Menschenrechte und mehr: Umfeld allgemein

In fast eigener Sache: Migrationshintergrund relativiert: The social participation of children with migration backgrounds von Julia Söhnholz vom Dezember 2020: “… whether and how children with migration backgrounds engage in social participation …. is related to … socioeconomic class, the number of siblings living in the household, parents’ and friends’ valuation of the child’s opinion and having a mobile phone” (S. 99). … “migration backgrounds are not a useful explanatory meta-narrative and an overemphasis on migration backgrounds risks to reproduce dominant divisions in society. Instead, for German society where every fourth person has migration backgrounds, it is crucial to ensure equal opportunities for social participation for all members of society” (S. 101). Mein Kommentar: Das ist die Masterarbeit meiner Tochter auf Basis von umfassenden Daten von World Vision. Ich hoffe, dass sie einen guten Job findet.

Schlaue Berater wissen, wie Net-Zero funktoniert: Net-Zero Europe Decarbonization pathways and socioeconomic implications von McKinsey&Company vom 3. Dezember 2020: “We find that the European Union could achieve net-zero emissions by 2050 at a net-zero cost. The investments and cost savings would be higher in some sectors and countries than others. However, if the cost increases and savings of decarbonization were passed through to households, the aggregate cost of living for an average household in a climate-neutral European Union nation would be roughly the same as it is today. Middle- and lower-income households would see some savings, while high-income households may experience a small cost increase. And the value of the stranded assets resulting from the transition would total €215 billion. In the following sections, we break down the cost-optimal pathway by sector, region, technology, and energy and land-use system” (S. 16). “Achieving the European Union’s climate goals would require a substantial departure from the current trajectory” (S. 17).

Blackrock et al. finanzieren sehr CO2 schädliche Projekte: Bericht über fossile Megaprojekte: Finanzindustrie sprengt das globale Kohlenstoffbudget von Urgewald vom 10. Dezember 2020: “Together, these 12 projects are expected to cause at least 175 gigatons of additional CO2 emissions …  This is almost half of the 395 Gt of remaining carbon budget to limit global warming to 1.5° with a 50% probability. …  The report finds that financial institutions have provided $1.6 trillion in loans and underwriting since January 2016 and, as of August 2020, invested $1.1 trillion in bonds and shares in the 133 companies driving the 12 fossil fuel expansion projects … With bonds and shares worth $110 billion, BlackRock (USA) is the top investor in the report’s coal, oil and gas companies. Vanguard (USA) is following closely behind with $104 billion in bonds and shares. State Street (USA) is in third place with $50.8 billion, followed by Capital Group (USA) with $48.4 billion. Only four of the top 20 investors are not from the US: the Norwegian Government Pension Fund with $31.9 billion in fifth place, UBS (Switzerland) with $11.8 billion in 11th place, Deutsche Bank (Germany) with $10.4 billion in 19th place and Legal & General (UK) with $9.8 billion in 20th place” (S. 6).

Carbonpricing mit weniger Nachteilen als erwartet: Distributional Impacts of Carbon Pricing: A Meta‑Analysis von Nils Ohlendorf, Michael Jakob, Jan Christoph Minx, Carsten Schröder, Jan Christoph Steckel vom 13. November 2020: “Based on a comprehensive, systematic and transparent screening of the literature, our sample comprises 53 empirical studies containing 183 efects in 39 countries. Results indicate a signifcantly increased likelihood of progressive distributional outcomes for studies on lower income countries and transport sector policies. The same applies to study designs that consider indirect effects, demand-side adjustments of consumers or lifetime income proxies (abstract).

Geldanlage allgemein

Sehr falsche Anreize für Banker: Executive Stock Options and Systemic Risk von Christopher Armstrong, Allison Nicoletti und Frank Zhou vom 21. September 2020: “We find that bank executives’ portfolio vega causes systemic risk that manifests only during economic downturns. We also document that vega motivates bank managers to take actions that contribute to the build-up of systemic risk …” (S. 32).

Einige Fondsanbieter profitieren zu Lasten von Anlegern: The Unintended Consequences of Investing for the Long Run: Evidence from Target Date Funds von Massimo Massa, Rabih Moussawi und Andrei Simonov vom 7. Dezember 2020: “We study how asset managers behave when shielded from liquidity constraints and their investors‘ short-term needs. … analyses document that asset managers exploit lower investor attention and deliver lower performance (around 2.9 basis points per year of distance from the target horizon). The long-term performance reduction is economically significant at -21% for an average investor holding the fund for 50 years. … Moreover, the longer the horizon, the higher the total fees the asset managers charge, partly because of TDFs investing in more expensive fund share classes of underlying funds” (abstract).

DWS pro passiv? A New Decade: Long for Longer? Von Olivier Souliac und Lukas Ahnert von der DWS vom Januar 2020: “The dispersion of asset class returns has reached new lows since 2013 (see Figure 2), arguably mitigating the performance impact of taking nuanced views between markets and potentially not holding the highest returning or avoiding the lowest returning assets. Not all assets are created equal, but the opportunity cost of not being invested continues to be substantial: the ratio between high performing and low performing asset classes is still clearly skewed towards the high performing ones” (S. 2). Mein  Kommentar: Mein Weltmarktportfolio müsste danach das fast perfekte Portfolio sein, vgl. z.B. hier Warum sich das Weltmarktportfolio so gut entwickelt – Verantwortungsvolle (ESG) Geldanlage (prof-soehnholz.com)

Sind professionelle Anleger irrationaler als private? Momentum, Reversals, and Investor  Clientele von Andy Chui, Avanidhar Subrahmanyam und Sheridan Titman vom 1. Oktober 2020: “The momentum effect refers to the phenomenon that stocks performing best in the recent past tend to perform well in the future. …. The risk-based explanations are based on the idea that those stocks performing the best in recent months are in some sense riskier than their counterparts performing the worst …. The behavioral explanations posit that the momentum effect arises from the cognitive biases of investors …” (S. 1). … “The Chinese A- and B-share markets provide a unique setting to investigate how the composition of investors influences return patterns. Trading in the A share market is dominated by domestic investors, whereas foreign institutional investors have a larger presence in the B share market. Since domestic institutions cannot own B shares, institutional ownership in such shares is exclusively foreign. This indicates that investors in B shares are more sophisticated than those in A shares. Our most striking finding is that, for those firms issuing both A and B shares, momentum is only present in B shares and not in A shares …” (S. 26/27).

Listed Real Estate (LRE) ist attraktiv: Features and trends in European listed real estate von Ali Zaidi und Sergiy Lesyk von EPRA und FTSE Russell vom November 2020: “The European LRE sector plays an important role by offering access to an asset class that requires high capital requirement and is highly specialized. Academic studies suggest that there is a high correlation between LRE and direct property over the longer term. In addition, evidence has emerged that challenges the perception of LRE returns being more volatile. Through de-lagging and using actual return data, LRE returns have demonstrated lower volatility, although price volatility in the short term remains inevitable due to public market movements. Diversification in terms of property sectors and geography is achieved in the most cost-efficient manner through the listed sector” (S. 21). Vgl. auch Erstes konsequent verantwortungsvolles ESG-Portfolio aus Immobilienaktien – Verantwortungsvolle (ESG) Geldanlage (prof-soehnholz.com)

Nichtfinanzielle Faktoren sind sehr wichtig: The power of firm fundamental information in explaining stock returns von Shuai Shao, Robert Stoumbos und Frank Zhang vom November2020: “Even though earnings have come to explain less of the annual return over time, we find that firm fundamental information still explains … around 20% of the annual return“ (S. 34).

Menschenrechte, ESG Daten und Ratings

Gute Tipps, wie Unternehmen besser werden können: Leading with a sustainable purpose von Ben Kellard et al. University of Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership vom November 2020:  “This report distils shared insights into how four leading companies developed, aligned and integrated a purpose and strategy to transition to a sustainable economy. This is intended to inspire and inform any leader, in any organisation that is seeking to align and integrate their purpose and strategy with a sustainable economy. Based on the experiences of five leaders it captures ten principles. Each principle has practices that describes how it can be achieved” (S. 3). Mein Kommentar: Auf www.diversifikator.com ist jetzt auch der Purpose dokumentiert.

Interessante Klimainfos für Anleger: Guide to climate investing -The investor handbook for low-carbon portfolio von Lyxor vom November 2020.

Multilaterale Entwicklungsbanken können mehr fürs Klima tun: E3G Public Bank Climate
Tracker Matrix von Sonja Dunlop, James Hawkins, Zacharias Malik und Johannes Schroeter von E3G vom Dezember 2020: “Our Matrix is designed to provide shareholders, the banks themselves and civil society with a shared understanding of how to accelerate the transformation of each bank into a climate champion. It aims to translate the technical and obscure into a simple, easy to understand traffic light system”. Mein Kommentar: Ich präferiere trotzdem Anleihen solcher Organsiationen gegenüber Staatsanleihen.

Nahrungsmittelhersteller müssen noch viel für bessere Menschenrechte tun: 2020 Food & Beverage Benchmark Findings Report von KnowTheChain vom 14. Oktober 2020: “finds that the majority of the 43 largest global food and beverage companies fail to address forced labor in their supply chains ….. The average score in the sector is 28/100, with a score range of 0 to 65”.

Menschenrechtslücken in Unternehmen und Engagementgrenzen: Corporate Human Rights Benchmark von der World Benchmarking Alliance vom Dezember 2020. :“In March 2020, a group of 176 international investors representing over USD 4.5 trillion in assets under management sent a letter to the 95 companies that failed to score any points on the human rights due diligence indicators in the 2019 CHRB assessment, calling for urgent improvement. Of those 95 companies, only 16 have improved on human rights due diligence this year, with 79 still failing to score any points on the related indicators. Of companies assessed for the first time in 2020, 70% also failed to score any points in this area of the assessment” (S. 9).

Hilfreiche Infos zu Menschenrechten: Why and how investors should act on human rights von den Principles for Responsible Investing vom 22. Oktober 2020: “With regulation on human rights due diligence already implemented in some jurisdictions, more measures in the pipeline and policy making converging around the UNGPs and OECD standards, investors can future-proof their approach to ESG issues by implementing these frameworks now” (S. 4).

Quantifizierte Menschenrechte: Values & Valuations – A comprehensive compilation of quantitative human rights indicators for companies von Laura Franken ecosense vom August 2020: “ …many guidelines on human rights policies, risk analyses, measures, and repoting have already been developed. Most of these guidelines are qualitative in nature. …. While acknowledging that quantitative indicators have limits, are difficult to assess, and do not replace a human rights due diligence, this paper nonetheless attempts to describe a set of quantitative human rights indicators relevant for companies. …. It can be downloaded as an Excel spreadsheet” (S. 4).

ESG Transparenz kann noch dauern: Sense and Nonsense in ESG Ratings von Ingo Walter von 11. November 2020: “We assess the industrial organization of the ESG ratings industry and review key empirical studies of ESG-driven investing. We conclude with policy recommendations intended to alleviate existing shortcomings in ESG ratings and improve their role in capital allocation and corporate governance” (abstract). … “Data, ESG target specification, assumptions, adjustments for missing data, quantification of qualitative information, factor weighting, and index construction should all be available in the public domain. It should be possible for researchers to replicate ESG calibration and subject it to stress testing using alternative inputs and assumptions. Since ESG rating follows a subscription (user-pays) business model based on proprietary information and rating models, product differentiation may be marketed as the “secret sauce.” So, transparency may be a long time coming“ (S. 334).

ESG Investing, Voting und Engagement

Sehr guter aktueller ESG/SRI/Impact Researchüberblick mit 20 Seiten Literaturliste: Recent perspectives in ESG equity investing von Guillaume Coqueret vom 12. Dezember 2020: “Many researchers claim that it is possible to obtain both at the same time, popularizing the “doing good and doing well” motto. At the aggregate level, the conclusions are not clear cut, which is the conclusion of most meta-studies. If SRI is (on average) not costly and may be socially beneficial, then it almost qualifies as ethical free lunch. Nevertheless, it is not obvious that the rise of ESG investing has a significant impact globally. …. More and more, sustainable firms may be considered as safer bets (rightfully so)” (S. 30).

Kein ESG Bubble: Is ESG Investing a Price Bubble? Probably Not. Von Guido Giese, Navneet Kumar und Zoltan Nagy von MSCI Research vom 9. Dezember 2020: “Overall, our findings deflate the notion of an ESG bubble during our sample period. If rising inflows into ESG investing had created a price bubble, we would expect to see rising valuations for these companies (as measured by increasing P/E ratios). Instead, our return decomposition showed little support for this theory. We found that outperformance of ESG was mainly driven by companies’ earnings growth and better dividend yields”.

Schlechte ESG Ratings können sehr hilfreich sein: ESG Ratings: The road ahead von Claude Lopez, Oscar Contreras und Joseph Bendix vom 30. November 2020: Using publicly available information, we illustrate how difficult it is to understand or predict some of the existing ratings. Yet we are also able to identify some commonalities. All ratings agree on the worst performers.  They also reach some consensus when measuring risks arising from governance factors, … (S. 3). …are E, S, and G factors equally important? Or does the rating focus mostly on one of them? Each method uses a different set of weights to aggregate data, which leads to a different rating, even when using the same data” (S. 4). Mein Kommentar: Der Beitrag nutzt leider nur 3 Ratinganbieter. Der Ausschluss der Unternehmen mit den schlechtesten ESG Ratings (nach dem Best-in-Universe Konzept) hat sich für Diversifikator seit 2016 sehr gut bewährt.

Es geht noch viel nachhaltiger: Swipe Left – Warum es bei nachhaltigen Finanzprodukten keine Matches gibt von Frederick Fabian et al. der 2o investing initiative vom 24. November 2020: „Finanzinstrumente werden gewinnbringend an Kund*innen verkauft, die oft andere Vorstellungen davon haben, was ein Produkt leisten sollte in Sachen Nachhaltigkeit. Dieses Problem zu erkennen und zur Lösung beizutragen, ist Ziel des Berichts …. Darüber hinaus braucht es aber auch das Engagement des Einzelnen. Es bedarf – wie auch in der „echten“ Dating-Welt, informierte Verbraucher*innen, damit es ein Match gibt“ (S. 15).

Vanguard ist schlecht: Blick ins Portfolio von Bernd Mikosch in Fonds professionell Nr. 4/2020 vom Dezember 2020: Auf Basis von Sustainalytics bzw. Morningstars Verantwortlichkeitsratings schneidet bei den ETF-Anbietern Vanguard besonders schlecht ab (2,5) und BNP Paribas ziemlich gut (3,9).  Die anderen großen Anbieter liegen zwischen 3,0 und 3,4 (S. 116).

Votingnachteile großer Fondsanbieter? Shareholder Engagement by Large Institutional Investors von Suren Gomtsian vom 25. August 2019: „The study also shows that the distinction between actively-managed and passive index-tracker funds or UK versus foreign funds matters less than expected. …concerns about “home bias” in engagement or “engagement passivity” of passive funds may be overstated. The negative effects of the increasing share of foreign institutional ownership at the expense of local investors or passive funds at the expense of actively managed funds may well not be as worrying as we predict. …The largest fund families are too big to be active in all situations; they also face the competitive pressure of cutting fund management costs (S. 46). … Large asset managers, whether passively- or actively managed, have neither expertise, nor incentives for studying company-specific performance data and proposing possible solutions, for example, by voting individually on every board candidate. …Numerous studies looked at the effect of corporate governance in general and specific governance proposals on firm performance, and the evidence is contradictory” (S. 47).

Engagement bringt bisher wenig: Listed equity snapshot 2017 – 2020 der Principles for Responsible Investment vom 8. Oktober 2020: “Despite the examples being self-selected, just 22% of them resulted in some type of change by the investee company. After a process of engagement, the most common result was an improvement in disclosure or some other commitment with diversity and executive remuneration recording the highest levels of success”. Mein Kommentar: Tolle interaktive Datenbank die – positiv formuliert – zeigt, wie viel auch große PRI Unterzeichner noch verbessern können.

Verkaufsdrohungspotential (Divestment) ist besser als Engagement: Institutional Investor Horizon and Firm Valuation around the World von Simon Döring , Wolfgang Drobetz , Sadok El Ghoul , Omrane Guedhami und Henning Schröder vom 8. Juni 2020.: “While long-term institutional investors are more likely to engage in relationship investing and exercise voice to influence managers directly, short-term investors are more willing to sell their shares and thus are more likely to exert influence indirectly through exit or the threat of exit. … Firms with a higher ratio of short-horizon institutional investors exhibit higher market-to-book ratios. …We do not find conclusive evidence on the relation between long-term institutional ownership and firm valuation. Overall, these results indicate that short-term investors, and in particular foreign short-term institutions, are more effective in aligning managers’ interests with their own. … we find that the positive valuation effect of short-term institutions is particularly strong in countries with high market liquidity and in firms with high stock liquidity” (S. 38/39).

Wealth Management und Fintech

ESG ist auch für Vermögensverwalter wichtig: Wealth Management Top Trends 2021 von Cap Gemini von …: “Sustainability-focused investing topped the agenda …” (S. 24) und Vieles mehr mit interessanten Beispielen. Mein Kommentar: Hier ist eine passendes Angebot für Vermögensverwalter: 12 Impact- und ESG Portfolios online – Verantwortungsvolle (ESG) Geldanlage (prof-soehnholz.com)

Millionäre haben falsche Überzeugungen: Millionaires speak: What drives their personal investment decisions von Svetlana Bender James J. Choi Danielle Dyson Adriana Z. Robertson vom Oktober 2020: “At the individual stock level, rich investors collectively believe that high-profitability stocks offer high risk-adjusted returns. … Past fund manager performance is seen as a strong evidence of stock-picking skill … “(S. 32).

Robo-Advice für reiche Männer: Digitales Anlegen in der Schweiz – ein Markt mit Potenzial von Andreas Dietrich, Tatiana Agnesens und Reto Wernli von der Hochschule Luzern vom  25. November 2020: „So hat sich die Anzahl an Angeboten im Bereich des digitalen Anlegens in den vergangenen Jahren – trotz einigen Marktaustritten – hierzulande weiter erhöht. Einerseits sind verschiedene FinTech-Start-ups mit neuen Geschäftsmodellen in diesen Markt vorgedrungen. Andererseits reagieren zunehmend auch etablierte Banken auf die entsprechenden Entwicklungen und lancieren unterschiedliche digitale Anlagelösungen. Diese derzeit im Markt verfügbaren 18 Angebote unterscheiden sich teilweise ziemlich stark. Auch der Übergang zwischen «echten» Robo Advisory Lösungen und der digital unterstützten, klassischen Vermögensverwaltung ist zunehmend fliessend. … Der typische Nutzer digitaler Anlagelösungen ist gemäss dieser Studie ein gut gebildeter, besserverdienender und vermögender Mann aus der Deutschschweiz. Das Durchschnittsalter eines Nutzers von digitalen Anlageprodukten liegt bei knapp 50 Jahren“ (S. 33). „Insgesamt gehen wir davon aus, dass sich solche Produkte in den nächsten Jahren zunehmend als Standardangebote bei vielen Banken etablieren werden und sich das Volumen entsprechend erhöhen wird. Gleichzeitig werden solche Lösungen in den nächsten fünf Jahren – bei einer Betrachtung des gesamten Anlagevolumens – hierzulande in einer Nische verbleiben“ (S. 34).

Crowdfunding ist riskant: Financial Literacy and Security-based Crowdfunding von Michele Meoli, Alice Rossi und Silvio Vismara vom 13. November: We study 432 security-based crowdfunding platforms active across the 37 OECD countries from 2007 to 2019 and document that one out of three (30%) platforms have closed (S. 23).

Kostenloser US-Modellportfoliomarktplatzt schliesst: The Latest In Financial #AdvisorTech von Michael Kitces vom Dezember 2020: “On the one hand, the fact that Oranj wasn’t able to be successful in gaining traction with advisors – even with a price point of free – emphasizes how, in the end, it’s not just the price point of software that dictates adoption (or not), but the switching costs of how difficult it is to go from one piece of advisor software to another…”

Blackrock macht jetzt auch Direct Indexing: Weekend Reading for Financial Planners (Nov 28-29) von Michael Kitces vom 27. November 2020: “Blackrock announced that it was acquiring Separately Managed Account (SMA) provider Aperio … suggesting that Blackrock is now making a “billion-dollar bet” on Direct Indexing taking hold amongst financial advisors in the coming years … it may not be clear whether Blackrock is picking up on an early trend, or may actually “cause” it to occur (given Blackrock’s own distribution capabilities), but either way, the fall of 2020 will likely, in retrospect, be seen as the watershed moment when the industry began to take Direct Indexing seriously” (s.a. Despite tepid net flows in 2020, Aperio finds its white knight; BlackRock makes a deal to compete with buyers of Parametric, Motif and Folio von Brooke Southall vom 26. November 2020). Mein Kommentar vgl. Direct ESG Indexing: Die beste ESG Investmentmöglichkeit auch für Privatkunden? – Verantwortungsvolle (ESG) Geldanlage (prof-soehnholz.com)

Buchtipp

Viele gute  und schlechte Algos: “Hello World – How to Be Human in the Age of the Machine” von Hannah Fry von 2018: “There is no doubting the profound positive impact that automation has had on all of our lives” (S. 198). “I have struggled to find a single example of a perfectly fair algorithm” (S.200). “Imagine we designed them to support humans in their decisions, rather than instruct them. To be transparent about why they came to a particular decision, rather than just inform us on  the results” (S. 201). “In the age of algorithm, humans have never been more important” (S. 202).