 research articles to accumulate precursors and outcomes of SE processes. … We used thematic analysis to provide evidence of the growing interest of academics and managers in firm-stakeholder engagement. The findings of this study suggest that shared benefits with a long-term perspective are valuable to both corporation and its stakeholders”.

Stakeholder engagement options: Stakeholder Engagement by Brett H. McDonnell as of Oct. 31st, 2022 (#88): “We have seen that the present reality of stakeholder engagement is fairly extensive, and sensible as far as it goes. As one would expect, employees are the most engaged group, followed by customers, and then by nonprofits, suppliers, and government regulators. The most used forms of engagement include meetings and surveys. Employee resource groups are near-universally used. Partnerships, social media, and councils are used less frequently, but still somewhat regularly. … And yet, the current reality falls well short of the future possibilities of stakeholder engagement. Current engagement mostly involves companies listening to what stakeholders have to say. It does not empower stakeholders to be more actively involved in corporate decision making” (p. 53/54). My comment: Very helpful paper for practitioners including reference to the AccountAbility Stakeholder Engagement Standard

Advert for German investors: “Sponsor” my research by investing in and/or recommending my article 9 mutual fund. I focus on social SDGs and midcaps and use separate E, S and G best-in-universe minimum ratings. The fund typically scores very well in sustainability rankings, e.g. this free new tool, and the performance is relatively good: FutureVest Equity Sustainable Development Goals R – DE000A2P37T6 – A2P37T

… continues on page 2 (# indicates the number of SSRN downloads on February 2nd, 2023):