Impactkritik: Viel neues Research zu Impact und ESG Investments

Umwelt- und soziale Fundamentals

Das Risiko von Methan wird unterschätzt: Increasing anthropogenic methane emissions arise equally from agricultural and fossil fuel sources von R. B. Jackson et al. aus den Environmental Research Letter vom 15. Juli 2020: „Methane emissions have continued to rise over the past decade and are tracking concentrations most consistent with the warmest marker scenario of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change … that yields an estimated global warming of 4.3 °C by year 2100“. … Increased emissions from both the agriculture and waste sector and the fossil fuel sector are likely the dominant cause of this global increase“. Mein Kommentar: Diversifikator ist meines Wissens einer der ersten Portfolioanbieter, der Rinderprodukte (Beef & Milk) aus diesem Grund aus seinen Portfolios so weit wie möglich ausschließt.

Mehr Information würde zu besserer Luft führen: Open air quality data: The global state of play von OpenAQ vom Juli 2020: „At least 30 governments generate real-time data but don’t yet share them in a fully open manner. Making these existing data more fully open* would affect 4.4 billion people.“

Viele offene Fragen zu Blended Finance: Catalyzing Capital for the Transition toward Decarbonization: Blended Finance and Its Way Forward von Esther Choi und Alicia Seiger von der Stanford Sustainable Finance Initiative vom Frühjahr 2020: Blended finance, a structuring mechanism with potential to mobilize significant capital and investment from diverse actors, has emerged as one promising solution to help economies decarbonize and deliver the goals of the Paris Agreement. … The paper investigates, and draws insights from, three cases: the Global Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Fund (GEEREF), the Climate Public Private Partnership (CP3), and Climate Investor One (CI1). The paper concludes with a proposed research agenda that can assist in enhancing the potential for blended finance” (S. 5).

Technologie gegen oder für Menschenrechte? Analysis Business and Human Rights in the Data Economy – A Mapping and Research Study von Isabel Ebert, Thorsten Busch  und Florian Wettstein vom Deutschen Institut für Menschenrechte und der Universität St. Gallen vom April 2020: “when it comes to upholding the human rights responsibilities of companies in the data economy, it is not enough to hide behind technological black boxes and to merely blame anonymous algorithms every time things go wrong (Angwin 2016). Instead, companies should follow a proactive approach by working with technological solutions while at the same time reflecting upon their potential adverse effects on human rights, using human rights due diligence management practices, and consulting with a wide range of affected stakeholders about the interplay between tech solutions and actual human beings” (S. 27).

Asset Allocation und Stockpicking generell

Gute Performance mit wenig Verantwortung: The Yale Endowment 2019 Mein Kommentar: Sehr gute Performance und künftig weniger Hedgefonds- aber noch mehr illiquide Investments, aber ich finde nichts zu verantwortungsvollen Investments im Report. Kein Wunder, Yales Politik zur verantwortungsvollen Geldanlage finde ich schwach. Dabei sollte eine der reichsten Bildungsinstitutionen der Welt mit gutem Beispiel vorangehen. Dazu kann Yale gerne den DVFA PRISC Ansatz nutzen, vgl. https://prof-soehnholz.com/prisc-policy-for-responsible-investment-scoring-die-taxonomiealternative-von-der-dvfa/.

Risiken von Anleihen: Do Treasuries Have a Place in a Modern Portfolio? von Jon Seed von Alpha Architect vom 9. Juli 2020: „the Bloomberg Barclay’s Aggregate Float Adjusted US Aggregate Index which most domestic aggregate “passive” fixed income ETFs try and track: no muni’s, no floaters, no private label mortgages or specified mortgage pools, no companies below investment grade (by 2 of 3 rating agencies), no preferred shares, no private placements. As Guggenheim Partners point out, the index represents less than half of the US investible fixed income universe and is skewed towards lower-yielding bonds“. …. Fixed Income indices are thoughtfully constructed to facilitate easy pricing and thus skewed toward treasuries and away from higher yielding bonds“. … „Treasuries are a pretty poor hedge in normal times. Currently, they are likely even worse given their low overall yield while their cost in foregone interest in alternative bonds is still high.“

Ist institutionelles besser als privates Sentiment? Institutional Investor Sentiment and Aggregate Stock Returns von Xiang Gao, Chen Gu und Kees Koedijk vom 1. Juli 2020: “In this paper, we find that the institutional investor sentiment serve as a statistically and economically significant predictor for aggregate stock returns. More specifically, one standard deviation increase in our institutional investor sentiment measure leads to a rise of 83 basis points in the performance of the stock market (S. 26) … Retail investor sentiment could be responsible in large part for temporary security price distortions as well as failures of market correction dynamics by acting upon their own expectations of market prices” (S. 27).

Schadet zu viel Finanzbildung oder ist traditionelle Finanzbildung falsch? Is Financial Literacy Dangerous? Financial Literacy, Behavioral Factors, and Financial Choices of Households von Tetsuya Kawamura, Tomoharu Mori, Taizo Motonishi und Kazuhito Ogawa vom 1. Juli 2020: “We have estimated the effects of financial literacy and behavioral factors on the financial behavior and attitudes of Japanese households founding that high financial literacy induces more speculative investment, risky asset holdings, overborrowing, and financial naivety“ (S. 29).

Institutionelle Investoren haben auch Biases: Social Proximity to Capital: Implications for Investors and Firms von Theresa Kuchler et al. vom Juni 2020: “We find that, all else equal, institutional investors invest more in firms located in regions to which they have stronger social ties. As a result, firms in regions that are socially proximate to institutional capital have higher liquidity and higher valuations” (S. 21).

Hedgefondsaktivisten sind nicht für alle gut: Hedge Fund Activists: Value creators or good stock pickers? Von Martijn Cremers, Erasmo Giambona, Simone Sepe und Ye Wang vom 23. Juni 2020: “results suggest a reinterpretation of the role of activist hedge funds. They show that hedge funds exhibit both strong selection skills and strong trading skills, which allow them to outperform other investors. The fact that these skills do not seem to benefit other (particularly buy-and hold) shareholders of targeted firms challenges the view that hedge fund activism adds long-term value to firms” (S. 23).

Frontrunning mit Wertpapierleihe bringt nicht viel: Securities Lending and Information Acquisition von Stefan Greppmair, Stephan Jank, Pedro Saffi und Jason Sturgess vom 1. Juli 2020: “Active funds that become informed by observing non-public signals of shorting demand in the securities lending market are more likely to exit positions than active funds observing only public signals. The informed exits front-run negative price revelation from shorting demand, resulting in active lenders realising lower losses and earning positive abnormal returns relative to active funds that do not participate in securities lending. However, somewhat surprisingly, we find very modest effects on fund-level performance” (S. 23).

Positive Impactkritik: ESG Performance

ESG mit besonders stabiler Outperformance: Is ESG a Factor? The S&P 500 ESG Index’s Steady Outperformance Ben Leale-Green von Standard & Poors Dow Jones Indices vom 17. Juni 2020. Mein Kommentar: Ich bin skeptisch in Bezug auf Faktoransätze, das zeigt sich auch an den Charts im Beitrag, aber die ESG Outperformance ist außergewöhnlich stabil, allerdings ist die Zeitreihe noch ziemlich kurz  (vgl. https://prof-soehnholz.com/esg-halbjahr-relativ-gute-performance-passiver-allokations-und-strenger-esg-portfolios/).

Zufriedene Mitarbeiter sind sehr wichtig: Corporate Sustainability and Stock Returns: Evidence from Employee Satisfaction von Kyle Welch und Aaron Yoon vom 24. Juni 2020: “we find that firms with high ratings on both ESG and employee satisfaction significantly outperform those with low ratings on both. In addition, firms with high ratings on both issues outperform those with high employee satisfaction alone” (S. 22).

ESG ist auch bei Anleihen gut: Europäische ESG-Anleihenfonds erzielen Outperformance gegenüber konventionellen Produkten vom 21. Juli von Absolut Research: „Nachhaltige Anleihenfonds mit Schwerpunkt Europa haben in den vergangenen drei Jahren mit 1,29 % p.a. einen leicht höheren Total Return als konventionelle europäische Anleihenfonds (1,20 %) erzielen können“.

ESG war auch im 2. Quartal gut:  Sustainable Stock Funds Held Their Own in Second-Quarter Rally von Jon Hale von Morningstar vom 8. Juli 2020: „Most sustainable funds finished in the top halves of their Morningstar Categories for the quarter, and 18 of 26 ESG-focused index funds outperformed conventional index funds that cover the same parts of the market. For the year to date, an impressive 72% of sustainable equity funds rank in the top halves of their Morningstar Categories and all 26 ESG (environmental, social, and governance) index funds have outperformed their conventional index-fund counterparts.“ … „ with energy the top-performing U.S. sector in the second quarter, sustainable funds faced headwinds in their effort to outperform their peers.“ … „The better relative performance of sustainable funds so far this year derives mainly from their focus on companies that have stronger ESG profiles and face lower levels of ESG risk.“

Christliche besser als andere Fonds? A Research Study on Faith Based Funds Performance Relative to Industry Averages von John Siverling vom Christian Investment Forum vom Juni 2020: “The study looked at return data for 44 Christian Faith based Funds in both equity and bond categories over a 15-year period ending December 31, 2020, and found that the performance of an average of those funds compared favorably against the benchmarks for each category, particularly in the equity funds categories. The results were consistent over different time periods of 1 year, 3 years, 5 years, 10 years and 15 years” (S. 1). Mein Kommentar: Es fehlt ein Vergleich mit passiven Benchmarks (ETFs). Mein islamisches Aktien-ETF Portfolio ist leider bisher kein Outperformer, obwohl es durch den Verzicht auf traditionelle Finanzdienstleister auch für einige Nicht-Muslime Charme haben sollte.

Keine Impactkritik: ESG Investments

Viele Labels aber wenig Klarheit: Overview of European Sustainable Finance Labels von Nicolas Redon, Lorène Moretti und Anne-Catherine Husson-Traore von Novethic und Caisse des Depots vom Januar 2020: “There are two categories of labels: on the one hand, labels focusing on ESG; on the other hand, labels focusing on green. Each of them combines positive criteria relative to the assets selected in portfolios with negative sectorial screenings. Yet, the boundary between the two can be vague since ESG labels can integrate environmental criteria and environmental labels exclude controversial companies on ESG dimensions. The variety of terminologies (SRI, ESG, Greenfin, Climate) further complicates the readability of the approach” (S. 2) zu LuxFLag, Umweltzeichen FNG und anderen.

Neue ESG Ratings mit Verbesserungen: Scope offers a new perspective on sustainable finance and corporate ESG impact von Scope ratings vom 8. Juli 2020: “First, existing sustainability scores primarily rely on non-standardised self-disclosure by companies. Second, a key part of environmental and social impact stems from supply chains, but corporate sustainability reports cannot integrate the entire supply chain. Third, selecting different sustainability indicators and uneven weighting makes it difficult to compare the results.” … Scope’s ESG Impact Review: 1. takes an independent approach that relies on publicly accessible and recognised international data sources (e.g. OECD, ILO, World Bank). The resulting ESG score provides a macroeconomic estimate of harmful environmental and social impacts of a company’s economic activities. 2. measures the impact of all three ESG factors – environment, social, governance – by including the global value chain, starting from the source of raw materials by country and industry, their subsequent refinement and production to final assembly of the product or service. Scope’s model combines impacts across about 450 sectors in 47 countries or regions. 3. attributes a monetary value to a company’s ESG impacts. Monetisation allows aggregation of different indicators and also offers a more readable interpretation of the result. This allows investors and issuers to compare companies and sectors“. Mein Kommentar: Ratings sollten nicht auf selbstberichtete Daten verzichten. Unternehmen müssen schließlich für deren Korrektheit geradestehen. Und die ESG Ratings, die ich kenne/nutze, verwenden durchaus auch externe Daten und berücksichtigen die Value Chain. Allerdings besteht diesbezüglich oft noch erhebliches Verbesserungspotential. Eine überzeugende Monetarisierung ist schwierig, aber interessant. Insgesamt: Ein zusätzliches unabhängiges Rating eines europäischen Anbieters ist zunächst gut, auch wenn mich das Konzept auf den ersten Blick nicht wirklich überzeugt.

Sind 4% Green Revenues in der „Paris aligned“ Benchmark Greenwashing? FTSE Russell Study on EU Paris-aligned Benchmarks von Yang Wang, Peter Gunthorp und David Harris von FTSE Russell vom 30. Juni 2020: „The FTSE Russell Green Revenues data model10 categorizes a company’s revenue using an industrial taxonomy for green goods, products and services into 10 sectors and 64 sub-sectors. This permits the percentage of total revenue arising from green products for a company to be identified. While the latest draft EU BMR regulation no longer includes a requirement to improve the proportion of green to brown revenues, earlier drafts of the TEG report did include such a provision. For this reason and those outlined earlier, we continue to include a requirement that the benchmark demonstrates a significant increase in the green to brown revenue ratio“ (S. 9). Mein Kommentar: FTSE Russell ist damit sogar strenger als die EU Vorgaben. Mit viel grüneren Indizes kann man sogar attraktivere Rendite-/Risikoprofile erreichen, wenn man auf Überdiversifikation verzichtet (vgl. https://prof-soehnholz.com/eu-klimaindizes-und-esg-indexverordnung-offizielles-greenwashing/).

Divestment ist besser als ESG-Integration: A Sustainable Capital Asset Pricing Model (S-CAPM): Evidence from Green Investing and Sin Stock Exclusion von Olivier Zerbib vom 24. März 2020: „Whether through exclusionary screening or ESG integration, sustainable investing contributes toward increasing the cost of capital of the least ethical or most environmentally risky companies. Both practices are thus effective means of pressure available to sustainable investors to encourage companies to reform.“ …. „Compared to the inclusion of environmental criteria, the more pronounced effect of sin stock exclusion may be attributed to the larger number of U.S. investors who exclude this category of assets for ethical motives“ (S. 28;  vgl. https://prof-soehnholz.com/divestmentkritik-populaere-aber-falsche-kritik-an-verantwortungsvollen-geldanlagen/).

Leerverkäufe können verantwortungsvoll sein, müssen es aber nicht: Short Selling and Responsible Investment von der AIMA Alternative Investment Management Association und Simmons & Simmons vom 17. Juli 2020: “By selling short carbon-intensive issuers, for instance, a manager can mitigate the carbon risks in its fund, while simultaneously contributing to a positive ESG impact by raising the cost of capital for the issuers being sold short. Short selling also provides a means by which managers can be rewarded for uncovering carbon and other ESG risks which may be inappropriately priced. …. The proposed EU regulation on the adverse impact of investments mentioned above, for instance, does not offer any means by which managers can report the impact of their short positions (or indeed even the existence of such positions). Doing so would ease the implementation of responsible investment outside of the long-only investment industry, and help unlock an effective tool for furthering the goals of responsible investment” (S. 13). Mein Kommentar: Das vorgeschlagene Reporting wäre gut. Dann würde man auch sehen, wenn gute ESG-Wertpapiere leerverkauft würden.

Länder mit höherem ESG Score managen die Coronakrise besser: Country ESG Ranking Update – July 2020 COVID-19 demonstrates the benefits of ESG analysis von Max Schieler von RobecoSAM vom 21. Juli 2020: “Of the 23 developed countries included in our country ESG assessment, 20 belong to the two top-tier ESG categories (scores of 7.0 or higher); only Greece, Italy, and Spain belong to the medium performing category (scores between 6.0 and 7.0). And though their scores kept them within the top 20, two of the world’s biggest economic giants, the United States and Japan are strikingly absent from the leading group. Singapore maintained its position as a leading emerging market country with an ESG score of 7.84 and a rank of 16 overall. Out of the group of 127 emerging market and developing countries, only 10 made it into the second-best category (scores between 7.0 and 8.0). Apart from Singapore, Hong Kong and Israel, they are all located in Europe. With the exception of Brazil, BRICS countries continued to perform poorly. All scored between 4.0 and 5.0, placing them in the second-lowest scoring category” (S. 5). …” Therefore, a country’s ESG characteristics will, with certainty, have an influence on whether a country will be reasonably successful in managing and rebounding from crises—whether environmental, social, economic, or geopolitical in nature. In light of the current crisis, we would expect countries with higher ESG scores to have lower viral caseloads—that expectation has largely played out in the data collected so far” (S. 16). “Along with strong social support structures, governance features are also highly correlated with how well countries have managed the COVID-19 crisis” (S. 19).

Family Office könnten mehr Impact haben: White Paper How to increase family office engagement in impact investing von der Bertelsmann Stiftung vom April 2020: “the White Paper highlights a range of recommendations that should support families and family offices in shifting their capital towards impact: Implement more and better communication both internally, as well as with peers; Take a strategic approach and build a team to translate family values into an impact strategy; Choose supportive advisors or get rid of them; Decrease transaction costs through active and intentional collaboration; “Walk the talk” (S. 7).

ESG Anbieter ohne Impactkritik

Reiche wollen ESG und mehr Informationen: World Wealth Report 2020 CapGemini: „Within the uncertain COVID-19 environment, hyper-personalized offerings and socially responsible investment options will be essential to meeting client expectations, retaining current business, and capturing growth opportunities“ (S. 4). … „HNWIs plan to allocate 41% of their portfolio to SI products by the end of 2020, and 46% by the end of 2021“ (HNWI = High Networth Individuals; S. 15). …„More than 60% of HNWIs reported unsatisfactory experience during their attempts to research information about a firm, regarding personalized updates about new wealth offerings, when receiving educational market information, and regarding value-added services“ (S. 21).

McKinsey findet ESG für Privatbanken sehr wichtig: The future of private banking in Europe: Preparing for accelerated change von McKinsey vom Juli 2020: “Banks should consider embedding sustainability and ESG propositions into all product offerings, to underline their long-term vision for their clients and society and meet the needs of emerging client segments (e.g., millennials). Yet, only 16 percent of our survey participants consider sustainability a priority driven by client demand, a desire to create positive impact on society, or regulation. These banks aim to put sustainability into action, by embedding it in the investment process or by minimizing the bank’s ecological footprint” (S. 11).

Gute Greenwashinganalyse von der DWS: How best to measure asset managers’ credentials when it comes to ESG von Wan Huang und Michael Lewis von der DWS vom Juli 2020: “However, a deeper examination into various corporate governance reports shows that asset managers have been employing a number of different calculations around this metric. … this “rebellious” measure can range from 15% to 75%, or even 100%, by applying smaller denominators such as the number of meetings held or companies voted, instead of number of resolution items” (S. 3). … “when asset managers disclose third-party ESG data providers in their PRI annual Transparency Report or Sustainability Report, the scope is not entirely consistent. Some only identify dedicated external ESG providers, such as Sustainalytics, MSCI or Trucost, while some others include existing financial data sources which provide additional ESG information, such as the three traditional credit agencies and Bloomberg” (S. 4). … “due to limited availability of clean data around ESG and historically fluid categorisation, greater AuM growth and inflows can be achieved by ESG fund reclassification. Similarly a larger number of ESG-related products does not testify for better approaches, underlying assets nor investment processes” (S. 5).

Es gibt erst wenige gute nachhaltige Vermögensverwaltungsangebote: Mit diesen Fonds-VV-Strategien können Vermittler nachhaltig punkten in FondsProfessionell Online vom 14. Juli 2020: „Einen Öko- oder Ethikfonds vermitteln kann jeder. Eine nachhaltige Vermögensverwaltung ist dagegen ein Alleinstellungsmerkmal. FONDS professionell hat sich bei Maklerpools und Depotbanken umgehört, welche Angebote freien Finanzberatern offenstehen.“ Mein Kommentar: Auswahl und Kosten der Angebote erscheinen nicht noch nicht überzeugend. Zum Vergleich können gerne die bereits seit 2016 angebotenen ESG ETF-Portfolios und die Aktien ESG Portfolios meiner Firma Diversifikator herangezogen werden oder auch die 16 Portfolios der Deutschen Wertpapiertreuhand.

Grüne Fondsnamen bringen mehr Absatz: What’s in a (Green) Name? The Consequences of Greening Fund Names on Fund Flows, Turnover, and Performance von Sadok El Ghoul und Aymen Karoui vom 24. Juni 2020: “funds that adopt a more sustainability-related appellation increase their flows by 1.18% per month (or 14.14% per year) in the year after their name change. Second, funds that change their name proceed to carry out a significant rebalancing of their portfolio, as gauged by the fund turnover which moves from 0.71 to 1.03, i.e. an increase of 0.32. Lastly, the rebalancing of the portfolio does not significantly change the exposure to major risk premia, nor affect fund performance, following the name change” (S. 13).

Impactkritik

Großzügige Impactbetrachtung: Impact Investing in Deutschland 2020 – ein dynamischer Wachstumsmarkt Zusammenfassung von Volker Then und Tobias Schmidt von der Bundesinitiative Impact Investing vom Juni 2020: „Impact Investing ist heute keine visionäre Idee einer kleinen Gruppe von Innovatoren mehr, sondern ein ausdifferenzierter Milliardenmarkt mit großem Wachstumspotential und hoher Dynamik“ schreibt Frank Niederländer auf S. 1. (vgl. https://prof-soehnholz.com/absolute-und-relative-impact-investing-und-additionalitaet/).

Impact-Tipps: The principles for positive impact finance der UNEP Finance Initiative sollen helfen: „investors and donors to holistically evaluate the impacts of their investments and orient their investment choices and engagements accordingly“.

Modellbasierter Ansatz ohne große Überraschungen: Sustainable Investing in Equilibrium von Lubos Pastor, Robert Stambaugh und Lucian Taylor vom 24. März 2020: „..sustainable investing generates positive social impact, in two ways. First, it leads firms to become greener. Second, it induces more real investment by green firms and less investment by brown firms“ (S 31).

Impact Venture bringt weniger Rendite: Impact Investing von Brad Barber, Adair Morse und Ayako Yasuda vom 18. März 2020. „We document that ex post financial returns earned by impact funds are 4.7 ppts lower than those earned by traditional VC funds” (S. 33). “We find that impact investors are on average willing to forgo … about 2.5 to 3.7 ppts in expected excess IRR” (S. 34). … “The willingness to pay for impact varies considerably across legal and regulatory environments, investor geography, and time (S. 35) “… development organizations, financial institutions, and public pensions – exhibit reliably positive willingness to pay for impact” (S. 34).

Impactkritik 1: Donating effectively is usually better than Impact Investing von Hauke Hillebrandt und John Halstead vom : “Impact investing might … be worse than investing to give, but from a social impact point of view it is still probably better than socially neutral investing alone. Thus, the arguments here should not be thought to justify socially neutral investing over impact investing. Impact investing in efficient markets may often only have a modest effect on the capital available to companies, but a modest effect is better than nothing, and the indirect effects appear more substantial. Our point is that …. people can probably increase their impact significantly by switching from impact investing to investing to give or donating now.” 

Impactkritik 2: Profiting from our pain: Privileged access to social impact investing von Cary Martin Shelby vom ….: Social impact investing … can successfully connect distressed communities to vital resources such as safe drinking water, low-cost business loans, clean energy sources, and even high-quality educational opportunities. Government and philanthropist resources will likely be insufficient in resolving these growing needs in coming decades. However, as this Article reveals, well-intentioned social impact investors can create devastating harms that can annihilate the very communities that they are trying to serve. Many such investments have generated negative externalities that have decreased net social welfare, thereby creating even more crises for the already underfunded governments and philanthropists to try to resolve” (S. 47).

Impactkritik 3: How Liberatory Philanthropy and Restorative Investing Can Remake the Economy von Rodney Foxworth in Non Profit News | Nonprofit Quarterly vom Sommer 2020 bzw. Februar 2019: “not only is philanthropy the product of wealth inequality, philanthropy—deliberate or not—thrives in an environment that perpetuates privilege, white supremacy, and entrenched power … of the fifteen largest U.S. foundations, only Ford, Kellogg, Kresge, and MacArthur have committed part of their endowments to align with their missions. But even with these foundations, their assets by and large are still not invested in alignment with their missions”.

36 deutsche SDG Fintechs: Focus note series on Fintech for sustainability: Current landscape and key opportunities von der Green Digital Finance Alliance, dem Fair Finance Institute, dem Institute for Social Banking (ISB) und Conscious Fintech vom Januar 2020 und German Fintech for Sustainability:  “Die SDG-Fintech-Szene wird in Deutschland von kleineren, jungen Firmen dominiert, etablierte Finanzdienstleister spielen nur eine geringe Rolle. Die meisten SDG-Fintechs zielen auf das SDG7 ab: „bezahlbare, verlässliche, nachhaltige Energie für alle“ (affordable and clean energy). Die für das Mapping identifizierten 36 „SDG-Fintechs“ stellen nur etwa 4-5 Prozent aller Fintechs in Deutschland dar.“ Mein Kommentar: Ich freue mich, dass Diversifikator aufgenommen wurde. Hier sind noch ein paar weitere Kandidaten: https://prof-soehnholz.com/robo-esg-verantwortungsvolle-online-investments-im-vergleich/. Über manche Firmen auf der Liste kann man aber streiten.

(ESG-) Wealthtech

Gutes Potential für hybride Robo-Advisors: Robo-Advice and the Future of Delegated Investment von Christoph Merkle vom 23. Juni 2020: “Robo-advisors primarily appeal to a clientele of already financially sophisticated investors. Not only are they easiest to reach for a new offer on the market, but also by design many robos demand a certain level of financial literacy. Robo-advisors lack some of the qualities people look for in a “money doctor”, which range from the initial encouragement to invest in risky asset classes to the opportunity to initiate contact to bring up a specific question. The human touch is valued highly by millennials as well, which implies that it will not go away just by the passage of time. The business model of online-only robo-advisors still has to stand the test of time. Currently there is a mismatch between the acquisition costs for each customer and the meager fee-income. Only very large robo-advisors can exploit the economies of scale, as the fixed costs for implementing an advisory tool are high. Consequently, a hybrid model with humans and technology working hand-in-hand is widely advocated as most promising solution. Most financial institutions are still in the experimental stage with such offers” (vgl. https://prof-soehnholz.com/hybridmodelle-worauf-traditionelle-finanzdienstleister-bei-robo-advisors-achten-sollten/).

Digitale Anleihen können attraktiv sein: Loanboox: Der Krimi um die erste digitale Anleihe von Stefan Mühlemann vom 23. Juli auf Finews.ch: „Emittenten wie Investoren sehen die Preisentwicklung sowie die Anzahl der Gebote und können bei Bedarf nachbessern. Die Zuteilung erfolgt schliesslich nach gebotenem Preis und nach dem Zeitpunkt der Eingabe – «first come, first served». Hinzu kommt das Versprechen, die Transaktion innert weniger Stunden oder gar Minuten und zur Hälfte des Preises abzuwickeln.“

Online-Finanzdienstleistungen über den Arbeitgeber: Goldman Sachs’ Ayco adds ‘marketplace’ for workplace clients von Emile Hallez vom 7. Juli in investment news: „The marketplace includes Betterment, student-loan provider CommonBond, Goldman Sachs Invest, Goldman Sachs affiliate Marcus, Ayco’s Protect insurance brokerage and charitable giving company Pinkaloo.“ …“The company is planning to expand its marketplace to include annuities, investment accounting and tax services“.

Charles Schwab und Betterment wollen Direct Indexing wohl forcieren: With Schwab in Motif mode, Jon Stein tells Bloomberg Betterment’s ETF view is shifting, talks ‚revolution,‘ but declines through spokesman to confirm any imminent shift to direct indexing von Oisin Breen vom 21. Juli 2020 auf RIABIZ.com (vgl. https://prof-soehnholz.com/direct-esg-indexing-die-beste-esg-investmentmoeglichkeit/).

Schreibe einen Kommentar

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert.

I accept that my given data and my IP address is sent to a server in the USA only for the purpose of spam prevention through the Akismet program.More information on Akismet and GDPR.

Diese Website verwendet Akismet, um Spam zu reduzieren. Erfahre mehr darüber, wie deine Kommentardaten verarbeitet werden.