ESG
Monitoring corporates against third-party ESG data providers

7 MIN ARTICLE

 


At Capital Group, using third-party data is only a part of how we monitor current and potential investments. Corporate holdings* are reviewed against available third-party ESG data to identify potential ESG risks. We then draw on our investment professionals’ deep knowledge and understanding of the issuer to determine the materiality of the risk to the investment case.

KEY TAKEAWAYS
  • Third-party data add an element of objectivity to the investment process, but ESG score providers often disagree.
  • Our own deep research is crucial as we analyze how issuers are addressing potential ESG risks.
  • It's important to look beyond individual events and consider the larger systemic issues as we continue to monitor investments.

At Capital Group, we believe the analysis of material environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues as part of our research can help us understand long-term risks and opportunities for investors.  We integrate ESG into our investment approach, The Capital SystemTM, through three interrelated elements designed to enhance our bottom-up investment research and analysis: Research & Investment Frameworks, Monitoring Process and Engagement & Proxy Voting.


This image details Capital Group's three-part ESG process. ESG integration enhances our investment approach, The Capital System. Investment research and frameworks reflect material ESG considerations in 30+ sectors. The monitoring process uses available third-party data to flag a subset of investments in certain asset classes for further research and review. Engagement and proxy voting involves engaging with issuers on material ESG risks and opportunities and voting proxies in the best interest of our clients. As of December 31, 2022, monitoring applies to corporate and sovereign holdings.

Source: Capital Group

The monitoring element of our investment process for corporates involves reviewing holdings against international norms and third-party ESG scores, where data is available, to identify potential ESG risks that merit further investigation. We then draw on our investment professionals’ deep knowledge and understanding of the issuer to determine the materiality to the investment case. Investment decisions are made based on a long-term view, engagement and analysis — never solely on monitoring results.


Introducing external data into our monitoring process helps guard against confirmation bias and supports objectivity in our ESG integration process.


Our monitoring criteria and review process


Capital Group uses several criteria when monitoring equity and corporate debt issuers against third-party data. We have a different methodology in place to cover sovereign debt, which will be examined in future publications.


Issuers are assessed based on how well they adhere to the norms embodied by the United Nations Global Compact. While there is no definitive list of violators or non-violators, any issuer that scores as a “fail” by our third-party data provider, MSCI, raises an initial flag to us, which prompts us to investigate the issue further.


We also look at overall ESG scores provided by MSCI and Sustainalytics, the extent to which the two sources agree, and how an issuer scores on the MSCI governance indicator. We have identified specific thresholds for each indicator that help us flag issues that are most likely to be material.


Our current criteria are illustrated in the below table.


THIRD-PARTY ESG DATA SOURCE

SCORING RANGE

CAPITAL GROUP FLAG THRESHOLD

MEASURES

MSCI UN Global Compact

Pass, Fail or Watchlist

    Fail

Violations of global norms (human rights, labour rights, environment, bribery/corruption)

MSCI ESG absolute score

Scale of 0–10

    <3

Performance on material ESG issues relative to MSCI universe

MSCI ESG adjusted score

Scale of 0–10

    <1

Performance on material ESG issues relative to industry peers

MSCI governance score

Scale of 0–10

    <2

Variety of traditional governance factors; flags align with Capital Group’s proxy guidelines 

Sustainalytics ESG score

Scale of 0–100

    >50

Exposure to and management of ESG risks

MSCI and Sustainalytics agreement score

Scale of 0–10; Scale of 0–100

    MSCI <4; Sustainalytics >35

Data providers agree on view of moderate ESG risk
 
Note: A separate process is employed for monitoring of sovereigns.
Source: Capital Group, MSCI, Sustainalytics. Latest as of July 2023.

 


On a regular basis throughout the year, we monitor our corporate holdings to ensure that changes in scores from third-party data providers are promptly identified.


Our monitoring criteria are reviewed periodically to help ensure efficacy of the process and relevance of our data sources.


The value in considering multiple third-party ESG data inputs


On the surface, ESG data offerings from different providers appear to be similar. For example, both MSCI and Sustainalytics consider an issuer’s exposure to industry-specific ESG risks and how well they are being managed.


However, a study published by Oxford University Press found that correlations vary significantly, ranging between 0.38 and 0.71 for the major providers.§ Correlation measures the strength of a relationship between two variables: a correlation of 1 means there’s a strong positive relationship, −1 means that there’s a strong negative relationship and 0 means no relationship.


Methodological differences are at the heart of this divergence. MSCI’s ratings, for example, evaluate a company in relation to its peers in the same industry. Sustainalytics scores a company on an absolute basis according to its exposure to the ESG risks of an industry or region, accounting for a company’s actions to manage that risk. In addition, the weight given to each issue (environmental, social or governance) may vary across providers, as can the importance given to different controversies.


This evidence supports our use of multiple inputs and providers in our monitoring process. It also demonstrates the importance of researching beyond individual ESG scores.


Our monitoring process tends to flag events rather than areas of systemic risk


In early 2023, our ESG specialists reviewed approximately 200 monitoring reports completed by analysts and portfolio managers since 2021. This involved putting key questions to our investment professionals to understand whether these flagged issues were considered impactful to their investment theses. We also reviewed the flagged companies to better understand trends across industries.


Our review highlighted that external flags tend to identify certain areas of consistent underperformance (such as poor human capital management practices, clawbacks and malus clauses) and events (human rights violations, bribery scandals, conflicts of interest, etc.) more frequently than other ESG risk indicators such as systemic risk and stability, competition or instances of director removals and poison pills. In many cases, we found that the issuer in question is taking appropriate steps to remedy the source of controversy, but this isn’t captured by the third-party provider’s score. This underlines the importance of having an ESG process that incorporates research and engagement alongside monitoring. In cases where we believed the issues raised were meaningful to the investment case, we generally engaged with the issuer on those topics.


How are we disclosing our monitoring?


Funds and accounts that primarily hold equities or corporate or sovereign bonds are subject to our monitoring process. On average across the global organization, between 2% and 7% of holdings (by number) are flagged, as of April 28, 2023, for additional review. We recognize that ESG transparency is important; clients value being shown how the process works in practice. Therefore, we have fund-level disclosure of the results of our corporate monitoring process — where data is available — disclosing which holdings are being flagged for in-depth review.


A view of the Capital Group Global Equity FundTM (Canada) portfolio (for illustrative purposes)


As of June 30, 2023,ǁ six holdings in Global Equity's portfolio, or about 3%, were flagged in the ESG monitoring process. These holdings are monitored by analysts and subject to a heightened level of research and potential engagement.


Fortunately, the % numbers for Global Equity are the same as for NPF, so the chart can stay. But in the alt text, swap out the words "New Perspective Fund" with "Capital Group Global Equity Fund (Canada)"

Because third-party ratings are increasingly used across the market, it is helpful to understand this “market view” of a company and why our view may differ. Many of our clients use third-party ESG tools, such as those provided by Morningstar or MSCI, which score the holdings in portfolios. We are committed to providing transparency and disclosure of our monitoring results, consistent with how our clients may be reviewing their portfolios for other performance metrics. 


Monitoring strengthens the other elements in the process


Our ESG integration process is rooted in investment materiality and enhances our investment approach, The Capital System. Monitoring is an important part of how we do this. We are also committed to driving ongoing improvement in all areas of our process, and monitoring is no exception. We review our corporate monitoring process on a regular basis to ensure it remains fit for purpose and flags material issues for deeper research. As ESG data grows and mature over time, we will continue to drive our process forward.


Your gateway to all things ESG at Capital Group

Explore the latest research and insights in our ESG perspectives library



Learn more about
ESG

* Certain holdings are currently not covered by third-party monitoring providers.

 

 Corporate holdings are monitored to the extent they are covered by third-party data providers.

 

§ Florian Berg and others, Aggregate Confusion: The Divergence of ESG Ratings, Review of Finance, Volume 26, Issue 6, November 2022, Pages 1315–1344, https://doi.org/10.1093/rof/rfac033

 

ǁ Data as of June 30, 2023. UNGC is United Nations Global Compact. Donut chart: Reflects all of the fund’s holdings at the issuer level. The monitoring process covers 100.0% of the fund’s holdings, which represent 100.0% of the fund’s assets, excluding cash and cash equivalents. “Other” holdings are those that either do not have available third-party data or that are not currently covered in the monitoring process. The data used in the monitoring process currently applies only to equity securities and corporate and sovereign bonds. The percentage figures may not total 100 due to rounding. Largest flagged holdings table: Represents the largest flagged holdings in the portfolio (at the issuer level), indicated by asset weight based on the total assets of the portfolio, including cash and cash equivalents. Totals may not reconcile due to rounding.

Commissions, trailing commissions, management fees and expenses all may be associated with mutual fund investments. Please read the prospectus before investing. Mutual funds are not guaranteed, their values change frequently and past performance may not be repeated.

Unless otherwise indicated, any Capital Group information referenced above reflects the Capital Group global organization.

Unless otherwise indicated, the investment professionals featured do not manage Capital Group‘s Canadian mutual funds.

References to particular companies or securities, if any, are included for informational or illustrative purposes only and should not be considered as an endorsement by Capital Group. Views expressed regarding a particular company, security, industry or market sector should not be considered an indication of trading intent of any investment funds or current holdings of any investment funds. These views should not be considered as investment advice nor should they be considered a recommendation to buy or sell.

Statements attributed to an individual represent the opinions of that individual as of the date published and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Capital Group or its affiliates. This information is intended to highlight issues and not be comprehensive or to provide advice. For informational purposes only; not intended to provide tax, legal or financial advice. We assume no liability for any inaccurate, delayed or incomplete information, nor for any actions taken in reliance thereon. The information contained herein has been supplied without verification by us and may be subject to change. Capital Group funds are available in Canada through registered dealers. For more information, please consult your financial and tax advisors for your individual situation.

All Capital Group trademarks are owned by The Capital Group Companies, Inc. or an affiliated company in Canada, the U.S. and other countries. All other company names mentioned are the property of their respective companies.

Capital Group funds are offered in Canada by Capital International Asset Management (Canada), Inc., part of Capital Group, a global investment management firm originating in Los Angeles, California in 1931. Capital Group manages equity assets through three investment groups. These groups make investment and proxy voting decisions independently. Fixed income investment professionals provide fixed income research and investment management across the Capital organization; however, for securities with equity characteristics, they act solely on behalf of one of the three equity investment groups.