FinanceMap scores this financial institution in the following areas. Please navigate to the relevant tab for in-depth analysis
FinanceMap assesses these portfolios for this financial institution. Please navigate to the relevant tab for in-depth analysis.
Fossil fuel companies are those whose primary sector falls within coal mining and services, or up-, mid-, and downstream oil and gas sectors. Green companies are defined as companies having over 75% revenue deriving from Substantial Contribution to Mitigation activities under the EU Taxonomy.
Portion of AUM Assessed: $61.3B
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Entergy Corp | 31.4% |
| Avista Corp | 16.0% |
| SSE PLC | 9.0% |
| Idacorp Inc | 6.3% |
| NTPC Ltd | 4.9% |
| Iberdrola SA | 4.3% |
| Tenaga Nasional Bhd | 4.2% |
| Enel SpA | 3.3% |
| Nextera Energy Inc | 3.2% |
| American Electric Power Company Inc | 2.6% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| BYD Co Ltd | 37.3% |
| General Motors Co | 26.3% |
| Toyota Motor Corp | 8.5% |
| Kia Corp | 7.5% |
| Hyundai Motor Co | 7.3% |
| Maruti Suzuki India Ltd | 3.8% |
| Dongfeng Motor Group Co Ltd | 2.8% |
| Ford Motor Co | 2.3% |
| Nissan Motor Co Ltd | 2.0% |
| Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd | 1.4% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Coal India Ltd | 54.1% |
| Glencore PLC | 19.5% |
| Exxaro Resources Ltd | 15.9% |
| Alamtri Resources Indonesia Tbk PT | 5.2% |
| Warrior Met Coal Inc | 5.1% |
| China Shenhua Energy Co Ltd | 0.2% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Antero Resources Corp | 16.9% |
| PetroChina Co Ltd | 13.3% |
| BP PLC | 13.2% |
| Petroleo Brasileiro SA Petrobras | 9.3% |
| Shell PLC | 8.8% |
| Exxon Mobil Corp | 5.6% |
| TotalEnergies SE | 4.7% |
| Chevron Corp | 3.0% |
| Devon Energy Corp | 2.6% |
| Permian Resources Corp | 2.0% |
Ameriprise Financial’s stewardship assessment is based on the activities of its asset manager subsidiary Columbia Threadneedle (CTI). The asset manager has a clear framework to inform climate priorities, for example, it uses PAII’s Net Zero Investment Framework to assess the alignment of companies to a net zero pathway and rates companies in 8 categories to give an overall alignment rating. Additionally, it assigns milestones on a 4 point scale to track and monitor engagement status. The asset manager has a clearly defined escalation strategy and provides examples of escalation activities in its reporting.
CTI is actively engaging with companies on various climate-related topics, for example, it engaged with Air Liquide to gain insight on energy transition technologies and its progress towards net zero targets and Standard Chartered on how the bank managing climate risks. Its engagements have supported behavior change on climate, including enhanced sustainability disclosures and climate target setting. The asset manager has engaged on climate policy influence with Chevron and Petroleum on enhancing climate lobbying disclosures. It actively participates in various climate-related investor initiatives including CA100+ and NZAM.
The asset manager has clearly described its stewardship governance structure, roles and responsibilities in its reporting as well as processes in place to review the effectiveness of stewardship policies and activities. For example, its responsible investment policies are reviewed at least annually. CTI is fully transparent about engagements, disclosing a full list of companies engaged with and named case studies in quarterly reports. It has disclosed its proxy voting guidelines and voting data, however voting justifications are not provided.
CTI appears to use shareholder authority to engage companies on climate around AGMs. For example, it has cast dissenting votes in the election of 41 directors for the lack of climate action, including at ExxonMobil.
Insightia data suggests that Columbia Threadneedle is has mixed support of AGM resolutions InfluenceMap categorizes as in line with the Paris Agreement, supporting 28.9% in 2019 and increasing its support in recent years with 40.6% in 2020, 60% in 2021, and 40% in 2022.
FinanceMap's methodology to measure the engagement process on climate was developed in consultation with several of the world's leading asset managers and uses key aspects of the UK Financial Reporting Council's 2020 Stewardship Code . The Stewardship Code was chosen to benchmark engagement quality as it provides an ambitious framework and detailed definitions of what constitutes effective engagement. FinanceMap defines the term ‘engagement’ as referring to all investor actions undertaken to influence the management strategy of the companies they own including private communications with corporate management and appointed advisors; questions at AGMs/other company meetings; comments on the company in the media; escalation and the shareholder resolution process (filing, voting behavior). FinanceMap’s methodology breaks the engagement process down into a set of sub-activities and looks for evidence associated with these across publicly available data sources.
Climate-relevance categorization of shareholder resolutions is based on the IPCC’s Special Report on 1.5°C and its concluded need for “rapid and far-reaching transitions in land, energy, industry, buildings, transport, and cities.” FinanceMap scored voting on any resolution where the intent and likely outcome is consistent with this IPCC stated need. The voting data is drawn from asset managers' disclosures to the US Security Exchange Commission (SEC), asset manager websites (including third-party websites they link to), directly from the asset managers, and through specialist voting data provider Insightia. The full list of resolutions assessed is available here.
The following table outlines the key queries and data sources, which FinanceMap uses to assess asset managers' corporate engagement programs. Every evidence piece is assessed on a five-point scale of -2,-1,0,1,2 or NA (not applicable)/NS (not scored). All queries, data sources, and evidence pieces are weighted against one another in a matrix system to arrive at a final top-level score. Clicking on specific cells will load the underlying evidence and information on how it has been assessed.
