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.
Itaú Unibanco has several board-level committees, including the Social, Environmental, and Climate Responsibility Committee, which defines, directs and supervises the organization’s climate strategy. Management-level positions and committees are assigned some climate-related responsibilities, including deliberating on climate risk decision-making, and monitoring performance on climate demands from the market, regulators, and civil society.
**Strategy: Itaú has defined various risks it considers relevant over different time horizons, and references some processes used to determine which risks and opportunities could have a material financial impact on the organization, including a climate risk and opportunity mapping process, sector classification according to climate exposure, and climate sensitivity monitoring and measurement. Itaú also considers climate-related risks and opportunities on its lending, advisory and investment activities.
The organization considers the impact of climate-related risks and opportunities on its corporate strategy planning, including in wholesale banking, retail, insurance, and investments. It appears to have previously participated in a pilot scenario to test its energy and agriculture portfolios, and has comprehensively tested the resilience of its loan portfolio using two scenarios for physical risks, and four NGFS scenarios for transition risks. Itaú has disclosed some implications of its scenario analysis on its strategy and business model, but has not described how it plans to respond to the effects identified.
The organization describes its processes for identifying and assessing climate-related risks, including its climate risk mapping methodology, assessment of exposure to climate risk by sector, and climate sensitivity and scenario analysis. Itaú outlinesprocesses for managing climate-related risks including risk management initiatives for identified climate risk groups and publication of its Global Social, Environmental, and Climate Risk Policy. The organization references some ways it integrates climate-related risks into overall risk management, stating that its climate risk assessment strategy is incorporated in its environmental and social risk framework.
Itaú is transparent about some key metrics related to climate-related risks and opportunities, including top line sustainable finance metrics and the incorporation of the management of climate-related risks into remuneration policies. The organization is transparent about Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions data and discloses some operational Scope 3 emissions data. It has also disclosed comprehensive Scope 3 Category 15 emissions for many sectors and sub-sectors as well as two asset classes in absolute emissions.
In October 2021, Itaú joined the UN convened Net Zero Banking Alliance, and it has committed to transition its lending and investment portfolios to align with net-zero by 2050 or sooner pathways. Itaú set an interim sector target for the power generation sector in its 2023 Climate Report, and set additional interim sector targets for the cement, steel, aluminum, agribusiness, and transport sectors in its 2024 Climate Report.
Itaú has committed to phasing out thermal coal by 2030, which includes coal-fired power generation and thermal coal mining. It will not provide financing to projects or companies planning the construction of new coal mines and plants, and will exclude companies that generate more than 15% revenue from coal mines or plants. Itaú appears to be actively financing the expansion of unabated oil and gas infrastructure, and has set some exclusionary policies for unconventional oil and unconventional gas activities, stating it will not finance new or expansion of oil and gas in the Arctic or in tar sands.
The organization is increasing its financing of renewables through its sustainable financing target of mobilizing R$1 trillion by 2030, and has outlined eligible green categories in its Sustainable Finance Framework.
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.
Portion of AUM Assessed: $4.71B
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Centrais Eletricas Brasileiras SA - Eletrobras | 82.6% |
| Companhia Paranaense de Energia | 8.7% |
| Energy of Minas Gerais Co | 4.2% |
| Eneva SA | 2.0% |
| Auren Energia SA | 1.2% |
| Neoenergia SA | 0.8% |
| CPFL Energia SA | 0.1% |
| Enel Chile SA | 0.1% |
| Equatorial SA | 0.1% |
| ENGIE Brasil Energia SA | <0.1% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Tesla Inc | 94.2% |
| Ferrari NV | 5.8% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Petroleo Brasileiro SA Petrobras | 99.6% |
| Prio SA | 0.4% |
| Enauta Participacoes SA | <0.1% |
Itaú Asset Management does not appear to be strongly engaging with companies around climate change, although reporting and disclosures are limited so it is unclear to what extent. The asset manager appears to place a strong focus on climate change and ESG integration, but it does not appear to have a climate engagement framework. Itaú does not appear to use milestones for tracking engagement progress or have a defined escalation response.
Due to the lack of case studies and examples in its reporting, it is unclear if Itaú is engaging companies on Paris-aligned business models or impacting company behaviour on climate. The asset manager is involved with a number of climate-related investor initiatives like CDP and Investidores Pelo Clima although it is not clear how it has engaged with these initiatives. Additionally, there is no evidence of engagement or expectations around indirect climate policy influence.
Itaú has described its sustainability governance structure but does not detail where stewardship fits into this structure or how its stewardship processes are reviewed. It is not transparent about engagements, only providing limited summary statistics, however the asset manager does publish quarterly reports with proxy voting data. There is no evidence in Itaú’s reporting that it is willing to use shareholder authority to engage companies on climate.
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.
