Sustainable (also known as environmental, social, and corporate governance [ESG]) investing is currently of intense interest in the investment world. In this article, the authors consider the salient challenges associated with ESG investing and how quantitative approaches may address them. Compared to fundamental methods of sustainable investing, the authors see quantitative methods as having several advantages: These methods can build on and extend the vast analytical toolbox of modern portfolio theory to incorporate investor preference in portfolio construction; they can leverage the recent data explosion to obtain insights on many intangible sustainability metrics; and they do not have the black box label. Instead, subjective judgment applied to building the quantitative system is essential. A thoughtful analytical system can be applied to a large universe of stocks, and quantitative methods may also be leveraged to predict popular ESG vendor ratings. Although these are the early days of quantitative sustainable investing, the authors believe these advantages will prove the quantitative method’s worth in sustainable investing. TOPICS: ESG investing, portfolio theory, portfolio construction, statistical methods Key Findings ▪ Quantitative methods have unique advantages for sustainable investing in the areas of portfolio construction, data application, and scaling domain knowledge. ▪ The skillful quantitative practitioner can create the optimal blend of human insight and computing power to extract sustainability insights from data.
[1]
George Serafeim,et al.
Stock price reactions to ESG news: the role of ESG ratings and disagreement
,
2021,
Review of Accounting Studies.
[2]
George Serafeim,et al.
Corporate Sustainability: First Evidence on Materiality
,
2016
.
[3]
Mike Chen,et al.
An Integrated Approach to Quantitative ESG Investing
,
2020
.
[4]
R. Rigobón,et al.
Aggregate Confusion: The Divergence of ESG Ratings
,
2020,
SSRN Electronic Journal.
[5]
Linda-Eling Lee,et al.
Deconstructing ESG Ratings Performance: Risk and Return for E, S, and G by Time Horizon, Sector, and Weighting
,
2021
.
[6]
George Serafeim,et al.
Four Things No One Will Tell You About ESG Data
,
2019,
Journal of Applied Corporate Finance.
[7]
E. Sorensen.
Bond ratings versus market risk premiums
,
1980
.
[8]
E. Dimson,et al.
Divergent ESG Ratings
,
2020,
The Journal of Portfolio Management.
[9]
How material is a material issue? Stock returns and the financial relevance and financial intensity of ESG materiality
,
2020
.
[10]
E. Sorensen.
Active Equity Management for the Future
,
2009,
The Journal of Portfolio Management.
[11]
E. Sorensen.
The Golden Age of Quant
,
2019,
The Journal of Portfolio Management.
[12]
E. Sorensen,et al.
Contextual Fundamentals, Models, and Active Management
,
2005
.