Academic literature on the topic 'RobecoSAM'

La sostenibilidad corporativa implica una amplia perspectiva que sugiere la creación de valor para los stakeholders y requiere desarrollar algunos compromisos a nivel económico, social, ambiental y de gobierno. La medición de los niveles de sostenibilidad corporativa tiene lugar a través de diferentes herramientas, siendo los rankings de sostenibilidad uno de los instrumentos más populares. Sin embargo, el impacto de estos indicadores en el valor de mercado es controvertido. Consecuentemente, nuestro objetivo es analizar la influencia del nivel de sostenibilidad sobre el valor de mercado de un conjunto de empresas. Para ello, aislamos el impacto del factor sostenibilidad de otra serie de efectos relacionados con la evolución general de los mercados financieros. Hemos utilizado información contenida en un ranking sostenible: el medallero elaborado por RobecoSAM. Nuestros resultados revelan que los inversores no valorar por igual los diferentes movimientos y calificaciones derivadas de la participación en un ranking sostenible. Corporate sustainability implies a broad perspective that suggests the creation of value for stakeholders and requires developing some commitments at the economic, social, environmental and governance levels. Measurement of the level of corporate sustainability occurs via different tools, with sustainable rankings being one of the most popular instruments. However, the impact of these indicators on the market value is controversial. Consequently, our aim is to analyse the influence of the level of sustainability on the market value of a set of companies. To do so, we isolate the impact of the sustainability factor from other series of effects related to the general evolution of financial markets. We have used the information contained in a sustainable ranking: the medal display table provided by RobecoSAM. Our results reveal that investors do not equivalently value the different movements and marks derived from participation in a sustainability ranking.

The article examines the essence of ESG ratings, the causes and history of their origin and dissemination. It has been found that sustainable development of the companies is in the interests of both investors, companies themselves and other stakeholders, as there is a clear positive correlation between commercial success, financial performance and the efforts of businesses to implement the principles of sustainable development. One of the important tools for evaluating the effectiveness of sustainable development of companies, their risks and potential opportunities in environmental, social and corporate governance spheres are ESG ratings, which provide the conversion of large amounts of information into assessments that can be used in management decision-making. It has been defined that ESG ratings are determined by more than one hundred specialized rating agencies and companies – providers of information and financial decision-making tools. The classification and characteristics of the main ESG ratings are presented. The proposed classification differentiates ESG ratings on such attributes as the level of coverage of companies; specialization; transparency of formation methodology; information used for ratings’ preparation; scale used to rank companies. Examination of the nine best in terms of quality and usefulness international ESG ratings (RobecoSAM Corporate Sustainability Assessment, Climate, Water & Forest Scores, Sustainalytics' ESG Risk Ratings, MSCI ESG Ratings, ISS ESG Governance QualityScore, ISS-Oekom Corporate Rating, Bloomberg ESG Disclosure Scores, FTSE Russell's ESG Ratings, Thomson Reuter's ESG Scores) and the first in Ukraine professional corporate sustainability rating Sustainable Ukraine allowed to establish that they differ significantly in algorithms of their formation, areas and indicators for companies’ assessment, sources of data used, etc., however, the common characteristics of the most authoritative ESG ratings are wide market coverage, transparency and correctness of the methodology used, experience and competence of specialists – developers of ratings.

This paper examines the impact of board of director gender diversity on organizational outcomes associated with gendered corporate social responsibility (GCSR). The study employs a sample of 458 companies reported in the 2018 RobecoSam sustainability report to examine the relationship between the board of director gender diversity (GD) to GCSR performance. In particular, it examines the influence of GD on the percentage of women hired by a company, female employee turnover, and recruitment of female managers. The study shows companies with high GD have a higher percentage of female employees and have greater female representation in managerial ranks. There was no support for higher GD and lower turnover among female employees.

Titel: Investerares riskexponering i hållbara investeringar - En studie av asymmetrisk risk och hur den påverkas av positivt urval och dynamisk SRI Nivå: Examensarbete på kandidatnivå i företagsekonomi Författare: Kim Jonsson & Jacob Larsson Handledare: Peter Lindberg Datum: Maj, 2018 Syfte: “Undersöka huruvida en portföljs negativa asymmetriska risk, ur ett investerarperspektiv påverkas av positivt urval utifrån dynamisk SRI, baserad på ESG-faktorer”.  Metod: Konstruktion av en hypotetisk portfölj bestående av aktier, utifrån dynamisk SRI och positivt urval. Med finansiell backtracking mäts hur portföljen presterat avseende asymmetriskt betavärde förutsatt att den varit implementerade under en historisk tidsperiod. Portföljen reallokeras efter förutbestämda kriterier vid ingången av varje år under den historiska tidsperioden. Resultat: Den konstruerade portföljen uppvisar konsekvent lägre betavärde än marknaden, både traditionellt och asymmetriskt. Det asymmetriska betavärdet är, för den tidsperiod som inkluderar finanskrisen 2008, högre vid utfall under medelvärdet för att sedan avta vid negativa utfall. Då studien justeras för finanskrisen förändras resultatet till att visa successivt avtagande betavärden för utfall under medelvärdet och vidare, negativa utfall. Slutsats: Studiens resultat indikerar att urvalskriterier baserade på ESG-faktorer och positiv urvalsmetod, under vissa premisser har påverkan på portföljens asymmetriska riskexponering. Denna slutsats tyder också på att företag genom aktivt hållbarhetsarbete har möjlighet att minska sin kapitalkostnad, då investerares avkastningskrav på företaget sjunker. Forskningsbidrag: Utvecklad insikt i praktisk tillämpning av asymmetrisk riskanalys och avseende att en portfölj med begränsat antal tillgångar kan prestera lägre systematisk riskexponering än marknaden. Samt att urvalsmetod och urvalskriterier kan påverka asymmetrisk riskexponering. Vidare forskning: Framförallt avseende om någon av hållbarhetsfaktorerna har större betydelse för den asymmetriska systematiska riskexponeringen än övriga. Ytterligare forskning inom AMH och dess paradigm är också nödvändigt då random walk är ifrågasatt. Nyckelord: Asymmetrisk risk, hållbarhet, ESG, betavärde, dynamisk SRI, positivt urval, urvalskriterier, portföljallokering och RobecoSAM.
Title: Investors risk exposure for sustainable investments – A study of asymmetrical risk and how it is affected by positive screening and dynamic SRI Level: Bachelor thesis in Business Administration Author: Kim Jonsson & Jacob Larsson Supervisor: Peter Lindberg Date: May, 2018 Aim: “Investigate whether a portfolios negative asymmetric risk, from an investors perspective, is influenced by positive screening based on dynamic SRI, based on ESG-factors”. Method: Construction of a hypothetical portfolio consisting of stocks, based on dynamic SRI and positive screening. Financial backtracking measures how the portfolio performed regarding asymmetric beta values, provided it was implemented during a historical period of time. The portfolio is reallocated according to predefined criteria in the beginning of each year during the historical period. Results: The constructed portfolio consistently demonstrates lower beta values than the market, both traditionally and asymmetrically. The asymmetric beta value, is for the period of time including the 2008 financial crisis, higher than traditional beta value at outcomes below the mean value, then decreases in negative outcomes. As the study is adjusted for the financial crisis, the result changes to show gradually decreasing beta values ​​for outcomes below average and further negative outcomes. Conclusions: The study results indicate that selection criteria based on ESG factors and positive selection screening, under certain conditions, affect the asymmetric risk exposure of the portfolio. This conclusion also indicates that companies through active sustainability awareness have the opportunity to reduce their cost of capital, as investors' required rate of return declines. Contribution of the thesis: Practical insight regarding asymmetric risk analysis, and the fact that a portfolio composed of a limited amount of assets potentially demonstrates lower systematic risk exposure than the market. Furthermore, selection methods and selection criteria can affect asymmetric risk exposure. Suggestion for future research: If any of the sustainability factors are of greater significance regarding the asymmetric risk exposure. Further research within AMH and its paradigms is also necessary as random walk is questioned. Key words: Asymmetric risk, sustainability, ESG, beta value, dynamic SRI, positive screening, selection criteria, portfolio allocation and RobecoSAM

Environmental, Social and Governance measurements have significantly increased in usage due to growing concerns for environmental and sustainability problems in today’s world. However, with no commonly agreed-upon criteria for ESG ratings, the scoring measure creates confusion both at the investor and company level. Besides, ESG agencies have different processes and parameters for measuring ESG compliance, which contributes to the problem. The study examines four ESG rating agencies’ rating models and ESG scores to get a better understanding of deviations in ESG scores among Nordic companies. By also studying the correlation amongst ESG scores and market capitalizations in firms, the paper hopes to shed light on if any relationships exist between them. Our results show that the four major ESG raters in the study showed a weak to a non-significant correlation against each other. The maximum correlation found was 0.419 between Thomson Reuters and MSCI. RobecoSAM and MSCI showed the lowest significant correlation at 0.291. Sustainalytics was detected not to show any significant correlation with the other raters. Correlation among market capitalization and ESG Raters was detected to not correlate to a greater extent. Only one ESG rater, RobecoSAM, showed a significant size to score-correlation at 0.278 with market capitalization. Thus, market capitalization does not seem to have any significant influence on ESG agencies’ decisions to set scores. Précising the study’s findings, the raters’ methods deviate from one another, but also how ESG raters make use of underlying factors.