Learn
What Are ESG Investments? Sustainable Investing Explained
ESG investing considers environmental, social, and governance factors alongside financial returns. Here's how it works, the performance debate.
Learn
ESG investing considers environmental, social, and governance factors alongside financial returns. Here's how it works, the performance debate.
This guide is designed for first-pass understanding. Start with core terms, then apply the framework in your own account workflow.
ESG investing is one of the most debated topics in finance today. Supporters say it's the future of responsible capitalism. Critics call it greenwashing at best and politically motivated at worst. The truth is more nuanced than either side admits. Here's what ESG actually means, how it works, and whether it belongs in your portfolio.
ESG investments are funds and securities that incorporate Environmental, Social, and Governance criteria into the investment selection process. ESG funds may screen out certain industries (fossil fuels, tobacco, weapons) or overweight companies with strong sustainability practices. The evidence on whether ESG investing helps or hurts returns is mixed; performance tends to track the broad market over long periods, with divergence driven mainly by sector weightings rather than the ESG criteria themselves.
ESG stands for Environmental, Social, and Governance; three categories of criteria used to evaluate how a company operates beyond just financial performance.
Several major firms rate companies on ESG criteria, with MSCI and Sustainalytics being the two most widely used. MSCI rates companies on a scale from AAA (leader) to CCC (laggard) based on exposure to ESG risks and how well they manage those risks relative to peers.
Sustainalytics, owned by Morningstar, takes a different approach. They measure "unmanaged ESG risk"; the risk a company faces from ESG issues that it hasn't adequately addressed. Lower scores mean less unmanaged risk.
Here's the problem: ESG ratings agencies often disagree with each other. A company that MSCI rates highly might get a mediocre score from Sustainalytics. Research has shown that the correlation between major ESG raters is surprisingly low; around 0.6 — compared to credit rating agencies where the correlation is above 0.9. This means ESG scoring is more subjective than most investors realize.
ESG investing evaluates companies based on Environmental (carbon emissions, waste, energy use), Social (labor practices, diversity, community impact), and Governance (board structure, executive pay, shareholder rights) factors alongside traditional financial analysis. ESG funds screen out or underweight companies that score poorly on these criteria.
Research is mixed. Some studies show ESG funds perform comparably to conventional funds over long periods. Others show slight underperformance due to excluding profitable sectors (oil, tobacco, defense). ESG funds tend to have higher expense ratios. The performance difference is smaller than most people assume in either direction.
Greenwashing is when companies or funds overstate their environmental or social credentials to attract ESG-conscious investors. Some ESG funds hold oil companies and defense contractors. Check what a fund actually holds, not just its marketing. Third-party ESG ratings also vary widely — the same company can score well on one rating system and poorly on another.
Try this workflow
Apply this concept with live balances, transactions, and portfolio data instead of static spreadsheets.
Graph: 3 outgoing / 2 incoming
learn · related-concept · 76%
Active vs Passive Investing: Performance, Fees, and the Data
Passive investing through index funds has beaten most active managers over the long term. Here's the data, when active management can work, and how to decide.
learn · related-concept · 76%
What Is an ETF? ETFs vs Mutual Funds vs Index Funds
ETFs explained simply — how they trade, expense ratios, tax efficiency, and how ETFs compare to mutual funds and index funds for building a portfolio.
learn · related-concept · 76%
What Is Factor Investing? Smart Beta and Risk Premiums
Factor investing targets specific return drivers — value, momentum, quality, size, and low volatility. Here's how factor strategies work and whether they.
learn · related-concept · 65%
Asset Allocation: Why It Matters More Than Stock Picking
The easiest way to invest with ESG criteria is through ESG-focused funds. These come in several flavors:
Expense ratios for ESG funds are typically slightly higher than their non-ESG counterparts — often 0.10% to 0.25% compared to 0.03% for a basic index fund. The gap has been narrowing as competition increases.
Greenwashing is when a fund markets itself as ESG-friendly but holds many of the same companies as a conventional index. And it's more common than you'd think. Some ESG funds hold oil companies, defense contractors, and fast fashion brands; just with slightly lower weightings.
The reason is that many ESG funds use a "best in class" approach, including the top ESG scorers within every sector; including fossil fuels. ExxonMobil might make the cut if it scores better on ESG metrics than other oil companies, even though it's still an oil company.
If you care about specific exclusions (no fossil fuels, no weapons, no tobacco), read the fund's methodology carefully. Don't assume the ESG label means what you think it means. Look at the actual holdings; Clarity can help you see exactly what companies you own across all your funds.
This is the million-dollar question, and the honest answer is: it depends on the time period, the methodology, and which study you read.
Studies from 2015-2020 mostly showed ESG funds performing on par with or slightly better than conventional funds. This was partly because ESG funds tend to overweight tech companies (which score well on ESG) and underweight energy companies (which score poorly). During a period when tech dominated and energy lagged, this looked like ESG was adding value; but it was really a sector bet.
In 2022, when energy stocks surged and tech plummeted, ESG funds significantly underperformed. Critics pointed to this as evidence that ESG costs you returns. But that was also a sector bet, just in reverse.
The most balanced view is that ESG screening, by itself, neither reliably helps nor reliably hurts long-term returns. What it does is change your portfolio's composition in ways that can lead to tracking error; your returns will diverge from the broad market in both directions. Whether that's acceptable depends on your values and your tolerance for deviation.
There are two broad approaches to ESG investing, and they produce very different portfolios:
Most institutional investors use the integration approach, arguing that ESG data is simply additional information that helps assess risk. Individual investors tend to prefer exclusion because it feels more aligned with their values. Neither approach is wrong; they just serve different purposes.
ESG investing and impact investing are often conflated, but they're different. ESG investing uses environmental, social, and governance criteria to select investments, but the primary goal is still financial returns. Impact investing intentionally targets measurable social or environmental outcomes; sometimes accepting lower returns to achieve them.
Examples of impact investing include community development finance, green bonds funding specific renewable energy projects, or microfinance lending in developing countries. The returns are often lower, and the investments are typically less liquid. But the impact is direct and measurable, not inferred from a scoring system.
If your primary motivation is financial returns with an ESG overlay, ESG funds make sense. If you want your money to directly fund positive change and are willing to accept trade-offs, impact investing might be more appropriate.
The SEC has proposed enhanced climate-related disclosure rules that would require publicly traded companies to report greenhouse gas emissions, climate risk assessments, and transition plans. The European Union's Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) already requires detailed sustainability reporting from fund managers operating in Europe.
For investors, better disclosure standards should eventually improve the quality and consistency of ESG data — addressing the ratings disagreement problem where the same company can score well on one ESG rating and poorly on another. In the meantime, look beyond the label and examine what a fund actually holds.
Starting around 2022, ESG investing faced significant political backlash, particularly in the United States. Several states passed anti-ESG legislation, prohibiting state pension funds from considering ESG factors in investment decisions. Some states pulled funds from asset managers like BlackRock, accusing them of prioritizing social agendas over fiduciary duty.
The core argument from critics is that fund managers should focus solely on maximizing financial returns for their clients, not on social or environmental goals. Supporters counter that ESG factors are financially relevant — climate risk, regulatory risk, and reputational risk all affect a company's bottom line.
The backlash has had practical effects. Several major asset managers have pulled back on ESG marketing and rebranded their products. The term "ESG" itself has become politically charged, even as the underlying practice of considering non-financial risks in investment decisions continues.
ESG investing makes sense for you if any of the following apply:
ESG investing probably isn't for you if you believe it reliably produces better returns (the evidence doesn't support that), if the slightly higher fees bother you, or if you'd rather donate to causes you care about while maximizing your investment returns separately.
Despite the backlash, the trend toward incorporating non-financial factors into investment decisions isn't going away. Climate change, regulatory shifts, and changing consumer preferences all create real financial risks that investors need to assess.
What's likely to change is the language. The term "ESG" may fade in favor of more specific terms like "climate risk," "sustainability," or simply "risk management." The practice of analyzing how companies manage environmental and social risks will continue even if the acronym falls out of fashion.
Regulation is also evolving. The EU already requires detailed sustainability disclosures from companies. The SEC has proposed similar rules in the US. As disclosure standards improve, the quality of ESG data should improve too — potentially addressing the ratings disagreement problem over time.
Understanding what you actually own is the first step in aligning your portfolio with your values. Connect your accounts to Clarity and review the actual holdings in your existing funds. You might be surprised — many broad market index funds already underweight the companies that ESG funds exclude. Or you might discover holdings that conflict with your values. Clarity shows your complete holdings across all accounts so you can make informed decisions about where adjustments are needed.
If you're interested in ESG investing, start by clarifying your goals. Do you want to exclude specific industries? Tilt toward better-managed companies? Fund specific environmental projects? Your goals should determine your approach.
Next, look at what you already own. Review the actual holdings in your existing funds and compare them to ESG fund alternatives. Either way, understanding your current portfolio is the essential first step.
This article is educational and does not constitute investment advice. Past performance does not guarantee future results. Consider consulting a financial advisor before making investment decisions.
Asset allocation — how you split money between stocks, bonds, crypto, and cash — determines 90% of your returns. Here's how to build yours by age and risk.