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.
Portfolio Paris Alignment analysis of this institution's activities in this portfolio area in 2020–2021.
Value Assessed: $166B
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.
Portfolio Paris Alignment analysis of this institution's activities in this portfolio area in 2020–2021.
Value Assessed: $114B
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.
Portfolio Paris Alignment analysis of this institution's activities in this portfolio area in 2020–2021.
Value Assessed: $96.8B
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 production companies are defined as those with primary sector of operations in the up-, mid-, and/or downstream segments of fossil fuel production. 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: $110B
Sector Paris Alignment scores for the sectors in which the asset manager has shareholdings. FinanceMap Paris Alignment analysis is limited to the automotive, upstream fossil fuel, and power sectors.
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Brazilian Electric Power Co | 26.7% |
| Enel SpA | 7.7% |
| Iberdrola SA | 6.1% |
| Engie SA | 4.2% |
| RWE AG | 4.1% |
| Nextera Energy Inc | 2.0% |
| EDP Energias de Portugal SA | 2.0% |
| Exelon Corp | 2.0% |
| Saudi Electricity Company SJSC | 1.7% |
| Korea Electric Power Corp | 1.6% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Toyota Motor Corp | 11.6% |
| Stellantis NV | 8.8% |
| Honda Motor Co Ltd | 6.8% |
| Volkswagen AG | 6.6% |
| Hyundai Motor Co | 5.9% |
| General Motors Co | 5.6% |
| Bayerische Motoren Werke AG | 5.6% |
| Ford Motor Co | 4.9% |
| Kia Corp | 4.8% |
| Great Wall Motor Co Ltd | 4.6% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| China Shenhua Energy Co Ltd | 49.7% |
| Peabody Energy Corp | 9.6% |
| Yankuang Energy Group Co Ltd | 9.4% |
| Glencore PLC | 7.4% |
| Arch Resources Inc | 7.0% |
| Exxaro Resources Ltd | 6.1% |
| Adaro Energy Indonesia TBK PT | 3.2% |
| CONSOL Energy Inc | 1.9% |
| Alpha Metallurgical Resources Inc | 1.4% |
| Whitehaven Coal Ltd | 1.3% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Petroleo Brasileiro SA Petrobras | 24.8% |
| Novatek PAO | 9.2% |
| TotalEnergies SE | 7.4% |
| NK Lukoil PAO | 6.9% |
| BP PLC | 5.0% |
| Shell PLC | 4.5% |
| Eni SpA | 3.7% |
| Repsol SA | 3.4% |
| Exxon Mobil Corp | 2.9% |
| Chevron Corp | 1.9% |
All equity funds that FinanceMap has identified as being managed by this asset manager. Click through to a fund's profile page to view in-depth analysis.
Credit Suisse Asset Management does not appear to be an active engager around climate change. The asset manager has mainly focused its climate engagements on publicly traded real estate companies in the past but has stated it plans to expand its climate engagements to high emitting companies in its portfolio based on IIGCC and CETF’s Net Zero Categorization Principles. It appears to monitor climate engagements with a 7 phase engagement process based on defined targets. It also appears to have an escalation response that includes meeting with the board, voting against the company, or reducing/divesting holdings.
Credit Suisse is engaging with some companies on climate, including a hydrogen technology supplier about carbon reduction products and solutions, as well as a European real estate company on emission reductions in construction materials. The asset manager does not reference any expectations set or examples of engagements on climate policy influence in its reporting. It is a member of several collaborative investor initiatives including CA100+, IIGCC, and Climate Bonds Initiative, but has not provided any examples of engagements with these initiatives.
Credit Suisse has provided some details on its net zero governance framework, but has not expanded on its stewardship governance or review processes. The asset manager is partially transparent about its engagements, providing a list of companies engaged with along with some case studies. It has disclosed its proxy voting data in an online dashboard, but does not provide voting justifications.
Credit Suisse has stated willingness to use shareholder authority but has not provided any examples in its reporting.
Insightia data suggests that Credit Suisse is broadly supportive of AGM resolutions InfluenceMap categorizes as in line with the Paris Agreement, supporting 78% in 2021, and 71.4% 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 financial institutions’ sustainable finance 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.
Credit Suisse appears to have limited but broadly positive engagement on sustainable finance regulation.
Credit Suisse has supported the role of finance in delivering the goals of the Paris Agreement, and has joined the Net-Zero Banking Alliance, which advocates for the alignment of lending and investment portfolios with net-zero emissions by 2050. In a joint statement by the financial sector in 2022, it also advocated for the post-2020 global biodiversity framework to mandate the alignment of financial flows with biodiversity goals.
In a 2021 letter to the SEC, Credit Suisse strongly supported the need for regulated corporate ESG disclosure, including disclosure on Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions. In its 2020-2021 CDP responses, Credit Suisse appears to have supported the revision of the Non-Financial Reporting Directive (NFRD) and the EU Taxonomy, as well as the development of an Asian taxonomy. In its 2022 CDP response, Credit Suisse stated support with some exceptions to regional efforts in Asia-Pacific around taxonomies and climate risk management, as well as in Switzerland on climate-risk disclosures
Credit Suisse has only described some of the policies it is following and has not disclosed positions or engagement activities in detail. Credit Suisse lacks a clear disclosure of its indirect engagement beyond listing some of its trade associations.
InfluenceMap’s methodology for assessing lobbying on sustainable 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 assessment of sustainable finance lobbying, InfluenceMap considers engagement on all financial policies which intersect with climate and/or other sustainability issues. 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 sustainable finance 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 sustainable finance policy issue, across each of the data sources.
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.
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.
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Credit Suisse is a member of IIF
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
As of February 2023, Axel Lehmann is on the board of the IIF. As of September 2023 this no longer appears to be the case.
Axel Lehmann (Chairman of the Board of Directors, Credit Suisse Group AG)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
As of November 2021, António Horta-Osório is on the board of the IIF
António Horta-Osório (Chairman)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Urs Rohner is on the board of the IIF
Urs Rohner (Chairman of the Board of Directors)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Credit Suisse is a member of IIF
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
As of February 2023, Axel Lehmann is on the board of the IIF. As of September 2023 this no longer appears to be the case.
Axel Lehmann (Chairman of the Board of Directors, Credit Suisse Group AG)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
As of November 2021, António Horta-Osório is on the board of the IIF
António Horta-Osório (Chairman)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Urs Rohner is on the board of the IIF
Urs Rohner (Chairman of the Board of Directors)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Shane O'Cuinn is on the AFME board of directors (last checked September 2023).
Shane O'Cuinn (Managing Director, Global Head of Macro and Emerging Markets Sales & Trading)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Jonathan Moore is on the AFME board of directors
Jonathan Moore (Head of Global Credit Products EMEA, Credit Suisse)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Shane O'Cuinn is on the AFME board of directors (last checked September 2023).
Shane O'Cuinn (Managing Director, Global Head of Macro and Emerging Markets Sales & Trading)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Jonathan Moore is on the AFME board of directors
Jonathan Moore (Head of Global Credit Products EMEA, Credit Suisse)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
As of February 2023, Credit Suisse is a member of the US Chamber.
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
As of February 2023, Credit Suisse is a member of the US Chamber.
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Credit Suisse is a member of Invest Europe (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Credit Suisse is a member of Invest Europe (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Credit Suisse is a member of EBF (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
As of February 2023, Credit Suisse is a member of UK Finance which is a national association member of EBF
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Credit Suisse is a member of EBF (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
As of February 2023, Credit Suisse is a member of UK Finance which is a national association member of EBF
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
As of February 2023, Credit Suisse is a member of SIFMA
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Nomita Chopra Singh is on the board of SIFMA. As of February 2023, this no longer appears to be the case.
Nomita Chopra Singh (Managing Director, Credit Suisse)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
As of February 2023, Credit Suisse is a member of SIFMA
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Nomita Chopra Singh is on the board of SIFMA. As of February 2023, this no longer appears to be the case.
Nomita Chopra Singh (Managing Director, Credit Suisse)
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
As of February 2023, Credit Suisse (UK) Ltd, Credit Suisse International & Credit Suisse Securities (Europe) Limited are members of UK Finance
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
As of February 2023, Credit Suisse (UK) Ltd, Credit Suisse International & Credit Suisse Securities (Europe) Limited are members of UK Finance
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Credit Suisse is no longer a strategic partner of the MFA. However, as of February 2023, the MFA is listed in its memberships on its website.
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Jodi Lynn DeVito is on the MFA board
Jodi Lynn DeVito (Managing Director, Americas Head of Prime Services Coverage and Client Services, Credit Suisse)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Credit Suisse is no longer a strategic partner of the MFA. However, as of February 2023, the MFA is listed in its memberships on its website.
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Jodi Lynn DeVito is on the MFA board
Jodi Lynn DeVito (Managing Director, Americas Head of Prime Services Coverage and Client Services, Credit Suisse)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
As of December 2021, Credit Suisse is an associate member of Japanese Bankers Association
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
As of December 2021, Credit Suisse is an associate member of Japanese Bankers Association
not specified
--no extract--
Credit Suisse's board determines the strategy towards climate-related matters, and the board-level Sustainability Advisory Committee assist the board in oversight of the group’s sustainability strategy and targets. The charter of the board’s Risk Committee outlines climate-related responsibilities, including reviewing the organization’s risk appetite. Management-level positions are assigned clear climate-related responsibilities and there are processes to ensure they monitor the progress of climate-related issues and initiatives.
The organization has clearly defined the climate-related opportunities it considers relevant to its business over different time horizons and considers climate-related risks and opportunities on its lending, advisory, capital markets and investment business activities. It has defined some processes used to determine which risks and opportunities could have a material financial impact on the organization, such as a heatmap to identify sectors vulnerable to physical and transition risks, however, it has not disclosed the results of its analysis in its TCFD reporting.
Credit Suisse provides some examples of how it has considered the impact of climate-related risks and opportunities on its corporate strategy planning, for example, it is working with clients to support their low-carbon transition and developing products and services to facilitate the transition and climate change mitigation.
The organization appears to have tested the resilience of its business strategy using climate scenarios, including a 2°C or lower warming climate-scenario. It has conducted pilot exercises such as a physical risk analysis focused on flooding risk on its Swiss and UK real estate portfolios as well as a transition risk pilot covering the oil and gas portfolio.
Risk Management:* Credit Suisse is aligned with elements of TCFD guidance on risk management. It has a three-step Reputational Risk Review Process (RRRP) and a sector-specific Client Energy Transition Framework (CETFs) which consists of the identification of priority sectors/industries and methodology to categorize clients according to energy transition readiness.
The organization has processes in place to manage and mitigate climate-related risks, including sector specific policies and restrictions that help manage transactions with clients or prospects in various industries. Additionally, Credit Suisse’s Climate Risk team has the mandate to set risk appetite and strategy to protect portfolios from climate-related risks.
Credit Suisse appears to have integrated climate risk assessments into its overall risk management approach. Climate-related risks are embedded into the group-wide risk taxonomy and it is working to enhance the Risk Appetite Framework from the top down to ensure climate risk is embedded within its risk culture.
The organization is transparent about key metrics used to measure and manage climate-related risks. For example, it discloses the proportion of assets materially exposed to climate risks and has incorporated the management of material climate-related risks into remuneration policies.
Credit Suisse discloses Scope 1, Scope 2 and some relevant Scope 3 emissions. It measures and discloses the weighted average carbon intensity of its top 50 lending financing to upstream fossil fuel producers and has begun measuring portfolio emissions for its investment funds labelled as ESG compliant. It has begun measuring and disclosing its financed emissions in line with PCAF for the coal, oil, and gas sector.
The organization has set a net-zero by 2050 target including a commitment to set 2030 interim targets. It was announced as a founding member of the Net Zero Banking Alliance in April 2021. In its 2021 Sustainability Report, Credit Suisse outlined its initial 2030 interim target, which includes a 49% emissions reduction goal for the oil, gas, and coal upstream and downstream sector in line with the NGFS 1.5C trajectory.
Credit Suisse appears to be phasing out of its financing for coal-related activities and companies that generate revenue from coal. It will not provide lending or capital markets underwriting to existing clients who derive more than 25% of their revenue from thermal coal extraction or coal power. This threshold is 5% for new clients from 2022. By 2030, it will have no remaining credit exposure in coal power generation and thermal coal mining and will not provide lending or capital markets underwriting for companies that derive more than 5% of revenues from thermal coal extraction and coal power - unless supporting the energy transition.
With regard to oil and gas, Credit Suisse has set exclusionary policies that limit financing offshore and onshore oil and gas projects in the Arctic. Transactions involving oil sands and oil shale development, shale oil and gas, and transnational pipelines require enhanced due diligence. The organization otherwise appears to provide financing for expanding oil and gas infrastructure given due diligence.
The entity appears to be supportive of the role of nuclear in the energy mix, and requires clients meet international safety standards. It has communicated support for a low-carbon economy and is increasing its financing of renewables to support the transition. As a member of NZBA, Credit Suisse has not yet aligned its energy financing portfolio with the IPCC guidance between 2020-2050.
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.
Open PDF file of Data Source
Open PDF file of Data Source
Open PDF file of Data Source