Carbon report SEB Sustainability Fund Global

Transcription

1 Carbon report SEB Sustainability Fund Global Report created on: February 27, 2018 The carbon footprint provides a historic snapshot of the emissions from the companies that make up the fund s equity portfolio. The calculations are not comprehensive and do not include indirect emissions. The metric says nothing about how the portfolio contributes to a low-carbon society. For further information about the metric, see

2 Contents Executive Summary 3 Sector weighthing and relative carbon footprint 4 Relative Carbon Footprint Comparison 4 Sector Analysis & Stock selection 4 Attribution Analysis 5 Summary of 10 largest absolute contributors 6 Summary of 10 largest portfolio companies 6 Scope 3 overview 7 Company sector & breakdown Carbon Barometer & Carbon Ranking Carbon Report - SEB Sustainability Fund Global 2

3 Carbon Report SEB Sustainability Fund Global Report created on: Feb 27, 2018 Holdings Date: Dec 31, 2017 : MSCI World (Net Return) Currency: EUR Industry Classification: GICS Company Breakdown Metrics: carbon intensity (tco2e / Mio. Value: 41'161' EUR Fund Management Company: SEB Investment Management AB Executive Summary Carbon emissions Scope 1-2 Total carbon emissions incl. Scope 3 Relative Carbon Footprint (kgco2e / EUR 1'000 invested) Carbon Intensity (kgco2e / EUR 1'000 Weighted Average Carbon Intensity (kgco2e / EUR 1'000 Disclosing Titles by Weight (market value) 1' ' % 99.0% 5' ' % 98.4% Total carbon emissions - measure the carbon footprint of a portfolio considering Scope 1-2 as well as Scope 3 emissions. *) - SEB Sustainability Fund Global is associated with greenhouse gas emissions of 1'344.3 tons per year. Relative carbon footprint - is a normalized measure of the portfolio's contribution. - It enables comparisons with a benchmark between multiple portfolios, over time and regardless of portfolio size. Carbon intensity - allows investors to measure how much carbon emissions per EUR of revenue are generated. - It therefore measures the carbon efficiency of a portfolio per unit of output. This report analyses the portfolio of securities in terms of the carbon emissions and other carbon related characteristics of the underlying portfolio companies, and compares this data to the performance of a relevant respectively chosen market benchmark. The portfolio s intensity is 83.0% lower than the benchmark The Sectors Consumer Discretionary, Information Technology and Industrials (per GICS classification) in the portfolio make up 50.0% of the weight vs. 74.9% of the contribution to emissions Carbon Intensity Carbon 50.0% Sector Weight Contribution to 18.4% 25.1% 39.1% 22.5% 13.1% 9.0% 22.7% Consumer Discretionary Information Technology Industrials All other Sectors 5 smallest contributors to the emissions of the fund are: emissions % of total Relative carbon footprint (kg CO2e / EUR 1'000 Invested) Eurazeo % 0.0 Hannover Rueckversicherung % 0.0 Hasbro Inc Com % 1.4 I-CABLE % Vonovia % largest contributors to the emissions of the fund are: Seagate Technology Com emissions % of total Relative carbon footprint (kg CO2e / EUR 1'000 Invested) % Royal Caribbean Cruises % Target Corp % 95.8 Kohls Corp % Yue Yuen Industrial % *) Scope 1 emissions are directly generated by company's operations, whereas indirect Scope 2 emissions are related to the company's energy consumption. Scope 3 emissions include other indirect emissions including e.g. business travel, use of company's products sold, investments, and goods and services purchased. Carbon Report - SEB Sustainability Fund Global 3

4 Sector weighting and relative carbon footprint Weight Rel. Carbon Footprint tco2e / Mio EUR invested vs. Consumer Discretionary 18.44% 12.13% % Information Technology 22.50% 16.65% % Industrials 9.05% 11.59% % Materials 2.52% 4.72% % Telecommunication Services 8.77% 2.77% % Consumer Staples 2.99% 8.99% % Others 8.29% 4.03% % Health Care 9.45% 11.75% % Financials 17.02% 16.58% % Relative Carbon Footprint Comparison Consumer Discretionary Information Technology Industrials Materials Telecommunication Services Consumer Staples Others Health Care Financials Sector Analysis & Stock Selection The graph below shows how the carbon allocation in the portfolio differs from the average of each sector. Sectors have been defined using the GICS classification at the Supersector/Industry Group level. 20% 10% 0% Apparel Retail Construction Machinery & Heavy Trucks Department Stores Electronic Equipment & Instruments Footwear General Merchandise Stores Industrial Machinery Integrated Telecommunication Services Marine Ports & Services Others Paper Packaging Railroads Semiconductor Equipment Semiconductors Technology Hardware, Storage & Peripherals GICS Sub-Industry, Average GICS Sub-Industry 4

5 Attribution Analysis The two principal reasons why the carbon exposure of the portfolio may differ from the benchmark are due to sector allocation as well as stock selection decisions. Sector allocation decision will cause the carbon intensity of the portfolio to diverge from the benchmark where the sectors are either carbon intensive or low carbon. If the portfolio is overweight in carbon intensive sectors the portfolio is likely to be more carbon intensive than the benchmark. However, if the stocks within a carbon intensive sector are the most carbon efficient companies, it is possible that the portfolio may still have a lower carbon footprint than the benchmark. Sector Allocation Sector Selection Sector Allocation Contribution to Out/ Underperformance Sector Allocation Contribution to Out/ Underperformance (%) Stock Selection Contribution to Out/ Underperformance Stock Selection Contribution to Out/ Underperformance (%) Energy % % Materials % % Industrials % % Consumer Discretionary % % Consumer Staples % % Health Care % % Financials % % Information Technology % % Telecommunication Services % % Utilities % % Others % % Total % % Explanation: The Outperformance of the portfolio is based on the effect of over/underweighting certain sectors and selecting more/less carbon intense stocks within each sector for each of the underlying holdings. A positive number indicates that the effect increased the greenhouse gas emission (in tons of CO2e) and a negative number indicated a decreasing effect. In this case, the sector weighting of SEB Sustainability Fund Global saved tco2e, while the stock selection saved tco2e versus the benchmark. This explains a 54.0% outperformance through sector weighting and 52.1% carbon outperformance by stock picking. Interaction Effect: % Total 1' '997.8 Carbon Outperformance Carbon Outperformance (%) 38.2 Attribution Analysis - Graph 20% 0% -20% -40% -60% Energy Materials Industrials Consumer Discretionary Consumer Staples Health Care Financials Information Technology Telecommunication Services Utilities Others Sector Stock Total 5

6 Summary of 10 largest absolute contributors The tables below show the 10 largest greenhouse gas contributors and the 10 largest holdings respectively of the SEB Sustainability Fund Global. Carbon Data section explains your, i.e. the amount of greenhouse gases that the portfolio finances from the company s overall emissions, relative to company ownership. You can further see what % of the overall portfolio GHG emissions each company accounts for and if the company s GHG emission number was disclosed by the company or approximated. In the Analysis section, the emissions are stated and the Average Sector allow a comparison of the greenhouse gas intensity of a company against its respective sector, i.e. the amount of GHG emissions that an investment of the same size would have financed, would it have been invested in the overall sector rather than the specific company. The effect on the portfolio can be found under Contribution: This is a measurement of how much a specific holding raises or reduces the carbon footprint of the portfolio. Company GICS Sub-Industry % of total Seagate Technology Com Royal Caribbean Cruises Target Corp Technology Hardware, Storage & Peripherals Hotels, Resorts & Cruise Lines General Merchandise Stores Weight Carbon Data Analysis carbon intensity (tco2e / Mio. Av. Sector Contribution 2.4% 0.0% 9.7% % 0.1% 8.3% % 0.1% 7.5% Kohls Corp Department Stores 1.8% 0.0% 5.9% Yue Yuen Industrial Footwear 0.7% 0.0% 5.6% Hitachi Electronic Equipment & Instruments 1.6% 0.1% 5.0% Avery Dennison Paper Packaging 2.3% 0.0% 3.6% Magna Intl A (CAD) Cummins Auto Parts & Equipment Construction Machinery & Heavy Trucks 0.9% 0.0% 3.2% % 0.1% 2.8% SKF B Industrial Machinery 1.3% 0.0% 2.6% Summary of 10 largest portfolio companies Company GICS Sub-Industry % of total Weight Carbon Data Analysis carbon intensity (tco2e / Mio. Av. Sector Contribution Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceuticals 3.4% 0.9% 0.4% Intel Corp Semiconductors 3.0% 0.5% 0.8% Cummins Construction Machinery & Heavy Trucks 2.6% 0.1% 2.8% Texas Instruments Semiconductors 2.6% 0.3% 2.2% Swisscom Reg Target Corp Seagate Technology Com Integrated Telecommunication Services General Merchandise Stores Technology Hardware, Storage & Peripherals 2.5% 0.0% 0.1% % 0.1% 7.5% % 0.0% 9.7% Persimmon Homebuilding 2.4% 0.0% 0.3% WESTERN UNION CO Data Processing & Outsourced Services 2.4% 0.0% 0.6% Avery Dennison Paper Packaging 2.3% 0.0% 3.6%

7 Scope 3 Overview The following section provides a top-down approximation of the financed scope 3 emissions from each sector. The purpose of this analysis is to give an order of magnitude of the emissions in the portfolio on a sector level and should not be used as a basis for comparing two individual companies. All emissions are in tco2e metrics. The following graph shows the financed Scope 1+2 emissions in relation to the Scope 3 emissions of the portfolio. 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Energy Materials Industrials Consumer Discretionary Consumer Staples Health Care Financials InformationTelecommunication Utilities Technology Services Scope 3 Scope 1& ' The graph below compares the total emissions (including Scope 1, Scope 2 and Scope 3) between portfolio and benchmark Scope 3 Scope 1&2 4'660 1'286 17'708 5'952 *) The methodology includes Scope 1, 2 and Scope 3 upstream and product use downstream. 7

8 Company Sector & Breakdown This table presents all holdings in the portfolio, sorted by sector, following the logic from the sections above. It shows how each company contributes to the overall portfolio footprint. It allows you to see which stocks are the greatest contributors to the portfolio s emission in absolute as well as relative terms. The -/+ signs on the far right indicate if a specific holding raises or reduces the carbon footprint of the portfolio. This helps with portfolio optimization and in managing the overall carbon portfolio footprint without comprising the chosen sector allocation. Weight Carbon Data Analysis Company % of total carbon intensity (tco2e / Mio. Av. Sector Contribution Commodity Chemicals 0.0% 0.3% 0.3% Asahi Kasei 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% Diversified Chemicals 0.0% 0.5% 1.2% Mitsubishi Chemical 0.0% 0.0% 1.2% Specialty Chemicals 0.0% 1.0% 0.7% COVESTRO 0.0% 0.0% 0.7% Paper Packaging 2.3% 0.2% 3.6% Avery Dennison 2.3% 0.0% 3.6% Aluminum 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% GRANGES 0.0% - 0.0% Steel 0.0% 0.3% 2.2% 2' Voestalpine 0.0% 0.0% 2.2% 2' Paper Products 0.0% 0.1% 0.6% Upm-Kymmene 0.0% 0.0% 0.6% Electrical Components & Equipment 0.5% 0.8% 0.3% Emerson Electric Co 0.5% 0.1% 0.3% Construction Machinery & Heavy Trucks 2.6% 0.6% 2.8% Cummins 2.6% 0.1% 2.8% Industrial Machinery 1.5% 1.3% 3.3% JTEKT 0.2% 0.0% 0.8% SKF B 1.3% 0.0% 2.6% Human Resource & Employment Services 2.2% 0.2% 0.3% Manpower 2.2% 0.0% 0.3% Research & Consulting Services 0.5% 0.5% 0.2% SGS Reg 0.5% 0.0% 0.2% Airlines 0.0% 0.2% 1.3% Deutsche Lufthansa 0.0% 0.0% 1.3% Railroads 1.6% 1.1% 2.4% Central Japan Railway 1.6% 0.1% 2.4% Marine Ports & Services 0.1% 0.0% 2.5% Kamigumi 0.1% 0.0% 2.5% Auto Parts & Equipment 0.9% 0.6% 3.2% Magna Intl A (CAD) 0.9% 0.0% 3.2% Tires & Rubber 0.6% 0.2% 2.3% Bridgestone 0.6% 0.1% 2.3% Automobile Manufacturers 0.1% 1.7% 0.3% Honda Motor 0.1% 0.1% 0.3% Consumer Electronics 0.5% 0.3% 0.2% Garmin 0.5% 0.0% 0.2% Homebuilding 6.6% 0.3% 0.7% Barratt Developments 0.7% 0.0% 0.1% Persimmon 2.4% 0.0% 0.3% Taylor Wimpey 2.1% 0.0% 0.2% Berkeley Group Holdings 1.4% 0.0% 0.1% Household Appliances 0.4% 0.1% 0.7% Electrolux B 0.4% 0.0% 0.7% Leisure Products 0.0% 0.1% 0.0%

9 Weight Carbon Data Analysis Company % of total carbon intensity (tco2e / Mio. Av. Sector Contribution Hasbro Inc Com 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Footwear 0.7% 0.2% 5.6% Yue Yuen Industrial 0.7% 0.0% 5.6% Hotels, Resorts & Cruise Lines 1.3% 0.4% 8.3% Royal Caribbean Cruises 1.3% 0.1% 8.3% Cable & Satellite 0.0% 0.8% 0.0% I-CABLE 0.0% - 0.0% Department Stores 1.9% 0.1% 6.0% Next 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% Kohls Corp 1.8% 0.0% 5.9% General Merchandise Stores 2.5% 0.3% 7.5% Target Corp 2.5% 0.1% 7.5% Apparel Retail 2.5% 0.5% 3.7% Foot Locker 1.0% - 1.6% GAP Inc Com 1.5% 0.0% 2.0% Computer & Electronics Retail 0.6% 0.1% 0.6% Best Buy 0.6% 0.0% 0.6% Drug Retail 0.2% 0.4% 0.2% Walgreens Boots Alliance USD 0.2% 0.2% 0.2% Food Distributors 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% Sysco Corp Com 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% Food Retail 0.2% 0.5% 1.1% Loblaw Companies 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Ahold Koninklijke 0.1% 0.1% 0.4% Kroger Co USD Com 0.1% 0.1% 0.6% Soft Drinks 2.1% 1.1% 2.5% Pepsico 2.1% 0.4% 2.5% Agricultural Products 0.0% 0.1% 0.4% Ingredion 0.0% 0.0% 0.4% Packaged Foods & Meats 0.1% 1.8% 0.1% Orkla 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Conagra Foods 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% Household Products 0.5% 1.2% 0.4% Procter & Gamble 0.5% 0.6% 0.4% Health Care Equipment 0.7% 1.8% 0.5% Baxter Intl INC Usd Com 0.7% 0.1% 0.5% Health Care Services 0.7% 0.4% 0.2% Miraca Holdings 0.7% - 0.2% Biotechnology 3.7% 2.0% 0.3% Gilead Sciences 2.0% 0.2% 0.1% United Therapeutics 1.7% 0.0% 0.2% Pharmaceuticals 4.4% 5.3% 0.5% Roche Holdings Genussscheine 0.4% 0.4% 0.1% Bristol Myers Squibbco com 0.6% 0.2% 0.1% Johnson & Johnson 3.4% 0.9% 0.4% Diversified Banks 4.7% 8.5% 0.2% KBC Bankverzekeringsholding 0.8% 0.1% 0.1% Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce 2.1% 0.1% 0.1% Toronto-Dominion Bank 1.0% 0.3% 0.0% ING Groep 0.3% 0.2% 0.0% Oversea-Chinese Banking 0.6% 0.1% 0.0% Multi-Sector Holdings 0.3% 0.1% 0.0% Eurazeo 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% Asset Management & Custody Banks 2.0% 1.0% 0.1%

10 Weight Carbon Data Analysis Company % of total carbon intensity (tco2e / Mio. Av. Sector Contribution CI Financial 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% T Rowe Price Group 1.6% 0.1% 0.1% Life & Health Insurance 7.1% 1.5% 0.5% Power Corporation of Canada 0.7% 0.0% 0.1% Power Financial Corp Com 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% Sun Life Financial 1.0% 0.1% 0.2% Swiss Life 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% CNP Assurances 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% Aflac 2.1% 0.1% 0.0% Principal Financial Group 1.4% 0.1% 0.1% Prudendial Financial 1.4% 0.1% 0.1% Unumprovident Corp 0.1% 0.0% 0.0% Multi-line Insurance 2.1% 1.1% 0.2% Allianz 2.1% 0.3% 0.2% Reinsurance 0.8% 0.3% 0.0% Hannover Rueckversicherung 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% Muenchener Rueckversicherung 0.3% 0.1% 0.0% SCOR SE 0.2% 0.0% 0.0% Internet Software & Services 0.8% 3.0% 0.2% Mixi 0.8% 0.0% 0.2% IT Consulting & Other Services 0.3% 0.9% 0.7% Fujitsu 0.3% 0.0% 0.7% Data Processing & Outsourced Services 2.4% 1.8% 0.6% WESTERN UNION CO 2.4% 0.0% 0.6% Systems Software 1.0% 2.2% 0.2% CA Inc 1.0% 0.0% 0.2% Communications Equipment 1.5% 0.8% 0.1% Cisco Systems 1.5% 0.5% 0.1% Technology Hardware, Storage & Peripherals 5.1% 2.7% 11.4% Seagate Technology Com 2.4% 0.0% 9.7% Brother 0.5% 0.0% 0.4% HP 2.1% 0.1% 1.3% Electronic Equipment & Instruments 1.6% 0.4% 5.0% Hitachi 1.6% 0.1% 5.0% Electronic Manufacturing Services 2.1% 0.1% 1.4% TE Connectivity 2.1% 0.1% 1.4% Semiconductor Equipment 2.0% 0.5% 0.1% Kla-Tencor Corp 2.0% 0.0% 0.1% Semiconductors 5.5% 2.2% 3.0% Intel Corp 3.0% 0.5% 0.8% Texas Instruments 2.6% 0.3% 2.2% Integrated Telecommunication Services 6.3% 2.0% 3.4% Proximus 0.7% 0.0% 0.1% BCE 0.7% 0.0% 0.2% Swisscom Reg 2.5% 0.0% 0.1% HKT Trust 0.6% 0.0% 0.4% Nippon Telegraph & Telephone 0.3% 0.1% 0.7% Telenor 1.1% 0.0% 1.9% Spark New Zealand 0.4% 0.0% 0.1% Wireless Telecommunication Services 2.4% 0.7% 1.5% NTT DoComo 1.5% 0.1% 1.0% KDDI 0.7% 0.1% 0.4%

11 Weight Carbon Data Analysis Company % of total carbon intensity (tco2e / Mio. Av. Sector Contribution StarHub 0.2% 0.0% 0.1% Others 8.3% 4.0% 4.3% GPT Group 0.4% 0.0% 0.3% Mirvac Group 0.7% 0.0% 0.3% Kerry Properties 0.4% 0.0% 0.3% Vonovia 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% FONCIERE DES REGIONS 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% Klepeirre 1.3% 0.0% 0.4% Wharf 0.1% 0.0% 0.1% Link Reit 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% Daito Trust Construction 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% Daiwa House Industry 2.3% 0.1% 1.3% Annaly Capital Management 2.3% 0.0% 1.6% Total portfolio 99.0% 98.4% 100.0% ' ' Note that the weighting for the benchmark will not always total 100% as the stocks shown are only for those held by the portfolio. 11

12 Carbon Ranking This is a standardized ranking of the fund based on the productís weighted average carbon intensity using two peergroups. One consisting of all other funds in the database (global percentile) and one where the fund is ranked taking the specific Lipper Global Classification into account (peer percentile). The ranking is based on percentiles and ranges from 0 (worst) to 100 (best). Global Percentile 93 (n=4380) Peer Percentile 93 (Lipper Global Equity Global, n=646) The carbon footprint provides a historic snapshot of the emissions from the companies that make up the fund's equity portfolio. The calculations are not comprehensive and do not include indirect emissions. The metric says nothing about how the portfolio contributes a low-carbon society. For further information about the metric, see 12