We conduct the first comparative analysis of the financial performance of European green, black (fossil energy and natural resource) and conventional mutual funds. Based on a unique dataset of 175 green, 259 black and 976 conventional mutual funds, the investigation contrasts the financial performance of the three dissimilar investment orientations over the 1991-2014 period. Over the full sample period, green mutual funds significantly underperform relative to conventional funds, while no significant risk-adjusted performance differences between green and black mutual funds could be established during the same period. Environmentally friendly investment vehicles display a significant exposure to small cap and growth stocks, while black funds are more exposed to value stocks. Remarkably, the green funds' risk-adjusted return profile progressively improves over time until no difference in the performance of the green and the conventional classes could be discerned. Further evidence suggests that the green funds are beginning to significantly outperform their black peers, especially over the 2012-2014 investment window.JEL classification: F30, G11, G15, G23, M14

No abstract

We study whether institutional investors that sign the Principles for Responsible Investment (PRI), a commitment to responsible investing, exhibit better portfolio-level environmental, social, and governance (ESG) scores. Signatories outside the US have superior ESG scores than non-signatories, but US signatories have at best similar ESG ratings, and worse scores if they have underperformed recently, are retail-client facing, and joined the PRI late. US signatories do not improve the ESG scores of portfolio companies after investing in them. Commercial motives, uncertainty about fiduciary duties, and lower ESG market maturity explain why US-domiciled PRI signatories do not follow through on their responsible investment commitments.