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 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: $125B
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 |
---|---|
Entergy Corp | 16.5% |
American Electric Power Company Inc | 7.1% |
AES Corp | 5.7% |
DTE Energy Co | 5.4% |
Southern Co | 4.4% |
Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc | 4.3% |
Duke Energy Corp | 3.6% |
FirstEnergy Corp | 3.2% |
Engie SA | 3.2% |
Enel SpA | 2.7% |
Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
---|---|
Volkswagen AG | 53.6% |
Stellantis NV | 12.6% |
General Motors Co | 5.0% |
Honda Motor Co Ltd | 4.3% |
Geely Automobile Holdings Ltd | 3.5% |
Toyota Motor Corp | 3.2% |
Subaru Corp | 2.5% |
Ford Motor Co | 2.4% |
Hyundai Motor Co | 1.4% |
Kia Corp | 1.3% |
Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
---|---|
Peabody Energy Corp | 70.8% |
Glencore PLC | 11.5% |
China Shenhua Energy Co Ltd | 6.0% |
Coal India Ltd | 4.0% |
Gujarat Mineral Development Corporation Ltd | 1.9% |
Yankuang Energy Group Co Ltd | 1.4% |
Arch Resources Inc | 0.9% |
Exxaro Resources Ltd | 0.8% |
NACCO Industries Inc | 0.5% |
Adaro Energy Indonesia TBK PT | 0.5% |
Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
---|---|
Devon Energy Corp | 9.9% |
Canadian Natural Resources Ltd | 8.0% |
Conocophillips | 7.8% |
Pioneer Natural Resources Co | 6.2% |
ARC Resources Ltd | 5.0% |
Diamondback Energy Inc | 4.6% |
Petroleo Brasileiro SA Petrobras | 4.6% |
Exxon Mobil Corp | 4.5% |
Suncor Energy Inc | 4.5% |
TotalEnergies SE | 4.4% |
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.
Manulife does not appear to be firmly engaging with companies on climate. The asset manager states it prefers to engage companies on effective implementation of climate risk mitigation and adaptation strategies and its top engagement topics in 2021 included GHG emissions and energy management. However, the organization does not appear to have a clear framework for climate engagements. It has outlined milestones to measure engagement progress, however, it is unclear how it tracks and monitors engagements. Manulife has a clearly defined escalation strategy, including examples of escalation activities in its reporting.
The asset manager is engaging with companies on climate. For example, it has engaged with an Asian steel manufacturer regarding its lack of disclosure and targets for GHG emissions. Its engagement with a Canadian fertilizer company about its exposure to transition risks and science based targets resulted in the company adopting SBTs in mid-2021. Manulife appears to be actively engaging in collaborative initiatives including CA100+, Climate Engagement Canada, and AIGCC. As part of CA100+, it took the role as leader engager for a large chemical company in 2021 and stated that it is looking to influence the company to produce a climate lobbying report.
Manulife has clearly described its sustainability governance structure, including roles and responsibilities related to stewardship and has described processes in place to review stewardship activities and policies. The asset manager has limited transparency on engagements, providing some anonymous case studies in its annual stewardship reports. It has disclosed its proxy voting record and global voting policy which outlines how voting decisions are made. However, voting justifications are not provided in its record.
Manulife does not appear to use its shareholder authority to file Paris Aligned shareholder resolutions.
Insightia data suggests that Manulife has mixed support of AGM resolutions InfluenceMap categorizes as in line with the Paris Agreement, supporting 33.3% in 2019 and 48.4% in 2020. Its support increased significantly in 2021 at 81.1% but decreased in 2022 at 64.5%.
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.
Manulife Financial Corporation (Manulife) appears to have had limited but generally positive engagement on sustainable finance policies, generally supporting the need for regulated corporate climate disclosures and opposing efforts to limit shareholder rights.
Manulife has recognized the risk climate change poses to the financial system, but it is unclear whether it supports systemic reforms to address this. In 2022, Manulife signed onto The Investor Agenda’s Global Investor Statement to Governments on the Climate Crisis, calling on governments to take action to limit temperature rise to 1.5C. Manulife Investment Management appears supportive of sustainable finance regulation in its 2022 Stewardship Report.
Manulife has been supportive of the need for disclosure regulation, while taking more mixed positions on specific policies. In its Climate Change Statement Manulife stated support for mandatory climate disclosure in line with the TCFD, and in its 2022 Stewardship Report supported the establishment of the International Sustainability Standards Board and a global baseline for sustainability disclosures. In response to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) request for input on climate change disclosure in June 2021, Manulife called on the Commission to mandate disclosure, advocating for a phase-in of Scope 3 emissions disclosure requirements. After the SEC released its climate disclosure proposal, Manulife outlined general support for the rule but again advocated for delaying implementation of Scope 3 requirements. In its 2022 CDP Response Manulife reported that it is encouraging its industry associations to take a “forward looking approach” to climate disclosure policies.
In 2020, Manulife opposed a Trump-era Department of Labor rule that sought to limit shareholder rights. Manulife also signed onto comment letters spearheaded by the Canadian Coalition for Good Governance that opposed a Trump-era rule that sought to limit ESG investing and strongly supported the Biden-era Department of Labor regulation that reversed earlier rules and permitted the use of ESG factors in fiduciaries’ decision making and exercise of shareholder rights.
Manulife has disclosed its industry association membership and given some details of its engagement with these groups on sustainable finance policies, but does not appear to have assessed whether these industry groups are aligned with Manulife’s positions or 1.5C.
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)
Andrew G. Arnott is on the board of ICI
Andrew G. Arnott (President & CEO, John Hancock Investment Management)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Manulife is a member of ICI (as John Hancock Investment Management)
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Andrew G. Arnott is on the board of ICI
Andrew G. Arnott (President & CEO, John Hancock Investment Management)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Manulife is a member of ICI (as John Hancock Investment Management)
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Manulife is a member of EFAMA (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Manulife is a member of EFAMA (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Manulife is a member of The Investment Association (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Manulife is a member of The Investment Association (last checked September 2023).
not specified
--no extract--
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Brooks Tingle is on the board of ACLI.
Brooks Tingle (President & CEO, John Hancock Insurance)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Manulife is a member of ACLI
not specified
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Brooks Tingle is on the board of ACLI.
Brooks Tingle (President & CEO, John Hancock Insurance)
InfluenceMap Data Point on Corporate - Influencer Relationship
(1 = weak, 10 = strong)
Manulife is a member of ACLI
not specified