Sherry Madera, in Baku for COP29, says more companies are reporting on climate than ever, despite a pushback against ESG.
4 min
BAKU, Azerbaijan—With more than 23,000 companies representing some $6.4 trillion of purchasing power reporting their emissions through CDP, the not-for-profit charity formerly known as the Carbon Disclosure Project is one of the leading names within the corporate sustainability space.
The U.K.-based nonprofit, which has been operating since 2000, was set up to encourage companies to disclose their environmental impact, including their carbon footprint, water usage and effects on forests and nature.
But amid a recent backlash against environmental, social and corporate governance initiatives, and as clean-energy stocks have slumped this year, concerns are growing over how important climate and sustainability reporting has become to companies. Greenhushing, the idea of companies pursuing climate plans without announcing them, has become a common practice, mainly because they fear being called out for greenwashing.
But, according to CDP Chief Executive Sherry Madera, these doubts should be put aside. A growing requirement for mandatory reporting, improved data and companies’ willingness to engage with supply chains are all signs that corporate engagement with climate and sustainability is still top of mind.
WSJ Pro Sustainable Business spoke to Madera at COP29 in Baku to discuss corporate engagement with climate and the push for company disclosures. The conversation has been edited for clarity and length.
WSJ: How will the Trump victory affect company policy around disclosures?
Madera: Climate change doesn’t start and stop with elections—and neither does climate action. Leading companies aren’t waiting to be told what to do; they’re already disclosing climate data because they know transparency equals opportunity. With 86% of the S&P 500 now voluntarily disclosing, it’s clear: U.S. companies aspiring to be global leaders understand that climate action is no longer optional—it’s a necessity. Regardless of shifting political landscapes, the competitive advantage is undeniable: those who act now will secure access to capital, reduce risks and lead in efficiency. The future isn’t just about compliance; it’s about staying ahead in a global economy where sustainability defines success. Any administration that cares about the economy has to care about data, science and climate.
WSJ: How can you encourage the private sector to disclose more climate and supply-chain data?
Madera: CDP is 24 years old. So the idea of surfacing information for investors, customers, economists and government regulators to take action on climate is not new for us. But it’s really come into its own in the last few years when disclosures became mandatory in many places around the world or have been signposted to be mandatory in the next few years.
I think that there’s a real shift in thinking about just setting targets versus now implementation. If we find ways of making sure that the money flows to more sustainable investment options, I think that really underpins what we as economies are trying to do.
There’s a lot of talk about the pushback, but the data doesn’t show that for us. So year-on-year we’re growing at about 24% voluntary disclosures from companies worldwide and that includes countries that don’t have a mandatory disclosure plan in place, i.e. the U.S.
Businesses are willing [to disclose] not because they necessarily have the primary directive of saving the planet but they’re willing to share information and to disclose data because it’s a business necessity now.
WSJ: How do you see corporate disclosures evolving over the next few years?
Madera: I see more mandatory disclosure is coming into place around the world and I think that’s a great thing. CDP has been encouraging this for decades so that’s great with the qualifier that says actually harmonising what is being asked for from a mandatory perspective is advantageous.
The reality is if you look at principles, frameworks, standards and data, the data is quite consistent and it’s just about making sure you’re mapping it and tagging that data so it doesn’t need to be written multiple times. And that efficiency I think is going to be really important because essentially every dollar you spend on reporting is a dollar you can’t spend on action and that doesn’t seem right.
WSJ: Do you see the role of the chief sustainability officer evolving and becoming more aligned with the chief financial officer? Would that be a good thing?
Madera : I think it’s a good thing. The CFO needs to be convinced that there is value in investing in servicing this information, in disclosing and being transparent. So being closely linked to other elements of the business, particularly the CFO who really has a say on the money that’s being spent.
CDP works with over 300 of the world’s largest supply chain owners and they’re very keen on looking at their scope 3. Not because they just want to report on it, but because they want to actually dig into the data so that they can work with their supply chain to find out ways that they can lower their emissions.
A great example of this is Walmart. So the Walmart gigaton project is something that CDP was closely involved in setting up and they came in and then the project was to lower emissions by a gigaton in about 15 years and they came in and achieved that six years early and they did that because they looked at the data from their supply chain and they actively engaged with those members and supply chain in order to be able to help them change their energy mix, helping them to find renewables as an alternative.
WSJ: With fewer companies expected to attend COP this year, how will you encourage more of them to disclose?
Madera: I have the luxury of speaking to many international corporations as well as private companies and the main thing they say to me is they want clear policy because that allows them to have very clear steer on how it is that they can build their business to be a sustainable business.
What I would hope we can see more of particularly starting now and going all the way through to COP30 in Brazil, is that deeper engagement of companies that are working within these jurisdictions to be able to know really clearly what it is that they are going to be asked to contribute to those national goals and be an important part of them.
WSJ: Do governments influence company climate policy?
Madera: In 2024, I think over 70% of the world’s population has gone, or will go to the polls and obviously climate isn’t the only issue, but it is one of the issues in various places around the world.
Businesses do want clear signposting in terms of policies and in terms of government support or encouragement. More companies are continuing to disclose to ensure that they’re competitive.
But they’re also tending to be quieter about it than they were a couple of years ago. Before they were proudly screaming from the rooftops that they were transparent, and they were setting targets and they were making progress and these are their transition plans. What we’re finding is that they’re disclosing the data, but they’re doing so with less fanfare and less engagement with us to try and promote themselves.
So they’re keeping their heads below the parapets, it doesn’t mean that the data is not there and it’s not moving.
Copyright 2020, Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. LEARN MORE
The Australian leather house has opened an immersive four-day pop-up in Manhattan, unveiling its Bloom Collection and redefining what a product launch can look like.
Following the successful launch of its Palais Collection, MAISON de SABRÉ has unveiled a new modular handbag system offering more than 720 styling combinations.
Wall Street’s hottest momentum trade has reversed sharply, as former winners tumble and heavily shorted stocks surge.
3 min
Wall Street’s hottest trade has gone ice cold.
For years, it paid off to buy stocks that were rising in price—and bet against struggling shares. The momentum trade was especially profitable this year, as investors piled into hot stocks including Micron Technology, Nvidia, Advanced Micro Devices and other artificial-intelligence darlings while wagering against those likely to be hurt by the embrace of AI.
The S&P 500 Momentum Index soared 44% in the second quarter, its best quarterly performance on record, and it surged 133% over the past five years, nearly double the broad market’s performance.
Mega funds and rookie investors alike piled into the trade, some using leverage and options contracts in an effort to amplify their returns, propelling the underlying shares higher.
“It is a self-fulfilling prophecy,” said Matthew Tym, managing director at Cantor Fitzgerald, of the trade.
Suddenly, the trade is a loser. The momentum index has tumbled more than 9% since July 1, lagging behind the S&P 500’s 2.8% gain. The index—which tracks stocks in the S&P 500 based on a “momentum score”—is on track for the biggest quarterly underperformance in 25 years. July was the second-worst month for the momentum trade in around 40 years, according to Bank of America estimates; the only month worse was April 2009, in the teeth of the global financial crisis.
Hedge funds that bought momentum shares while shorting low-momentum stocks suffered even more. At the same time, a basket of the most popular stocks held by hedge funds tracked by Goldman Sachs recorded its biggest one-month underperformance in July relative to the S&P 500 in more than 20 years, according to the bank’s analysts.
Momentum trading is based on a rather simple observation: Investments that go up tend to keep outperforming; those that underperform often remain laggards. This kind of trading might seem too simple a stock-picking strategy to work. Yet it often has.
“For decades, it didn’t take a lot of sophistication to run a momentum strategy and make a decent living at it,” says Agustin Lebron, senior researcher at EquiLibre, a trading firm.
Part of the reason: It takes a while for corporate and other information to spread to various investors, so they slowly build positions, producing buying momentum.
“A huge pension fund can’t flip around its positions in a day,” says Lebron. “Behavioral biases also account for some of the effect, as well—people tend to sell their winners too early and hold losers too long.”
Fans of the strategy point to the human tendency to extrapolate from past results—and chase investment returns—noting that momentum patterns have been evident in markets for decades, even centuries. They also say that some of the worst months for momentum strategies are during longer periods of outperformance.
Some have been doing the trade by buying the strongest investments in a sector while shorting the weakest; others lean in to rising markets or asset classes. Still others use a quantitative approach or turn to banks or others who sell ways to make distinct wagers on momentum as a “tradable factor” or a “thematic basket.”
The fans remain believers. “Any strategy has disappointing periods,” says Antti Ilmanen, global co-head of the portfolio solutions group at AQR Capital Management.
The surge in Moderna and other biotech stocks helped crush the momentum trade. These shares were among the most heavily shorted in recent years, but positive news on a cancer vaccine from Moderna and Merck sent those stocks flying, crushing some quant and other hedge funds. Moderna is up around 150% so far this month.
These traders had an especially rough day on Aug. 19, which Goldman Sachs told its clients was the worst day for “systematic long-short managers” in more than two years. About half of the losses were because of momentum trades, the bank said.
Some traders have begun to short, or bet against, the very stocks that propelled the momentum trade earlier this year. Net short positions in futures tied to the Nasdaq-100 index among speculators recently climbed to some of the highest levels of the past two decades, according to data from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
The about-face is a sign of how markets have become more treacherous for investors, even as indexes keep climbing. Part of the issue: the recent meltdown of Situational Awareness, a hedge fund that had piled into some of the most popular momentum shares, including chip stocks. After a period of market tumult, Nvidia shares rocketed almost 9% after its earnings, showing how quickly sentiment can shift.
Some investors say the run-up in share prices driving tech stocks higher reminds them at times of the dot-com frenzy decades ago.
Mike Ogborne, the founder of San Francisco-based Ogborne Capital Management, said he has grown more cautious on technology stocks and is keeping more of his portfolio in cash than he typically does.
And he is nervous about the surge in spending by technology giants and quarterly capital expenditures that keep rising.
“It is a little bit like Cinderella and the clock striking midnight. You don’t know when midnight is going to come around,” Ogborne said. “They don’t send a memo around telling you when the capex cycle is over.”
