Carbon report SEB Fastighetsfond

Transcription

1 Carbon report SEB Fastighetsfond 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 8-9 Carbon Barometer & Carbon Ranking 10 Carbon Report - SEB Fastighetsfond 2

3 Carbon Report SEB Fastighetsfond Report created on: Feb 27, 2018 Holdings Date: Dec 31, 2017 : FTSE EPRA NAREIT Global Real Estate Index (Return Index) Currency: SEK Industry Classification: GICS Company Breakdown Metrics: carbon intensity (tco2e / Mio. revenue) Value: 540'654' SEK Fund Management Company: SEB Investment Management AB Executive Summary Carbon emissions Scope 1-2 Total carbon emissions incl. Scope 3 Relative Carbon Footprint (kgco2e / SEK 1'000 invested) Carbon Intensity (kgco2e / SEK 1'000 revenue) Weighted Average Carbon Intensity (kgco2e / SEK 1'000 revenue) Disclosing Titles by Weight (market value) 6' ' % 95.1% 1' % 98.0% Total carbon emissions - measure the carbon footprint of a portfolio considering Scope 1-2 as well as Scope 3 emissions. *) - SEB Fastighetsfond is associated with greenhouse gas emissions of 6'261.7 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 SEK 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 70.1% higher than the benchmark The Sectors Others, Industrials and Consumer Discretionary (per GICS classification) in the portfolio make up 95.1% of the weight vs % of the contribution to emissions. Sector Weight Contribution to 10.8% 0.3% Carbon Intensity 18.9 Carbon 4.9% 92.2% 2.0% 0.9% 88.9% Others Industrials Consumer Discretionary All other Sectors 5 smallest contributors to the emissions of the fund are: emissions % of total Relative carbon footprint (kg CO2e / SEK 1'000 Invested) ProLogis % 0.0 CT Real Estate Investment Trust Morguard Real Estate Investment Trust % % 0.2 DIC Asset % 0.1 Dream Industrial Real Estate Investment % largest contributors to the emissions of the fund are: Frasers Commercial Trust emissions % of total Relative carbon footprint (kg CO2e / SEK 1'000 Invested) 3' % 2'508.9 Hopewell % WHARF REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT APPLE HOSPITALITY REIT % % 8.3 Keihanshin Building % 7.9 *) 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 Fastighetsfond 3

4 Sector weighting and relative carbon footprint Weight Rel. Carbon Footprint tco2e / Mio SEK invested vs. Others 92.25% 97.79% % Industrials 0.89% 0.00% % Consumer Discretionary 1.98% 0.09% % Relative Carbon Footprint Comparison Others Industrials Consumer Discretionary 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. 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Homebuilding Industrial Conglomerates Others 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 (%) Industrials % % Consumer Discretionary % % Health Care % % Others % 4' % Total % 4' % Explanation: The Underperformance 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 Fastighetsfond saved 32.5 tco2e, while the stock selection harmed 4'376.5 tco2e versus the benchmark. This explains a 2.8% outperformance through sector weighting and 371.6% carbon underperformance by stock picking. Interaction Effect: % Carbon Underperformance Total 6' ' '229.7 Carbon Underperformance (%) Attribution Analysis - Graph 400% 300% 200% 100% 0% -100% Industrials Consumer Discretionary Health Care 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 Fastighetsfond. 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 Frasers Commercial Trust Hopewell WHARF REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT APPLE HOSPITALITY REIT Weight Carbon Data Analysis carbon intensity (tco2e / Mio. revenue) Av. Sector Contribution Others 0.3% % 17' ' ' Industrial Conglomerates 0.9% % 1' Others 0.6% 0.5% 3.9% Others 2.2% 0.3% 1.7% Keihanshin Building Others 2.1% - 1.6% Dream Office Real Estate Inv Trust Others 1.0% 0.1% 1.5% Corecivic Others 1.7% - 1.4% Outfront Media REIT Others 1.9% - 1.1% Host Hotels & Resorts Inc (fd Host Marriott) XENIA HOTELS & RESORTS Others 2.7% 1.0% 1.0% Others 1.0% 0.2% 1.0% Summary of 10 largest portfolio companies Company GICS Sub-Industry % of total Host Hotels & Resorts Inc (fd Host Marriott) Weight Carbon Data Analysis carbon intensity (tco2e / Mio. revenue) Av. Sector Contribution Others 2.7% 1.0% 1.0% Mirvac Group Others 2.3% 0.5% 0.3% Hysan Development Others 2.3% 0.2% 0.2% DDR Corp Others 2.3% 0.2% 0.2% Safestore Holdings Others 2.3% 0.1% 0.1% Sun Hung Kai Properties Retail Properties of America A AMERICAN HOMES 4 RENT Others 2.2% 1.6% 0.2% Others 2.2% 0.2% 0.2% Others 2.2% 0.4% 0.6% Vereit Others 2.2% 0.5% 0.6% Mapletree Industrial Trust Others 2.2% 0.1% 0.1%

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% Industrials Consumer Discretionary Health Care Scope 3 Scope 1&2 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 1' *) 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. revenue) Av. Sector Contribution Industrial Conglomerates 0.9% 0.0% 10.8% 1' Hopewell 0.9% % 1' Homebuilding 2.0% 0.0% 0.3% Starts 0.4% - 0.1% Sekisui House 1.6% - 0.2% Others 92.2% 97.8% 88.9% ' ' ' ABACUS PROPERTY GROUP 1.8% - 0.3% Cromwell Property Group 1.5% 0.1% 0.3% Growthpoint Properties Australia 0.2% - 0.0% Mirvac Group 2.3% 0.5% 0.3% Shopping Centres Australasia 1.1% 0.1% 0.1% Stockland 1.6% 0.6% 0.3% Kerry Properties 2.0% - 0.5% CT Real Estate Investment Trust 0.1% - 0.0% Dream Office Real Estate Inv Trust 1.0% 0.1% 1.5% Dream Industrial Real Estate Investment 0.1% - 0.0% Granite Real Estate 2.1% 0.1% 0.1% Morguard Real Estate Investment Trust 0.1% - 0.0% Swiss Prime Site 0.7% 0.4% 0.0% Mobimo Holding 1.1% 0.1% 0.1% Dt Euroshop 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% TAG IMMOBILIEN 0.3% 0.2% 0.0% DIC Asset 0.7% 0.0% 0.0% Technopolis 1.0% 0.0% 0.5% Unibail-Rodamco (NL) 1.9% 1.7% 0.1% Mercialys 0.4% 0.1% 0.0% Safestore Holdings 2.3% 0.1% 0.1% WORKSPACE GROUP 0.1% 0.1% 0.0% Wharf 2.0% 0.3% 0.4% Hysan Development 2.3% 0.2% 0.2% Sun Hung Kai Properties 2.2% 1.6% 0.2% Weelock & Company 1.4% - 0.4% Immobiliare Grande Distribuzione 0.6% 0.0% 0.2% Starts Proceed Investment 0.5% - 0.1% NTT Urban Development 0.4% 0.1% 0.1% Keihanshin Building 2.1% - 1.6% Heiwa Real Estate 1.1% - 0.3% WHARF REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT 0.6% 0.5% 3.9% Eurocommercial Properties 1.1% 0.1% 0.1% Precinct Properties New Zeal 0.3% - 0.0% Argosy Property 0.2% - 0.0% Hemfosa Fastigheter 0.8% 0.1% 0.4%

9 Weight Carbon Data Analysis Company % of total carbon intensity (tco2e / Mio. revenue) Av. Sector Contribution Capitamall Trust 0.1% 0.2% 0.0% Yanlord Land Group 0.3% - 0.1% Mapletree Industrial Trust 2.2% 0.1% 0.1% Frasers Commercial Trust 0.3% % 17' ' '723.7 Soilbuild Business Space REIT 0.2% - 0.0% AMERICAN HOMES 4 RENT 2.2% 0.4% 0.6% APPLE HOSPITALITY REIT 2.2% 0.3% 1.7% Armada Hoffler Properties 0.1% - 0.1% Brandywine Reality Trust 2.2% 0.2% 0.1% CBL & Associates Properties 1.1% 0.1% 0.9% CHATHAM LODGING TRUST 2.0% 0.1% 0.9% Corecivic 1.7% - 1.4% Corporate Office Properties Trust SBI MD 0.9% 0.2% 0.0% DDR Corp 2.3% 0.2% 0.2% CommonWealth REIT 2.1% 0.2% 0.1% Getty Realty 1.9% 0.1% 0.1% GRAMERCY PROPERTY TRUST 1.8% 0.3% 0.1% Highwoods Properties 1.5% 0.3% 0.1% Host Hotels & Resorts Inc (fd Host Marriott) 2.7% 1.0% 1.0% Lamar Advertising 0.6% - 0.0% Lexington Realty Trust 1.1% 0.2% 0.3% Liberty Property Trust 1.4% 0.4% 0.5% Medequities Realty Trust REIT 1.1% - 0.0% Medical Properties Trust 0.8% 0.3% 0.1% Mid-America Apartment Communities REIT 0.3% 0.8% 0.1% One Liberty Properties REIT 0.3% - 0.1% Outfront Media REIT 1.9% - 1.1% PS Business Parks 1.9% 0.2% 0.3% Paramount Group 2.0% 0.2% 0.2% Piedmont Office Realty 2.0% 0.2% 0.1% ProLogis 0.4% 2.3% 0.0% Public Storage 0.1% 2.1% 0.0% Rayonier 2.0% - 0.5% Retail Properties of America A 2.2% 0.2% 0.2% Simon Property Group Inc 2.0% 3.6% 0.1% Summit Hotel Properties 1.1% 0.1% 0.4% Sunstone Hotel Investors 2.1% 0.2% 0.9% Vereit 2.2% 0.5% 0.6% XENIA HOTELS & RESORTS 1.0% 0.2% 1.0% Total portfolio 95.1% 98.0% 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. 9

10 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 6 (n=4380) Peer Percentile 3 (Lipper Global Equity Sector Real Est Global, n=36) 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 10