PI Partnership


Fadi Zaher is head of index solutions at Legal & General Investment Management (LGIM)


INDEX INVESTING: LIFTING THE LID ON ESG INTEGRATION


Index investing is not passive investing. Yet a conflation of the two concepts sadly persists despite the numerous observable ways in which index investors are not nec- essarily passive: they proactively allocate in and out of funds, they select strategies that adhere to proactively designed methodolo- gies, and this in turn can reinforce the al- ready proactive use of their voting rights. It is worth emphasising this distinction be- tween index and passive investing because it helps debunk the myth that index inves- tors cannot be responsible investors. Even setting to one side the role index investors can play as active owners in equities, it is clear that they make proactive decisions about what they own. One such proactive decision can be to integrate environmen- tal, social, and governance (ESG) consider- ations into their index strategies. Just as investors in the S&P 500 index have historically made the proactive decision, implicitly or explicitly, to exclude *Tesla – a stock that has grown larger than the likes of *JPMorgan Chase, *Walt Disney, *Walmart or *Pfizer – so index investors can reflect ESG criteria. We believe this can make a genuine differ- ence to portfolios. For example, through their choice of strategy index investors can: – Eliminate their exposure to businesses that conflict with their own values.


– Reduce the amount of carbon emitted by the companies in their portfolios. – Allocate more of their capital to firms that have more diverse executive teams or stronger governance. However, it must be remembered that in index investing, what you want to achieve can only be understood in the context of how you intend to achieve your desired outcome. Index funds are rules based, and for ESG strategies investors must under- stand how those rules have been structured.


The power of three


There are generally three methods for inte- grating ESG criteria into an index. Exclusion: Historically, the exclusion ap- proach – or negative screening – has been the most widely used to avoid specific stocks or industries in an index. The most prominent exclusions have tended to be to- bacco, alcohol, gambling, fossil fuels and weapons. The advantages of this type of ap- proach are that it is transparent and tends to give a guaranteed impact and peace of mind if an investor’s ultimate objective is to remove exposure to specific securities and sectors. However, this type of integration also tends to alter the profile of the portfolio quite sig- nificantly if the sector or issuer excluded has a material weight in the parent index. Consequently, with more exclusions, the index tends to deviate from generating market-like returns and to some extent a market-like risk profile as investors are in- evitably taking on tracking error or active risk from the market.


Exclusions also remove the possibility of the asset owner engaging with issuers to change their behaviour and hold compa- nies


accountable risks.


Optimisation: This approach aims to max- imise the ESG score or rating of an index.


Important Information: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. The value of an investment and any income taken from it is not guaranteed and can go down as well as up, you may not get back the amount you originally invested. Views expressed are of LGIM as at 01 July 2020 . The Information in this document (a) is for information purposes only and we are not soliciting any action based on it, and (b) *is not a recommendation to buy or sell securities or pursue a particular investment strategy; and (c) is not investment, legal, regulatory or tax advice. Legal & General Investment Management Limited. Registered in England and Wales No. 02091894. Registered Office: One Coleman Street, London, EC2R 5AA. Authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority, No. 119272.


Issue 98 | November 2020 | portfolio institutional | 41 for any sustainability


This can be helpful for investors looking to identify companies that are setting the standard in ESG criteria and practices, or companies that have committed to moving toward best practices. Unlike the exclusion approach, optimisation tends to over- weight and underweight securities – rather than removing them – to achieve an ESG outcome subject to tracking-error targets or an active-risk budget. Furthermore, optimisation can also be quite efficient when applied to an index so- lution that requires meeting multiple ob- jectives simultaneously, such as adhering to


climate transition and Paris-aligned


benchmarks. For example, an index opti- mised for these objectives may have con- straints including: – a tracking-error target;


– reducing carbon intensity by 50% from inception and by a further 7% every subse- quent year;


– specific or general sector deviations of no more than 1% relative to a benchmark. Tilting: The tilting approach simply allo- cates more capital to companies with high- er ESG scores and less to companies with poor ESG scores. This capital allocation can be based on various techniques such as deciles of ESG scores, whereby the low- est deciles have their index weight down- graded by 80% and the top decile obtains twice the capital allocation of the original weight in the index. At LGIM, we believe tilting provides a com- pelling blend of impact, transparency and market exposure.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52