Prepared by Marco Belloni, Margherita Giuzio, Simon Kördel, Petya Radulova, Dilyara Salakhova and Florian Wicknig[1]
Published as part of the Financial Stability Review, November 2020.
Green financial markets are growing rapidly globally. Assets of funds with an environmental, social and governance (ESG) mandate have grown by 170% since 2015 (see ChartA, left panel). The outstanding amount of euro area green bonds has increased sevenfold over the same period. Given the financial stability risks stemming from climate change,[2] this box aims to understand the performance of such products and their potential for greening the economy. It focuses on the resilience of ESG funds and the absence of a consistent “greenium” a lower yield for green bonds compared with conventional bonds with a similar risk profile reflecting the fact that green projects do not benefit from cheaper financing.
Chart A
ESG funds have grown rapidly and tend to invest in sectors less affected by the recent market turmoil
Euro area investors have pivoted towards ESG funds since the onset of the coronavirus. The aggregate exposure of euro area sectors to ESG funds has increased by 20% over the last year. Households and ICPFs hold over 60% of euro area ESG funds (see ChartA, left panel). In the first quarter of 2020, euro area financial institutions and households reduced their non-ESG fund holdings (down by 1-8%, depending on the holder sector) in favour of ESG funds (up by 4-10%). The implied higher resilience of ESG fund flows during the market turmoil could reflect a more stable and committed investor base,[3] as well as a lower exposure to underperforming sectors such as energy (see ChartA, right panel). However, although an EU Ecolabel for retail financial products is under discussion at the European Commission, there is currently no regulatory definition of ESG funds, creating the potential for so-called“greenwashing”.[4]
In parallel, almost all sectors also increased their holdings of green bonds in the first quarter of 2020. Euro area investors now hold €197 billion of euro area green bonds. Market intelligence suggests that green bonds were issued in primary markets at lower interest rates and with larger order books than conventional bonds in 2019 and 2020. In the secondary market, however, green bonds do not consistently differ from similar conventional bonds either in terms of interest rates or liquidity (see Chart B, left panel). The finding that green bonds do not provide cheaper funding may reflect the fact that investors do not fully price in climate-related risks and/or that green bonds carry a risk of “greenwashing” in the absence of clear standards.[5] Indeed, while green bonds target green projects, evidence that the bonds lead to lower carbon emissions by issuers is limited.[6] Moreover, issuers are not accountable for the targets of projects financed by green bonds not being reached, although the standardisation of verification and reporting of green bonds is now under discussion at the European Commission as a part of the EU Green Bond Standard.
Chart B
No consistent premium for green bonds, while banks keep increasing their green assets
As green markets have developed, euro area banks have also increased their role in green financing. Euro area banks have increased the share of green bonds in their portfolios, although the median share of green investments is still only just above 1% of total bank securities holdings (see ChartB, right panel). However, banks are also increasing their own issuance of green bonds, in some cases to provide green financing opportunities to firms that are traditionally loan-financed. In the third quarter of 2020, new green bond issuance accounted for 13% of total euro area bank bond issuance, up from just 4% in the first quarter of 2020, following the rapid expansion of the green bond market in the second half of the year.
Financial markets can help to support the transition to a more sustainable economy and reduce vulnerability to climate-related risks. Although possible market failures can stem from incomplete, inconsistent and insufficient disclosure of environmental data, the increase in bond issuance in response to the pandemic provides an opportunity to deepen the green financial market.[7] And the continuing shift towards ESG funds can also help to foster the green transition, especially given the potentially important role of equity markets in financing green projects.[8] The resilience of green finance instruments during the recent market turmoil suggests that investors do not need to make sacrifices on performance to help foster the transition to a greener economy.
- Sante Carbone, Angelica Ghiselli and Filip Nikolic provided data support.
- See Special Feature A entitled “Climate change and financial stability”, Financial Stability Review, ECB, May 2019. For a discussion on the vulnerability of financial markets to tail events stemming from the mispricing of climate risks, see Schnabel, I., “When markets fail – the need for collective action in tackling climate change”, speech at the European Sustainable Finance Summit, 28September 2020.
- See Riedl, A. and Smeets, P., “Why Do Investors Hold Socially Responsible Mutual Funds?”, Journal of Finance, Vol.72, Issue 6, 2017, pp. 2505-2550, and Hartzmark, S. and Sussman, A., “Do Investors Value Sustainability? A Natural Experiment Examining Ranking and Fund Flows”, Journal of Finance, Vol.74, Issue 6, 2019, pp. 2789-2837.
- The European Commission is developing the EU Ecolabel for Retail Financial Products within the framework of the Sustainable Finance Action Plan.
- See Schnabel, I., “When markets fail – the need for collective action in tackling climate change”, speech at the European Sustainable Finance Summit, 28September 2020.
- See Ehlers, T., Mojon, B. and Packer, F., “Green bonds and carbon emissions: exploring the case for a rating system at the firm level”, BIS Quarterly Review, Bank for International Settlements, September 2020.
- See “Positively green: Measuring climate change risks to financial stability”, European Systemic Risk Board, June 2020, and Schnabel, I., “Never waste a crisis: COVID-19, climate change and monetary policy”, speech at the roundtable on “Sustainable Crisis Responses in Europe” organised by the INSPIRE research network, 17July 2020.
- See De Haas, R. and Popov, A., “Finance and carbon emissions”, Working Paper Series, No2318, ECB, September 2019, and “Financial Integration and Structure in the Euro Area”, ECB, March 2020.
As an expert in green finance and sustainable investments, I've closely followed the trends and developments outlined in the article prepared by Marco Belloni, Margherita Giuzio, Simon Kördel, Petya Radulova, Dilyara Salakhova, and Florian Wicknig, published in the Financial Stability Review in November 2020. The information presented sheds light on the growing landscape of green financial markets, particularly focusing on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) funds and green bonds within the euro area.
The evidence presented in the article indicates a substantial growth in green financial markets globally. Notably, the assets of funds with an ESG mandate have experienced a remarkable 170% growth since 2015, with the outstanding amount of euro area green bonds increasing sevenfold over the same period. This growth is crucial, given the financial stability risks associated with climate change.
One key aspect discussed is the resilience of ESG funds during market turmoil, especially in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Euro area investors have shifted towards ESG funds, with a notable 20% increase in aggregate exposure over the last year. The implication is that ESG funds demonstrated higher resilience during the market turbulence, possibly attributed to a more stable and committed investor base, as well as a lower exposure to underperforming sectors like energy.
The article also addresses concerns about "greenwashing," emphasizing the absence of a regulatory definition for ESG funds. The lack of clarity poses a risk of misleading investors. Despite discussions about an EU Ecolabel for retail financial products, the absence of clear standards creates challenges in ensuring the authenticity of green investments.
The analysis extends to green bonds, where market intelligence suggests that these bonds were issued in primary markets at lower interest rates and with larger order books than conventional bonds. However, in the secondary market, green bonds do not consistently differ from conventional bonds in terms of interest rates or liquidity. This finding raises questions about the full pricing of climate-related risks by investors and the potential risk of "greenwashing."
Euro area banks' increasing role in green financing is also highlighted, with a growing share of green bonds in their portfolios. However, the median share of green investments in total bank securities holdings remains just above 1%. The article emphasizes the role of financial markets in supporting the transition to a more sustainable economy and reducing vulnerability to climate-related risks.
In conclusion, the evidence presented in the article suggests a dynamic and rapidly growing landscape for green financial markets. It underscores the need for clear regulatory definitions, transparency, and standards to mitigate the risks associated with greenwashing and ensure the authenticity and impact of green investments. The resilience demonstrated by ESG funds during market turmoil further supports the idea that investors can contribute to a greener economy without sacrificing performance.
