Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 186

Discovering the good and the bad among ethical ETFs

Just over a year ago I started what I thought was a simple idea, to put together some low-cost ethical investment portfolios, readily available online for anyone to invest in. As my focus was low-cost, I thought the best products would come from the wide range of ethical exchange-traded funds (ETFs). By my reckoning there are close to 100 such ETFs globally to choose from, more than enough to construct some well-diversified investment portfolios.

What I discovered in this search is that there are, on the one hand, some great, innovative products available. On the other hand, there are some that are ethical in name only. For me, the due diligence process was a lot more interesting than I expected, and I have shared some of my insights below.

Highlights of the good points

Let’s start with the good stuff. In recent years there’s been a large increase in the range of ethical ETFs on offer. Of the ones we reviewed, over 25% were created in the past year. This has led to the launch of some specific innovative products, enabling investors to tailor their portfolios to their unique values. These include:

  • UN sustainable development goals: In September 2015 the United Nations set out 17 goals designed to transform the world. These include eradication of poverty, quality education, gender equality, clean energy, and many more. Blackrock have put together an ETF (ticker MPCT) where investors can access companies that generated at least 50% of their revenue from achieving one of these goals.
  • Gender diversity: A number of studies have shown that companies with more women on the board perform better than their male-dominated counterparts. If you want to support gender diversity, State Street Global Advisors offer an ETF (ticker SHE) that invests in S&P500 companies based on the number of women on the board and in senior leadership positions.
  • Organic food: If you love your organic produce and want to align your investments with your eating habits, you could try Janus Capital’s ETF (ticker ORGID). This ETF invests in global companies that service, produce, distribute or sell organic food, drinks, and cosmetics.
  • LGBT rights: Workplace equality is a broader issue than just gender diversity. Denver Investments offers an ETF (ticker EQLT) that invests in US companies that support LGBT equality in the workplace, for example by offering benefits to same-sex couples.

Above is just a sample of some of the ETFs we came across that offer something more than just negative screens. There are also a wide range of ETFs available that do offer the negative screens, excluding tobacco, gambling, alcohol, pornography, and arms-related enterprises.

Highlights of the questionable points

‘Ethical’ is a widely-used term, open to interpretation by whomever is constructing the ETF, and this project has taught me there are uncertainties when selecting an ethical ETF investment.

Exchange Traded Notes

Barclays offers a variety of ethical Exchange Traded Notes (ETN), such as their Return on Disability ETN. One potential problem with this structure is that the ETN is an unsecured debt obligation of Barclays Bank. The return of the ETN is linked to the Disability US LargeCap ETN Total Return USD Index which tracks the performance of 100 stocks selected based on their support for people with disabilities. This index is managed by the Donovan Group (not Barclays). You need to ensure you are aligning your investments with your values, and accept this is providing funding for Barclays rather than an investment in the companies in the index.

Definitional differences

Index providers use their own definitions that are not consistent among providers. Some examples include:

  • Environmental, Social & Governance (ESG) criteria: One ESG ETF is not necessarily the same as another, it depends on the index provider’s ESG criteria. Even those that rely on the same criteria, such as a MSCI ESG rating, may apply it differently. For example, some ETFs only invest in companies with a minimum MSCI ESG Rating, others consider the rating but do not have a minimum threshold.
  • Fossil fuel free: Fossil fuels are a particularly tricky area. Some indexes define a fossil fuel company as one that holds fossil fuel reserves, others only exclude those that produce ‘more carbon-intensive fossil fuels’, while others exclude companies with a ‘significant interest in’ fossil fuels. It is worth checking the fine print to make sure your fossil fuel free ETF is excluding the companies you want to divest from. MSCI has a guide about different approaches to divesting from fossil fuels, which you can find here.
  • Emerging markets: Many index providers have a slightly different definition of emerging markets. If there are particular countries that you are looking to invest in, check that they are included in the definition.

Redundant exclusions

UBS offers six ETFs with exposure to different regions, all of which exclude tobacco and controversial weapons (i.e. landmines, cluster bombs, chemical weapons). Yet two of these do not exclude any companies. In Australia, there are no tobacco or controversial weapons companies in the ASX100, so the UBS ETF is exactly the same as a mainstream investment. Similarly, in their Asia APEX 50 Ethical ETF, there are no tobacco or controversial weapons in the top 50 largest companies in Asia, so essentially you are investing in the MSCI Asia Apex 50.

There is nothing inherently wrong with these ETFs, they do follow the guidelines and none of the ETFs include tobacco or controversial weapons. However, while the product is true to the stated exclusions, they are somewhat redundant.

Surprising inclusions

It is always worth looking at an ETF’s holdings if you’re considering an investment, and sometimes they may surprise you. For example:

  • We came across a couple of ESG ETFs that include Wells Fargo. Apparently they have a very high ESG Score, however many people would expect the large-scale fraud that occurred at the bank to automatically exclude them from an ESG portfolio.
  • The iShares MSCI Low Carbon Target Index has a 73% reduction in current carbon emission intensity and a 99% reduction in potential carbon emissions when compared to the MSCI All World Index. This is great, but it should not be confused with a fossil fuel free index as it does contain some oil companies (e.g. Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Caltex).
  • An ETF that has a single focus (e.g. women on the board, or fossil fuel free) will invest purely based on that focus. Such an ETF could therefore contain companies involved in tobacco, gambling, or pornography. Don’t assume that because an ETF has a single ethical focus it excludes all non-ethical industries.

 

Emily Martin, CFA, is Chief Investment Officer at Balance Impact. The information in this article is of a general nature only and may contain advice that is not based on your personal objectives, financial situation or needs. A full list of ethical ETFs that were reviewed can be found here.

 

6 Comments
Rod
December 16, 2016

Well said Warren.

Warren Bird
December 15, 2016

Gary M, it's easy to ridicule, but if someone is willing to risk potentially giving up some financial wealth by avoiding investing in certain areas then that is their call. What they have done, in essence, is that they've chosen a different benchmark to yours - the organic food benchmark. This isn't marketing fluff, it's aligning investment decisions with your personal beliefs, or risk tolerance if you like, which is what everyone should be doing!

And who says that the big question is to beat the index? Most ETF's don't have that objective in mind. I'm looking for an ethical international equity ETF right now that won't have to beat the index - I will get that done with other parts of the portfolio. If I can get global share exposure in a low cost ethical way then I'll be happy.

You don't have to use either an organic food ETF or an ethical one it if you don't want to, but there's no need to be rude to those who choose differently.

Laurent
January 09, 2017

Hi Warren, I fully agree with you.

I would even go further and point out that if you are a long term 'buy and hold' investor, then it is prudent to invest in ethical companies. At any given time and with no warning, non-ethical companies can be struck by a scandal or a sudden reversal of public opinion.

As an example, I am amazed how quickly renewable energies have become fashionable on the markets. I would be very worried to be invested in coal as politicians could withdraw their support at any time.

I have the same comments on the quick loan industry (immoral), gaming (damaging our communities), tobacco (selling death), weapons, etc.

Gary M
December 15, 2016

Organic food! - does anybody actually believe all that marketing fluff??. It avoids the big question – do they beat the index? If not, what is the costs in future wealth/lifestyle that you are giving up?

Emily Martin
December 15, 2016

Hi Gary, that's a good question.

The Responsible Investment Association of Australasia produce a yearly report looking at the performance of responsible investments. They have found that responsible investment funds outperformed both the ASX300 and the average large cap Australian equities funds across one, three, five and 10 years.

Responsible investing is a broad category, so it doesn't mean that all categories will outperform, but it does mean that you don't necessarily have to give up anything in terms of future wealth / lifestyle if you decide to invest with your values.

The report can be found here: http://bit.ly/2gLlgef

Peter C
March 15, 2017

Actually Gary it's the other way around. Ethical funds tend to out-perform your average fund. So you are not actually "giving-up," you are gaining.

This should not be a surprise though as ethical funds tend to invest in sunrise industries such as medical/biotechnology and internet stocks and avoid sunset industries such as coal and oil and tobacco.

Besides Gary, living a slightly more frugal lifestyle, and using the savings to have back to your community, increases your health and well-being.

 

Leave a Comment:

     

RELATED ARTICLES

Wirecard shows not all ethical ETFs pass the smell test

The rise of socially responsible investing

Four reasons ESG investing continues to grow

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Unexpected results in our retirement income survey

Who knew? With some surprise results, the Government is on unexpected firm ground in asking people to draw on all their assets in retirement, although the comments show what feisty and informed readers we have.

Three all-time best tables for every adviser and investor

It's a remarkable statistic. In any year since 1875, if you had invested in the Australian stock index, turned away and come back eight years later, your average return would be 120% with no negative periods.

The looming excess of housing and why prices will fall

Never stand between Australian households and an uncapped government programme with $3 billion in ‘free money’ to build or renovate their homes. But excess supply is coming with an absence of net migration.

Five stocks that have worked well in our portfolios

Picking macro trends is difficult. What may seem logical and compelling one minute may completely change a few months later. There are better rewards from focussing on identifying the best companies at good prices.

10 reasons wealthy homeowners shouldn't receive welfare

The RBA Governor says rising house prices are due to "the design of our taxation and social security systems". The OECD says "the prolonged boom in house prices has inflated the wealth of many pensioners without impacting their pension eligibility." What's your view?

Six COVID opportunist stocks prospering in adversity

Some high-quality companies have emerged even stronger since the onset of COVID and are well placed for outperformance. We call these the ‘COVID Opportunists’ as they are now dominating their specific sectors.

Latest Updates

Retirement

10 reasons wealthy homeowners shouldn't receive welfare

The RBA Governor says rising house prices are due to "the design of our taxation and social security systems". The OECD says "the prolonged boom in house prices has inflated the wealth of many pensioners without impacting their pension eligibility." What's your view?

Interviews

Sean Fenton on marching to your own investment tune

Is it more difficult to find stocks to short in a rising market? What impact has central bank dominance had over stock selection? How do you combine income and growth in a portfolio? Where are the opportunities?

Compliance

D’oh! DDO rules turn some funds into a punching bag

The Design and Distribution Obligations (DDO) come into effect in two weeks. They will change the way banks promote products, force some small funds to close to new members and push issues into the listed space.

Shares

Dividends, disruption and star performers in FY21 wrap

Company results in FY21 were generally good with some standout results from those thriving in tough conditions. We highlight the companies that delivered some of the best results and our future  expectations.

Fixed interest

Coles no longer happy with the status quo

It used to be Down, Down for prices but the new status quo is Down Down for emissions. Until now, the realm of ESG has been mainly fund managers as 'responsible investors', but companies are now pushing credentials.

Investment strategies

Seven factors driving growth in Managed Accounts

As Managed Accounts surge through $100 billion for the first time, the line between retail, wholesale and institutional capabilities and portfolios continues to blur. Lower costs help with best interest duties.

Retirement

Reader Survey: home values in age pension asset test

Read our article on the family home in the age pension test, with the RBA Governor putting the onus on social security to address house prices and the OECD calling out wealthy pensioners. What is your view?

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2021 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. Any general advice or ‘regulated financial advice’ under New Zealand law has been prepared by Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892) and/or Morningstar Research Ltd, subsidiaries of Morningstar, Inc, without reference to your objectives, financial situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide (AU) and Financial Advice Provider Disclosure Statement (NZ). 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.

Website Development by Master Publisher.