Tesla's Removal From S&P Index Sparks Debate About ESG
Tesla's own carbon footprint is a small fraction of its peers, and its success in the market has pushed the industry overall away from gas-powered vehicles.
May 19, 2022 at 01:01 PM
4 minute read
Corporate GovernanceA benchmark ESG stock index has removed Tesla Inc., sparking a debate about which companies do — and don't — pass muster with socially aware investors.
Tesla has grown into a $735 billion company on the back of its breakthrough electric-vehicle engineering. Its own carbon footprint is a small fraction of its peers, and its success in the market has pushed the industry overall away from gas-powered vehicles.
But the other components of ESG — the social and governance risks — give investors pause. Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk is an unconventional manager, prone to impulsive tweeting, and the company discloses very little information about its workforce or labor conditions.
That split became material Wednesday after it emerged that Tesla was expelled from the ESG version of the S&P 500 Index. Musk responded by saying ESG is "a scam." It added to an already bad day for the company, whose stock fell 6.8% amid a broad sell-off in tech shares.
"This all speaks to the big inconvenient fact about ESG: You can't keep the baby and throw out the bathwater," said Eric Balchunas, senior ETF analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence. "You have to accept or reject both."
In a report, analysts at Bloomberg Intelligence wrote that Tesla's ESG status remains among the most debated for any company, with many ESG-labeled funds still holding the stock. In fact, the world's largest ESG-focused exchange-traded fund has about 1.8% of its assets invested in Tesla, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
The fund, BlackRock Inc.'s $21.9 billion iShares ESG Aware MSCI USA ETF (ticker ESGU), tracks the MSCI USA Extended ESG Focus Index, which still includes Tesla as a member.
Balchunas and BI's Shaheen Contractor wrote Wednesday that eight of the 15 largest U.S. funds that include ESG in their portfolio filters have significant positions in Tesla.
"Though Tesla might fit an environmental focus or impact theme, the company's social and governance issues make its inclusion in ESG funds debatable and Tesla's removal from the S&P 500 ESG Index perhaps overdue," the analysts said in their posting entitled "Is Tesla ESG?"
S&P Dow Jones Indices, which removed Tesla from its S&P 500 ESG Index, said the company's score on environmental, social and governance standards has remained "fairly stable" over the past year, but it has slipped down the ranks against improving global peers.
The index provider cited concerns related to working conditions and Tesla's handling of an investigation into deaths and injuries linked to its driver-assistance systems. A lack of low-carbon strategy and codes of business conduct also counted against Musk's company, it said.
"While Tesla may be playing its part in taking fuel-powered cars off the road, it has fallen behind its peers when examined through a wider ESG lens," Margaret Dorn, senior director and head of ESG indexes for S&P Dow Jones in North America, said in a Tuesday blog post.
For months now, Tesla has been critical of ESG. The company said in its annual report that ESG ratings are "fundamentally flawed," and in an April tweet, Musk said "corporate ESG is the devil incarnate."
From a market standpoint, Tesla's removal from the S&P index probably will be minimal as there was only about $11.7 billion that tracked S&P ESG gauges as recently as the end of 2020. By contrast, trillions of dollars track the main S&P 500 gauge.
Investors are split on S&P's decision. Kristin Hull, founder of Nia Impact Capital, a sustainability fund in Oakland, California, that has been pressing Tesla to address worker issues, said she was relieved that there was "finally accountability."
Zach Stein, chief investment officer of Carbon Collective, a climate-change focused online investment adviser based in Berkeley, California, said the opposite. The biggest issue in ESG is climate change, so kicking out the leading maker of electric vehicles makes no sense, especially since companies like Exxon Mobil Corp. remain in the S&P index, he said.
Tim Quinson reports for Bloomberg News.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllDisney's Black Eye Over Arbitration Gambit Likely to Linger, Underscoring PR Risks of Spurning Courts
Trump Organization's Independent Monitor Recommends Continued Oversight
Trending Stories
- 1Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-61
- 2Decision of the Day: School District's Probe Was a 'Sham'; Title IX Administrator Showed Sex-Based Bias
- 3US Magistrate Judge Embry Kidd Confirmed to 11th Circuit
- 4Shaq Signs $11 Million Settlement to Resolve Astrals Investor Claims
- 5McCormick Consolidates Two Tesla Chancery Cases
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250