|
BEATRICE BERTELLI
Assegnista di ricerca Dipartimento di Economia "Marco Biagi" CULTORE DELLA MATERIA Dipartimento di Economia "Marco Biagi" Docente a contratto Dipartimento di Comunicazione ed Economia
|
Home |
Curriculum(pdf) |
Didattica |
Pubblicazioni
2022
- ESG compliant optimal portfolios: The impact of ESG constraints on portfolio optimization in a sample of European stocks
[Working paper]
Torricelli, C.; Bertelli, B.
abstract
The introduction of the Environmental, Social, Governance (ESG) dimensions in setting up optimal
portfolios has been becoming of uttermost importance for the financial industry. Given the absence
of consensus in empirical literature and the limited number of studies providing performance
comparison of ESG strategies, the aim of this paper is to assess the impact of ESG on optimal
portfolios and to compare different approaches to the construction of ESG compliant portfolios.
Following Varmaz et al. (2022) optimization model, we minimize portfolio residual risk by imposing
a desired level of portfolio average systemic risk and ESG (measured by Bloomberg ESG score) over
both an unscreened and a screened sample based on the 586 stocks of the EURO STOXX Index in
the period January 2007 – August 2022.
Three are the main results. First, regardless of the level of portfolio systemic risk, the Sharpe ratio of
the optimal portfolios worsens as the target ESG level increases. Second, the Sharpe ratio dynamics
of portfolios with the highest average ESG scores follows market phases: it is very close to/higher
than other portfolios in bull markets, whereas it underperforms in stable or bear markets suggesting
that ESG portfolios do not seem to represent a safe haven. Third, negative screenings with medium low threshold reduce the performance of optimal portfolios with respect to optimization over an
unscreened sample. However, when adopting a very severe screening we obtain a superior
performance implying that very virtuous companies allows investors to do well by doing good.
2022
- ESG screening strategies and portfolio performance: how do they fare in periods of financial distress?
[Working paper]
Torricelli, C.; Bertelli, B.
abstract
This paper analyses the impact of screening strategies based on ESG (Environmental, Social,
Governance) scores, with a focus on periods of financial distress such as the 2008 global recession
and the 2020 Covid-19 pandemic. To this end, negative and positive screening strategies based on
Bloomberg ESG disclosure scores and different screening thresholds are set up from the 559 stocks
belonging to the EURO STOXX index in the period 2007-2021. To compare ESG portfolios
performance with a benchmark passive strategy, we compute risk-adjusted performance measures:
the Sharpe ratio and the alphas resulting from both a one-factor model and the Carhart four-factor
model. Three main results emerge. First, each single ESG dimension has a different role in
determining performance: environmental and governance screens, and the combined ESG ones,
generally lead to over performance, in contrast to the social screens. Second, ESG screens represent
better performing strategies in the long-term, whereas, when the focus is on times of financial distress,
the passive strategy appears to perform better and ESG portfolios do not seem to represent a safe
haven. Finally, positive screening strategies, and in particular those based on the social dimension,
limit diversification benefits and are characterized by significant underperformance during periods of
crises. These results are useful to address ESG portfolio optimization and to gauge the role that
finance may have in support of sustainable economic development.
2022
- The market price of greenness. A factor pricing approach for Green Bonds
[Working paper]
Bertelli, B.; Boero, G.; Torricelli, C.
abstract
Fostered by an empirical literature providing disparate evidence on the green premium, we propose
a two-factor model to explain returns on green bonds not only as a function of market risk but also of
the bond greenness. The second factor can be interpreted as a greenness premium, which can be either
positive or negative depending on the product of the price given by the market to greenness and the
sensitivity of the specific green bond to the latter. Based on the model proposed and its Fama-Mac
Beth estimation on a sample of Euro-denominated bonds over the period 08.10-2014-31.12.2019, we
are able to conclude that the market does price greenness, but the price is very small: including
Government green bonds is 0.7 bps, and focusing on corporate green bonds only is – 1.3 bps. In all
cases the dynamics of the price for greenness has a positive drift as the market reaches a more mature
phase, landing to a positive average value (2 bps), which implies greenness being viewed as a small
penalty. However, differences emerge when we look at the issuer sector level and at single bonds,
thus our model is able to explain the disparate empirical evidence provided by the literature on the
greenium. On the whole, results hint to a market where the difference in pricing between conventional
and green bonds is, ceteris paribus, shrinking, which is consistent with greenness becoming a new
normal. These results are of interest for many economic agents, including market participants and
financial intermediaries, whereby the latter are also called by the regulator to manage their portfolio
in consideration of climate risk.