Connect with us

Markets

Asset managers warned over ‘insufficient’ climate risk reporting

Published

on


Asset managers are not providing enough information about climate risks at the companies they invest in to enable clients to make informed choices, a regulatory task force has warned.

Despite record inflows to funds that invest according to environmental, social and governance principles — taking their assets under management above $1tn this year — the Financial Stability Board’s Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures has found “reporting to their clients . . . is likely insufficient”.

In its third annual status report, published on Thursday, the TCFD said climate risk reporting by asset managers had increased since 2017. However, it concluded that “reporting by these organisations to their clients and beneficiaries may not be sufficient and that more progress may be needed to ensure clients and beneficiaries have the right information to make financial decisions”.

According to the TFCD, climate risk reporting by asset managers is essential, given the role they play in the allocation of capital. Their responsibility “includes obtaining information from investee companies, and providing their clients and beneficiaries with decision-useful information”, it said. 

The task force was created in 2015 during the Paris climate negotiations as a market-driven initiative, and was backed by Mark Carney, then governor of the Bank of England and now a UN special envoy for climate action and finance. Former SEC chair Mary Schapiro leads its secretariat.

Michael Bloomberg, the billionaire media executive who chairs the body, stressed the need for better-informed capital allocation when launching the report. “The more companies know about their risks and opportunities related to climate change, and the more information investors have, the better we’ll be able to allocate resources and make progress,” he said.

More work will now be carried out by the task force “to better understand” asset managers’ reporting of climate risks.


1 in 15


Asset managers disclose resilience of strategies under different climate scenarios

The report said companies also needed to make progress on climate risk disclosures. To date, more than 1,500 organisations have expressed their support for the TCFD’s recommendations, which represents an increase of more than 85 per cent since 2019.

A review of their reports also found that disclosure of climate-related financial information in line with those recommendations had “steadily increased” in the past three years. However, the report said disclosure of the financial impacts on businesses “remains low”.

Only one in 15 of the companies reviewed disclosed any information on the resilience of their strategies, under different climate scenarios. This was “significantly lower” than the proportion of companies making other climate disclosures.

Climate Capital

Where climate change meets business, markets and politics. Explore the FT’s coverage here 

Overall, 42 per cent of companies with a market capitalisation of $10bn or more gave their investors at least some of the information recommended by the TCFD in 2019. European companies led the way, ranking highest for 10 of the task force’s 11 recommended disclosures. But companies in North America were best at communicating climate-related “risks and opportunities”. In sector terms, energy companies, builders and materials suppliers provided the most climate information.

Progress towards the TCFD’s end-goals remains slow, though. If the growth rate in climate disclosures since 2017 remained constant in coming years, companies would not be providing all 11 pieces of information that the task force recommends until 2029.

Some regulators are now taking action to increase disclosure levels. In March next year, new EU regulation is due to come into force making the online publication of sustainability impacts mandatory. Earlier this year, the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority said all London-listed companies would soon have to make the climate-related disclosures prescribed by the TCFD — or explain why they cannot.



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Markets

Financial bubbles also lead to golden ages of productive growth

Published

on

By


Sir Alastair Morton had a volcanic temper. I know this because a story I wrote in the early 1990s questioning whether Eurotunnel’s shares were worth anything triggered an eruption from the company’s then boss. Calls were made, voices raised, resignations demanded. 

Thankfully, I kept my job. Eurotunnel’s equity was also soon crushed under a mountain of debt. Nevertheless, the company was refinanced and the project completed. I raised a glass to Morton’s ferocious determination on a Eurostar train to Paris a decade later.

With hindsight, Eurotunnel was a classic example of a productive bubble in miniature. Amid great euphoria about the wonders of sub-Channel travel, capital was sucked into financing a great enterprise of unknown worth.

Sadly, Eurotunnel’s earliest backers were not among its financial beneficiaries. But the infrastructure was built and, pandemics aside, it provides a wonderful service and makes a return. It was a lesson on how markets habitually guess the right direction of travel, even if they misjudge the speed and scale of value creation.

That is worth thinking about as we worry whether our overinflated markets are about to burst. Will something productive emerge from this bubble? Or will it just be a question of apportioning losses? “All productive bubbles generate a lot of waste. The question is what they leave behind,” says Bill Janeway, the veteran investor.

Fuelled by cheap money and fevered imaginations, funds have been pouring into exotic investments typical of a late-stage bull market. Many commentators have drawn comparisons between the tech bubble of 2000 and the environmental, social and governance frenzy of today. Some $347bn flowed into ESG investment funds last year and a record $490bn of ESG bonds were issued. 

Last month, Nicolai Tangen, the head of Norway’s $1.3tn sovereign wealth fund, said that investors had been right to back tech companies in the late 1990s — even if valuations went too high — just as they were right to back ESG stocks today. “What is happening in the green shift is extremely important and real,” Tangen said. “But to what extent stock prices reflect it correctly is another question.”

If the past is any guide to the future, we can hope that this proves to be a productive bubble, whatever short-term financial carnage may ensue.

In her book Technological Revolutions and Financial Capital, the economist Carlota Perez argues that financial excesses and productivity explosions are “interrelated and interdependent”. In fact, past market bubbles were often the mechanisms by which unproven technologies were funded and diffused — even if “brilliant successes and innovations” shared the stage with “great manias and outrageous swindles”.

In Perez’s reckoning, this cycle has occurred five times in the past 250 years: during the Industrial Revolution beginning in the 1770s, the steam and railway revolution in the 1820s, the electricity revolution in the 1870s, the oil, car and mass production revolution in the 1900s and the information technology revolution in the 1970s. 

Each of these revolutions was accompanied by bursts of wild financial speculation and followed by a golden age of productivity increases: the Victorian boom in Britain, the Roaring Twenties in the US, les trente glorieuses in postwar France, for example.

When I spoke with Perez, she guessed we were about halfway through our latest technological revolution, moving from a phase of narrow installation of new technologies such as artificial intelligence, electric vehicles, 3D printing and vertical farms to one of mass deployment.

Whether we will subsequently enter a golden age of productivity, however, will depend on creating new institutions to manage this technological transformation and green transition, and pursuing the right economic policies.

To achieve “smart, green, fair and global” economic growth, Perez argues the top priority should be to transform our taxation system, cutting the burden on labour and long-term investment returns, and further shifting it on to materials, transport and dirty energy.

“We need economic growth but we need to change the nature of economic growth,” she says. “We have to radically change relative cost structures to make it more expensive to do the wrong thing and cheaper to do the right thing.”

Albeit with excessive enthusiasm, financial markets have bet on a greener future and begun funding the technologies needed to bring it to life. But, just as in previous technological revolutions, politicians must now play their part in shaping a productive result.

john.thornhill@ft.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Markets

US tech stocks fall as government bond sell-off resumes

Published

on

By


A sell-off in US government bonds intensified on Wednesday, sending technology stocks sharply lower for a second straight day.

The yield on the 10-year US Treasury bond, which acts as a benchmark for global borrowing costs, climbed to nearly 1.5 per cent at one point. It later settled around 1.47 per cent, up nearly 0.08 percentage points on the day.

Treasury trading has been particularly volatile for a week now — 10-year yields briefly eclipsed 1.6 per cent last Thursday — but the rise in yields has been picking up pace since the start of the year and the moves have begun weighing heavily on US stocks.

This has been especially true for high-growth technology companies whose valuations have been underpinned by low rates. The tech-focused Nasdaq Composite index was down 2.7 per cent on Wednesday, on top of a 1.7 per cent drop the day before.

The broader S&P 500 fell by 1.3 per cent.

The US Senate has begun considering President Joe Biden’s $1.9tn stimulus package, with analysts predicting that the enormous amount of fiscal spending will boost not only economic growth but also consumer prices. The five-year break-even rate — a measure of investors’ medium-term inflation expectations — hit 2.5 per cent on Wednesday for the first time since 2008.

Inflation makes bonds less attractive by eroding the value of their income payments.

“I would expect US Treasuries to continue selling off,” said Didier Borowski, head of global views at fund manager Amundi. “There is clearly a big stimulus package coming and I expect a further US infrastructure plan to pass Congress by the end of the year.”

Mark Holman, chief executive of TwentyFour Asset Management, said he could see 10-year yields eventually trading around 1.75 per cent as the economic recovery gains traction later this year.

“It will be a very strong second half,” he said.

Line chart of Five-year break-even rate (%) showing US medium-term inflation expectations hit 13-year high

Elsewhere, the yield on 10-year UK gilts rose more than 0.09 percentage points to 0.78 per cent, propelled by expectations of a rise in government borrowing and spending following the UK Budget.

Sovereign bonds also sold off across the eurozone, with the yield on Germany’s equivalent benchmark note rising more than 0.06 percentage points to minus 0.29 per cent. This was an example of “contagion” that was not justified “by the economic fundamentals of the eurozone”, Borowski said, where the rollout of coronavirus vaccines in the eurozone has been slower than in the US and UK.

The tumult in global government bond markets partly reflects bets by some traders that the US Federal Reserve will be pushed into tightening monetary policy sooner than expected, influencing the costs of doing business for companies worldwide, although the world’s most powerful central bank has been vocal that it has no immediate plans to do so.

Lael Brainard, a Fed governor, said on Tuesday evening that the ructions in US government bond markets had “caught my eye”. In comments reported by Bloomberg she said it would take “some time” for the central bank to wind down the $120bn-plus of monthly asset purchases it has carried out since last March.

After a series of record highs for global equities as recently as last month, stocks were “priced for perfection” and “very sensitive” to interest rate expectations that determine how investors value companies’ future cash flows, said Tancredi Cordero, chief executive of investment strategy boutique Kuros Associates.

Europe’s Stoxx 600 equity index closed down 0.1 per cent, after early gains evaporated. The UK’s FTSE 100 rose 0.9 per cent, boosted by economic support measures in the Budget speech.

The mid-cap FTSE 250 index, which is more skewed towards the UK economy than the internationally focused FTSE 100, ended the session 1.2 per cent higher.

Brent crude oil prices gained 2 per cent at $64.04 a barrel.



Source link

Continue Reading

Markets

UK listings/Spacs: the crown duals

Published

on

By



City-boosting proposals are not enough to offset lack of EU financial services trade deal



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending