Between the new ISR Label framework deployed since January and the ESMA directives applicable from May, asset managers face a major challenge: understanding and quickly adapting to these new requirements.
This regulatory evolution is not trivial. With more than 1,600 ESG or sustainable funds that will need to change their names or review their asset allocations, and a significant reduction in the number of ISR-labelled funds (from 11,342 to 939), the impact is considerable for the entire sector.
Several questions arise:
- How to efficiently navigate this regulatory complexity?
- Which requirements are the most constraining?
To help you see more clearly, WeeFin has conducted a detailed analysis comparing the different exclusions of the ISR Label and ESMA directives (PAB and CTB).
What truly distinguishes our comparative analysis is a "WeeFin Commentary" column that accompanies each analysed criterion. Our team of sustainable finance experts has enriched this document with strategic insights on the practical implications of these differences:
- **Analysis of subtleties**: our experts decipher the nuances between the requirements of the ISR Label and ESMA directives (PAB and CTB)
- **Identification of vigilance zones**: we highlight criteria where ISR Label requirements are stricter than those of ESMA directives, and vice versa, allowing you to anticipate potential friction points.
- A criterion-by-criterion comparison of social, environmental, and governance requirements
- An analysis of exclusion thresholds for each controversial sector (coal, hydrocarbons, tobacco, weapons...)
- Comments from our expert team on the practical implications of these differences
- A summary table to quickly identify points of vigilance
‍
‍
.webp)
.jpg)
.jpg)
