1. Big asset manager has very successful equity fund.
2. Marketing want to add an ESG label to it, to raise even more money.
3. ESG manager says "no, it would change investment process too much, no go."
4. Marketing has none of it. Let's hire a big 4 consultant.
5. Big 4 looks at fund. Produces a report : if u change universe and use this one instead & if you take this data vendor and not the other one, then your fund is ESG compatible Art 8 SFDR with no investment change
6. Asset manager pays big 4, big 4 produces a nice "compliance report", everybody happy.
7. Clients can now claim they invested in an ESG fund.
Beautiful.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Even if the @EBA_News headlines tries its best, it’s hard to find bad news in their latest risk dashboard on European banks: capital is up, NPLs are down, profitability jumped sharply…
@EBA_News When you think about it, it’s crazy how the Covid fears were exaggerated (more on why below.) I mean, look at this: even the most affected sector only saw a very modest rise in NPLs. A 25% scenario would not have been absurd! We're barely at 9% vs 8% in Q1 2020.
@EBA_News Payment holidays on loans are in freefall, with meaningful # only remaining in Spain, Italy or Portugal.
Long overdue, the thread I promised about ESG investing – mostly personal experience and thoughts.
Remember I mostly invest in fins – but not only.
For many years, the conversation was going like this:
Allocator: do you guys do ESG investing?
Me: Dude, banks have paid 500bn$ in fines since the GFC, so yeah, we kind of look at all the shit they do!
Also me: some banks have gone bust because of dodgy accounting (Alexandria..), because of money laundering, because of bribery, because they lent tens of M€ to the head of their audit committee, etc. So if you don’t do ESG investing with banks, you might as well pick another job
The Bloomberg story about Credit Suisse & Gupta is insane. A recap. 1/n
A group of commodity trade finance experts (presumably because they had actually read @BondHack) at CS told management Gupta was doing dodgy deals and blacklisted it.
When you know commodity trade finance, the bar for "dodgy deals" is VERY HIGH. E.g. recently ABN disclosed that 100% of its fraud loss experience was in trade finance. It's almost a normal cost of business.
Despite that, CS continued to lend money to Greensill which fund Gupta. This in itself is already crazy. But it doesn't stop there.
About the odious Belarus scheme to arrest political opponents, I'm intrigued. Was it really illegal? I'm not 100% sure. Maybe @piris_jc
, a real expert on this, has a view? persee.fr/doc/afdi_0066-…
And before you jump on me:
- not it's not obvious it's illegal because they didn't endanger the plane - and this is what Chicago convention explicitly prohibits.
(Imagine the same story but traveling in a bus - would it be illegal ? No. Sovereignty is a tricky concept...)
- yes it's important to know if it's illegal, because if it's not, then the treaty might need some changes !
About those bots pushing bad narratives, something strikes me. The other day - for some reason - I read 3 academic papers on fake news, bots etc. All well written and interesting but deep down it's only platitudes: confirmation bias, echo chambers, power law network etc. 1/n
The truth seems to be that no one has a clue how to properly manage this problem. AI far from achieving anything.
My gut feeling (totally speculative) is that we should be more focused on the boundary conditions: where does it stop/start, where do the power laws truncate.
Instead of looking at nodes/links etc we should look at field equations, basically the Faraday revolution of physics (which gave Maxwell, general relativity, quantum field theory etc). In those settings border conditions are crucial to understand and stop physical processes.