14 ms·
Both of these investors mentioned have “ESG” policies where they will deliberately influence companies to act in certain political ways, rather than purely for
by mwint 5y ago
Both of these investors mentioned have “ESG” policies where they will deliberately influence companies to act in certain political ways, rather than purely for the furtherance of the company.
Whether that’s good or bad is up for debate, but the Vangaurds of the world certainly have interests beyond buying and holding all the stocks.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- nullc 5y agoESG funds are such a scam. They charge high management fees and because of the pressure to deliver market returns (without which almost no one would buy them) they end up owning substantially the same stuff-- when they exclude a company because its this weeks' press whipping boy they replace it with more shares selected to optimize their correlation with the replaced company. Now as always the only lesson to companies is "don't get caught" or "make sure you put a positive spin on it". I wish they did meaningfully push companies to implement profit incompatible policies-- then at least they'd be interesting to short.
- vba616 5y agoAn "interest" seems to me like it has a bit of a connotation beyond a "preference". It suggests some substantial motivation that I'm not sure ESG policies rise to the level of. Individuals working for Vanguard have some motivation to talk about ESG and go through the motions. But at the end of the day, if they buy all the stocks, and if their customers understand that they buy all the stocks, then how can ESG considerations make a meaningful difference in the overall job? It seems way too constrained.