市場觀點

It takes the right metrics to engineer a Paris-aligned portfolio

We outline the most effective analytics for building climate-resilient and optimized buy-and-maintain portfolios.

作者

    Head of Investment Solutions and Portfolio Manager
    Co-head of Fixed Income Solutions and Portfolio Manager
    Climate Specialist

概要

  1. Achieving a portfolio net-zero pathway requires an integrated approach
  2. Proper application of relevant forward-looking analytics is key
  3. Portfolio optimization addresses investor-specific investment objectives

Insurers and pension funds face the imperative of finding investment solutions that generate sufficient returns while also managing risk, in a world of high inflation, geopolitical uncertainty and increasing regulation. The focus on sustainability and specifically climate change is also rising, with increasing pressure to set net-zero commitments.

Setting and implementing climate targets are the next steps in this challenge. Targets typically include emission reductions, engagement and investment in climate solutions, with the ultimate aim of reducing real-world emissions and enabling the transition to a low-carbon economy. Implementing these targets requires forward-looking climate analytics that go beyond traditional carbon footprint data and that can be applied to anticipate future emission pathways.

We consider the most effective metrics for building Paris-aligned portfolios and illustrate how they can be used in conjunction with other portfolio metrics to construct buy-and-maintain and constrained credit portfolios.

Climate portfolio optimization challenge

For insurers and pension funds, the challenge is to balance the economic and regulatory profile of the portfolio with restrictions and objectives that are driven by sustainability. Figure 1 shows an overview of the objectives on which we typically optimize portfolios using our proprietary Fixed income Asset & Liability Client Optimization Navigation (FALCON) tooling.

Figure 1 | Typical investor objectives

Source: Robeco. For illustrative purposes only.

When it comes to aligning a portfolio with a net-zero 2050 ambition, an important aspect to consider is the forward-looking portfolio profile of the carbon footprint. Forward-looking climate analytics play an important part in this.

Forward-looking climate analytics

There are different ways of estimating and assessing the future pathway of emissions for a company. We discuss four metrics that we use for this assessment: two proprietary in-house metrics and two external metrics.

1. The Robeco Paris Alignment Assessment (‘Traffic Light’)

The Robeco Traffic Light assesses a company’s degree of alignment with a below 2 °C scenario. The categories of alignment can vary from ‘aligned’, ‘aligning’ and ‘partially aligning’ to ‘misaligned’ (see Figure 2). Our SI research analysts assess a company’s degree of alignment by determining the following:

  • Are this company’s projected emissions in line with its required sector decarbonization pathway?

  • Does the company have verified targets and a credible plan for achieving its emission-reduction plans?

Figure 2 | Robeco Paris Alignment assessment

Source: Robeco. For illustrative purposes only.

We use the Paris Alignment assessment for three main purposes: engagement, voting and portfolio construction. While this is our preferred method for assessing the future trajectory of portfolio emissions, external metrics can also be used to assess alignment. Two such metrics are Science Based Targets initiative approval and Implied Temperature Rise.

2. Robeco Climate Risk Assessment

The Traffic Light is also an important input in our fundamental assessment to determine to what extent climate risk could have an impact on a firm’s business fundamentals. This climate risk assessment by our fundamental credit analysts of a company’s credit risk profile has three components: assess the level of climate risk exposure, establish how the firm is dealing with climate risk, and estimate the potential financial impact. It incorporates internal and external metrics. We see this as the most complete assessment of a company’s exposure to climate change and the potential impact on default and downgrade risk.

3. Science Based Targets initiative (SBTi)

The SBTi was created in 2015, following the Paris Agreement, to measure the robustness of companies’ targets relative to the ambition of the Paris Agreement. To do this, the SBTi created sectoral methodologies to determine the required reduction in emissions per sector and to establish which metrics are most relevant. The SBTi assesses whether the trajectories of companies are aligned with different pathways. The main advantages of this metric are that it is simple, has a transparent methodology and is widely used and scrutinized. One of the drawbacks is that it can not confirm the likelihood of a company’s ability to meet its targets.

4. Implied Temperature Rise

Implied Temperature Rise (ITR) metrics reflect an implied global temperature rise that is calculated using a company’s emissions overshoot or undershoot relative to a given carbon budget. It is an intuitive metric that, by making a number of assumptions, data providers are usually able to achieve high coverage of the investment universe. However, the modeling entails significant complexity and various assumptions, which can result in a wide range of possible portfolios and outcomes. And, as is the case with the SBTi, most providers rely on the targets set by companies and do not include any assessment of the credibility of these targets.

There is overlap between these four metrics and each has advantages and disadvantages, ranging from issuer coverage and data quality, to comprehensiveness of assessment. In our view, the metrics are best used in combination, with our fundamental assessments of climate alignment and risk being an overriding factor for issuer selection.

Case study: Balancing climate integration with risk, return and regulatory considerations

We illustrate our approach to incorporating climate targets using a cash flow-matching case study that is a typical for many life insurers or when de-risking a pension scheme. The portfolio in this case study needs to limit the number of fallen angels, match the target cash flow, uphold a minimum rating, have an optimal spread, maintain low capital requirements, make an impact across the SDGs and limit the current and future carbon footprint.

After in-depth client consultation, we construct a portfolio that balances the client’s various risk, return, regulatory and sustainability criteria, and we show across a range of metrics how this portfolio measures up versus a passive reference, as illustrated in Figure 3.

Figure 3 | Case study portfolio characteristics

Source: Robeco, Trucost, SBTI, MSCI, Bloomberg and using September 2022 valuations. For illustrative purposes only and based on model assumptions. Fundamental score ranges between -3, +3 and reflect Robeco’s credit analysts’ assessment of the credit quality. SDG score ranges between -3, +3 and reflects Robeco’s SI analysts’ assessment of the SDG alignment. Carbon footprint is scope 1,2 & 3 and indexed to passive reference. The Fallen Angel % uses average historical rating migration numbers. *refers to the portfolio score on the most climate-related SDGs: 7. Affordable and Clean Energy, 11. Sustainable Cities and Communities and 13. Climate Action.

The SDGs can be used to further generate a targeted impact on specific investors’ sustainability objectives through alignment with a specific set of the UN SDGs. Also, by allocating solely to companies that score positively on the SDGs, an SFDR article 9 portfolio can be created.

Conclusion

Investors have their work cut out in implementing ambitious investment-related targets for Paris-aligned investing. Forward-looking climate metrics are crucial in this process of constructing and maintaining portfolios that decarbonize over time. In practice, we see that incorporating meaningful climate and SDG objectives into a portfolio can usually be achieved with limited impact on the return potential and quality of the portfolio. The more constrained the portfolio is, however, the more challenging this becomes. We can help investors assess the possible financial impact of incorporating SDG and climate-driven constraints on their portfolio.

重要資料

本網站僅供《證券及期貨條例》(香港法例第571章)及其附屬法例所界定之專業投資者瀏覽及使用。 投資涉及風險。過往表現並不代表未來表現。本網站所載資料僅供參考之用,並不構成任何投資建議,亦非作出買賣任何證券或採納任何投資策略之要約或招攬。投資者不應僅憑本網站提供之資料作出投資決定,在作出任何投資決定前,應徵詢獨立意見(包括有關稅務影響之意見)。投資者應確保完全理解投資產品的相關風險,亦應考量自身投資目標及風險承受水平。投資乃閣下之個人決定。除非銷售投資產品的中介人已向閣下告知該投資產品適合閣下,並已解釋其符合閣下投資目標之原因,否則閣下不應投資。請參閱相關發售文件或其他法律文件,以獲取包括風險因素在內的進一步詳情。 本網站由荷寶投資管理香港有限公司發布,該公司受香港證券及期貨事務監察委員會(「證監會」)規管(中央編號:APU851)。本網站未經證監會審閱。 無法保證任何投資產品可實現其投資目標。概不就任何投資產品之表現或投資回報作任何聲明或承諾。投資的價值或會波動。本網站所載過往表現、推算或預測,均不應視作未來表現之保證或指標,且概不提供任何明示或暗示之保證。本網站內容建基於相信為可靠之來源,惟因應資料傳遞技術特性及須採用多項數據來源(包括第三方內容),故概不保證其準確性。所述觀點僅乃截至上述日期,或會隨市況變化而改變,可予更改而毋須另行通知。該等意見可能有別於其他荷寶投資專業人士之意見。因使用本材料或當中所載任何評論、意見或估算而引致之直接、間接或相應損失,荷寶概不承擔法律責任。荷寶並無責任更新本網站或任何網站內容。未經荷寶事先書面許可,不得複製、分發或刊發本網站任何材料。 除非另有說明,資料來源:荷寶。

警告 — 有不法分子在網站及社交媒體上冒用荷寳 了解更多