The investment landscape has undergone significant shifts over the past few years, particularly in the context of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) strategies. Once a hallmark of strong market-relative and absolute performance, ESG strategies have faced unexpected challenges since early 2022. 

Rising oil prices and the robust performance of defence stocks, triggered by the tragic events in Ukraine, disrupted the decade-long narrative of ESG outperformance (PRI, 2024). 

This shift was especially pronounced for responsible investment strategies underweight in the energy and defence sectors, leading to increased scrutiny of ESG benchmarks and returns (MSCI, 2022).

Despite these challenges, evidence highlights a key insight: companies with strong ESG ratings are more likely to achieve better financial performance over the long term (Wrighton, 2024). 

This blog explores into the evolving dynamics of ESG investing, exploring the interplay between ratings, benchmarks, and returns to better understand its implications for investors navigating an ever-changing market.

Historical Performance of ESG Strategies

Pre-2022: A Decade of Strong ESG Performance

Before the market shifts of 2022, sustainable and ESG-focused investment strategies experienced a decade of remarkable success. 

Research consistently demonstrated their ability to deliver strong relative and absolute returns, making ESG a cornerstone for many investment portfolios. 

Companies with higher ESG ratings often outperformed their sector peers, a trend supported by studies from Kroll (Kroll, 2023) and MSCI ( Wrighton, 2024).

MSCI’s long-term data analysis further underscores this, showing that companies with better ESG ratings excelled financially on a risk-adjusted basis. 

This success was attributed to stronger earnings fundamentals and effective management practices that aligned with sustainability goals (Wrighton, 2024). 

ESG leaders often demonstrated better resilience, operational efficiency, and adaptability to emerging risks, which contributed to their consistent market outperformance (Kroll, 2023).

Post-2022: The Impact of Market Shifts

The geopolitical and economic upheaval caused by the Ukraine conflict in early 2022 marked a turning point for ESG strategies. 

Rising oil prices and the robust performance of defence stocks—sectors traditionally underrepresented in ESG portfolios—shifted the market narrative (PRI, 2024). 

Responsible investment strategies, particularly those underweight in energy and defence, struggled to maintain their previous level of performance (MSCI, 2022).

This change raised questions about the ability of ESG benchmarks to consistently deliver returns during volatile periods. 

A Nuanced Perspective on ESG Resilience

MSCI’s findings illustrate that higher ESG ratings are not simply tied to sector-specific biases (e.g., "green" sectors) but reflect management quality and risk mitigation strategies across industries. 

For example, during both the COVID-19 pandemic and the Ukraine conflict, companies with high ESG scores demonstrated resilience, although the level of outperformance varied.

Kroll’s detailed analysis of over 13,000 publicly traded companies globally during the 2013–2021 period supports this. 

Their study confirmed that companies with higher ESG ratings, such as those rated AAA or AA by MSCI, consistently outperformed those with lower ratings, including during times of crisis. 

This was particularly evident in developed markets, where ESG leaders managed to sustain better financial and operational performance despite challenging environments.

Factors Influencing ESG Performance

#1 Market Dynamics: The Role of Crowding Effects

One factor often debated in ESG strategies' performance is the crowding concept. Over the past decade, strong fund inflows might have influenced the relative outperformance of highly rated ESG stocks. 

Investors keen on aligning with sustainable practices may have prioritized companies with high ESG rankings without fully considering their underlying earnings or cash flow fundamentals.

This phenomenon, referred to as crowding, could lead to overvaluation. In such cases, rising demand for ESG-rated stocks might inflate their prices beyond what current and future earnings can justify. If this trend continues uncontrolled, it poses a risk to the long-term sustainability of ESG investments (diBartolom‌eo & Zieff, 2024).

For instance, some experts argue that the expansion of valuation multiples—essentially, paying a premium for ESG-friendly companies—could eventually outpace these companies' ability to generate corresponding financial returns (Le Sourd, 2022). 

This raises questions about whether investors are over-relying on rankings like those offered by an ESG profiler, which assesses companies based on environmental, social, and governance factors rather than focusing on robust financial metrics.

While these concerns highlight potential vulnerabilities, ESG performance is fundamentally tied to stronger earnings and sustainable growth strategies, reassuring investors who use tools like ESG profilers to guide their decisions (Bell, 2021) . 

#2 MSCI Findings

MSCI’s research provides valuable insights into the factors driving the performance of ESG strategies. While some believe that the outperformance of ESG stocks is due to inflated valuation multiples, MSCI's findings suggest otherwise.

Better earnings fundamentals are the primary driver of ESG outperformance. Companies with strong ESG ratings tend to deliver sustainable earnings growth, supported by effective management of financially material risks and opportunities (MSCI, 2024). 

This demonstrates that ESG investments are not just about popularity or market trends but are often backed by real financial strength and long-term value creation.

These findings emphasise the significance of focusing on companies with robust fundamentals when using ESG benchmarks, as this approach can help investors identify firms with true growth potential and resilience.

#3 Management Practices

McKinsey’s research reinforces MSCI’s findings, highlighting the critical role of thoughtful management practices in achieving long-term success (McKinsey, 2024). 

Companies that focus solely on rapid growth without considering how their strategies impact ESG factors expose themselves to significant risks.

Ignoring ESG considerations can increase reputational risks, damaging a company’s brand and stakeholder trust. More importantly, such short-sighted strategies often prevent companies from reaching their full growth potential (McKinsey, 2024). 

McKinsey’s analysis of global companies reveals that sustainable growth—anchored in ESG principles—helps organisations navigate challenges while maintaining profitability and resilience.

Moreover, management teams that integrate ESG goals into their growth strategies can reduce risks and unlock new pathways for innovation and long-term value creation (Doherty et al., 2023). 

This approach positions companies as leaders in both performance and responsibility, proving that sustainable management is key to thriving in today’s competitive business landscape.

#4 Variability in Research Outcomes

Research on the connection between ESG ratings and investment performance has produced a wide range of conclusions, reflecting the nuanced and multifaceted nature of this relationship. 

A notable study by Vanguard found little to no link between ESG ratings and financial returns (Vanguard, 2023). However, this conclusion contrasts with other global studies, such as those conducted by MSCI and Kroll, which consistently identified a positive correlation between ESG ratings and improved financial performance.

The discrepancy may largely stem from Vanguard's narrow geographic scope, which limited the stock universe analysed in comparison to the broader, more comprehensive data sets used in studies like MSCI’s and Kroll’s. 

Global studies often include diverse markets and industries, providing a more strong framework for analysing the financial impact of ESG ratings. 

For instance, MSCI’s 17-year history of analysing large and mid-cap companies across developed and upcoming markets has revealed consistent outperformance from companies with higher ESG ratings, even after adjusting for factors like size, region, and sector.

Vanguard’s findings illustrate that methodology and scope matter greatly when interpreting the relationship between ESG and performance. 

The narrower focus of the Vanguard study could explain why it did not observe the same trends identified in broader analyses. 

This variability emphasises the importance of considering the context and limitations of individual research when applying findings to investment decisions.

Complexities in ESG Performance Correlations

#1 A Nuanced and Complicated Relationship

The connection between ESG factors and financial performance is not as straightforward as it may seem. While many studies highlight the benefits of ESG integration, the relationship is influenced by several complex variables:

  • Geography: ESG performance often varies by region, with factors like local policies and market maturity playing a role.
  • Market Capitalisation: Larger companies may have more resources to invest in ESG initiatives, influencing their performance compared to smaller firms (Gómez et al., 2024).
  • Industry Sector: Certain sectors, like energy or technology, face unique ESG challenges and opportunities that impact performance differently.
  • Ranking Differences: ESG performance can depend on how rankings are calculated, with variations in methodologies across providers leading to differing results.
  • Data Gaps: Incomplete historical data or limited coverage of the investment universe can skew findings.
  • Policy Influence: Shifting government policies and incentives significantly impact companies’ ESG practices and financial outcomes.
  • Consumer Behaviors: Changing consumer preferences for sustainable products and services further influences ESG-related performance.

Avoiding Oversimplifications

While it might seem tempting to view ESG ratings as a shortcut to superior returns, constructing portfolios solely from the best ESG-rated companies is not a guaranteed strategy for success. Overlapping factors like style trends (e.g., focusing on high-quality companies) and the variables above complicate the picture.

#2 Importance of Financial Materiality

Focusing on financially material ESG indicators is essential for understanding and improving a company’s performance. These indicators highlight the sustainability factors that directly impact a company’s financial health, such as revenue growth, profitability, and risk management.

Sector-Specific Relevance

The importance of financial materiality lies in its relevance to specific industries:

  • Energy-Intensive Industries: For companies in sectors like energy or manufacturing, environmental factors such as carbon emissions are highly material. Reducing emissions can lower regulatory risks, improve efficiency, and reduce costs, directly benefiting financial performance (Greenly, 2024).
  • Service Sectors: In contrast, environmental metrics like emissions may carry less financial weight for service-oriented industries, where factors such as data privacy or diversity in the workforce are often more relevant to profitability and risk.

By tailoring ESG strategies to focus on sector-specific financial materiality, companies can better align their sustainability efforts with operational goals and investor expectations. This targeted approach enhances financial resilience, builds trust with stakeholders, and positions businesses for long-term success (Rose, 2024).

#3 Diverging Investor Motivations

Sustainable investing is driven by a wide range of investor motivations, which can significantly influence portfolio outcomes. While some investors focus purely on financial returns, many prioritise aligning their investments with personal values or broader societal and environmental goals.

Ethical Investors

Ethical investors often avoid companies or sectors that conflict with their moral or ideological beliefs. For instance, they might exclude "sin stocks" like tobacco, gambling, or weapons manufacturers from their portfolios. 

This approach prioritises aligning investments with personal values over maximising financial returns, accepting the possibility of lower profits in exchange for greater ethical alignment.

Impact Investors

Other investors adopt a more proactive approach, seeking to fund companies and industries that address global challenges such as human rights, climate change, and resource scarcity. 

These impact investors focus on generating measurable positive change, such as reducing carbon emissions or promoting workforce equality, even if it means foregoing higher returns.

Balancing Financial and Social Goals

These diverging motivations underscore the complexity of ESG investing. While some investors are willing to renounce financial returns for non-financial objectives, others aim to balance social impact with profitability. 

Understanding these differing goals is essential when evaluating the performance and effectiveness of ESG investment strategies.

Emerging Trends and Perspectives

#1 Long-Term Value Creation

Research consistently shows that the benefits of integrating ESG factors into business operations become more apparent over the long term. Companies that prioritise ESG principles tend to experience enhanced corporate performance over extended periods, driven by stronger management practices, operational efficiencies, and better risk management (‌Polequeu, 2024).

Rockefeller Asset Management’s Insights

Rockefeller Asset Management highlights that ESG integration—the process of embedding ESG considerations into investment and business strategies—outperforms traditional negative screening approaches (Rockefeller Capital Management, 2024) . 

Unlike exclusionary strategies that simply avoid certain sectors or companies, ESG integration actively identifies financially material ESG factors that align with long-term growth.

Key advantages of ESG integration include:

  • Downside Protection: Companies with strong ESG practices are better equipped to weather market downturns and crises.
  • Lower Volatility: A focus on ESG factors reduces risk exposure, leading to more stable performance over time.

These insights suggest that incorporating ESG into decision-making is not just about aligning with sustainability goals—it’s also a strategic approach to creating sustained financial value and resilience in an increasingly complicated and uncertain global market.

Challenges and Criticisms of ESG Ratings

#1 Reliability and Variability of ESG Scores

The practice of ESG scoring has become central to sustainable investing, but it is not without its challenges. Several concerns highlight the reliability and variability of ESG scores:

Over-Reliance on ESG Ratings

ESG ratings often focus on how well companies manage internal processes, such as compliance or risk mitigation, rather than the actual societal or environmental impact of their operations. For example, a company may score well for managing emissions internally but contribute to significant environmental damage through its products or services (Njenga, 2024).

Variations Across Providers

Different ESG rating providers use distinct methodologies, assigning varying weights to environmental, social, and governance factors. This can lead to significantly different scores for the same company, making it challenging for investors to compare companies or sectors consistently (Li, 2020).

Bias Favoring Larger Companies

Larger companies, particularly in developed markets, often have more resources to produce detailed ESG reports, resulting in higher scores. Smaller companies, especially in emerging markets, may lack the resources or infrastructure for comprehensive ESG reporting, creating an inherent bias in scoring (Stewart Investors, n.d).

Conflicts of Interest

Some ESG rating providers face potential conflicts of interest, as they may sell ESG-related services or indices alongside issuing ratings. Research shows that these providers sometimes inflate scores for companies with strong stock performance or those included in their indexes (Romanek, 2023).

While ESG scores are valuable tools, their variability and potential biases require careful interpretation. Investors should avoid over-relying on a single rating and instead consider independent evaluations, multiple providers, and real-world impacts when making ESG-aligned investment decisions. 

#2 Need for Improved Transparency

Transparency in ESG data is becoming a critical focus as both regulators and investors work to enhance its reliability and utility. 

The growing reliance on ESG metrics for investment decisions has highlighted the need for clearer and more consistent reporting standards.

Regulatory Efforts to Improve ESG Data

Regulators in regions like the EU and UK are implementing frameworks, such as the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) (European Commission, 2023), to:

  • Ensure companies disclose accurate and standardised ESG information.
  • Reduce the risk of greenwashing, where companies exaggerate their sustainability claims.
  • Increase confidence in ESG ratings and metrics by demanding clearer methodologies from providers.

Investor-Led Assessments

Investors are taking a more proactive role in assessing ESG performance, recognising that traditional data sources may lack consistency or completeness. Many now employ advanced technologies, such as artificial intelligence (AI) (KPMG, 2024), to:

  • Gather data: AI scans multiple sources, including corporate reports, social media, and news articles, for ESG-related information.
  • Analyse trends: AI helps identify material ESG factors, emerging risks, or opportunities more quickly than manual methods.
  • Enhance decision-making: By using AI to process and analyse ESG data, investors can build more informed and resilient portfolios.

Why Transparency Matters?

Improved transparency in ESG data benefits all stakeholders:

  • Investors: Gain confidence in the reliability of ESG metrics, enabling better risk management and alignment with sustainability goals.
  • Companies: Build trust with investors and stakeholders by demonstrating accountability and genuine commitment to ESG principles.
  • Regulators: Ensure the ESG ecosystem is fair, consistent, and less prone to misleading claims.

Final Words

Despite facing challenges in recent years, ESG strategies remain a promising approach for achieving long-term financial performance and effective risk management. 

Research invariably shows that companies with strong ESG practices tend to demonstrate better resilience and profitability over time.

However, ESG investing is complex and requires a nuanced understanding of various factors, including:

Differences in ESG ratings and methodologies.

  • The evolving role of technology, such as artificial intelligence (AI), in enhancing data collection and analysis.
  • There is a need to balance financial returns with broader social and environmental goals.
  • Ongoing scrutiny of ESG practices and tools is vital to addressing these complexities and maximising their potential.

For investors, ESG strategies offer significant opportunities but demand a vigilant and innovative approach. This involves:

  • Using robust and reliable data to guide investment decisions.
  • Staying informed about upcoming trends and regulatory changes.
  • Employing advanced technologies and independent assessments to improve the accuracy and relevance of ESG insights.

By leveraging well-researched ESG strategies and adapting to the evolving landscape, investors can align their portfolios with sustainability goals while achieving financial success in an increasingly complex global market.

Sources:

PRI. (2024, September 25). A summary of some of the public industry research examining the connections between ESG factors, company ... PRI. https://www.unpri.org/pri-blog/part-iii-esg-factors-and-returns-a-review-of-recent-research/12728.article

‌but, U. (2022, August 24). MSCI. Msci.com. https://www.msci.com/www/blog-posts/msci-esg-indexes-underperformed/03350348890

‌Wrighton, J. (2024, March 4). 17 years of MSCI ESG Ratings and long-term corporate performance. MSCI Sustainability Institute. https://www.msci-institute.com/insights/in-depth/long-term-corporate-performance/

ESG and Global Investor Returns Study. (2023.). Kroll. https://www.kroll.com/en/insights/publications/cost-of-capital/esg-global-investor-returns-study

diBartolom‌eo, D., & Zieff, W. (2024). Has ESG Become a Crowded Trade? The Journal of Impact and ESG Investing, 4(3), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.3905/jesg.2024.1.093

Le Sourd, V. (2022, October 12). Does ESG investing improve risk-adjusted performance? Climateimpact.edhec.edu. https://climateimpact.edhec.edu/does-esg-investing-improve-risk-adjusted-performance

‌Bell, M. (2021, March 9). Why ESG performance is growing in importance for investors. EY. https://www.ey.com/en_gl/insights/assurance/why-esg-performance-is-growing-in-importance-for-investors

Tying short-term decisions to long-term strategy | McKinsey. (2024). Www.mckinsey.com. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/tying-short-term-decisions-to-long-term-strategy

‌Doherty, R., Kampel, C., Koivuniemi, A., Pérez, L., & Rehm, W. (2023). Unlocking the triple play: How integrating ESG priorities into growth strategies delivers sustainable profitable growth and outperforms peers | mckinsey. Www.mckinsey.com. https://www.mckinsey.com/capabilities/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/the-triple-play-growth-profit-and-sustainability

‌Vanguard Investor Webinar: ESG ratings and investments returns: is there a connection? | Vanguard Netherlands Professional. (2024). Nl.vanguard. https://www.nl.vanguard/professional/events-education/events-webinars/vanguard-investor-webinar-impact-of-esg-ratings-on-risk-and-return

Gómez Martínez, R., Medrano-Garcia, M. L., & Amo Navas, D. (2024). Evaluating ESG performance: The influence of firm size and gender diversity.Small Business International Review,8(2), e693. https://doi.org/10.26784/sbir.v8i2.693Copyright 2024 Raúl Gómez Martínez, Maria Luisa Medrano-Garcia, Daniel Amo NavasPublished by AECA (Spanish Accounting and Business Administration Association) and UPCT (Universidad Politécnica de Cartagena) This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

‌Double Materiality Explained. (2024, February 2). What is financial materiality? Greenly.earth. https://greenly.earth/en-us/blog/company-guide/what-is-financial-materiality

‌Rose, A. (2024, May 9). Exploring the Role of SASB in ESG Frameworks - LytHouse | Empowering Sustainability. Lythouse. https://www.lythouse.com/blog/exploring-the-role-of-sasb-in-esg-frameworks

‌Polequeu. (2024, April 17). Companies that prioritize ESG tend to achieve better performance compared to their counterparts. Headmind Partners. https://www.headmind.com/en/companies-that-prioritize-esg-tend-to-achieve-better-performance-compared-to-their-counterparts/

‌ESG and Financial Performance. (n.d.). Rockefeller Capital Management. https://www.rockco.com/strategic-insights/esg-and-financial-performance/

‌Njenga, M. (2024, September 23). The risks and rewards of impact investing with ESG rating uncertainty - Africa Sustainability Matters. Africa Sustainability Matters. https://africasustainabilitymatters.com/the-risks-and-rewards-of-impact-investing-with-esg-rating-uncertainty/

Li, F. (2020). What a Difference an ESG Ratings Provider Makes! https://www.researchaffiliates.com/content/dam/ra/publications/pdf/770-what-a-difference-an-esg-ratings-provider-makes.pdf‌

The problem with ESG scores. (n.d.). Www.stewartinvestors.com. https://www.stewartinvestors.com/global/en/all/insights/the-problem-with-esg-scores.html

‌Romanek, B. (2023, September 25). Investigating possible conflicts of interest among ESG rating providers - ESG Professionals Network. ESG Professionals Network. https://www.esgprofessionalsnetwork.com/investigating-possible-conflicts-of-interest-among-esg-rating-providers/

European Commission. (2024). Corporate sustainability reporting. European Commission. https://finance.ec.europa.eu/capital-markets-union-and-financial-markets/company-reporting-and-auditing/company-reporting/corporate-sustainability-reporting_en

‌KPMG. Make the Difference. kpmg.com/in ESG in the age of AI. (2024). https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmgsites/in/pdf/2024/08/esg-in-the-age-of-ai.pdf.coredownload.inline.pdf