Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 553

Why ESG can still play a crucial role in investor portfolios

ESG (environment, social and governance) has become a fixture of investing in financial markets over the last decade. It refers to a range of factors that can affect investment decisions beyond day-to-day financial impacts relevant to investors and companies. Examples include climate change and decarbonisation, workplace safety, board composition, as well as management remuneration and accountability.

As public awareness and interest in ESG issues have grown, it has created a wave of new investment options marketed as ESG focussed using various labels such as 'responsible', 'sustainable', 'socially aware' and 'ethical'. Despite being widely used, there are no standardised, generally accepted definitions of these terms and they can vary widely. Two products with the same label provided by different funds can have quite different portfolios drawn from very different investable universes. This requires a level of due diligence and research on the part of people considering investing in them.

ESG denotes quality

The use of terms like “ESG investing” and “ESG products” is somewhat grating for any sensible investor. It suggests a false choice between two different types of investing – one which incorporates consideration of ESG issues and another which doesn’t. In reality, investors seeking long term returns have always had a focus on investing in assets and businesses that have quality as a core tenet, demonstrated by their capacity to generate consistent, sustainable and growing cashflows and earnings in a way that balances the needs of various stakeholders. The increasing prominence of ESG into investment processes is simply the natural evolution to a more comprehensive framework for assessing quality within an investment context.

ESG labelled funds typically invest in a restricted universe relative to more mainstream funds, with exclusions or negative screens for producers of products like tobacco, fossil fuels and weapons as well as companies involved in alcohol, gambling, human rights violations or other controversial activities. In addition, these funds may be marketed as having various positive attributes in terms of sustainability objectives or other desirable features. These restrictions and attributes inevitably raise issues for investment firms or superannuation funds, their members and regulators, around the scope of the negative screens and measurement of positive attributes claimed.

Look under the hood of ESG products

It is incumbent on the investor or super fund member to check the product is aligned with their expectations; are they aware of the scope of the exclusions and the metrics used to assess positive attributes? For example, does the negative screen for tobacco apply only to producers of tobacco or does it extend to related products? Should it apply to companies deriving revenue from tobacco sales or packaging above a certain threshold? In the case of weapons, will they be comfortable investing in a company that has incidental exposure because it produces components that go into fighter aircraft? Likewise, what are the metrics used to determine the positive attributes claimed? Will the investor be satisfied with the positive attribute of the fund based on the percentage invested in ESG “leaders” as determined by a third party ESG ratings provider – noting that different providers will apply different methodologies?

For the manager, there may be higher cost in terms of compliance checking to ensure the exclusions are applied in line with the product mandate. Higher costs can mean that these products may have higher management fees impacting net returns but it’s not always so – it’s wise to always check the fees and costs attached to any product you choose.

Equally important is the effect of negative screens on investment performance. Any negative screen will by definition produce investment outcomes that deviate from that of the broader market and benchmark indices. For example, the exclusion of fossil fuel companies means that these products will have a structural underweight exposure to the energy sector, with a corresponding overweight exposure to other sectors, such as the technology sector. For most of the last decade, this has been a winning trade with the global oil price sitting above US$100/bbl in 2013 and then falling precipitously to under US$20/bbl during the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020. This was coupled with technology shares performing very strongly during this period. However, the recovery in the oil price over 2021 and 2022 to back over US$120/bbl and subsequent sell-off in technology names saw significant underperformance in these products relative to their mainstream counterparts.

Another consequence of restricting the investment universe is the potential inclusion of higher risk assets. Narrowing the universe can mean going down the quality spectrum or choosing assets that may be more volatile. It‘s important for those considering investing in these products to get comfort with the risk they are taking.

Regulators are also weighing in and we are seeing an increase in claims of “greenwashing.” While this word is relatively new, the concept it represents is the familiar one of misrepresentation or misleading and deceptive conduct. This is complicated by the lack of standardised definitions of terms like 'responsible', 'sustainable' or 'impact'. The Federal Government’s initiative to develop a framework for labelling and classification should help ensure greater alignment and greater clarity for investors.

In summary, the plethora of ESG labelled products provides people with an opportunity to invest their savings in a way that is aligned with their values. However, there can be substantial differences between different products even if they have the same label and as a result products vary widely and can be difficult to compare. As with any investment, it pays to do your research and understand the investment before making any choice.

 

Lou Capparelli is Head of ESG at UniSuper, a sponsor of Firstlinks. Please note that past performance isn’t an indicator of future performance. The information in this article is of a general nature and may include general advice. It doesn’t take into account your personal financial situation, needs or objectives. Before making any investment decision, you should consider your circumstances, the PDS and TMD relevant to you, and whether to consult a qualified financial adviser.

 

RELATED ARTICLES

Mike Murray on watching for the changing narrative

10 lessons from Larry Fink's 2022 Outlook

It's time to assess your super fund’s carbon footprint

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

16 ASX stocks to buy and hold forever, updated

This time last year, I highlighted 16 ASX stocks that investors could own indefinitely. One year on, I look at whether there should be any changes to the list of stocks as well as which companies are worth buying now. 

UniSuper’s boss flags a potential correction ahead

The CIO of Australia’s fourth largest super fund by assets, John Pearce, suggests the odds favour a flat year for markets, with the possibility of a correction of 10% or more. However, he’ll use any dip as a buying opportunity.

2025-26 super thresholds – key changes and implications

The ABS recently released figures which are used to determine key superannuation rates and thresholds that will apply from 1 July 2025. This outlines the rates and thresholds that are changing and those that aren’t.  

Is Gen X ready for retirement?

With the arrival of the new year, the first members of ‘Generation X’ turned 60, marking the start of the MTV generation’s collective journey towards retirement. Are Gen Xers and our retirement system ready for the transition?

Why the $5.4 trillion wealth transfer is a generational tragedy

The intergenerational wealth transfer, largely driven by a housing boom, exacerbates economic inequality, stifles productivity, and impedes social mobility. Solutions lie in addressing the housing problem, not taxing wealth.

What Warren Buffett isn’t saying speaks volumes

Warren Buffett's annual shareholder letter has been fixture for avid investors for decades. In his latest letter, Buffett is reticent on many key topics, but his actions rather than words are sending clear signals to investors.

Latest Updates

Investing

Designing a life, with money to spare

Are you living your life by default or by design? It strikes me that many people are doing the former and living according to others’ expectations of them, leading to poor choices including with their finances.

Investment strategies

A closer look at defensive assets for turbulent times

After the recent market slump, it's a good time to brush up on the defensive asset classes – what they are, why hold them, and how they can both deliver on your goals and increase the reliability of your desired outcomes.

Financial planning

Are lifetime income streams the answer or just the easy way out?

Lately, there's been a push by Government for lifetime income streams as a solution to retirement income challenges. We run the numbers on these products to see whether they deliver on what they promise.

Shares

Is it time to buy the Big Four banks?

The stellar run of the major ASX banks last year left many investors scratching their heads. After a recent share price pullback, has value emerged in these banks, or is it best to steer clear of them?

Investment strategies

The useful role that subordinated debt can play in your portfolio

If you’re struggling to replace the hybrid exposure in your portfolio, you’re not alone. Subordinated debt is an option, and here is a guide on what it is and how it can fit into your investment mix.

Shares

Europe is back and small caps there offer significant opportunities

Trump’s moves on tariffs, defence, and Ukraine, have awoken European Governments after a decade of lethargy. European small cap manager, Alantra Asset Management, says it could herald a new era for the continent.

Shares

Lessons from the rise and fall of founder-led companies

Founder-led companies often attract investors due to leaders' personal stakes and long-term vision. But founder presence alone does not guarantee success, and the challenge is to identify which ones will succeed in the long term.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.