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: $54.5B
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 |
|---|---|
| SSE PLC | 15.2% |
| Enel SpA | 11.9% |
| Entergy Corp | 8.9% |
| Innergex Renewable Energy Inc | 7.7% |
| Avangrid Inc | 6.7% |
| Boralex Inc | 5.0% |
| Northland Power Inc | 4.9% |
| CPFL Energia SA | 4.1% |
| Engie Brasil Energia SA | 2.7% |
| China Longyuan Power Group Corp Ltd | 2.5% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Stellantis NV | 24.0% |
| Kia Corp | 20.8% |
| Dongfeng Motor Group Co Ltd | 14.0% |
| Guangzhou Automobile Group Co Ltd | 6.7% |
| Hyundai Motor Co | 6.3% |
| Honda Motor Co Ltd | 5.9% |
| Subaru Corp | 4.9% |
| SAIC Motor Corp Ltd | 3.3% |
| Mercedes Benz Group AG | 2.9% |
| BYD Co Ltd | 2.6% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| Glencore PLC | 98.4% |
| United Tractors Tbk PT | 1.3% |
| Kailuan Energy Chemical Co Ltd | 0.3% |
| Adani Enterprises Ltd | <0.1% |
| Holding Name | Contribution to Sector Production |
|---|---|
| NK Lukoil PAO | 21.0% |
| Novatek PAO | 13.4% |
| TotalEnergies SE | 10.5% |
| Surgutneftegaz PAO | 7.0% |
| Shell PLC | 6.7% |
| Eni SpA | 4.0% |
| Marathon Oil Corp | 4.0% |
| Devon Energy Corp | 3.5% |
| Pioneer Natural Resources Co | 3.5% |
| Diamondback Energy Inc | 3.3% |
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.
Robeco appears to be a leading engager around climate and is highly involved in collaborative investor engagements. Robeco has outlined a clear and detailed framework for climate engagements across multiple sectors, listing various engagement themes including: climate action, net zero carbon emissions and climate transition of financials. The asset manager has a traffic light milestone system for the top 200 emitters in its investment universe, although it is unclear if milestones are used across all engagements. It has demonstrated an escalation response based on engagement outcomes, expanding its enhanced engagement program with a focus on the Paris Agreement and companies falling behind in the transition.
Robeco is actively engaging with companies to transition business models in line with the Paris Agreement. For example, its engagements with Enel has driven the company to set ambitious decarbonization targets, and has focused other engagements on decarbonization plans for investee companies in key sectors in the energy transition. Robeco appears to be engaging companies, including Enel, on aligning policy influence with the Paris Agreement. The asset manager is also a leader on collaborative climate engagement, co-leading engagements with Enel and Shell as a part of CA100+.
Robeco has disclosed its stewardship governance structure and appears to audit stewardship activities on a regular basis to improve effectiveness of its approach. It is partially transparent about engagements and discloses some companies engaged with in its annual Stewardship Report. It is fully transparent about its voting record, and provides rationale for votes against management as well as rationale for key votes on shareholder resolutions and Say on Climate proposals. Robeco appears to be willing to use shareholder authority to engage companies on climate, including opposing the election of the board chair at over 25 AGMs due to climate concerns.
Insightia data suggests that Robeco is broadly supportive of AGM resolutions InfluenceMap categorizes as in line with the Paris Agreement, supporting 75% in 2019, 85.1% in 2020, 100.0% in 2021, and increasing to 86.0% 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.
Robeco appears to have limited but positive engagement on sustainable finance regulation, and is particularly engaged on mandatory climate and biodiversity reporting.
Robeco has strongly advocated for action to achieve net-zero by 2050 and the role of finance in keeping global temperature rise to 1.5C across its sustainability reporting and in joint investor statements in 2021 and 2022. In 2022, Robeco also advocated for the post-2020 global biodiversity framework to mandate the alignment of financial flows with biodiversity goals. Robeco has offered broad support for the EU Sustainable Finance Action Plan on its website.
In joint investor statements, Robeco has supported mandatory implementation of the TCFD in 2021 and further advocated for 1.5°C pathway-aligned transition plans in 2022. In response to the US Securities and Exchange Commission in 2022, Robeco advocated for increased ambition in the SEC’s climate disclosure proposal, including mandatory reporting on Scope 3 emissions and independent auditing. As disclosed in its 2021 Stewardship report, Robeco participated in a statement to governments advocating for the introduction of corporate disclosure requirements that enable financial institutions to address biodiversity-related risks and opportunities. Similarly, during COP15 in December 2022, Robeco it also supported the need for policy to improve disclosures around impact and dependencies on nature
In 2020, Robeco opposed regulations proposed by the US SEC during the Trump administration that would have limited shareholder rights, such as increasing resubmission thresholds to re-file shareholder resolutions. Similarly, in response to the SEC in 2022, Robeco supported a proposal seeking to expand shareholder rights. As disclosed in its 2021 Stewardship Report, Robeco advocated for a stewardship and corporate governance code to be implemented and enforced in a meeting with the Shanghai Stock Exchange,
Robeco has also offered broad supportive statements and descriptions of EU policies on its website, such as the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR), Taxonomy, Green Bond Standard and Paris-Aligned Benchmarks.
Robeco has disclosed positions, activities and outcomes sought around its sustainable finance policy engagement in its stewardship reporting. Robeco has also disclosed memberships to sustainability-related organizations on its website, but no further information around indirect engagement such as policy positions of these organizations or actions taken to address misalignment.
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.
Open PDF file of Data Source