TIME TO TAKE THE ‘E’ OUT OF ESG INVESTING - Kanebridge News
Share Button

TIME TO TAKE THE ‘E’ OUT OF ESG INVESTING

The decision by the boss of DWS to step down is a wake-up call to the investment industry as environmental claims come under growing scrutiny.

By ROCHELLE TOPLENSKY
Tue, Jun 7, 2022 11:42amGrey Clock 2 min

The days when selling ESG funds was an easy marketing ploy for fund managers are over.

Investing based on environmental, social and governance criteria has been a hugely popular new market for full-service asset managers struggling to compete with low-fee tracker funds. While this type of ethical investing can genuinely mean different things to different people, scrutiny of the environmental part of the claims is rising.

On Wednesday, Asoka Woehrmann, chief executive of DWS, Deutsche Bank’s minority-listed asset-management subsidiary, said he would resign after its coming annual general meeting. The news came the day after German authorities raided the offices of both companies amid allegations that DWS made misleading claims about ESG funds. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and federal prosecutors also have ongoing probes.

ESG investing has been a boon for the industry. Fund managers have often promised investors higher returns while doing good with their money. However, ESG is a slippery concept, without widely accepted definitions, criteria and metrics. Infamously, a single company’s ESG rating can vary widely between credible credit-rating firms.

That variance isn’t unreasonable. There are many ways to combine the three criteria into one score, and for any single one there can be honest disagreement about what good or bad actually looks like. For example, some might rank Shell highly on “E” because it has a plan to decarbonize its business, or poorly because it sells oil and plans to sell natural gas for years.

However, the scope for variance in environmental ratings is starting to narrow. European officials have set new rules for different categories of sustainable investments and are working on definitions of what is and isn’t green. The SEC is also working on its own set of rules. While the standards increase the compliance burden on fund managers, they should also help ensure investors are getting what they were promised, rather than just a lot of hot air.

Concerns about greenwashing—in which reality falls short of green claims—are widespread and recent events are only fanning the flames. The SEC recently fined Bank of New York Mellon $1.5 million for misleading claims about ESG funds. DWS reported far lower “ESG assets” in its most recent annual report than “ESG integrated” assets in the prior year. A whistleblower alleged last year that its disclosure was misleading. It will now be up to a new boss to draw a thicker line under the affair.

A speech last month entitled “Why investors need not worry about climate risk” from the head of responsible investment at HSBC’s Asset Management arm, in which he argued that the financial effects of climate change would be “de minimis,” only reinforced concerns that inside thinking often doesn’t match the marketing. The bank’s executives were quick to distance themselves from the now-suspended employee’s comments.

The continuing fallout at DWS is a warning to other asset managers to stand up or scale back green claims. More broadly, the tighter rules around what qualifies as environmentally friendly, even as social and governance criteria remain less well-defined, could mean it is time to take the “E” out of ESG investing—if not retire the grouping altogether. It never helped investors, and now it isn’t much use for fund managers either.

Reprinted by permission of The Wall Street Journal, Copyright 2021 Dow Jones & Company. Inc. All Rights Reserved Worldwide. Original date of publication: June 1, 2022.



MOST POPULAR

PSB Academy currently hosts over 20,000 students each year and offers certification, diploma and degree courses.

Rachel Zegler and Gal Gadot star in an awkward live-action attempt to modernize the 1937 animated classic.

Related Stories
Money
The U.S. Now Has More Billionaires Than China. Musk Is Still Tops.
By ABBY SCHULTZ 28/03/2025
Money
U.K. Asset Manager ICG Mulls Sale of Singapore Private Education Institution, Sources Say
By P.R. VENKAT 20/03/2025
Money
China Pumps Up Support for Country’s Stock Markets
By Tracy Qu 23/01/2025

The U.S. now has more billionaires than China for the first time in a decade, driven by AI and a booming stock market.

By ABBY SCHULTZ
Fri, Mar 28, 2025 3 min

The number of U.S. billionaires in the world reached 870 in mid-January, outpacing the number in China for the first time in 10 years, according to a snapshot of the wealthiest in the world by the Hurun Report.

The U.S. gained 70 billionaires since last year, powered by a rising stock market, a strong dollar, and the insatiable appetite for all things AI, according to the 14th annual Hurun Global Rich List . China gained nine billionaires overall for a total of 823. Hurun is a China-based research, media, and investment group.

“It’s been a good year for AI, money managers, entertainment, and crypto,” Rupert Hoogewerf, chairman and chief researcher of the Hurun Report, said in a news release. “It’s been a tough year for luxury, telecommunications, and real estate in China.”

Overall, the Hurun list—which reflects a snapshot of global wealth based on calculations made Jan. 15—counted 3,442 billionaires in the world, up 5%, or 163, from a year ago. Their total wealth rose 13% to just under $17 trillion.

In November, New York research firm Altrata reported that the billionaire population rose 4% in 2023 to 3,323 individuals and their wealth rose 9% to $12.1 trillion.

Elon Musk, CEO of electric-car maker Tesla and right-hand advisor to President Donald Trump, topped the list for the fourth time in five years, with recorded wealth of $420 billion as of mid-January as Tesla stock soared in the aftermath of the U.S. election, according to Hurun’s calculations.

The firm noted that Musk’s wealth has since nosedived about $100 billion, falling along with shares of Tesla although the EV car maker is benefiting on Thursday from Trump’s 25% tariff on cars made outside the U.S.

According to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, Musk’s wealth stood at about $336 billion as of the market’s close on Wednesday, although measuring his exact wealth —including stakes in his privately held companies and the undiscounted value of his Tesla shares—is difficult to precisely determine.

The overall list this year contained 387 new billionaires, while 177 dropped off the list—more than 80 of which were from China, Hurun said. “China’s economy is continuing to restructure, with the drop-offs coming from a weeding out of healthcare and new energy and traditional manufacturing, as well as real estate,” Hoogewerf said in the release.

Among those who wealth sank was Colin Huang, the founder of PDD Holdings —the parent company of e-commerce platforms Temu and Pinduoduo—who lost $17 billion.

Also, Zhong Shanshan, the founder and chair of the Nongfu Spring beverage company and the majority owner of Beijing Wantai Biological Pharmacy Enterprise , lost $8 billion from “intensifying competition” in the market for bottled water. The loss knocked Zhong from his top rank in China, which is now held by Zhang Yiming founder of Tik-Tok owner Bytedance. Zhang is ranked No. 22 overall.

Hurun’s top 10 billionaires is a familiar group of largely U.S. individuals including Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and Larry Ellison. The list has France’s LVMH CEO Bernard Arnault in seventh place, three notches down from his fourth ranked spot on the Bloomberg list, reflecting a slump in luxury products last year.

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang is ranked No. 11 on Hurun’s list as his wealth nearly tripled to $128 billion through Jan. 15. Other AI billionaires found lower down on the list include Liang Wenfeng, 40, founder and CEO of DeepSeek, with wealth of $4.5 billion and Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI, with $1.8 billion.

Also making the list were musicians Jay-Z ($2.7 billion), Rihanna ($1.7 billion), Taylor Swift ($1.6 billion), and Paul McCartney ($1 billion). Sports stars included Michael Jordan ($3.3 billion), Tiger Woods ($1.7 billion), Floyd Mayweather ($1.3 billion), and LeBron James ($1.3 billion).

Wealth continues to surge across the globe, but Hoogewerf noted those amassing it aren’t overly generous.

“We only managed to find three individuals in the past year who donated more than $1 billion,” he said. Warren Buffet gave $5.3 billion, mainly to the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, while Michael Bloomberg —ranked No. 19 with wealth of $92 billion—gave $3.7 billion to various causes. Netflix founder Reed Hastings, ranked No. 474 with wealth of $6.2 billion, donated $1.1 billion.