Weebit - 2021and beyond, page-9939

Great find, thanks for posting. There is by large increasing pressure on institutional managers to engage with underlying companies and set environmental targets for their broader portfolio. This generally leads to negative screening (e.g. exclusion or down weighting of high emitting or companies/sectors) or active impact investing (e.g. EVs, solar and wind farms, green community infrastructure, etc). While ESG investing has been around for decades, the urgency of 2030 & 2050 targets require investment managers to act promptly in the best interests of their members/investors. Long term investment decisions start today and impact decades down the future.

The importance of climate change has swelled so much so that it's a subject that comes up in most meetings investment managers have with companies they research prior to investing.Rating companies using proprietary ESG scores forms a key part of almost all institutional managers' investment process.

Traditionally the battle for fund managers has been that the inclusion of ESG investments have typically resulted in trade-off with returns, as the investable universe was not only small but there where few companies that were considered fundamentally sound. This is no longer the case or at least fast changing ... as a result traditional non-green companies that do not demonstrate initiatives to reduce climate change risks in their production process will become stranded or overlooked.

The brilliance of our BoD/Management team is recognising future patterns. A formal assessment on the environmental footprint of WBT technology is not just ostentatious marketing it has real investment implications.