Decarbonization Factors
An exploration of the relative performance of portfolio decarbonization strategies, and how performance is affected by institutional investor fund flows.
An exploration of the relative performance of portfolio decarbonization strategies, and how performance is affected by institutional investor fund flows.
The authors suggest more effective ways to integrate ESG data, however imperfect, into investment decision-making processes.
A deep dive on the private companies that are working on commercializing fusion.
The Investor Agenda 2019 Annual Progress Report showcases investor action and progress made on climate change. To date, nearly 1,200 investors have taken action in one or more of the focus areas of The Investor Agenda since its launch in September 2018.
Abstract
In the face of accelerating climate change, investors are making capital allocations seeking to decarbonize portfolios by reducing the carbon emissions of their holdings. To understand the performance of portfolio decarbonization strategies and investor behavior towards decarbonization we construct decarbonization factors that go long low carbon intensity sectors, industries, or firms and short high carbon intensity. We consider several portfolio formation strategies and find strategies that lowered carbon emissions more aggressively performed better. Decarbonization factor returns are associated with contemporaneous institutional flows into the factors. Buying decarbonization factors when coincident flows are positive while selling when they are negative produces significantly positive alphas. Combining decarbonization factors that have positive contemporaneous flows would provide investors with significantly superior returns and continuous exposure to low carbon portfolios. The results are more pronounced in Europe relative to the US. Our results suggest that institutional investor flows contain information about anticipated fundamentals related to climate change developments.
Written Testimony of Alicia Seiger, Managing Director, Stanford Sustainable Finance Initiative. Prepared for the U.S. House of Representatives, Committee on Financial Services, Subcommittee on National Security, International Development and Monetary Policy.
Peabody Energy Corp. scrapped an $800 million junk-bond sale meant to refinance existing debt and pave the way for a joint venture as investors increasingly wary of the prospects for coal producers demanded double the average yield of similar BB rated peers.
Case study from North Carolina how value-based care is being implemented at the individual provider level, and some of the issues to be worked through.
“I no longer find it defensible to say that our investment strategy is only to maximize the value of our endowment—just as it’s no longer defensible for a corporation to say its only responsibility is to maximize shareholder value.”
—Darren Walker, Ford Foundation President
Investors in the upcoming initial public offering of The We Company are being asked to lower their standards for corporate governance beyond what other technology startups have demanded, say securities law experts.
MSCI analyzes what tighter anti-plastics regulation and negative consumer sentiment could mean for the oil and gas companies producing petrochemicals – the main inputs for plastics. The financial impact could be significant.
Companies and investors are increasingly engaging on sustainability. The recent moves on climate issues made by Royal Dutch Shell, Glencore, and BP show how investor pressure (and in particular the Climate Action 100+ investor group) is helping shape corporate behavior. Last month, for the first time in its 30-year history, the nonprofit sustainability organization Ceres
Consumers are increasingly focusing on sustainability when making purchasing decisions, according to research by the Center for Sustainable Business at NYU Stern. Their analysis shows that 50% of the growth in sales of consumer packaged goods in the last five years came from purchases of products marketed as ‘sustainable’.
As consumers move away from single-use plastics, Coke and Pepsi are starting to embrace a ‘bring your own bottle’ business model, particularly on college campuses.
A recent study by CDP, formerly known as the Carbon Disclosure Project, reveals that some of the largest companies in the world expect climate change to pose a trillion dollar financial burden to their businesses. And, many of those effects are expected to be felt within the next five years.
The impact of ESG ratings on companies’ cost of capital is on the rise. According to Bloomberg New Energy Finance, $32 Billion in loans are now tied to ESG ratings. That’s up from $3 Billion just two years ago. However, the data is still controversial and inconsistent, as the ratings don’t necessarily reflect actual performance
A 2017 study reported that companies with the highest ESG ratings outperformed the lowest-rated firms by as much as 40%. In 2018, Bank of America Merrill Lynch observed that “firms with a better ESG record than their peers produced higher three-year returns, were more likely to become high-quality stocks, were less likely to have large
Berkeley, California is requiring coffee shops to charge a 25-cent fee per disposable cup to encourage people to produce less plastic waste.
Decreasing meat consumption will not have as large an impact on the environment as many believe. Meat production does not generate more greenhouse gases than the transportation sector, and the continuation of meat consumption is necessary to sustain the increasing world population.
The privatization of academic programs leads to an increase in profits, and an increase in inequality among those who can attend college. Online colleges, if not for their high prices, could have lessened inequality within the higher education system.