开发者:上海品职教育科技有限公司 隐私政策详情

应用版本:4.2.11(IOS)|3.2.5(安卓)APP下载

荒诞的肉丸 · 2024年03月31日

为什么选b

NO.PZ2024021802000004

问题如下:

Describing ESG performance attribution at a portfolio level is difficult because:

选项:

A.there is a lack of third-party data providers. B.there is a size bias in ESG ratings in favor of large companies. C.many third-party data providers describe ESG attributes as an uncorrelated, statistically independent factor.

解释:

A. Incorrect because third-party data providers are developing increasingly sophisticated ESG ratings and scoring methodologies.

B. Correct because the ratings from many providers reveal a significant, underlying correlation with existing factors, such as value, quality, size, and momentum. In addition, there is a size bias in ESG ratings in favor of large companies because large companies have the resources to disclose information and create ESG management policies.

C. Incorrect because third-party data providers are developing increasingly sophisticated ESG ratings and scoring methodologies, but many fall short in describing ESG attributes as an uncorrelated, statistically independent factor. In fact, the ratings from many providers reveal a significant, underlying correlation with existing factors.

只提到公司的size factor有偏差,不是太单一了么

1 个答案

净净_品职助教 · 2024年03月31日

嗨,努力学习的PZer你好:


选项B,关键的考虑因素是ESG评级对大公司的偏向。这种偏向存在的原因是大公司通常有更多的资源来披露ESG相关信息,制定和实施ESG管理政策,这可以使他们在ESG评级中获得更高的得分。这不仅关系到数据的可获取性,也关系到大公司可能更有能力投资于那些提升ESG表现的措施,如可持续性倡议和社会责任项目。

这种偏向导致的问题是,ESG评分可能会因为公司规模而产生扭曲,而不完全是基于公司实际的环境、社会和治理表现。这可能使投资组合经理在评估投资组合中的公司ESG表现时面临挑战,因为这些评级可能会与其他因素(如市值大小、品牌知名度等)相关联,而不是单纯反映ESG因素。

选项A不正确,因为市场上的第三方数据提供商正在发展越来越复杂的ESG评分和评级方法,这说明数据的获取并不是描述投资组合层面ESG绩效归因的主要障碍。

选项C也不正确,因为虽然有些第三方数据提供商可能在将ESG属性描述为非相关、统计上独立的因素方面存在不足,但这不是描述投资组合层面上ESG绩效归因难度的主要原因。

详见第八章水印版讲义P47

----------------------------------------------
就算太阳没有迎着我们而来,我们正在朝着它而去,加油!