The last few years have seen a surge of interest in environmental, social and governance (ESG)-focused funds. These assess potential investments’ success in cutting carbon emissions and improving racial or social diversity and governance.
Two subcategories of the ESG strategy are socially responsible investing (SRI) and impact investing. When it comes to SRI, investors actively favour sectors such as healthcare or renewable energy and avoid businesses such as tobacco firms.
By contrast, a broader ESG strategy might hold Royal Dutch Shell in its portfolio because on some screens it scores well for reducing its emissions (not least by being focused on natural gas). Impact investing, meanwhile, focuses on a particular area to achieve positive, measurable outcomes.
Subscribe to MoneyWeek
Subscribe to MoneyWeek today and get your first six magazine issues absolutely FREE
Sign up to Money Morning
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter
Running the numbers
ESG investing relies heavily on numbers-led screening based on data sets frequently provided by established market-data firms, such as MSCI or IHS Markit.
There is some debate about how these are constructed, where the data is sourced from (usually the reporting firms) and why it varies so significantly.
The self-reporting of data has prompted experts’ calls for uniform, perhaps even legislated, accounting standards. Other critics point to the relative lack of data on social statistics. Very few screens look at CEOs’ pay, wage differentials or labour representation.
Many ESG strategies lean heavily towards equities with a growth bias that favours technology companies. This has helped many ESG funds to outperform “conventional” equities in the last few years.
But as Vincent Deluard of US-based investment house StoneX observes, the trend has created a skew towards companies that overpay CEOs, employ fewer staff than their old-economy counterparts, invest less in capital expenditure and pay less tax. Tens of billions of pounds are flowing into ESG funds, partly due to their eco-friendly selling point. But there is a strong chance that both the energy complex and old-world cyclical industrial companies will significantly outperform the new world of ESG stocks in the coming months and years.
This could undermine ESG funds’ appeal, especially if the clean-energy stocks – which look overpriced on several measures – start to depreciate sharply. London-based fintech Util argues that ESG is a broken model and that we need to replace it with something else. Cue SRI and impact investing.
Finding alternatives
UK-listed investment trust Menhaden Resource Efficiency (LSE: MHN) launched in 2015 with a broad sustainability strategy. It made mistakes and its share price languished before the board narrowed its focus to profiting from the efficient use of energy and resources. This is a much more interesting remit and the fund is trading at an unreasonable 25% discount to its net asset value (NAV).
Impact investing carries risks, because many of the businesses likely to have an impact may not be very well established. But an excellent example is Home Reit (LSE: HOME), which generates an income by renting out property to the homeless and those struggling with addiction problems, thereby achieving a direct, quantifiable, social outcome.
Combined, these could constitute a socially responsible part of your portfolio. Forget the all-encompassing ESG approach and set a few objectives. Identify the impact outcomes you’d like to help achieve, then find funds that focus on this. Schroders and Big Society Capital are already backing specialist funds such as their joint Social Impact Trust. Concentrating on a few impacts might mean you don’t tick every box: a business that focuses on emissions reductions may not have a great record in other areas. But you can help make a discernible difference.
-
Is a mortgage in retirement always a bad idea?A mystery shopper exercise shows high street lenders are “shunning” retirees looking to take out a mortgage. Are they right to do so?
-
Three funds to consider as UK small caps trade at 30% discountUK small caps have been unloved for some time, but a shifting economic environment could give them a boost
-
Investment opportunities in the world of Coca-ColaThere is far more to Coca-Cola than just one giant firm. The companies that bottle and distribute the ubiquitous soft drink are promising investments in their own right.
-
Streaming services are the new magic money tree for investors – but for how long?Opinion Streaming services are in full bloom and laden with profits, but beware – winter is coming, warns Matthew Lynn
-
'Pension funds shouldn't be pushed into private equity sector'Opinion The private-equity party is over, so don't push pension funds into the sector, says Merryn Somerset Webb.
-
A fund that looks past the short term in AsiaGrowth should remain strong, but successful managers also need to focus on governance. Here's how to find active opportunities in Asian markets.
-
Greg Abel: Warren Buffett’s heir takes the throneGreg Abel is considered a safe pair of hands as he takes centre stage at Berkshire Hathaway. But he arrives after one of the hardest acts to follow in investment history, Warren Buffett. Can he thrive?
-
Who will be the next Warren Buffett?Opinion There won’t be another Warren Buffett. Times have changed, and the opportunities are no longer there, says Matthew Lynn.
-
Will Comstock crash – or soar?Opinion The upside for Comstock, a solar panel-recycling and biomass-refining group, dwarfs the downside, says Dominic Frisby.
-
Can new management turn RIT Capital around?After several years of poor performance, there is growing evidence that RIT has turned the corner, says Max King
