IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/31114.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Four Facts About ESG Beliefs and Investor Portfolios

Author

Listed:
  • Stefano Giglio
  • Matteo Maggiori
  • Johannes Stroebel
  • Zhenhao Tan
  • Stephen Utkus
  • Xiao Xu

Abstract

We analyze survey data on ESG beliefs and preferences in a large panel of retail investors linked to administrative data on their investment portfolios. The survey elicits investors’ expectations of long-term ESG equity returns and asks about their motivations, if any, to invest in ESG assets. We document four facts. First, investors generally expected ESG investments to underperform the market. Between mid-2021 and late-2022, the average expected 10-year annualized return of ESG investments relative to the overall stock market was –1.4%. Second, there is substantial heterogeneity across investors in their ESG return expectations and their motives for ESG investing: 45% of survey respondents do not see any reason to invest in ESG, 25% are primarily motivated by ethical considerations, 22% are driven by climate hedging motives, and 7% are motivated by return expectations. Third, there is a link between individuals’ reported ESG investment motives and their actual investment behaviors, with the highest ESG portfolio holdings among individuals who report ethics-driven investment motives. Fourth, financial considerations matter independently of other investment motives: we find meaningful ESG holdings only for investors who expect these investments to outperform the market, even among those investors who reported that their most important ESG investment motives were ethical or hedging reasons.

Suggested Citation

  • Stefano Giglio & Matteo Maggiori & Johannes Stroebel & Zhenhao Tan & Stephen Utkus & Xiao Xu, 2023. "Four Facts About ESG Beliefs and Investor Portfolios," NBER Working Papers 31114, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:31114
    Note: AP CF EEE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w31114.pdf
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text is generally limited to series subscribers, however if the top level domain of the client browser is in a developing country or transition economy free access is provided. More information about subscriptions and free access is available at http://www.nber.org/wwphelp.html. Free access is also available to older working papers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Richard Bofinger & Simon Cornée & Ariane Szafarz, 2024. "When in Rome, Do as the Romans Do: Disclosure Regulation and ESG Fund Management by Social and Conventional Banks," Working Papers CEB 24-003, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    2. Auzepy, Alix & Bannier, Christina E. & Gärtner, Florian, 2024. "Looking beyond ESG preferences: The role of sustainable finance literacy in sustainable investing," CFS Working Paper Series 719, Center for Financial Studies (CFS).
    3. Giglio, Stefano & Kuchler, Theresa & Stroebel, Johannes & Zeng, Xuran, 2023. "Biodiversity Risk," SocArXiv n7pbj, Center for Open Science.
    4. KEIDA Masayuki & TAKEDA Yosuke, 2024. "How Loud is a Soft Voice? Effects of positive screening of ESG performance on the Japanese oil companies," Discussion papers 24002, Research Institute of Economy, Trade and Industry (RIETI).

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • G4 - Financial Economics - - Behavioral Finance
    • G5 - Financial Economics - - Household Finance
    • Q50 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - General
    • Q54 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Climate; Natural Disasters and their Management; Global Warming

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:31114. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.