2019 responsible investing design platform - gam · incorporate esg factors into portfolio...
Post on 26-Jun-2020
1 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
2019 Responsible InvestingSurvey Key Findings
To what extent are ESG principles used as part of your investment approach and decision making?
2
21%
46%
33%
24%
48%
28%
24%
46%
30%
Significantly Somewhat Not used
Pe
rcen
tage
of
resp
on
de
nts
2017 2018 2019
(all respondents)
What are your reason(s) for incorporating ESG in your investment approach?
3
54%48%
58% 56%50%
45%
57%
65%
Total U.S. Canada Europe/UK
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Fiduciary duty
2018 2019
29%
22%
34%
28%29%
22%
41% 41%
Total U.S. Canada Europe/UK
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Mandated by investment guidelines
2018 2019
53%
43%
53%
63%
53%48%
61%68%
Total U.S. Canada Europe/UK
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Lower risk, increase return
2018 2019
35%32%
35%37%
28%25%
33%35%
Total U.S. Canada Europe/UK
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Mandated by board/stakeholders
2018 2019
What are your reason(s) for not incorporating ESG factors in your investment approach?
4
27%
34%30%
0%
33% 34% 33%
50%
Total U.S. Canada Europe/UK
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Inconsistent with fiduciary duty
2018 2019
29% 29% 28%
20%19%16%
19%
25%
Total U.S. Canada Europe/UK
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Insufficient resources
2018 2019
18%
23%
20%
13%
22% 22%19%
0%
Total U.S. Canada Europe/UK
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Won't materially impact returns
2018 2019
11%
16%
11%
7%
16%19%
11%
25%
Total U.S. Canada Europe/UK
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Not important to plan members
2018 2019
For which of the following asset classes do you incorporate ESG factors into portfolio management?
5
84% 81% 84%89%87% 87% 89%
73%
Total U.S. Canada Europe/UK
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Equities
2018 2019
60%
52%
64%69%
62% 60%65%
73%
Total U.S. Canada Europe/UK
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Fixed Income
2018 2019
43%
33%
48%53%
38%
30%
53%
35%
Total U.S. Canada Europe/UK
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Real Estate
2018 2019
34%
40%
32% 31%34% 34% 33%
43%
Total U.S. Canada Europe/UK
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Alternatives
2018 2019
For which of the following asset classes do you incorporate ESG factors into portfolio management?
6
(continued from previous slide)
36%
25%
46%
36%
31%
21%
45% 46%
Overall U.S. Canada Europe/UK
Infrastructure
2018 2019
13%11%
13%
16%14% 13% 13%
27%
Overall U.S. Canada Europe/UK
Other Real Assets
2018 2019
How do you believe ESG integrated portfolios are likely to perform relative to non-ESG integrated investments?
7
64%
18% 18%
59%
31%
10%
53%
29%
18%
As well Better Worse
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Total
2017 2018 2019
69%
5%
26%
57%
24%18%
53%
25% 22%
As well Better Worse
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
U.S.
2017 2018 2019
67%
24%
9%
66%
25%
9%
57%
34%
10%
As well Better Worse
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Canada
2017 2018 2019
54%
44%
2%
47%44%
8%
As well Better Worse
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Europe/UK
2018 2019
Data for 2017 not available.
Do you believe that integrating ESG factors can help mitigate risk?
8
67%
14%
19%
2018
Yes No Not sure
48%
32%
20%
2017
Yes No Not sure
58%18%
24%
2019
Yes No Not sure
(all respondents)
Do you believe that integrating ESG factors can help mitigate risk?
9
28%
50%
23%
54%
24%21%
50%
21%
29%
Yes No Not sure
U.S.
2017 2018 2019
68%
14%19%
71%
11%18%
72%
11%17%
Yes No Not sure
Canada
2017 2018 2019
83%
4%13%
89%
9%3%
Yes No Not sure
Europe/UK
2018 2019
Data for 2017 not available. *Sample size not statistically significant. Data for 2017 not available.
58%
12%
30%
48%
16%
36%
Yes No Not sure
Asia
2018 2019*
Do you believe that integrating ESG factors can help generate alpha?
10
24%
46%
30%
2017
Yes No Not sure
38%
20%
42%
2018
Yes No Not sure
36%
23%
41%
2019
Yes No Not sure
(all respondents)
Do you believe that integrating ESG factors can help generate alpha?
11
17%
59%
24%
39%
28%33%33%
26%
40%
Yes No Not sure
U.S.
2017 2018 2019
21%
37%41%
30%
22%
49%
40%
16%
43%
Yes No Not sure
Canada
2017 2018 2019
52%
10%
38%
61%
11%
28%
Yes No Not sure
Europe/UK
2018 2019
21%15%
64%
12%20%
68%
Yes No Not sure
Asia
2018 2019
Data for 2017 not available. *Sample size not statistically significant. Data for 2017 not available.
*
In the Fossil Fuel Free context, do you consider divestment to be more effective than engagement?
12
6%
8%
10%
43%
45%
39%
16%18%
16%
11%
8%
12%
23%
21%
23%
2017 2018 2019
Perc
ent
of
respondents
Divestment is more effective
Engagement is more effective
They are equally effective
Neither approach is effective
Not sure
(all respondents)
In the Fossil Fuel Free context, do you consider divestment to be more effective than engagement?
13
6%
42%
14% 15%
24%
7%
39%
24%
11%
19%
10%
34%
15% 15%
26%
Divestment ismore effective
Engagement ismore effective
They are equallyeffective
Neither approachis effective
Not sure
U.S.
2017 2018 2019
6%
51%
11%6%
27%
8%
47%
13%7%
25%
9%
47%
20%
7%
17%
Divestment ismore effective
Engagement ismore effective
They are equallyeffective
Neither approachis effective
Not sure
Canada
2017 2018 2019
6%
38%34%
9%13%
9%
54%
15%6%
16%
6%
67%
14%6% 8%
Divestment ismore effective
Engagement ismore effective
They are equallyeffective
Neither approachis effective
Not sure
Europe/UK
2017 2018 2019
9%
42%
12%9%
27%31%
19%15%
4%
31%
Divestment ismore effective
Engagement ismore effective
They are equallyeffective
Neither approachis effective
Not sure
Asia
2018 2019
*Sample size not statistically significant. Data for 2017 not available.
*
How satisfied are you with the current amount of ESG-related disclosure provided by issuers?
14
Ranked on a scale of 0-5, 0 being not satisfied, 5 being very satisfied
19%
13%
20%
14%
17%
10%
12%
18%
32%
12%
Bottom 2 Not Satisfied
Top 2 Satisfied
Percent of respondents
TOTAL
U.S.
Canada
Europe/UK
Asia
(Ranking 4 and 5)
(Ranking 0 and 1)
*Sample size not statistically significant.
*
How satisfied are you with the current amount of ESG-related disclosure provided by issuers?
15
Ranked on a scale of 0-5, 0 being not satisfied, 5 being very satisfied
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
0 1 2 3 4 5
Perc
ent
of
respondents
TOTAL U.S. Canada Europe/UK Asia
*Sample size not statistically significant.
*
How satisfied are you with the current quality of ESG-related disclosure provided by issuers?
16
Ranked on a scale of 0-5, 0 being not satisfied, 5 being very satisfied
24%
9%
23%
10%
29%
8%
17%
8%
27%
12%
Bottom 2 Not Satisfied
Top 2 Satisfied
Percent of respondents
TOTAL
U.S.
Canada
Europe/UK
Asia
(Ranking 4 and 5)
(Ranking 0 and 1)
*Sample size not statistically significant.
*
How satisfied are you with the current quality of ESG-related disclosure provided by issuers?
17
Ranked on a scale of 0-5, 0 being not satisfied, 5 being very satisfied
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40%
45%
50%
0 1 2 3 4 5
Perc
ent
of
respondents
TOTAL U.S. Canada Europe/UK Asia
*Sample size not statistically significant.
*
In your opinion, who should take the lead in influencing companies to provide better ESG-related information?
18
41%
46%
50%
25%27%
22%24%
17%
21%
2%5%
3%
7%5% 5%
2017 2018 2019
Pe
rcen
t o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Shareholders Government regulators Industry organizations Stock exchanges Other
(all respondents)
In your opinion, who should take the lead in influencing companies to provide better ESG-related information?
19
43%
52% 55%
15%20%
13%
33%
21% 22%
1% 2% 2%8% 5% 7%
2017 2018 2019Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
U.S.
Shareholders Government regulators
Industry organizations Stock exchanges
Other
38%41% 43%
34%28%
33%
20% 21% 18%
4% 6%3%4% 5% 2%
2017 2018 2019Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Canada
Shareholders Government regulators
Industry organizations Stock exchanges
Other
34%
54%
31%
43%
33% 34%
9% 9%
31%
4% 1% 0%
11%4% 3%
2017 2018 2019
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Europe/UK
Shareholders Government regulators
Industry organizations Stock exchanges
Other
28%37%34%
56%
9%
0%
25%
7%3% 0%
2018 2019
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Asia
Shareholders Government regulators
Industry organizations Stock exchanges
Other
*Sample size not statistically significant. Data for 2017 not available.
*
In your opinion, should gender diversity targets be adopted?
20
48%52%
All respondents
Yes No
45%
50%
56%
63%
55%
50%
44%
37%
U.S. Canada Europe/UK Asia*
By region
Yes No
*Sample size not statistically significant.
What is your preferred approach to encourage gender diversity on corporate boards?
21
39%
42%
45%
13% 13%
17%
43%
36%
27%
6%
9% 10%
2017 2018 2019
Pe
rcen
t o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Shareholder proposals Government regulations Market forces Other
(all respondents)
What is your preferred approach to encourage gender diversity on corporate boards?
22
42% 42%49%
6% 7%13%
48%43%
26%
5% 7%12%
2017 2018 2019
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
U.S.
Shareholder proposals Government regulations
Market forces Other
43% 42% 41%
12% 11%
21%
40%34%
27%
5%
14%11%
2017 2018 2019
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Canada
Shareholder proposals Government regulations
Market forces Other
28%
41%
53%
34%
20%
11%
31% 31%37%
6% 8%
0%
2017 2018 2019
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Europe/UK
Shareholder proposals Government regulations
Market forces Other
*Sample size not statistically significant. Data for 2017 not available.
29%
12%
35%
47%
29%35%
6% 6%
2018 2019
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Asia*
Shareholder proposals Government regulations
Market forces Other
What would be a reasonable non-binding target for theboard of an issuer to adopt regarding gender diversity?
23
(all respondents)
5%6%
17% 17%
26%
20%
15% 15%
2018 2019
Pe
rcen
t o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
20% or less 21% – 30% 31% – 40% More than 40%
What would be a reasonable non-binding target for the board of an issuer to adopt regarding gender diversity?
24
8% 7%
22%
16%
25%
20%
11% 12%
2018 2019
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
U.S.
20% or less 21% – 30% 31% – 40% More than 40%
4% 5%
12%
17%
28%
21%21% 21%
2018 2019
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Canada
20% or less 21% – 30% 31% – 40% More than 40%
9% 8%
34%
40%
6%4%
6%
0%
2018 2019
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Asia
20% or less 21% – 30% 31% – 40% More than 40%
1% 0%
13% 12%
33%
26%
14%
21%
2018 2019
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Europe/UK
20% or less 21% – 30% 31% – 40% More than 40%
*Sample size not statistically significant.
*
Do you think corporations are too focused on short-term financial results?
25
87% 85%
13% 15%
2018 2019
Perc
ent
of
respondents
TOTAL
Yes No
88% 86%
12% 14%
2018 2019
Perc
ent
of
respondents
U.S.
Yes No
88% 86%
12% 14%
2018 2019
Perc
ent
of
respondents
Canada
Yes No
89%81%
11%19%
2018 2019
Perc
ent
of
respondents
Europe/UK
Yes No
72%
81%
28%
19%
2018 2019*
Perc
ent
of
respondents
Asia
Yes No
*Sample size not statistically significant.
What do you think is causing that short-term focus?
26
76% 76%
80%
71%
75%
68%
61% 61%
71%
53%
42%
23%
57% 56%
64%
47%
58%55%
53% 53%
57%
53%
42%
32%
36%38% 37%
12%
33% 32%32% 31%
36%
24%
33%
27%
4% 5%2%
0% 0%
9%
TOTAL U.S. Canada UK* Europe* Asia*
Perc
ent
of
respondents
Short-term earning pressures from investors Structure of executive compensation plans
Quarterly reporting Short-term earning pressures from executives and the board
Quarterly forecasts Short strategic planning horizons
Other
*Sample size not statistically significant.
Do you require your external asset manager(s) to apply any negative Socially Responsible Investment (SRI) screens to your portfolio?
27
24% 23%
76% 77%
2018 2019
Perc
ent
of
respondents
TOTAL
Yes
No
17%21%
83%79%
2018 2019
Perc
ent
of
respondents
U.S.
Yes
No
17%20%
83%80%
2018 2019
Perc
ent
of
respondents
Canada
Yes
No
39%42%
61%58%
2018 2019
Perc
ent
of
respondents
Europe/UK
Yes
No
*Sample size not statistically significant.
41%
30%
59%
70%
2018 2019*
Perc
ent
of
respondents
Asia*
Yes
No
Which screens are applied?
28
75%
60%
66%
42%
34%
32%
22%
16%
64%
63%
63%
45%
37%
37%
28%
23%
Cluster munitions andlandmines
Tobacco
Weapons
Fossil Fuel related
Alcohol
Gaming
Nuclear Power
Other
Percent of respondents
2019
2018
n=require that asset managers apply negative SRI screens to your portfolio
(all respondents)
Is it important to incorporate ESG factors into both equity and fixed income strategies?
29
35%
2%
15%
48% 46%
30%
2%
22%
Bothequally
important
Both, butmore
materialfor
equities
Both, butmore
materialfor fixedincome
NeitherPerc
ent
of
respondents
TOTAL
2018
2019
42%
32%
2%
25%
46%
24%
2%
28%
Bothequally
important
Both, butmore
material forequities
Both, butmore
material forfixed
income
NeitherPerc
ent
of
respondents
U.S.
2018
2019
54%
31%
1%
44% 41%
1%
14% 14%
Bothequally
important
Both, butmore
material forequities
Both, butmore
material forfixed
income
NeitherPerc
ent
of
respondents
Canada
2018
2019
48%
7%
17%
28% 30%
43%
0%
26%
Bothequally
important
Both, butmore
material forequities
Both, butmore
material forfixed
income
NeitherPerc
ent
of
respondents
Asia*
2018
201956%
41%
1% 1%
69%
31%
0% 0%
Bothequally
important
Both, butmore
material forequities
Both, butmore
material forfixed
income
NeitherPerc
ent
of
respondents
Europe/UK
2018
2019
*Sample size not statistically significant.
Do you believe that there are sufficient fixed income product offerings that incorporate ESG factors?
30
14%
43% 43%
16%
38%
46%
Yes No Not sure
Perc
ent
of
respondents
TOTAL
2018
2019 17%
42%41%
20%
36%
45%
Yes No Not sureP
erc
ent
of
repondents
U.S.
2018
2019
11%
33%
56%
12%
37%
51%
Yes No Not sure
Perc
ent
of
respondents
Canada
2018
2019
13%
50%
37%
9%
39%
52%
Yes No Not sure
Perc
ent
of
respondents
Asia
2018
2019*
15%
56%
29%
9%
54%
37%
Yes No Not sure
Perc
ent
of
respondents
Europe/UK
2018
2019
*Sample size not statistically significant.
For what type of fixed income issuer do you believe ESG issues are the most material?
31
34%
34%
27%
6%
35%
30%
30%
5%
Both sovereigns andcorporates equally
Corporate mandates
Not sure
SSA/Sovereign mandates
Percent of respondents
2019
2018
(all respondents)
For what type of fixed income issuer do you believe ESG issues are the most material?
32
6%
27%
38%
30%
6%
28%
33%
33%
SSA/Sovereign mandates
Corporate mandates
Both sovereigns andcorporates equally
Not sure
Percent of respondents
U.S.
2019
2018
3%
32%
31%
34%
3%
35%
34%
28%
SSA/Sovereign mandates
Corporate mandates
Both sovereigns andcorporates equally
Not sure
Percent of respondents
Canada
2019
2018
14%
35%
24%
28%
10%
20%
35%
35%
SSA/Sovereign mandates
Corporate mandates
Both sovereigns andcorporates equally
Not sure
Percent of respondents
Asia*
2019
2018
6%
48%
33%
14%
3%
34%
54%
9%
SSA/Sovereign mandates
Corporate mandates
Both sovereigns andcorporates equally
Not sure
Percent of respondents
Europe/UK
2019
2018
*Sample size not statistically significant.
Do you/your company have a climate action policy?
33
(all respondents)
24%
59%
17%
Yes No Not sure
Do you currently hold any impact products in your portfolio?
34
26%
51%
23%
27%
48%
25%
Yes No Not sure
Pe
rcen
t o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
2018
2019
(all respondents)
Do you currently hold any impact products in your portfolio?
35
*Sample size not statistically significant.
34%
52%
13%
31%
45%
24%
Yes No Not sure
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
spo
nd
en
ts
U.S.
2018
2019 17%
48%
35%
15%
53%
32%
Yes No Not sure
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
spo
nd
en
ts
Canada
2018
2019
21%
52%
28%
15%
60%
25%
Yes No Not sure
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
spo
nd
en
ts
Asia*
2018
2019
31%
53%
16%
34%
51%
14%
Yes No Not sure
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
spo
nd
en
ts
Europe/UK
2018
2019
Do you expect to allocate funds to Impact Investing as opposed to ESG/SRI in the next 1-5 years?
36
20%
29%28%
37%
33%31%
43%
38%
42%
2017 2018 2019
Pe
rcen
t o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Yes
No
Not sure
(all respondents)
Do you expect to allocate funds to Impact Investing as opposed to ESG/SRI in the next 1-5 years?
37
19%
34%31%
41%38%
32%
40%
29%
37%
2017 2018 2019
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
U.S.
Yes
No
Not sure13%
18% 18%
35%38%
31%
52%
44%
51%
2017 2018 2019
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Canada
Yes
No
Not sure
40% 42%38%
28%
17%21%
32%
40% 41%
2017 2018 2019
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
sp
on
de
nts
Europe/UK
Yes
No
Not sure21%
24%28%
24%
52% 52%
2018 2019
Perc
ent
of
respondents
Asia*
Yes
No
Not sure
*Sample size not statistically significant. Data for 2017 not available.
Of your portfolio that falls under the umbrella of responsible investing, what percent is actively managed (versus passively managed or index-based)?
38
10%
14%
14%
16%
18%
28% 0% – it is all passive
1 – 25%
26 – 50%
51 – 75%
76 – 99%
100% – the entire portfolio is actively managed
(all respondents)
Of your portfolio that falls under the umbrella of responsible investing, what percent is actively managed (versus passively managed or index-based)?
39
8%
13%
6%
17%
9%
15%16%
8%
12%
20%
10%9%
18% 18%
12%
21%
42%
45%
U.S. Canada Europe/UK
0% – it is all passive
1 – 25%
26 – 50%
51 – 75%
76 – 99%
100% – the entire portfolio is actively managed
Among the issues you would consider while investing, how concerned are you about the following…
40
67%
59%
66%
65%
57%
58%
56%
57%
37%
50%
43%
42%
40%
44%
38%
35%
42%
38%
37%
25%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Cyber Security
Climate change
Anti-corruption
Water
Renewable energy
Health & safety
Shareholder rights / voting
Executive compensation
Income inequality
Resource use & management
Community impact
Employee engagement
Biodiversity
Land use
Board diversity
Workplace diversity
Corporate structure
Other Governance
Other Environmental
Other Social
Percent of respondents
Ranked on a scale of 0-5, 0 being not concerned, 5 being very concerned (Top 2 Concerned)
(all respondents)
Among the issues you would consider while investing, how concerned are you about the following…
41
71%
53%
66%
63%
54%
57%
53%
54%
35%
50%
43%
42%
39%
44%
37%
35%
43%
37%
37%
25%
65%
64%
69%
66%
63%
64%
68%
66%
40%
48%
47%
43%
37%
45%
40%
37%
39%
42%
35%
25%
59%
88%
66%
84%
69%
47%
41%
50%
50%
61%
31%
34%
66%
50%
31%
28%
34%
37%
45%
27%
Cyber Security
Climate change
Anti-corruption
Water
Renewable energy
Health & safety
Shareholder rights / voting
Executive compensation
Income inequality
Resource use & management
Community impact
Employee engagement
Biodiversity
Land use
Board diversity
Workplace diversity
Corporate structure
Other Governance
Other Environmental
Other Social
Europe/UK Canada U.S.
Ranked on a scale of 0-5, 0 being not concerned, 5 being very concerned (Top 2 Concerned)
Do you employ external managers who incorporate ESG factors into their portfolio management process?
Investment Consultants
42
77%
59%
18%
11% 11%
77%
50%
27%
13%10%
Yes (NET) Yes – for some mandates Yes – for all mandates No Not sure
Pe
rce
nt o
f re
spo
nd
en
ts
2018
2019
Do you require your external manager to provide regular reporting on any of the following?
Investment Consultants
43
73%
48%
36%
24%21%
9%
ESG practices andintegration
Proxy voting Engagement activities Impact measurement Diversity and inclusion Other
n=employ managers who incorporate ESG factors into their portfolio management process
RBC Global Asset Management (RBC GAM) and BlueBay Asset Management LLP developed a survey of 27 questions around the topic of responsible investing.
The survey was distributed to institutional asset owners, consultants, clients, P&I Research Advisory Panel members, and members of the Pensions & Investments database throughout Canada, Europe, Asia and the United States.
Signet Research, Inc. collected and analyzed the results of 799 respondents and determined that the findings from the survey could be accepted as accurate at a 95% confidence level within a sampling tolerance of approximately +/-3.5%.
Methodology
44
45
In Canada: institutions@phn.com
In the US: gamusmarketing@rbc.com
Internationally: gamukmarketing@rbc.com
Visit our website:
http://www.rbcgam.com/corporate-governance-and-responsible-investment/index.html
This document is provided by RBC Global Asset Management (RBC GAM), the asset management division of Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) for informational purposes only and may not be reproduced, distributed or published without the written consent of RBC GAM or its affiliated entities listed herein. This document does not constitute an offer or a solicitation to buy or to sell any security, product or service in any jurisdiction. This document is not available for distribution to people in jurisdictions where such distribution would be prohibited.
RBC GAM is the asset management division of Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) which includes RBC Global Asset Management Inc., RBC Global Asset Management (U.S.) Inc., RBC Global Asset Management (UK) Limited, RBC Global Asset Management (Asia) Limited, and BlueBay Asset Management LLP, which are separate, but affiliated subsidiaries of RBC.
In Canada, this document is provided by RBC Global Asset Management Inc. (including PH&N Institutional) which is regulated by each provincial and territorial securities commission with which it is registered. In the United States, this document is provided by RBC Global Asset Management (U.S.) Inc., a federally registered investment adviser. In Europe this document is provided by RBC Global Asset Management (UK) Limited, which is authorised and regulated by the UK Financial Conduct Authority. In Asia, this document is provided by RBC Global Asset Management (Asia) Limited, which is registered with the Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) in Hong Kong.
This document has not been reviewed by, and is not registered with any securities or other regulatory authority, and may, where appropriate, be distributed by the above-listed entities in their respective jurisdictions. Additional information about RBC GAM may be found at www.rbcgam.com.
This document is not intended to provide legal, accounting, tax, investment, financial or other advice and such information should not be relied upon for providing such advice. RBC GAM takes reasonable steps to provide up-to-date, accurate and reliable information, and believes the information to be so when printed. RBC GAM reserves the right at any time and without notice to change, amend or cease publication of the information.
Any investment and economic outlook information contained in this document has been compiled by RBC GAM from various sources. Information obtained from third parties is believed to be reliable, but no representation or warranty, express or implied, is made by RBC GAM, its affiliates or any other person as to its accuracy, completeness or correctness. RBC GAM and its affiliates assume no responsibility for any errors or omissions.
Past performance is not indicative of future results. Return estimates are for illustrative purposes only and are not a prediction of returns. Actual returns may be higher or lower than those shown and may vary substantially over shorter time periods. It is not possible to invest directly in an unmanaged index.
Some of the statements contained in this document may be considered forward-looking statements which provide current expectations or forecasts of future results or events. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance or events and involve risks and uncertainties. Do not place undue reliance on these statements because actual results or events may differ materially from those described in such forward-looking statements as a result of various factors. Before making any investment decisions, we encourage you to consider all relevant factors carefully.
® / TM Trademark(s) of Royal Bank of Canada. Used under license. © RBC Global Asset Management Inc., 2019.
top related