TY  - UNPD
A1  - Billio, Monica
A1  - Costola, Michele
A1  - Hristova, Iva
A1  - Latino, Carmelo
A1  - Pelizzon, Loriana
T1  - Inside the ESG ratings: (dis)agreement and performance
T2  - SAFE working paper series ; No. 284
N2  - 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.
T3  - SAFE working paper - 284 
KW  - Corporate Social Responsibility
KW  - ESG Rating Agencies
KW  - Sustainable Investments
Y1  - 2020
UR  - http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/frontdoor/index/index/docId/55244
UR  - https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:hebis:30:3-552443
UR  - https://ssrn.com/abstract=3659271
IS  - June 15, 2020
PB  - SAFE
CY  - Frankfurt am Main
ER  -