|
 
 |
Login | Search | HomeNews
and Events
Find an Advisor
Contact UsSRI
in the Rockies |
|
|
|
Our ServicesSustainable Investment Solutions™ Proxy Voting Guidelines (pdf) FAFN Giving FundAbout UsMore About UsOur BeliefsOur GoalsMedia Center FAFN Leadership |
|
|
|
|
Media
Center
Following is a list of press releases, media
coverage of FAFN and SRI topics, and publications by FAFN staff and Members more
than 12 months old. Select a title to view the entire piece or a summary with
a link to the piece. December 2007 December 4, 2007 December 1, 2007 October 10, 2007 August 1, 2007 July 2007 June 2007 March 2007 March 2007 March 2007 March 2007 December 2006 October 2006 October 2006 July 2006 From Natural Life Magazine July/August, 2006 July 2006 July 25, 2006 May 2006 August 2006 April 24, 2006 March 2006 February 2006 February 2006 January 26, 2006 January 3, 2006 Jan. 2006 November 14, 2005 October 10, 2005 September 12, 2005 August 8, 2005 August 3rd, 2005 Summer 2005 July 29, 2005 May 29, 2005 Earth Day 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 February 2005 October 2004 October 19, 2004 Fall 2004 August 1, 2004 April 30, 2004 March/April 2004 Spring 2004 December 2003 Volume 10 Number 1 Spring-Summer 2003 November 2002 November 2002 First half of 2002 November/December 2001 August 8, 2001 August 9, 2001 August 8, 2001 July/August 2001 December 2007 December 4, 2007 Though still small in number, they are blossoming in traditional firms as well as those focused on socially responsible investing. The reason: investor demand and investment opportunity. Clients want their money to have a positive environmental impact, and many feel that global warming can't be ignored as a factor in investing. "There's a growing trend toward green investing and aligning people's values with their investments," says Craig Metrick, U.S. head of responsible investment at Mercer LLC's investment consulting business. Some financial firms are responding with "green" mutual funds and exchange-traded funds. They are also identifying companies well positioned for global warming, either because they are devising new technologies or taking advantage of changes in markets. But beyond these products, a self-selected group of advisers are specializing in "green" investing, just as some brokers focus on clients who are athletes or doctors. While this group is only a tiny percentage of the thousands of financial advisers, their numbers are rising in response to investor demand. "Business is booming, especially since Al Gore's movie, people want to do the right thing," says Jon Ellenbogen, a financial consultant at A.G. Edwards & Sons Inc. in Washington, referring to the documentary "An Inconvenient Truth." Mr. Ellenbogen says he is working with others because he is so busy and adds that "green investing is here to stay. There is money to be made in it if people are interested." To be sure, not all green investments will pan out. Some alternative green investments are risky because of their small size, unproven technology and dependence on high prices for oil. For instance, it now appears that investors overestimated the prospects for ethanol. Some financial firms and advisers entering the field don't have sufficient expertise. And simply selecting a green managed or indexed mutual fund from a well-established firm doesn't guarantee a sound green portfolio. "Investors need to be wary," says Truman Semans, director of the Business Environmental Leadership Council at the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization. "The rapid growth of products and advisers has led to a wide range of quality." Indicative of the interest, the 2007 SRI in the Rockies Conference -- the annual meeting of the socially responsible investment industry -- sold out a month early with more than 650 participants, 100 more than in 2006. "I think the growth potential is fabulous," says Steve Schueth, president of First Affirmative Financial Network LLC, a nationwide network of financial advisers who specialize in social investing. "More and more folks are finding out that you can do well and do good at the same time." He says: "The vast majority of advisers won't bring it up because they don't understand it," but clients are raising the issue because of "awareness of climate change, awareness of the need of alternative energy strategies." The network, which designs socially responsible and green portfolios for traditional advisers, saw assets increase in the past year by $100 million, to $700 million. The Social Investment Forum, a national association for the social investment industry, says total SRI assets rose to $2.29 trillion in 2005 from $639 billion a decade earlier. "Socially responsible investing is the fastest-growing segment of the market we see," says John V. Carberry, president of F.L. Putnam Investment Management Co., based in Wellesley, Mass. "Environmental issues are at the top of the list."
Copyright (c) 2007 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. December 1, 2007 Nice guys finish last, the good die young, the road to hell is paved with good intentions and socially responsible investments generate fewer profits. Well, maybe not. On balance, when it comes to investing, a clear conscience may well be the best pillow. Although the prevailing sense among many advisors is that SRI investment performance lags conventional, non-SRI performance, there is little evidence of a difference. "You can go back to 1993 and you will find no statistical difference between social and non-social fund performance," says Lloyd Kurtz, senior portfolio manager at Nelson Capital, a wealth management firm in Palo Alto, Calif. Indeed, the debate over SRI or sustainable investment performance tends to focus more on whether there is an alpha associated with SRI returns rather than a penalty. And even on that front there is cause for optimism.
SRI Performance in a Well-Oiled Economy
A plethora of academic and industry studies have defied the conventional wisdom by concluding that SRIs offer comparable returns to other investments. For instance, a recent report from the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) Finance Initiative, "Demystifying Responsible Investment Performance," which reviewed key academic and broker research on environmental, social and governance factors (ESG), found that only three of twenty academic studies showed any negative effect on returns from social investing. Ten of the studies showed a positive effect on returns and the rest a neutral effect. The report states that, "there does not appear to be a performance penalty from taking ESG factors into account in the portfolio management process." Still, there have been some hiccups. The nature of conventional SRI funds is that they will sometimes be over- or underinvested in a sector that is doing well such as technology, which gave SRI funds a boost in the late 1990s, or oil, which has contributed to their lagging performance in recent years. "It's really tough for a company in the business of international oil production to be in a social portfolio," says Amy Domini, CEO of Domini Social Investments and codeveloper of the Domini 400 Social Index, the SRI equivalent of the S&P 500. Kurtz agrees that the energy-dominated market has hurt the performance of SRIs. "The last few years have been pretty rough, but that really boils down to oil. Modern risk models don't take that into account. They look at value versus growth, they look at size, but oil weighting is not something they take into account."
From SRI to Sustainability
Sue Hansen, a financial advisor and owner of Hansen's Financial Services in Fayetteville, N.Y., senses that SRI funds performance has improved, in part, because of a maturation of the industry. Now, she routinely asks new and prospective clients if they are interested in SRI, and 85% to 99% of her clients indicate that yes, they are. "I have moved a lot of money out of mutual fund companies with no SRI fund to the SRI world," she says. Keefe contends that another part of the reason for the growing interest in SRI is that the focus has moved from negative screening to sustainable investment. "We don't even use the term SRI anymore; we define our approach in terms of what we do invest in," says Keefe. "The materiality of environmental, social and governance issues on financial performance is becoming more and more apparent every day, so there is a movement toward integrating those factors into investment analysis." It's a movement that is gaining steam from UNEP's Principles for Responsible Investment Initiative (PRI). PRI, which was formed at the behest of the UN to "mainstream responsible investment globally," sets forth six best practices for incorporating environmental, social and governance factors into investment decisions. One indication of the growing importance of these factors is the speed with which the PRI initiative has attracted signatories to its principles: Since its inception in 2006, nearly 200 signatories worldwide have signed on.
Fiduciary Risk Revisited
Alpha Bets
But for others, the nonexistence of an SRI-based alpha is not so clear. Alex Edmans, an assistant professor of finance at Wharton, recently released a study that showed that Fortune's "Best Companies to Work for In America" in 1998 earned more than double the market's return by the end of 2005 after adjusting for factors like size, market sensitivity and past performance momentum. A fund screened for employee satisfaction is not technically an SRI fund, and Edmans observes that most SRI studies show that SRI screening has no effect on returns. However, the study does suggest that the market may not fully value intangibles in the short term. "Social responsibility is very hard to quantify and observe," he says. "We may be moving toward a different way of valuing companies." Kurtz suggests it may be that SRI managers have an edge in factoring in a firm's reputation when they consider its value. "I wouldn't say that social investors have mastered the art of reputation pricing or predicting problems but I do think we have valuable things to say to the rest of the profession," he says. "Our system depends on trust, and in a free market your reputation is your most important asset. The winners in the future will not just be managers who can crunch numbers; they will be managers who can make good qualitative judgments that is something computers can't do." The takeaway for financial advisors? A confluence of factors increasing investor interest, no evidence of diminished returns, the tantalizing possibility of an SRI alpha and a changing definition of fiduciary risk seems to be pushing SRI into the mainstream. As SRI enthusiasts might see it, good things come to those who wait. Kathy Gevlin is a freelance writer based in Dobbs Ferry, N.Y., and a frequent contributor to Financial Planning.
(c) 2007 Financial Planning and SourceMedia, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.Financial-Planning.com
http://www.sourcemedia.com October 10, 2007 August 1, 2007 July 2007 June 2007 March 2007 March 2007 March 2007 March 2007 December 2006 October 2006 October 2006 July 2006 From Natural Life Magazine July/August, 2006 July 2006 Socially responsible investment strategies serve as the foundation for the United Nations' new Principles for Responsible Investment. The U.N.'s voluntary guidelines provide a framework for the systematic integration of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) issues into investment decision-making. I share Secretary-General Kofi Annan's hope that the Principles will "contribute to a more stable and inclusive global economy." Fortunately, most of the investment management and mutual fund companies who serve socially conscious investors have been operating in a manner consistent with the U.N. Principles for years -- it's what differentiates us in the marketplace. So this no experiment -- we've been proving the wisdom of a more holistic approach to investing for a long time. Steven J. Schueth is president of First Affirmative Financial Network, LLC.. GreenBiz.com; Responsible Investment Forum with Steve Schueth. July 2006 View Coverage July 25, 2006 A new study recently released by TIAA-Cref finds that socially responsible investors and non-SRI investors share many of the same values, presenting the niche fund category with a potential area to grow its assets. Investors who aren't invested in a socially responsible fund are interested in the concept, the study funds. This means there is room to attract more socially responsible investors as participants say they want their social values reflected in their investments. Washington-based Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research conducted the research in February. A total of 1,002 interviews were conducted with TIAA-Cref participants 501 who invest in the Cref Social Choice Account and 501 who do not. The Cref Social Choice Account, or SCA, is a variable annuity account with $8.06 billion in assets as of March 31. It gives special consideration to certain social criteria. The survey is the first one from TIAA-Cref on the topic in roughly a decade. Even though returns topped the list of investor concerns, the survey also shows that investors care a lot about social issues, says Scott Budde, managing director for TIAA-Cref Asset Management. The problem is that investors either don?t understand the nuts and bolts of SRI funds or have false concerns about performance. An overwhelming majority, or 91%, of participants who are not invested in SCA, and 85% who are invested in it, agree or strongly agree with the statement that financial return is most important when making investment decisions. But TIAA-Cref participants also indicated that they want their social values reflected in their investments. About one quarter, or 27%, of SCA participants strongly agreed, and 83% agreed, with the statement that ?ensuring that my investment decisions reflect my personal values about social and environmental impacts is most important when making investment decisions. ?We were certainly impressed by the level of interest of the broad investor in social issues,? Budde says. He also says that even though the TIAA-Cref investor population which includes the academic, medical and cultural fields is better educated and typically more involved than the general population, there is a strong indication that the results from the survey are applicable to the public in general. Timothy Smith, senior vice president at Walden Asset Management and president of the Social Investment Forum, agrees. I thought it was fascinating the responses [from SCA and non-SCA investors] weren't on other ends of the spectrum, he says. The survey is notable because it provides us a fascinating snapshot of what informed investors are likely supporting, Smith says. Steve Schueth, president of First Affirmative Financial Network, an RIA that specializes in managing portfolios for socially conscious clients, says it's no surprise that performance was the study's top finding. I know the management at TIAA-Cref is focused on performance and so they're not going to say anything that doesn't say performance is No. 1. However, Schueth was surprised at how closely aligned the opinions of the SCA investors are with those of the non-SCA investors. Unfamiliarity with socially responsible investments was the main reason participants gave for their failure to invest in SRIs, and 60% of non-SCA investors describe themselves as unfamiliar with the Cref SCA. Budde says the survey's findings show there is an opportunity to educate investors. This survey confirmed the need and opportunity to educate them on social investing issues, Budde says. There's clearly an interest and a need for greater awareness of what's out there. It is surprising that so few know much about SCA or don't know their options, Scheuth says. TIAA-Cref hasn?t done a good job of promoting [SCA] inside [its] own marketing strategy, he says. The survey perhaps reflects newfound interest in the space. In June, TIAA-Cref said it had formed a new Social and Community Investing Department within its asset management area. The department includes Budde and Amy O'Brien, TIAA-Cref's director of social investing. O'Brien joined the firm about a year ago. Budde says the survey confirmed the rationale for creating the department, which will allow TIAA-Cref to increase focus on some of these issues. The department will enhance screening methodology for screened funds as well as initiate new investment programs that will focus on different aspects of community investing, looking at new product development and new types of funds around social investment themes such as the environment. According to the survey, SCA and non-SCA investors prefer a social screening approach that is more inclusive than exclusive. In other words, participants prefer an approach that seeks to reward good corporate actors. A large majority, or 88% of SCA investors and 78% of non-SCA investors, say they are more likely to invest in a fund that includes investments in corporations with a positive track record. That's compared to the 61% of SCA participants and just 43% of non-SCA participants who say they are more likely to invest in a fund that excludes corporations whose products are objectionable to some people. Schueth also observes that other socially responsible firms don't have the luxury of doing what TIAA-Cref has done in that TIAA-Cref has the ability to test both sides of the fence. I think TIAA-Cref is in a unique position to test the waters with those who have consciously decided to be socially responsible investors and those who have decided not [to be].
Schueth goes on to say that growth has continued in socially responsible funds and there is no reason to think it will stall out. This is another indication that there?s an awful lot of people whose values match the mainstream socially conscious investor and yet they're not invested in a responsible manner. It?s an opportunity for TIAA-Cref and anyone else. May 2006 August 2006 The temptation is overwhelming. We are bombarded by impressive statistics every time we open the financial pages or tune in to cable news. Unfortunately, numerous studies have demonstrated how harmful chasing investment performance can be. One of the better-known evaluations was conducted a few years ago by Morningstar (a mutual fund rating firm) and showed that investor returns were generally many times lower than the reported return of the funds. Why? Primarily because once a fund performs well, fund companies market the good performance and lots of money flows in. Mediocre or worse performance often follows. Socially conscious (and unconscious) investors who buy into the previous year's best performers are often buying high and selling low-exactly the opposite of what anyone would want to do. As First Affirmative's Chief Investment Officer, Kevin O'Keefe, explains, there is no substitute for gaining an in-depth understanding of the sustainability of a manager's performance record. What you don't know can hurt you a lot. R. Kevin O'Keefe CIMA, AIF is Chief Investment Officer of First Affirmative Financial Network, LLC. GreenBiz.com; Responsible Investment Forum with Steve Schueth. August 2006 View Coverage April 24, 2006 March 2006 February 2006 February 2006 January 26, 2006 January 3, 2006 Jan. 2006 November 14, 2005 October 10, 2005 September 12, 2005 August 8, 2005 August 3rd, 2005 Summer 2005 July 29, 2005 They're part of a growing number of investors choosing to rank conscience ahead of profit, becoming part of a class of stock owners known as socially conscious investors. The profit potential for such investors is increasing, and experts say socially conscious investing is creating new industries and changing how some companies market themselves. Socially conscious investing amounts to screening companies to determine whether their financial or political ties are in-line with an investor's personal beliefs. Whether it's ethical or environmental concerns, or simply a demand for more corporate transparency after a series of Wall Street scandals, experts aren't sure exactly what is fueling the trend. But there's one thing they are certain about-the trend is growing. "Whether it's tobacco or terrorism, more people are taking a closer look at what their money is supporting," said Denver University Daniels School of Business professor Bruce Hutton, who spoke in Colorado Springs last week during an event sponsored by the Pikes Peak Sustainable Business Network. "There's plenty of data out there that shows people want to screen their investments," he said. Statistics show he might be right. A study by The Social Investment Forum, a national nonprofit organization promoting ethical investment, found that more than $ 2 trillion in assets-or one of every nine professionally invested dollars-is managed by some sort of socially responsible screening strategy. Ten years ago, analysts estimated about $ 600 billion in assets funded social screening for companies. The idea of screening companies has become so popular that screening itself has become a large, lucrative industry, Hutton said. And, according to Hutton, Colorado Springs' own George Gay is a pioneer in the field. Gay and a business partner opened First Affirmative Financial Network in 1982 with 55 planners in 20 states and less than $ 5 million in managed assets. Today, First Affirmative has 140 advisors nationwide with about $ 460 million in managed assets. "I'd say we've done well," Gay said. "And, yeah, I'd say the industry is growing." Gay said that when the economy sagged after 2001, the company's assets neither increased nor decreased, but since have grown rapidly. The socially conscious investment trend has been aided by institution of corporate uniform reporting procedures known as the Global Reporting Initiative The GRI was created in 1997 as an initiative between the Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies and the United Nations Environment Program. Investors are starting to see better returns on their socially conscious investments, Hutton said. Until recently, Hutton said, the biggest obstacle to socially responsible investing was the perception that returns on those investments wouldn't compare with investments made with a blind eye. But, from 1995 to 2003, assets involved in social investing grew 40 percent faster than all managed investment assets. And, according to the Social Investment Forum, socially conscious investments grew 40 percent faster than traditionally managed assets between 1995 and 2003. "These days you can earn just as good or better with socially conscious investments," Hutton said. The fact that more and more people are investigating a company's ethics is not lost on a number of large corporations. Typically, a company's strongest selling points are revenue, earnings and cash flow, but more companies are making strides to display their return on environmental efficiency and the ethics of the corporate governing body. And Hutton said a prior understanding of a company's ethics leads to fewer lawsuits down the road. While there's no doubt socially conscious investments are growing, Hutton noted that what's a socially conscious investment to one person might not be to another and that as with most ethical issues, it's up to the individual to decide what's good and not good. For example, some investors might view military support as positive, while others see it as negative, especially in light of the war in Iraq. Hutton said the same goes for nuclear energy. "Some view it as a good thing. But then again a lot of people don't," he said. Hutton also said that investors find themselves in other ethical dilemmas, like choosing what they view as the lesser of two evils. Owners of the soap and hygiene product seller, The Body Shop, long touted the fact that the company does not test products on animals. But, in recent years, owners discovered that the companies they bought ingredients from do conduct tests on animals. The Body Shop has continued to purchase ingredients from the same suppliers, Hutton said. On the other hand, soap and pharmaceutical maker Proctor and Gamble openly admits testing products on animals but also reports that it is spending millions of dollars to explore alternatives. "So, it's up to each person to decide which is better, and it's often different for different people," Hutton said. Regardless of what an individual's personal ethics are, analysts expect to see a growing number of people screen prospective investments, pouring billions of dollars into companies that line up with their values, for very basic reasons. "I just believe my choices have consequences, and I want to make responsible decisions with my money," Gay said. "That's how a lot of people feel."
Copyright 2005 Gale Group, Inc. ASAP Copyright 2005 Dolan Media Newswires May 29, 2005 Earth Day 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 February 2005 October 2004 October 19, 2004 Fall 2004 August 1, 2004
FAFN President Steve Schueth and FAFN Professional Member Madeline Moore are quoted in this article April 30, 2004 Executives from New York-based TIAA-CREF, or Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association-College Retirement Equities Fund, agreed to review information provided by Social Choice for Social Change, an activist group, before deciding how to proceed. The group, whose representatives met TIAA-CREF officials in New York last month, wanted a new fund that would invest in community development, provide venture capital and vote for socially progressive proxies. "We were not able to identify another single fund in the marketplace that has the characteristics that they were talking about," TIAA-CREF spokeswoman Stephanie Cohen Glass said. Though no final decision has been made, "we weren't going to be the first." TIAA-CREF offers the Social Choice Equity Fund to mutual fund investors and a similar account to retirement-plan participants. The $6.2 billion accounts exclude investments in tobacco and defense-related stocks and in utilities with interests in nuclear power plants
Neil Wollman, co-chairman of Social Choice for Social Change, said a new fund would have been more proactive than the current socially screened fund. His group and the company will exchange information and hold additional meetings. "They're certainly not jumping at all of things that they were asked and yet at the same time they were open to ways to meet the needs, as they perceive them, of their participants," said Steven Schueth, who represented the shareholder group. March/April 2004 Spring 2004 December 2003 Volume 10 Number 1 Spring-Summer 2003 November 2002 November 2002 First half of 2002 November/December 2001 August 8, 2001 August 9, 2001 August 8, 2001 July/August 2001 Specific securities mentioned in these articles are not recommendations to buy or sell those securities. |
||||
|
| First Affirmative Financial Network, LLC is an independent Registered Investment Advisor (SEC File #801-5687). The information posted on this website is for informational use only. As such, it is illustrative in nature and subject to change. This is neither an offer to sell nor a solicitation of an offer to buy any securities that may be mentioned herein. Nothing on this website should be considered financial or business advice. All investment reporting is based upon historical information and should not be considered indicative of future results. First Affirmative will never guarantee specific investment results. The information contained herein has been obtained from sources considered to be reliable, but First Affirmative does not guarantee the accuracy of any specific statement contained herein. View our Privacy Policy. View our Internet Security information. |
|
| © May 2000– 18 November, 2008 . Unless otherwise stated, photographs contained in this site are © Jupiterimages Corporation. Unless otherwise stated, all text and other images contained in this site are the property of First Affirmative Financial Network, LLC Colorado Springs, Colorado USA. No portion of this document may be reproduced without written consent. Thank you. This site is created and maintained by Mountain Muse Communications. If you experience any concerns or problems with this site, please contact their webmaster. |