Stocks continued their ascent yesterday fueled by the Fed’s Goldilocks messaging. Existing Home Sales jumped by +9.5% in February, taking economists by surprise, showing that mortgage rates are not the only thing considered by homebuyers.
Slippery business. Do you care about the environment? Of course you do. You recycle, and I won’t tell anyone that you accidentally put that soda can in the wrong bin. You don’t mind temperatures being a bit warmer, but you feel bad that it may be the result of global warming, caused by excessive use of fossil fuels. You have considered buying a Tesla to help… but mainly because they look cool. I get it, you are doing your part. We all are. Collectively, we just might make a difference. So, it was easy to answer my first question. But here is a tougher one for you.
Do you care about return on your investments? That seems to be a silly question to ask someone reading a daily market note. Of course, you care about return on your investment. Let’s say, for example, that I offer you a choice between two funds, one is expected to return +10% annually and the other +8.5%. Which would you pick? The answer is quite obvious, but what if I revealed that the +10% fund invests in any fossil fuels while the other strictly avoids them. We established earlier that you care about the environment, but would you be willing to accept less return on your investment to help the environment? That is the very question at the heart of many raging battles going on across the US lately.
At this very moment, fund giant BlackRock is at the center of this very debate… sort of. Stay with me. On March 19th, the Texas State Board of Education unilaterally decided to divest $8.5 billion from BlackRock’s funds in response to the companies ESG policies. You may not be surprised that the state is known for its oil industry. In fact, the state has laws which ban investments in companies that boycott energy companies (Bill 13). The board of education cited BlackRock’s persistent leadership in the ESG movement as being the reason for the decision. Texas is not alone. Florida made a similar move in 2022 pulling some $2 billion out of BlackRock’s funds. Ok, that all seems to be pretty messy, but hey, at some level the move by Texas seems almost… logical. But how logical is it, really?
You see, despite all the PR around BlackRock’s ESG leadership, the company still has significant energy investments, including a $550 million stake in Houston’s own Occidental Petroleum. If you start to dig deeper, you will quickly find that there are some very deep political drivers involved… ON BOTH SIDES. Foremost, how can BlackRock claim to be ESG-forward when it has some $320 billion invested in global energy 😕. If I know that, how can the fund managers of Texas’ Permanent School Fund not know that? Of course, they know, and I am sure that BlackRock’s CEO Larry Fink has told them as much. Are you confused yet?
Let’s take a step back. First, let’s recognize that demand for energy is expected to be at record levels this year, averaging some 103.2 million barrels per day. That’s a lot 😉. Further as far back as I can remember, there have been many analysts calling peak energy and the growing popularity of EVs has certainly amplified those calls, but in reality, as you now know, demand continues to grow. Sure, there are lots of reasons for the growth in demand, but the reality is that fossil fuels are not going away anytime soon, and BlackRock’s managers are well aware of this. They are also aware that the S&P500 Energy Sector Index has returned +226% since its 2020 lows. BlackRock, at the end of the day, is in business to make returns on investments for its clients. Should it decide to forego solid financial investments in order to protect the environment, giving up potential returns, its clients must also agree, and with $10 trillion under management, its clients seem to be happy with its choices.
Where am I going with all this? The Texas decision seems reasonable considering the state’s reliance on the energy industry and its actual laws. However, given what we know about BlackRock’s actual investments and the above-average returns it has provided to Texas, one must question what the motivations were. ADDITIONALLY, BlackRock does go through great lengths to tout its ESG sensitivity, yet despite this, holds a sizable amount of energy investments. That also seems reasonable given that BlackRock would like its investors to feel good knowing that it cares about the environment… AND knowing that if it underperforms financially, it is likely to lose assets. Seems like lots of clashes between public and private agendas, wouldn’t you say? Look, at the end of the day, if you would like to stick to socially responsible investments, you must do your homework and find investment companies that actually invest responsibly, and from them select the best. Only you can decide how much you may be willing to give up in return to help the environment. Since 2010 the S&P500 has earned +13.45% annually on average, while the S&P ESG Index has earned +11.65% on average. The decision to go with one or the other is yours, alone. Just do your homework, as we now know that there are many agendas in the investment world, and they may not always align with yours.
YESTERDAY’S MARKETS
NEXT UP