Abstract

The question of whether environmental, social, and governance investments outperform or underperform other conventional financial investments has been debated in the literature. In this study, we compare the volatility of rates of return of selected ESG indices and conventional ones and investigate dependence between them. Analysis of tail dependence is important to evaluate the diversification benefits between conventional investments and ESG investments, which is necessary in constructing optimal portfolios. It allows investors to diversify the risk of the portfolio and positively impact the environment by investing in environmentally friendly companies. Examples of institutions that are paying attention to ESG issues are banks, which are increasingly including products that support sustainability goals in their offers. This analysis could be also important for policymakers. The European Banking Authority (EBA) has admitted that ESG factors can contribute to risk. Therefore, it is important to model and quantify it. The conditional volatility models from the GARCH family and tail-dependence coefficients from the copula-based approach are applied. The analysis period covered 2007 until 2019. The period of the COVID-19 pandemic has not been analyzed due to the relatively short time series regarding data requirements from models’ perspective. Results of the research confirm the higher dependence of extreme values in the crisis period (e.g., tail-dependence values in 2009–2014 range from 0.4820/0.4933 to 0.7039/0.6083, and from 0.5002/0.5369 to 0.7296/0.6623), and low dependence of extreme values in stabilization periods (e.g., tail-dependence values in 2017–2019 range from 0.1650 until 0.6283/0.4832, and from 0.1357 until 0.6586/0.5002). Diversification benefits vary in time, and there is a need to separately analyze crisis and stabilization periods.

Highlights

  • The pandemic has highlighted social and global inequality and spiked interests in environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing

  • 31 December 2019, it is essential to conduct graphical, statistical, and econometric examinations of these time series to check for their stationarity and the presence of the autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARCH) effect

  • During the 2008 global financial crisis Fernández et al (2019) found that German green mutual funds had risk-adjusted returns slightly better than their peers

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The pandemic has highlighted social and global inequality and spiked interests in environmental, social, and governance (ESG) investing. ESG assets reached $35.3 trillion in 2020 from around $30.7 trillion in 2018, reaching a third of current total global assets under management, according to the Global Sustainable Investment Association USD 17 trillion of professionally managed assets, a 42% increase since 2018. Such continued growth is expected over the long term, too. Since 1995, the value of US sustainable investment assets (USD 639 billion) has increased more than 25-fold A few terms are used interchangeably to describe environmental, social, and governance investments, e.g., socially responsible investing (SRI), responsible investing, sustainable investing, and impact investing. We understand ESG investing in terms of the ESG factors, which enhance traditional financial analysis, making it more complete

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call