BlueOnion and Morningstar Sustainalytics Collaborate to Expand Sustainable Investment and Due Diligence Coverage
With the surge in ESG assets and heightened regulatory scrutiny—such as the recent circular issued by the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) on the Sale and Distribution of Sustainable Investment Products, the synergistic interplay between BlueOnion's analytics and Morningstar Sustainalytics' data will enhance the financial sector's efforts in meeting compliance requirements in a transparent and fuss free manner.
Together, the BlueOnion SFDR product and Morningstar Sustainalytics' data expand coverage to 300,000 mutual funds, ETFs, and 93,000 bond funds, offering broader insights for sustainable investing. The platform standardizes sustainability product measurement, aligns with the EU SFDR, and empowers organizations to analyze ESG performance, assess carbon emissions, avoid controversies, and address climate change—all while meeting regulatory and investor expectations with transparency and confidence.
'Proper due diligence is essential for banks to meet regulatory compliance and for asset managers to build portfolios aligned with global sustainability standards. This process depends on robust data, analytics, and clear visualization. BlueOnion's advanced analytics and visualization capabilities, together with our robust data, bridges a gap in the fixed income asset class and the small to mid-cap coverage. As a turnkey solution, it helps our banking and fund clients save time and costs,' said Nick Cheung, Managing Director of Enterprise Products, Greater China, Morningstar.
This collaboration allows clients to seamlessly integrate Morningstar Sustainalytics' data with BlueOnion's existing data and analytics solution on sustainability, offering clients an intuitive solution to tackle challenges in regulatory compliance and sustainability-focused investment strategies.
'We are excited to collaborate with Morningstar to deliver a transformative, turnkey solution that empowers banks and asset managers on their sustainability journey. By combining Morningstar's unparalleled global fund data and analytics expertise with BlueOnion's innovative platform, we provide deeper insights into funds pursuing sustainability integration, transition, and impact through EU taxonomy-related activities. Together, we are elevating industry standards in ESG research, data quality, and transparency, driving meaningful impact and innovation,' said Elsa Pau, Group CEO of BlueOnion.
This collaboration exemplifies BlueOnion and Morningstar Sustainalytics's commitment to supporting financial institutions in combating greenwashing, achieving compliance, and advancing the global ESG agenda. Together, they enable clients to uncover actionable insights and drive meaningful progress in sustainable investing.
Hashtag: #BlueOnion #MorningstarSustainalytics #SustainableFinance #ESG #Compliance #GreenFinance #AssetManagement #InstitutionalInvesting #Innovation
The issuer is solely responsible for the content of this announcement.
About BlueOnion
BlueOnion is the end-to-end sustainability analytics platform transforming the financial ecosystem. Banks, asset managers, institutional investors, and companies rely on BlueOnion to assess carbon emissions, analyze ESG performance, conduct climate scenario analysis, and build green portfolios. The platform supports sustainability reporting, climate risk management, and compliance with anti-greenwashing regulations, enabling organizations to meet regulatory, investor, and customer expectations. BlueOnion's intuitive tools and data visualizations empower users to drive meaningful decarbonization, enhance transparency, and achieve their sustainability goals responsibly. To learn more, visit www.blueonion.today.
About Morningstar Sustainalytics
Morningstar Sustainalytics is a leading sustainability data, research, and risk rating service provider. It supports investors in developing responsible investment strategies. With over 30 years of expertise, Sustainalytics helps financial institutions integrate sustainability risk assessments into their investment processes while ensuring compliance with evolving sustainability regulations. Learn more at www.sustainalytics.com.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Like Active Management? Odds of Outperformance Are Slim
Time has not exactly been kind to active funds over the long haul. Just a third of actively managed mutual funds and ETFs beat their passive counterparts over a year, according to a new Morningstar report. And believe it or not, that's about as good as it gets, with the data finding that under 6% of active large blend funds beat index funds over 10 years, and under 3% of large growth funds outperformed passives. Stretch that out to 20 years, and the figures are 7% and less than 1%, respectively. However, short-term figures for active management were better for some categories of foreign stocks and intermediate core bonds. And investors' odds of picking winners in fixed income were considerably better in the long term than for equities. 'There is value in investing a small portion of your portfolio in an actively managed ETF,' said Alvin Carlos, managing partner of District Capital Management, citing low fees and histories of outperformance. 'It's easier to find good active ETFs for bonds. You can find a good one with a 0.10% fee. It's harder for stocks. The active stock ETF we may recommend to certain clients has a 0.59% expense ratio.' Morningstar's data showed that over a year, nearly 52% of active intermediate core bond funds did better than passive ones on an asset-weighted basis. Corporate bond funds are an entirely different story, with a scant 4% of active ones beating passives. READ ALSO: Liquid Staking Crypto Isn't a Securities Issue, SEC Says and ETFs for Risk-On Investors The Price Is Right … Right? As it turns out, costs do matter when it comes to active management, and having low fees is linked to higher odds of investors beating benchmarks over time, Morningstar found. That hasn't been lost on investors, who on average 'have chosen active funds wisely,' the report noted. Over 10 years, a dollar invested in active funds has, on average, beaten active funds as a whole, implying that 'investors favor cheaper, higher-quality strategies,' the authors wrote. Still, the odds are stacked against active: In the past 10 years, through June, 27% of actively managed funds that were in the lowest quintile by cost beat peers, while that was the case for just 15% of funds in the most expensive quintile, according to Morningstar. For US large-cap mutual funds and ETFs, there was a performance penalty that was higher for picking underperforming strategies than over choosing winners, the authors said. However, the benefits of choosing outperforming real estate and high-yield bond managers were greater than the costs of selecting low performers. Actively Recruiting: The findings come as managers and assets have been flocking from active mutual funds to ETFs (both passive and active) and as the number of actively managed ETFs on the market is growing wildly. In the first half of the year, nearly 300 new active ETFs launched in the US, per Morningstar. Getting advisors on board with strategies that, on average, are unlikely to beat the market is a challenge. 'I don't see any value in actively managed funds, given their higher expense ratios and frequent underperformance relative to passive investment products,' said Kevin Feig, founder of Walk You to Wealth. 'The vast majority of them don't outperform passively managed funds, and those that do rarely achieve the same feat over multiple years.' This post first appeared on The Daily Upside. To receive exclusive news and analysis of the rapidly evolving ETF landscape, built for advisors and capital allocators, subscribe to our free ETF Upside newsletter. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
CNBC
a day ago
- CNBC
'A lot' of 'high IQ' people make this investing mistake, says money psychology expert—Warren Buffett agrees on what to do instead
It's natural to feel like being a good investor means coming up with a complicated strategy that maximizes returns, Morgan Housel, author of "The Psychology of Money," said on a recent episode of The Burnouts podcast. But that perspective is likely holding you back from long-term financial gains, he said. "A lot of people in investing, particularly smart people ... high IQ, high educated people, are like, 'Let's try to make this as complicated as we possibly can,' and they do," Housel said. But when it comes to investing, "the more complicated you make it, the worse you're probably going to do." Instead of chasing hot stocks or trying to time the market, the smartest approach to investing is making it as "brainless and simple and boring as you can," Housel said. "If you can be an average investor for an above-average period of time, like just earn average market returns every year for the next 20 years, you'll do amazing," Housel said. "The simple people who can be simple and average for 50 years are the ones who end up doing the best." One of the best tools for this approach is a low-cost index fund, which tracks a market index like the S&P 500 and aims to replicate its performance. Considering that even the world's most seasoned money managers struggle to consistently beat their benchmark indexes, investing to merely keep pace with the market is a savvy, low-effort approach, says Ben Smith, a certified financial planner and founder of Cove Financial Planning in Milwaukee, Wisconsin. It might feel more exciting to try to chase the highest returns possible, but chances are, that probably won't get you closer to your long-term goals than staying consistent with a low-cost index fund, he says. "I kind of joke to my clients, if investing is fun and sexy, you're probably doing something wrong," Smith says. "It should be kind of boring, it should be pretty easy ... You don't have to pick and choose different stocks and be really strategic, because that often doesn't work out very well, at least for most investors." Data indicates the same: Between January 2015 and December 2024, only 7% of active mutual fund managers beat their average passive rival, according to Morningstar. Warren Buffett, chairman of Berkshire Hathaway and one of the world's most successful stock market investors, has long been a proponent of passive investing. In a 1993 letter to shareholders, he wrote, "by periodically investing in an index fund ... the know-nothing investor can actually outperform most investment professionals." On CNBC's On the Money in 2017, Buffett reiterated similar advice: Most investors shouldn't focus on picking "the right company," he said, but rather they should consistently buy all the big companies through the S&P 500 in a "very, very low-cost way." Ultimately, owning a diversified portfolio of low-cost index funds, and holding onto them for as long as you can, will make "the most sense practically all of the time," Buffett said. Smith agrees. Beyond being easier to manage than a collection of individual stocks, index funds and exchange-traded funds enable you to harness the historical upward trend of the market, while reducing the risk that a decline in any single investment could derail your portfolio's returns. Plus, when you're choosing a strategy that's low-effort and won't pressure you to constantly check the market or second-guess your selections, it'll be easier to stick by your investments for the long haul. To Housel, that's most important for achieving your long-term goals. "The question you want to ask when investing is not, 'What are the highest returns that I can earn?'" Housel said. Rather, "What returns can I keep going for the longest period of time?" Of course, it's always smart to check in with your own financial advisor before making any changes to your portfolio.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
This simple tip can pay big dividends in your 401(k) plan ― and elsewhere
If there's one simple investment maxim that will improve your odds of success in any market climate, it's this: Keep your costs down. This can be especially important with mutual funds and exchange-traded funds, as researcher Morningstar affirmed in a newly released study. The company found that funds of either type that buy and hold preselected baskets of stocks or bonds, as grouped in indexes, usually beat those managed by professionals trying to pick winners. The main reason: Index funds are cheaper to run, with cost savings passed on to investors. Index funds are those that hold groupings of stocks such as the 500 companies in the Standard & Poor's 500 index. There are many other indexes, including those focused on bonds, foreign stocks and real estate companies. This isn't a new finding: Research by Morningstar and others has supported the idea that passive index funds are a good way to invest. Morningstar describes these funds as 'passive' because there's no ongoing efforts to tweak or alter their portfolios, as opposed to 'active' funds run by managers who try to pick future outperformers or make other adjustments. The study analyzed the performance of more than 9,000 funds. You might think active managers could better react to economic and other developments, but that doesn't seem to improve their results. "Elections, executive orders, tariffs and geopolitical risks made for a roller-coaster ride during the 12 months through June 2025," wrote Bryan Armour, a Morningstar director who co-authored the study. "Conventional wisdom says active managers should better manage those complexities, but performance says otherwise." Why should I care about this investing study? The study offers insights on how you should invest your money. For example, if you participate in an employer-sponsored 401(k) program, you probably have a choice of at least a dozen funds in which to invest, and possibly other options like shares of individual stocks. Placing index funds at the center of your portfolio can be wise, especially if you're investing for the long haul. Roughly 44% of Arizonans have access to 401(k) or other retirement programs through work and 31% invest in mutual funds, stocks, bonds or other securities on their own, according to a separate study by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. Those figures compare with 52% of Americans overall having workplace retirement plans and 34% investing through outside accounts. What exactly did the Morningstar research uncover? Morningstar found that just 33% of actively run mutual funds and exchange-traded funds beat similar types of passive index funds over the 12 months through June 2025 and survived through that period. That's down from 47% over the prior year and marks one of the largest drops since Morningstar has been conducting this research. Some funds fold from time to time, which is why Morningstar tracked only the ones that survived over the full 12 months. Exchange-traded funds are similar to mutual funds, except that investors can buy and sell them at different prices throughout the day. Mutual funds, by contrast, typically are priced just at the close of the market's daily trading session. Do these results extend to bond funds, too? Yes. Morningstar found that the difference was even more pronounced on the bond side, with only 31% of actively managed fixed-income funds beating their passive-index rivals over the 12 months through June. What explains these discrepancies? In part, even professionals can make blunders when trying to pick stocks or bonds, such as by purchasing at inflated prices, selling too low or investing in bad companies. But even more than this, costs matter. Performance results for mutual funds and exchange-traded funds are reported after expenses have been deducted. As noted, passive index portfolios typically are cheaper to run than those on the active side. Only 15% of the most-costly active funds outperformed their passive-index rivals, Morningstar reported. Morningstar tallied average investor-borne expenses for active funds at 0.59% a year, equivalent to $59 for a $10,000 investment, compared with 0.11% or $11 for passive index funds. That doesn't sound like much, but it explains much if not most of the performance gap. Do the same results apply over periods longer than 12 months? Yes. They often are even more pronounced over longer periods. For example, just 21% of active funds beat their passive-index peers over the 10 years through June 2025. Are there investment areas where active managers fare better? Active managers of funds that buy international stocks did better over the 12 months ending in June, with 52% beating their passive index rivals, up from 44% over the prior year. Bond and real estate funds also typically are competitve with indexing, Armour added. What conclusions might I draw from this? One suggestion: It can be wise to incorporate passive index funds, and lower-cost investments generally, into your portfolio. Also, the study should make you skeptical of active funds or stockpickers touting exceptional short-term performance. Anyone can get a hot hand; the question is whether the momentum will last. Vanguard, Fidelity, Schwab and iShares are among the many groups that offer index funds, including these favorites from Morningstar. What to know: Arizonans are struggling financially in these key areas, study says Reach the reporter at This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Keeping costs low can boost results in your stock, bond investments Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
