Does Social Investing Generate Higher Returns?

by Denys Glushkov and Meir Statman

Does Social Investing Generate Higher Returns? Splash image

Editor’s note: This is based on the authors’ article, “The Wages of Social Responsibility,” copyright 2009, CFA Institute. Reproduced and republished from the Financial Analysts Journal, Volume 65, Number 4, with permission from the CFA Institute. All rights reserved.

Socially responsible investments have attracted much money, many investors, and many studies. We have studies of socially responsible mutual funds, socially responsible indexes, “sin” stocks, stocks with good and bad environmental records, and stocks with good and bad employee relations. But some parts of our knowledge are inconsistent with other parts and some gaps in our knowledge remain.

In this article


Share this article


About the author

Denys Glushkov is a research support director at Wharton Research Data Services, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Denys Glushkov Profile
All Articles by Denys Glushkov

Meir Statman is a Glenn Klimek professor of finance at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, California.
Meir Statman Profile
All Articles by Meir Statman

The Social Investment Forum, a national nonprofit organization promoting the concept, practice, and growth of socially responsible investing, describes socially responsible investing as “an investment process that considers the social and environmental consequences of investments, both positive and negative, within the context of rigorous financial analysis.”

Screening is the most prevalent form of socially responsible investing, followed by shareholder advocacy and community investing. Negative screening excludes or reduces the portfolio weights of companies with weak environmental, social, or governance records, and positive screening includes or increases the portfolio weights of companies with strong records.

Negative screens that exclude tobacco companies have been the most popular screens among socially responsible mutual funds, followed by screens that exclude companies associated with alcohol, gambling, and weapons. Negative and positive screens related to community relations come next in popularity, followed by screens related to the environment, labor relations, products and services, and equal employment.

To read more, please become an AAII Registered User or CLICK HERE.

First:   
Last:   
Email:

              
Denys Glushkov is a research support director at Wharton Research Data Services, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Meir Statman is a Glenn Klimek professor of finance at Santa Clara University, Santa Clara, California.


Discussion

All global companies want to make profit steadily. A small percentage less try for social responsibility. So an individual investor should match this ratio to get value for his/her investment. It is good to be social but does not pay our bills. Look Dalai Lama exiled in India, did not do any bad to Tibet, wants only do good, but he is in a growing billion people nation, propelling into an industrial giant economy. So, the merging market helps accommodate this social do good policy. We are all constrained into this mode.
Thanks for lettering me write these thoughts to share

posted about 1 month ago by Vaidy Bala from

You need to log in as a registered AAII user before commenting.
Create an account

Log In