Inside the ESG ratings: (dis)agreement and performance
- We analyze the ESG rating criteria used by prominent agencies and show that there is a lack of a commonality in the definition of ESG (i) characteristics, (ii) attributes and (iii) standards in defining E, S and G components. We provide evidence that heterogeneity in rating criteria can lead agencies to have opposite opinions on the same evaluated companies and that agreement across those providers is substantially low. Those alternative definitions of ESG also a↵ect sustainable investments leading to the identification of di↵erent investment universes and consequently to the creation of di↵erent benchmarks. This implies that in the asset management industry it is extremely dicult to measure the ability of a fund manager if financial performances are strongly conditioned by the chosen ESG benchmark. Finally, we find that the disagreement in the scores provided by the rating agencies disperses the e↵ect of preferences of ESG investors on asset prices, to the point that even when there is agreement, it has no impact on financial performances.
