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.
Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC)’s board and board committees appear to incorporate climate-related issues in guiding corporate strategy and risk management processes and policies. It has assigned climate-related responsibilities to management-level positions and committees, and has some descriptions of how senior management is involved in the implementation and management of climate-related issues.
CIBC describes several climate-related risks and opportunities it considers relevant to its business, and uses a Carbon Risk Scoring system to consider clients’ current, medium, and long-term positioning with regards to physical and transitions risks. Additionally, it uses this risk scoring system to inform its climate heat mapping and scenario analysis, and appears to consider climate-related risks across its lending, advisory, and investment activities.
The organization is fully transparent about the impact of climate-related risks and opportunities on corporate strategy planning across different lines of business, including through sustainable products and service offerings, and its strategy for achieving its own net-zero ambitions.
CIBC appears to test the resilience of its business strategy using climate scenario analysis. In 2021 reporting, it placed an emphasis on three 30-year scenarios suggested by the Bank of Canada OSFI, including below 2C immediate, below 2C delayed, and net-zero 2050 which is a 1.5C model. In 2022 and 2023, it appears to have tested the resilience of its corporate and commercial lending as well as retail lending across various scenarios. However, reporting of these analyses lacks detail, and the organization has not outlined its capacity to adjust its strategy based on the results of these exercises.
CIBC has clear risk management processes in place to identify and prioritize climate-related risks, and it has described how it determines the relative significance of climate-related risks, including using a heatmap analysis and its Carbon Risk Scoring Methodology to assess its exposure. It has some processes in place to manage climate-related risks, and has identified several risk types and outlined its risk management approach for each. It appears to have fully integrated climate-related risk into its overall risk management approach. CIBC has embedded climate risk into its risk appetite statements and has integrated its climate heatmapping assessment into enterprise-wide stress testing.
The organization is fully transparent about key metrics used to assess climate-related risks and opportunities, including the amount and percentage of credit exposure vulnerable to physical and transition risks, investment deployed towards managing climate-related opportunities, and the percentage of senior management remuneration impacted by climate considerations.
CIBC fully discloses Scope 1 and 2 emissions as well as some relevant Scope 3 emissions. It also has disclosed Scope 3 Category 15 emissions, disclosing absolute emissions metrics for several sectors including oil and gas, power, automotive, real estate, and agriculture, and meets some of the requirements outlined in the PCAF reporting standard.
In August 2021, CIBC set a Net Zero by 2050 target for its financing activities, which appears to include both lending and capital markets activities. In March 2022, it released its initial 2030 interim target for the oil and gas sector, and in September 2022 it published another interim 2030 target for the power generation sector. However, both of these reduction targets are based on emissions intensity and not absolute emissions metrics. In its 2023 report, CIBC began to disclose emissions coverage for residential mortgages, agriculture, commercial real estate, and motor vehicle loans, but states that it has not set targets for these sectors yet due to challenges and limitations.
CIBC is not aligned with IPCC guidance on the role of coal in the energy mix up to 2050. Its policies include major exemptions, stating it will not lend to any client or project where proceeds will be primarily used for developing new coal-fired power plants, mountaintop removal coal mines, or standalone thermal coal mines, and will evaluate coal reduction efforts of any new or existing utility or power generation client with more than 60% of power generation from coal. Additionally, it has not outlined a coal phase out in line with IPCC guidance.
Regarding unconventional natural gas and oil, the organization states that it won’t directly finance entities that are involved in exploration or development of oil and gas in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. It has not outlined other activities related to oil and gas in its environmental policy and thus appears to be actively financing new or expansionary projects. CIBC has established 2030 interim targets for its oil and gas portfolio, targeting a 35% reduction in operational emissions intensity, and a 27% reduction in end use emissions intensity.
CIBC is increasing its financing of renewables under its $300 billion sustainable finance by 2030 target and has outlined its approach to categorizing, assessing and reporting its progress toward this target in its Sustainable Finance Methodology.
FinanceMap’s Climate Governance and Policies analysis assesses statements financial institutions (FIs) are making on how they are incorporating climate issues into their decision-making and operations using FinanceMap’s matrix methodology. This methodology is adapted from the Task Force on Climate-Related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) recommendations and guidelines, Net-Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA) or equivalent Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net-Zero (GFANZ) initiative reporting, and IPCC and IEA technology statements. The TCFD provide guidance on 11 recommendations across four areas which are reflected in our matrix: Governance, Strategy, Risk Management, and Metrics and Targets. Additional benchmarks have been introduced to strengthen the ambition of scoring criteria in the assessment of targets, which are supplemented by guidance from the NZBA or equivalent GFANZ initiatives.
Additionally, Science-Based Policy (SBP) benchmarks are used to measure alignment of an FIs technology positions with the science of climate change. These benchmarks are applied to an FIs internal policies on technologies including coal, oil, gas, nuclear, and renewables and also assesses its engagement with broader climate and energy policy issues such as advocacy on the role and importance of different strategy types in the future energy mix.
For each TCFD recommendation and technology, FIs statements are applied to a five point scoring scale ranging from +2 to -2, measuring alignment with the relevant benchmarks. The detailed scores for this FI are displayed below within each matrix cell.
The following table outlines the key queries and data sources, which FinanceMap uses to assess financial institutions climate governance, targets and policies. 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.
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.
Portfolio Paris Alignment analysis of this institution's activities in this portfolio area assesses deals in 2020–2024.
Value Assessed: $260B
Sector Paris Alignment scores for the sectors to which this portfolio has exposure. FinanceMap Paris Alignment analysis is limited to the automotive, upstream fossil fuel, and power sectors.
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.
Portfolio Paris Alignment analysis of this institution's activities in this portfolio area assesses deals in 2020–2024.
Value Assessed: $67.3B
Sector Paris Alignment scores for the sectors to which this portfolio has exposure. FinanceMap Paris Alignment analysis is limited to the automotive, upstream fossil fuel, and power sectors.
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: $3.84B
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Nextera Energy Inc | 82.2% |
| WEC Energy Group Inc | 12.7% |
| TransAlta Corp | 4.7% |
| National Grid PLC | 0.4% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Suzuki Motor Corp | 80.1% |
| Toyota Motor Corp | 19.8% |
| Ferrari NV | <0.1% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Exxon Mobil Corp | 19.6% |
| Shell PLC | 18.9% |
| Equinor ASA | 17.2% |
| ConocoPhillips | 16.3% |
| Chevron Corp | 13.3% |
| Diamondback Energy Inc | 12.0% |
| Suncor Energy Inc | 0.9% |
| Cenovus Energy Inc | 0.7% |
| Canadian Natural Resources Ltd | 0.7% |
| ARC Resources Ltd | 0.3% |
Climate Lobbying Overview: The Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (CIBC) and its subsidiary CIBC Asset Management appear supportive of action to tackle climate change, regulated corporate climate disclosure, and the transition to a low-carbon economy.
Top-Line Messaging on Climate-Related Financial Policy: In its 2022 Climate Report, CIBC stated support for action to keep global temperature rise to 1.5C, and CEO Victor Dodig supported urgent action to tackle climate change in 2024 testimony to the Canada House of Commons. CIBC Asset Management’s 2024 Responsible Investing Policy supports action to achieve Paris Goals, and in 2022 it signed onto the Canadian Investor Statement on Climate Change, supporting action to limit global temperature rise to 1.5C. CIBC’s 2023 Climate Report states support for “best practice” on sustainable finance policies.
Position on Regulated Corporate Climate Disclosure: CIBC Asset Management appears supportive of regulated corporate climate disclosure. In 2024, CIBC Asset Management signed the UNPRI’s Call to Action for ISSB Global Adoption, advocating for policymakers globally to commit to adopt the International Sustainability Standards Board’s (ISSB) climate and sustainability disclosure standards by 2025. In a 2022 comment letter, CIBC Asset Management advocated for increased ambition in Canadian disclosure standards, supporting mandatory emissions disclosure and encouraging quicker implementation. CIBC also submitted a 2022 response to this consultation, but did not take a clear position on the Canadian Securities Adminsitrators’ proposed rules.
Positon on a Taxonomy: In its 2022 Climate Report CIBC reported engaging with policymakers on the development of a “green” and “transition” taxonomy to achieve the goals of the Paris Agreement, although details of this engagement and the taxonomy are unclear. CIBC participated in the Sustainable Finance Action Council, which developed a taxonomy roadmap for the Canadian government. In its 2023 Climate Report, CIBC supported the finalization of a taxonomy aligned with reaching net zero by 2050, and specified that “transition” activities should refer to decarbonizing carbon intensive activities.
Position on Incorporating Climate Factors Into Risk Management/Prudential Regulation: In its 2022 CDP response CIBC said that it supported, with minor exceptions, the Canadian Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions’ (OSFI) “climate sensitive” prudential framework.
Position on Energy, Industry, and Land Transitions: CIBC appears generally supportive of the energy transition. In its 2023 Climate Report, CIBC reported engaging with policymakers to “enable the low carbon transition,” supporting electrification of the economy and carbon contracts for difference to scale up low-carbon technologies. CIBC also appeared supportive of the clean energy tax credits in Canada’s Budget 2023 in the 2023 Climate Report. CIBC and CIBC Asset Management have reported engagement on other energy transition policies, but with few details. In its 2022 ESG & Stewardship Report CIBC Asset Management reported engaging with a Canadian province on its energy transition policies, but without details of this engagement. In its 2023 ESG & Stewardship Report, CIBC Asset Management detailed engaging with the Government of Canada’s Green Financing Framework to support a role for inclusion of nuclear energy within the framework to support emissions reductions, a position that is mostly aligned with the IPCC’s guidance on the role of nuclear in the energy mix.
Industry Association Governance: CIBC has not disclosed a list of industry association memberships. CIBC is a member of multiple associations actively engaged on climate-related policy, including but not limited to the Bank Policy Institute, the Business Council of Canada, and the Canadian Chamber of Commerce
InfluenceMap collects and assesses evidence of corporate climate policy engagement on a weekly basis, depending on the availability of information from each specific data source (for more information see our methodology). While this analysis flows through to the company’s scores each week, the summary above is updated periodically. This summary was last updated in Q4 2024.
InfluenceMap’s methodology for assessing lobbying on climate finance policy closely follows InfluenceMap’s established methodology on climate policy engagement, which is used extensively by investors, including via the Climate Action 100+ investor engagement process. Our full methodology can be found here.
Under our lobbying assessment, InfluenceMap considers engagement on all financial policies which intersect with climate issues, as well as “real economy” climate change policies.
The analysis takes into account both the engagement of the financial institution and the activities of industry associations they hold membership of. InfluenceMap’s methodology covers seven publicly available data sources, searching for evidence of engagement and corporate positioning since 2017. To determine the policy issues within the scope of the analysis, InfluenceMap breaks down policy engagement into a series of subcategories, or 'queries'. These are designed to cover high-level issues relating to the importance of sustainable finance, as well as more specific areas of sustainable finance policymaking. InfluenceMap’s research process searches for evidence of an organization's engagement with each policy issue, across each of the data sources.
The following table outlines the key queries and data sources, which InfluenceMap uses to assess financial institutions' policy engagement. 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.
In this section, we depict graphically the relationships the corporation has with trade associations, federations, advocacy groups and other third parties who may be acting on their behalf to influence climate change policy. Each of the columns above represents one relationship the corporation appears to have with such a third party.
In these columns, the top, dark section represents the strength of the relationship the corporation has with the influencer. For example if a corporation's senior executive also held a key role in the trade association, we would deem this to be a strong relationship and it would be on the far left of the chart above, with the weaker ones to the right. Click on these grey shaded upper sections for details of these relationships. The middle section contains a link to the organization score details of the influencer concerned, so you can see the details of its climate change policy influence. Click on the middle sections for for details of the trade associations. The lower section contains the organization score of that influencer, the lower the more negatively it is influencing climate policy.
