// learn · Strategy

ESG & "ethical" investing: what the label really means

Start here, because nobody selling it will say it: an ESG or "ethical" fund is not a measure of how ethical a company is. It's mostly a marketing label, frequently a more expensive version of a plain index fund holding the same names. That doesn't make investing by your values impossible; it means you have to see through the label first. Here's how.

1. "Same names, higher fee", do the maths

Open a popular broad ESG fund and a plain world index fund side by side. The ESG one's top holdings are usually the same mega-caps, Microsoft, Apple, Nvidia, Amazon, because they screen out only the obvious offenders and keep the rest weighted by size. You often get ~90% of the same basket for a higher fee. And that fee gap isn't small over time:

€10,000 · 30 years · 7% grossPlain index (TER 0.15%)Typical ESG fund (TER 0.50%)
Net annual return6.85%6.50%
Ending value≈ €73,000≈ €66,100
Cost of the label≈ €6,900

That 0.35% extra fee quietly costs about €6,900, nearly 70% of your original stake, for what is often a near-identical portfolio. Before paying an ESG premium, compare the two funds' actual top-10 holdings; if they match, you're buying a sticker.

2. Measure it yourself, the metrics that mean something

An ESG letter grade hides more than it shows (and the big raters often disagree on the same company). If you actually care about a specific issue, skip the label and check concrete, disclosed numbers:

You care about…The concrete metricWhere to find it
ClimateCarbon intensity: tonnes CO₂e per €M revenue (comparable across firms)Company sustainability report / CDP
A specific harm% of revenue from the activity (e.g. >5% from tobacco, weapons, fossil fuels)Segment breakdown in the annual report (10-K)
Governance% independent directors; is CEO also chair; dual-class shares (founder control)Proxy statement
ConductCount and severity of recent controversies / regulatory finesNews + regulator filings

These are checkable and comparable, a company with 15% of revenue from thermal coal is objectively more exposed than one at 0%, whatever its ESG grade says. That's an indicator; a letter is a marketing summary.

3. What exclusion actually does to your portfolio

Screening isn't free, it changes your risk, and you should quantify it. Concrete effects when you exclude sectors from a world index (approx. MSCI World weights):

4. Impact vs. signalling, the honest part

Buying an existing share on the secondary market sends the company no money, you buy it from another investor, the price barely moves, the firm's cash doesn't change. Real-world impact comes mostly from primary capital (IPOs, bond issues), shareholder engagement, and voting your shares, not from which names sit in your basket. Excluding a stock mainly changes your exposure, not the company's behaviour.

A grounded method

Write down what you genuinely won't own, and check it against the revenue-exposure numbers above, not a rating. Prefer low-cost, transparent funds whose holdings you can inspect (a values-tilted portfolio can often be built more cheaply with plain index funds plus a few explicit exclusions than with a branded ESG product). And keep two questions separate: does this match my values, and is this a good investment, both matter, neither answers the other.

Educational market information, not financial advice. Some links on this site are affiliate links, always disclosed. Markets carry risk of loss, do your own research and consider a licensed advisor.

← Back to Peaky Finance