Summary

AI-generated

This summary is written by a language model reading the source document. It is not the publisher's words and is not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment

The document details a multi-component methodology to evaluate 30 major asset managers from the US and Europe. It assesses their policies on restricting new fossil fuel investments, their holdings in bonds issued by fossil fuel developers between January 2024 and June 2025, and their 2025 proxy voting behavior at annual general meetings. The methodology employs a color-coded system (Red, Orange/Yellow, Light Green, Green) to categorize the level of commitment and alignment with climate goals across five specific criteria, including board re-elections and executive remuneration votes.

Key insights

AI-generated

These insights are written by a language model reading the source document. They are not the publisher's words and are not a substitute for the original.

Learn more about AI enrichment
  • The analysis covers 30 asset managers, including the 7 largest headquartered in the United States and the 23 largest headquartered in Europe, based on 2024 assets under management rankings.
  • The scope of companies assessed includes the 75 largest coal developers (comprising 45 power developers and 44 mining developers) and the 75 largest upstream oil and gas developers as of September 2023.
  • Asset managers are evaluated on their commitment to stop new fossil fuel investments using a color code: 'Red' for no commitment, 'Orange' for commitments covering only some coal developers, 'Light green' for some coal and some oil and gas developers, and 'Green' for all fossil fuel developers.
  • The assessment of bond holdings focuses on bonds issued by fossil fuel developers between 1 January 2024 and 30 June 2025, excluding green bonds.
  • Proxy voting records from September 2024 to August 2025 were analyzed, specifically regarding the re-election of directors, discharge of boards, and remuneration of top executives.
  • The methodology for voting records includes a specific indicator for climate-related rationales, calculating the percentage of votes not in favor of a resolution that are justified by a climate-related reason.

Cite the original document

APA
Reclaim Finance (2025). Assessment of the climate practices of asset managers. https://reclaimfinance.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Assessment-of-the-climate-practices-of-asset-managers_Methodology_2025.pdf
Chicago
Reclaim Finance. Assessment of the climate practices of asset managers. 2025. https://reclaimfinance.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Assessment-of-the-climate-practices-of-asset-managers_Methodology_2025.pdf.
Wikipedia
{{cite report |author=Reclaim Finance |title=Assessment of the climate practices of asset managers |date=December 2025 |url=https://reclaimfinance.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Assessment-of-the-climate-practices-of-asset-managers_Methodology_2025.pdf |access-date=23 October 2026 |via=Climate Insights Directory}}
BibTeX
@techreport{reclaimfinance2025assessment, author = {{Reclaim Finance}}, title = {{Assessment of the climate practices of asset managers}}, institution = {Reclaim Finance}, year = {2025}, month = dec, url = {https://reclaimfinance.org/site/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/Assessment-of-the-climate-practices-of-asset-managers_Methodology_2025.pdf}, urldate = {2026-10-23}, note = {Indexed by Climate Insights Directory} }

Full text

Collected · Record updated