HOME
AWARDS INFORMATION
Hong Kong & Singapore
Taiwan 台灣
Winners List 2023
Fund Awards 2023
MPF Awards 2023
PAST WINNERS
Fund Awards 2022 – Premier Hub
Fund Awards 2022 – Winners List
MPF Awards 2022 – Winners List
FORUM
Gatekeepers Forum
Sustainable Wealth Forum
ABOUT
About Benchmark
About BlueOnion
Contact Us
Fund Awards 2023 – Winners List
MPF Awards 2023 – Winners List
HOME
AWARDS INFORMATION
Hong Kong & Singapore
Taiwan 台灣
Winners List 2023
Fund Awards 2023
MPF Awards 2023
PAST WINNERS
Fund Awards 2022 – Premier Hub
Fund Awards 2022 – Winners List
MPF Awards 2022 – Winners List
FORUM
Gatekeepers Forum
Sustainable Wealth Forum
ABOUT
About Benchmark
About BlueOnion
Contact Us
Fund Awards 2023 – Winners List
MPF Awards 2023 – Winners List
"
*
" indicates required fields
Submission ID
*
Region
*
Category
*
Other Submission ID
Clone submission
Also apply this submission for other Thematic Impact ETF entries.
Thematic Impact - Sustainable Investing ETF
Name of firm
*
The Flagship Fund's name
*
The Fund's ISIN Code
*
Data as of the quarter-end
MM slash DD slash YYYY
Pillar 1: Investment Proposition
1. Management style: This ETF is managed according to the following style.
Please select only one response.
Passive, index-tracking (including smart beta and other strategies that replicate any index, even if the index has a 'fundamental' or other 'value-added' approach - importantly, the ETF itself is index-tracking with no active portfolio management decisions)
Actively managed i.e. the portfolio manager makes active decisions; this ETF is managed just as an active mutual would be managed; the only difference is, this ETF is listed on a stock exchange
2. Index weighting: This question is about the index on which your ETF is based. What is the weighting of that index based on?
Please select only one response.
Yes, there are material consequences, including bonus reduction, promotion freeze and/or specific financial consequences on the ultimately responsible individual
No, there are no material consequences
3. Competitive edge: Compared with similar ETFs available, what is your ETF's unique proposition to investors?
Please select all applicable responses.
For retail investors and smaller institutions, our ETF provides access to assets, markets or investment strategies that are usually only available to large, major institutional asset owners
Access to inaccessible markets, or assets, for all investors
Trading in local time, instead of North American or European time
Better execution, resulting in tighter bid/ask, lower expense ratios, etc.
Better liquidity of underlying assets, leading to better risk management
Physical replication or holdings, as opposed to synthetic or other non-physical means
Our ETF is based on a different index from competing ETFs, giving our ETF a better risk-return profile
Our ETF has a lower tracking error over 3 years or more
Our ETF has a longer track record
Our ETF charges lower management fees
Our ETF has a better known brand
Additional Remarks, if any (maximum 250 words)
4. Please complete Question 1 before answering Question 4.
4. Index selection: When you selected the base index for this ETF, what were your requirements?
Please select all responses that apply.
The index was produced by a firm reputed for robust research and strong processes
The index was produced by a company with more than 10 years' track record in indexing
The index allows for 85-100% physical replication at reasonable costs and risks
The index allows for 85-100% synthetic replication at reasonable costs and risks
The index's components have reasonable to high liquidity in the secondary markets
The index's components can be traded cost-effectively
The index is reasonably diversified and is not overly concentrated in any single security, sector, country/region, credit quality, etc.
The index constituents have average or above-average ESG ratings
The index provider has a stewardship code/framework/practices that are clearly articulated, explicit and publicly available
The index license is competitively priced
Additional remarks, if any (maximum 250 words)
4. Alpha sources, or performance drivers What were the major sources of alpha, or performance drivers, over the last 3 years (if your active ETF is fewer than 3 years old, then please provide alpha sources since inception)?
You may select more than one response.
Securities/assets mispriced by the market
Securities/assets misunderstood by the market
Securities/assets that benefited from cyclical factors
Securities/assets that are relatively inaccessible by retail investors and/or smaller institutional asset owners
Securities/assets in special situations
Picking up securities/assets with strong fundamentals during times of market panic
Risk budgeting and allocation
Asset allocation to specific sectors, geographies, asset classes
Securities/assets in a sector/business model that has not yet been discovered by mainstream investors
Our quantitatively based investment approach
Securities/assets with higher-than-average environmental scores
Securities/assets with higher-than-average social scores
Securities/assets with higher-than-average governance scores
Additional remarks, if any (maximum 250 words)
5. Is your flagship ETF approved or aligned with the EU Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR)?
Yes, our fund is approved/aligned with the SFDR – Article 8: environmental and socially promoting, and our integration Characteristics include the companies:
Yes, our fund is aligned with the SFDR – Article 9: products targeting sustainable investments as an objective, and our investment activities are targeted at:
No, we are not approved, but we are in the middle of an approval process
No, we are not approved, but we plan to obtain approval/becoming aligned
No, we are neither approved nor aligned, and we have no plans to do so within the next 12 months
No, but we are aligned with another framework:
Selected: Yes, our fund is approved/aligned with the SFDR – Article 8. Characteristics include the companies:
Not being involved in controversial environmental-related activities such as biological weapons, cluster bombs, uranium, mining, fossil fuel, hydraulic fracking, etc.
Not being involved in controversial social-related activities such as animal cruelty, animal testing, alcohol, games adult, tobacco, etc.
UNGC alignment at least 5 out of the 10 principles
Sound management structure such as independence of the Chairman, independence of most of the directors, etc.
Sound Employee Relation such as measuring employees' satisfaction, employee's safety and health, etc.
Other characteristics that may apply, and please define the qualitative metrics:
Selected: Other characteristics that may apply, and please define the qualitative metrics:
Selected: Yes, our fund is aligned with the SFDR – Article 9. Our investment activities are targeted at:
That contributes to an environmental objective, such as the use of energy, renewable energy, raw materials, water and land, the production of waste, greenhouse gas emissions, etc.
That contributes to a social objective, particularly an investment tackling inequality or fostering social cohesion, social integration, labor relations, etc.
That follow good governance practices, particularly sound management structures, employee relations, etc.
Do no significant harm
That has at least one stream of green revenue
That engage in at least one Environmental related SDG
That encounter in at least one Social related SDG
That does PAI screening
That abide by International norms such as the ILO Conventions or OECD Guidelines
That is aligned with the UNGC
Selected: No, but we are aligned with another framework: Please specify the framework(s) you are aligned with:
6. To what extent do you consider Principal Adverse Impact (PAI)?
Yes, we consider principal adverse impacts, whether material or likely to be material, of investment decisions on sustainability factors
We integrate with our processes, including in our due diligence processes, the procedures for considering the principal adverse impacts alongside the relevant financial risks and relevant sustainability risks
We use indicators as adverse sustainability factors which have a negative effect on sustainability, whether environmental or social-related ones, which are linked to investment decisions
We assess Environmental KPIs, including:
We assess Social KPIs, including:
We assess Governance KPIs, including:
Selected: We assess Environmental KPIs, including:
Air Emissions
Energy Management
Environmental Management
Habitat Protection
Waste Management
Water Management
Other KPIs that may apply
Please define the qualitative metrics such as deforestation policy, biodiversity protection, water strategy, etc. applicable to the Environmental pillar:
Selected: We assess Social KPIs, including:
Human Capital-Diversity
Human Capital-Human Rights
Human Capital-Safety & Health
Supply Chain Management
Other KPIs that may apply
Please define the qualitative metrics such as forced labor, child labor, social grievance mechanisms, supplier code of conduct, etc. applicable to the Social pillar:
Selected: We assess Governance KPIs, including:
Anti-Corruption
Business Ethics
Management & Board
Other KPIs that may apply
Please define the qualitative metrics such as anti-corruption policy, anti-competitive legal proceedings, whistleblowing, etc. applicable to the Governance pillar:
7. Is your strategy aligned with the TCFD recommendations?
Yes
No, we do not consider TCFD as a guideline
No, we did not consider TCFD as a guideline, but we have plans to implement this framework within the next 12 months
Selected: Yes - Please explain your policies and actions taken towards the four major themes:
I. Governance: How is your organization's governance designed around climate-related risks and opportunities?
II. Strategy: What does your organization's strategy address the actual and potential impacts of climate-related risks and opportunities on the organization's businesses, approach, and financial planning?
III. Risk Management: What are the processes used by your organization to identify, assess, and manage climate-related risks?
IV. Metrics and Targets: What are the high-level metrics and targets used to assess and manage relevant climate-related risks and opportunities?
8. Is your flagship ETF aligned with the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (UNSDG)?
Yes
No
Selected: Yes - Which are UNSDG you have targeted to achieve impact?
Please select all that apply.
Goal 1: No Poverty
Goal 2: Zero Hunger
Goal 3: Good Health and Well-Being
Goal 4: Quality Education
Goal 5: Gender Equality
Goal 6: Clean Water and Sanitation
Goal 7: Affordable and Clean Energy
Goal 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth
Goal 9: Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure
Goal 10: Reduced Inequalities
Goal 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
Goal 12: Responsible Consumption and Production
Goal 13: Climate Action
Goal 14: Life Below Water
Goal 15: Life on Land
Goal 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions
Goal 17: Partnerships
9. Does your initiative target to create environmental impact?
Please select all that apply in the environmental themes below.
Energy Efficiency
Green Buildings
Renewable Energy
Sustainable Agriculture
Sustainable Forestry
Water
Others (please specify)
Please specify.
10. Does your initiative target to create social impact?
Please select all that apply in the environmental themes below.
Affordable Housing
Education
Health
Food
Inclusive Finance
Others (please specify)
Please specify.
Pillar 2: Execution & Performance
1. Effectiveness: Please select only one response related to performance in the last 12 months.
[i] Net of all costs and charges borne by investors.
My index-tracking ETF's R-squared is below 75%
My index-tracking ETF's R-squared is between 75% - 85%
My index-tracking ETF's R-squared is above 85%
My ACTIVELY MANAGED ETF's NET[i] Alpha is above 0
My ACTIVELY MANAGED ETF's NET[i] Alpha is below 0
2. Expense ratio: What is your ETF's expense ratio, over the past 12 months, compared with its peer group average (for example China A-share ETFs, fixed income ETFs, active ETFs, etc.)?
Please select only one response.
More than 25 basis points ABOVE average
20 - 25 basis points ABOVE average
Between 15 -20 basis points ABOVE average
Between 10 - 15 basis points ABOVE average
Between 1 - 10 basis points ABOVE average
0 - 5 basis points BELOW average
Between 5 - 10 basis points BELOW average
Between 10 -15 basis points BELOW average
Between 15 - 20 basis points BELOW average
More than 20 basis points BELOW average
3. Bid-ask spread: What is your ETF's average bid-ask spread over the last 12 months?
Above 2%
Between 1.5% - 2%
Between 1% - 1.5%
Between 0.5% - 1%
Between 0.25% - 0.5%
Below 0.25%
4. Market makers, 1Y: How many market makers, on average, did this ETF have in the last 12 months?
2 or fewer
3 to 5
6 to 8
9 to 11
12 to 14
15 or more
Pillar 3: Operations
1. Lead manager experience: How long has the LEAD manager of this ETF been managing similar ETFs?
You may include ETF management experience gained in other firms. Please select only one answer.
Less than 1 year
1 - 2 years
3 -5 years
More than 5 years but fewer than 10 years
10 or more years
2. Investment team experience: What is the average experience of the investment team managing similar ETFs?
You may include ETF management experience gained in other firms. Please select only one answer.
Less than 1 year
1 - 2 years
3 -5 years
More than 5 years but fewer than 10 years
10 or more years
3. Lead manager tenure: What is the tenure of the LEAD manager of this ETF at the current firm?
Less than 1 year
1 - 2 years
3 -5 years
More than 5 years but fewer than 10 years
10 or more years
4. Transparency: How often do you disclose the full holdings of the ETF?
Daily
Weekly
Monthly
Quarterly
Annually
We never disclose the full holdings
Pillar 4: Stewardship
Note: When answering the questions in this pillar, please respond directly relevant to this specific fund/strategy. They should NOT be general answers that generally apply to all your firm's funds/strategy. [i] Stewardship is a set of behaviors, principles, and/or policies guiding responsible shareholding. Stewards invest with awareness of the investees' ability to create long-term value not just for shareholders but also for society and the economy. [ii] Material impacts are events likely to affect a company's operations and financial position, positively or negatively. Materiality varies from one industry to another and one business model to another. They may include but are not limited to supply chain, employee welfare, environmental practices, product safety, etc. [iii] Definition of concrete: Explicitly and clearly defined framework, parameters, principles, methods/techniques, and objectives are available for imminent implementation [iv] Adaptation of the CFA Institute ESG Disclosure Standards For Investment Products, November 2021
1. Stewardship Activity: Engagement activities [iv] have been undertaken on behalf of investors to put stewardship into effect. These activities include:
Participation in a shareholder meeting
Casting, abstaining, or withholding a vote on a management or shareholder resolution, on management or shareholder resolution
Filing a shareholder resolution
Commencement, continuation, modification, or discontinuation of an engagement with an investee company
Enforcement of covenants
Exercise of warrants or embedded options
Lending of securities
Taking a seat on the board of directors of an investee company, hiring, firing, and directing the management of an investee company
Maintenance and improvement of real estate and physical assets
Advocating for strong environmental, social, or governance practices
Stating a position or advocating for or against public policies or proposals that affect, or may affect, the investment product
We are a passive manager and we do not think it is necessary to take an active approach for engagement
We do not currently have a stewardship policy for engagement any of the above, BUT we have concrete[iii] plans to begin monitoring at least some of the above within the next 12 months
Do not do any of the above and have no concrete[iii] plans to do so
Additional Remarks, if any (maximum 250 words)
2. Stewardship Monitoring scope: Our stewardship for investees/potential investees monitoring scopes include the following:
On material[ii] environmental issues
On carbon footprint and exposures to climate risk
On material[ii] social issues
On material[ii] governance issues
On corporate culture and remuneration
On capital structure
On strategy
On overall material risks
On transparency
As passive managers, we do not think it is necessary to monitor our issuers
We do not currently monitor any of the above, BUT we have concrete[iii] plans to begin monitoring at least some of the above within the next 12 months
Do not do any of the above and have no concrete[iii] plans to do so
Additional Remarks, if any (maximum 250 words)
3. Stewardship Team: A dedicated stewardship team [iv] is set up to flag specific companies and issues for engagement which includes the undertakings below:
All written communications and meeting records, including targeted outcomes of the engagement, are logged in the stewardship management system
Engagement is undertaken with the intent to improve a company's environmental and social resource management and to reduce risks related to environmental and social practices or activities
Engagement activities include in-person and virtual meetings, written correspondence, and emails
Engagement may occur with a company's board of directors, executive management, or investor relations and may be conducted independently or in collaboration with other investors through the fund's proxy voting and engagement service provider
The Fund's Stewardship Team reviews progress toward each engagement effort quarterly against the targeted outcomes and determines next steps as needed
As passive managers, we do not see a need to establish a team for active engagement
We do not currently have a stewardship team, BUT we have concrete[iii] plans to begin monitoring at least some of the above within the next 12 months
Do not have a team to do any of the above and have no concrete[iii] plans to do so
Additional Remarks, if any (maximum 250 words)
4. Proxy Voting: At the product level, we have transparent proxy voting [iv] policies that are unique to this particular investment strategy:
Yes
We are a passive manager and we do not think it is necessary for us to vote
We do not vote
We cannot/prefer not to divulge our voting practices
Additional Remarks, if any (maximum 250 words)
Selected: Yes
We disclose that the portfolio managers undertake proxy voting for the investment product while investee engagements are handled at the organizational level
The firm's Proxy Voting Committee purely determines voting decisions
The firm's Proxy Voting Committee determines voting decisions in conjunction with input from the strategy teams and a third-party proxy advisor
All proxy votes are recorded and stored in our internal proxy voting and engagement system
When voting against management, the following issues are typically prioritized based on:
We may vote against management on an issue, and when the Proxy Voting Committee has voted against management on an issue:
Selected: When voting against management, the following issues are typically prioritized based on:
Their potential to affect a company's financial performance
Board independence
Accountability
Shareholder rights
Transparency
ESG reporting
Workplace health and safety issues
Environmental resource management issues that may increase the likelihood of regulatory fines or risks
Selected: We may vote against management on an issue, and when the Proxy Voting Committee has voted against management on an issue:
The engagement team initiates an engagement effort to discuss our specific concerns with management
We engage with companies to encourage best governance practices, including those related to reporting on material ESG information
An engagement effort will be initiated, and a file is created in our proxy voting and engagement system that includes the company name, the specific issue identified, the targeted outcome, and a copy of the initial written communication
An automatic alert for review of each individual engagement effort is put in place based on the recommended follow-up time frame
Engagement efforts and progress are tracked and reviewed on an ongoing basis by the engagement team
Continued engagement efforts are recommended per our engagement policy
All written communications and summaries of any meetings with company management are documented and maintained in the centralized internal database
The engagement team provides quarterly updates to portfolio managers and meets with them as needed
5. Voting Disclosure: Please select the statements that describe your firm's practices related to voting.
You may select more than one statement:
Our disclosure on voting is available to ALL investors, from retail to institutional asset owners, without them having to make a request, i.e., the disclosure is on our website or another electronically accessible venue
Our disclosure on voting is available ONLY to institutional asset owners, including family offices, without them having to make a request, i.e., the disclosure is electronically accessible to them
We disclose our votes and rationale ONLY if an investor asks for disclosure
In our disclosures, we explain in plain, clear, unambiguous language the rationale behind every vote
In our disclosures, we explain the rationale behind every vote, BUT we do not make an effort to present it in plain language, clear, unambiguous language
We do not currently disclose our votes and rationale, but we have concrete plans to do so within the next 12 months
We do not disclose and have no plans to disclose our voting
We do not vote
We cannot/prefer not to divulge our voting practices
Additional Remarks, if any (maximum 250 words)
6. Engagement frequency: Teamwide over the last 1 year, we have engaged with investees/potential investees on the material[ii] issues selected above:
Please include both collective engagement and engagement conducted on your own.
Once a year on average
Twice a year on average
Once a quarter on average
Once every two months on average
Once a month on average
More frequently than once a month on average
We currently have no engagement
Additional Remarks, if any (maximum 250 words)
7. Engagement Disclosure: Do you disclose your key engagement activities, along with the outcomes, to investors?
Yes, we disclose in a separate report devoted to stewardship (electronic or printed)
Yes, we disclose as part of scheduled reporting, such as factsheets and annual reports, etc
Yes, we disclose on our website, which is accessible to investors
Yes, we disclose but only when investors request for it
No, we do not currently disclose, but we have concrete[iii] plans within the next 12 months
No, we do not currently disclose and have no concrete[iii] plans to disclose
Additional Remarks, if any (maximum 250 words)
8. Actual Example - Please provide an ACTUAL example of how you executed ONE of the following, in a maximum of 500 words.
A change in security weight resulting from your engagement activities
How your stewardship code/framework/philosophy/methods/approach has, or has, evolved over the years. How do these changes affect investors and the community your firm operates in?
How you've adapted your firm's stewardship practices/approaches for Asia, the rationale behind the adaptation/s and the outcome/s
Please briefly describe the critical challenge/s, actions taken, results and lessons learned:
Pillar 5: Corporate Responsibility and Strength
Please complete this pillar in separate "Pillar 5: Corporate Responsibility and Strength" questionnaire. You will only need to respond to Pillar 5 ONCE for all your firm's investment strategies.
Please provide the following attachments:
- Latest factsheets
- Prospectus
- Research papers
- Other relevant materials
Attachments
Drop files here or
Select files
Max. file size: 50 MB.
CAPTCHA