Capital Group’s founder, Jonathan Bell Lovelace, was a pioneering investor back in the days of the Great Depression and the Dust Bowl. Almost a century later, his innovative emphasis on fundamental research still guides us.

Research is all about building a deep and well-rounded understanding in order to try and make better investment decisions. Weighing developments that could have financial consequences for an issuer of equities or bonds is, therefore, crucial.

This is why, at Capital Group, we believe in the importance of analyzing material ESG issues as a part of our fundamental research as we strive to deliver superior long-term investment results to our clients.

Our ESG philosophy emphasises materiality

Which ESG risks and opportunities do we believe are material to the long-term success of issuers from a particular sector? Asking and answering this question is at the heart of our approach to ESG integration and aligns with our legacy of deep research in two important ways.

First, the consequences of many ESG issues can unfold over several years or decades, a timeframe that naturally aligns with our long-term orientation.

Second is our bottom-up fundamental research approach. ESG integration is refining and rounding out our understanding of investments. "Our research and experience have shown us that the companies that are most thoughtful about their long-term strategy are also working hard to understand how ESG risks and opportunities could impact their business," says Martin Romo, chairman and chief investment officer of Capital Group.

How we integrate ESG into The Capital System^TM

Capital Group has more than 350 portfolio managers and investment analysts who, within our investment approach, The Capital System, are empowered to pursue their individual investment convictions. Fundamental research is front and center. Rigorous debate is the norm.

Our ESG process includes three mutually reinforcing components. We have intentionally created a process that deepens our understanding over time, but does not come up with a single answer or score.

Research & Investment Frameworks

More than 200 of our equity and fixed income investment analysts, in partnership with our ESG team, have created over 25 sector-specific ESG investment frameworks that identify the issues we believe to be material to each sector, including sovereigns.

We refresh our frameworks regularly to capture the dynamic nature of ESG issues and help ensure they are forward-looking.

Monitoring process

We complement our in-house analysis with third-party ESG data, where available, to surface external views of potentially material ESG risks. We believe third-party data can be a useful input as we seek to build a holistic view of a company or issuer. However, our perspectives are built on a long-term view, engagement and detailed analysis − never on monitoring results alone. 

To inform our ESG evaluation process, we monitor our equity holdings and corporate and sovereign (government) bond holdings, where data is available. The monitoring process involves reviewing our corporate (equity and fixed income) and sovereign holdings against third-party data from a range of providers to surface external views of potentially material ESG risks, as well as issuers in violation of international norms. Issuers that do not meet our thresholds are flagged for review by our investment professionals. Additionally, our Issuer Oversight Committee (IOC) reviews a subset of issuers presenting elevated ESG-related risks that may affect portfolio holdings.

Engagement & Proxy Voting

Our investment professionals and ESG team partner to lead ESG-specific engagements that help us to better understand how ESG risks and opportunities are being managed, and this feeds into our fundamental research process.

In 2023, we held 1,115 ESG-specific engagements on topics that are informed by our research, investment frameworks, voting and monitoring process. We document engagements and track the outcomes of our discussions with management.

Proxy voting is another integral part of our investment process. We have an investor-led voting process focused on voting in the best interest of our investors and clients.

Our Global Stewardship & Engagement (GSE) team conducts an assessment of each proxy proposal. Importantly, this is done in accordance with voting guidelines authored by our investment professionals and refreshed annually. This research is shared with our investment analysts (who are familiar with the company and industry) to help them make a recommendation. The final decision, including on high-profile or contentious proxies, or proxies where there is a difference of opinion, is made by the appropriate proxy committee, made up of senior investment professionals.

In 2023, our three equity investment divisions separately voted in over 2,100 general and special shareholder meetings across more than 55 markets.

Building on our legacy of research

By considering material ESG risks and opportunities, I firmly believe we’re building on the 90-plus-year legacy of fundamental research pioneered by Capital Group’s founder, Jonathan Bell Lovelace.

Through our investments in the people, data and technology that support ESG integration, we are building global capabilities that can evolve and adapt over time.

Because this is so important to us, we want to be transparent with our clients and stakeholders. We publish our investment stewardship report annually. And, on a quarterly basis, we disclose fund-level monitoring outcomes for our corporate and sovereign holdings (where data is available) to indicate which companies and/or issuers have been flagged for in-depth review. 

As Rob Lovelace has put it, our increased focus on material ESG issues plays to Capital Group’s strengths as an organization that has always emphasized the responsible stewardship of our clients’ assets. No matter how the specifics of our ESG investment frameworks or broader ESG process evolve, I believe that insight will continue to hold true.