RAM’s Systematic Equity:
A leading approach to ESG
Integration
2019
For professional investors only,
Promotional document

Table of contents
Overview
ESG data
RAM ESG Pillars  
Conclusion
References
•	 Pillar 1: Governance
•	 Pillar 2: Transparency
•	 Pillar 3: Climate
•	 Pillar 4: Diversity 
•	 ESG data: A growing source of information
•	 ESG data analysis: The common pitfalls 
13-14
18
8
4
2

Overview 
As a UN PRI signatory & CDP Member, RAM 
has always considered the ethical impact 
which underpins its investments. 
Historically, as the availability of data was relatively scarce, the 
reflection of our Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) 
philosophy was expressed through exclusionary screening. This 
consisted of avoiding stocks which failed to meet our moral and 
ethical values.  
In recent years, the proliferation of ESG data reported by 
companies has enabled our Quantitative Research Team to build 
their expertise in systematic ESG investing, allowing them to 
develop a deep understanding of the fundamental mechanics 
behind best practices. We now target a full ESG integration in our 
Strategies; i.e. a systematic and explicit inclusion of ESG risks and 
opportunities across our quantitative engines. 
Below, we have presented an overview of our data sources, 
methodology and results. 
For professional investors only  -  Promotional document
2

ESG data

RAM’s Systematic Equity: A leading approach to ESG Integration, 2019 
ESG data
ESG data : A growing source of information
Over the last decade, awareness 
surrounding ESG issues has been growing 
rapidly, with investors increasingly 
incorporating non-financial information into 
their analysis. Companies and third party 
entities are responding to this demand by 
providing an ever-expanding range of data, 
both in terms of their coverage and diversity 
of fields. RAM’s research approach is one 
of constant evolution; trying to ensure we 
never neglect any possible information 
source that could be integrated into our 
process and thus could enable us to 
better-capture the inefficiencies we seek 
to exploit . We view this new availability of 
data as a potential source of alpha, bringing 
a complementary profile to the existing 
information-set already captured by our 
factors. We have already explored several 
alternatives in accessing ESG data.
In 2011, fewer than 20% of S&P500 
companies disclosed their ESG data. In 
2016, the number of companies issuing 
sustainability or integrated reports has 
increased to over 80% [1]. According to 
KPMG, circa 75% of the N100 companies 
(defined as the top 100 companies by 
revenue in 49 countries) released annual 
sustainability reports.[2] Bloomberg collects 
and publishes this data alongside financial 
reports, covering 9,000 stocks globally, and 
remains our preferred source for accessing 
reported data. 
Our testing also includes major ESG data 
and ratings providers, covering either the 
full spectrum of criteria or a specific angle 
such as CDP (ex-Carbon Disclosure Project). 
CDP is a not-for-profit charity that collects, 
on behalf of investors,  environmental data 
provided on a voluntary basis. We use this 
as one of our sources when measuring a 
company’s Carbon Footprint. Below we can 
see the growth in the number of companies 
which provide CDP with Environmental  data, 
with a 192% increase since 2009.
220
290
343
912
1395
2166
2403
2903
3531
4112
4482
4968
5532
5815
6251
7018
220
290
343
912
1395
2166
2403
2906
3536
4140
4539
5001
5624
5863
6316
6937
176
283
345
589
1064
1237
1462
1997
2113
100
138
179
179
199
264
455
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Companies Disclosing ESG
Companies Disclosing Climate Change
Companies Disclosing Water Security
Companies Disclosing Forest
Source: CDP Worldwide as of 31 December 2018
The Expansion of ESG Data
For professional investors only  -  Promotional document
4

RAM’s Systematic Equity: A leading approach to ESG Integration, 2019 
ESG data
ESG data analysis: The common pitfalls
The struggle for many investors is incorporating those ESG factors which can enhance a portfolio’s 
risk-adjusted performance. Countless academic papers which study the relationship between 
corporate & social responsibility and a stocks’ performance reach contradictory conclusions on this 
point. In this section of the paper, we will examine the common pitfalls that befall investors in this 
space, below we’ve outlined the primary reasons that these can occur:
The reliability of data
ESG performance is not reported in a 
universal format, thus a lack of robustness, 
comparability, reliability and timeliness 
can be prevalent. According to the CFA 
Institute, this remains the most restrictive 
factor for investors in effectively evaluating 
non-financial information (3). Various 
interest groups such as the Sustainability 
Accounting Standards Board (SASB) and 
the Investor Network on Climate Risk 
(INCR) are helping to drive consistency by 
standardizing the disclosure on specific 
ESG topics.
This problem can often be augmented 
when ratings agencies rely on this 
inconsistent data to calculate the metrics 
for their differing methodologies. 
Consequently, the same company can 
display disparity for the same metric 
emanating from two different agencies. 
The same problem can also occur via 
changes in methodology by these same 
agencies, making it tricky to interpret time 
series
1
                  RAM’s Approach: 
RAM focuses on low level data that are 
consistent across both time series and 
platforms. Any metric we utilize is based 
on a simple, repeatable and transparent 
methodology. Additionally, because of 
timeliness/point in time issues, we adopt 
conservative data availability assumptions 
to avoid any look-ahead bias.
For professional investors only  -  Promotional document
5

RAM’s Systematic Equity: A leading approach to ESG Integration, 2019 
ESG data
Data mining & Reverse causality
Repeating the same thing often enough will 
occasionally yield successful results. Take 
a single ESG factor in isolation; sufficient 
research on a given ESG factor could 
unintentionally reveal an attractive correlation 
in relation to stock performance.
With hundreds of ESG fields and a relatively 
short data history, the risk of data mining 
is high and researchers can often uncover 
spurious relationships between ESG factors 
and stock performance. The frequency of data 
updates (often annual ratings) brings another 
risk of modeling; if causality is assumed when a 
correlation is observed. As described by Kruger 
(2015) [4], the pitfall for investors here, is using 
such a low-frequency measure to analyse 
the relationship between returns and trading 
strategies. The fundamental question here is; 
has the company performed well because they 
do good, or they do good, because they have 
performed well?
2
Unintentional factor exposures
This pitfall can be two-fold: the inadvertent 
capturing of a factor via a sub-optimal 
approach, or an accidental exposure to a factor 
which the investor has no comprehension. 
ESG factors considered on a standalone 
basis may identify characteristics that could 
be better captured with other fundamental 
factors.  For example; the risk-adjusted 
performance of a ESG-tilted portfolio might 
exhibit an attractive profile, but in reality, it is 
actually exposed to Quality in a sub-optimal 
way (i.e. there are better ways to capture this 
Quality premium).  Additionally, a naïve ESG 
exposure could present an unwanted bias to 
factors such as Volatility, Market Capitalization 
or Sector, with the investor potentially and 
unwittingly exposed to these risks. 
3
                  RAM’s Approach: 
Our research effort is based on hypothesis 
testing; understanding how the ESG profile 
of a given company impacts, not only future 
stock performance, but also current/future 
fundamentals and ultimately financial 
returns. Various methodologies are able 
to adjust to relatively short data history, 
including geographical out samples and 
cross-validation on alternative databases. 
RAM believes that an openness in our 
flexibility based on rigorous testing and 
back testing is the way forward. Test, 
observe, implement, monitor and adapt 
form the basis of our ESG factor integration.
                  RAM’s Approach: 
A large element of our research efforts 
consists of analysing how ESG metrics 
interact with common factors. This includes 
the more “traditional” measures which 
investors use to evaluate companies, 
providing us with a more complete picture 
of a company’s financial and non-financial 
performance. 
For professional investors only  -  Promotional document
6

RAM ESG Pillars

RAM’s Systematic Equity: A leading approach to ESG Integration, 2019 
RAM ESG Pillars
RAM ESG Pillars  
RAM’s Quantitative Research Team has identified four Pillars that 
underpin our Systematic ESG investment process. These pillars are the 
result of the Team’s proprietary research in this field. We propose an 
analysis on how ESG performance, captured through the spectrums 
of Governance, Transparency and Climate, leads to improve both 
company fundamentals and stock performance.
For professional investors only  -  Promotional document
8

RAM’s Systematic Equity: A leading approach to ESG Integration, 2019 
RAM ESG Pillars
Pillar 1: Governance
RAM defines corporate governance as the structures, 
rules and processes through which a company 
manages its business. A company embracing sound 
governance works to meet its current financial, 
operational and strategic objectives while targeting 
long-term sustainability. To avoid diluting strong 
governance characteristics, our approach focuses on 
individual items that will help us identify companies 
with the desired corporate structure.
One of our Governance metrics is the 
independency levels of the board. 
Consistent with the Free Cash flow 
Hypothesis (Jensen 1986) [5], our research 
indicates that firms’ shareholders, where 
control lies mostly with managers, are less 
likely to receive free cash flow via dividend 
payouts.
Favoring stocks with an independent board 
structure will drive our selection towards 
companies with conservative levels of 
operational leverage and responsible 
cash flow management. This helps us 
to differentiate between firms that are 
spending capex (capital expenditure) only 
to engage in positive net value projects, 
and firms that are retaining earnings for 
buildings or safeguarding their empire. 
Managers’ may be attempting to stave off 
“empire collapse” with high expenditure 
and acquisition activity, as described by 
Gompers, et al.(2003)[6]. Those firms are 
subsequently able to generate stable free 
cash flow (operating cash flow minus capex) 
and offer high, sustainable payouts to 
shareholders through dividends and share 
buybacks.
Healthy Corporate 
Structure & 
Processes
Responsible 
Cash Flow 
Management
Stable Free Cash 
Flow Generation
Sustainable 
Retribution to 
Shareholders
For professional investors only  -  Promotional document
9

RAM’s Systematic Equity: A leading approach to ESG Integration, 2019 
RAM ESG Pillars
Due to important discrepancies in 
governance standards between countries, 
it seems reasonable to consider some 
factor adjustments. For instance, Japanese 
companies have historically tended to grow 
organically, retaining staff throughout their 
career and placing senior managers on 
the board. Even though they are starting 
to transform, independent directors held 
an average of only 23% of Nikkei 225-listed 
companies in 2014, compared with 84% in 
America’s S&P500 [7].
The Governance Pillar was the first fully-
integrated ESG component by RAM back 
in 2014 through the RAM (Lux) Systematic 
Global Sustainable Income Equities 
(previously named RAM (Lux) Shareholder 
Yield Equities). Below is the performance 
of the RAM Global Sustainable Income 
Equities strategy since inception until end 
of 2017 when other ESG metrics have been 
integrated in our stock selection process, 
together with its benchmark, the MSCI 
World High Dividend.
Governance in Action
Cumulative Performance* Since Strategy Inception
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
150
2014
2015
2015
2016
2017
RAM Global Sustainable Income Equities Strategy
MSCI World High Div Yld TRN $
Growth of $100
Source: RAM Active Investments, MSCI Indices  (April 2014 – February 2018)
Actual realised track record, gross of investment management fees.
Past performance is not an indicative guidance of future results.
For professional investors only  -  Promotional document
10

RAM’s Systematic Equity: A leading approach to ESG Integration, 2019 
RAM ESG Pillars
Pillar 2: Transparency
Financial & 
Non-Financial 
Transparency
Low Information 
Asymmetry
Low Cost of  
Capital & High 
Stock Liquidity
Sustainable 
Financing
The increased availability and quality 
of data on a given firm reduces the 
informational asymmetry between the 
firm and its investors. That information 
transfer is then optimized owing to the 
high accuracy of analyst forecasting. It is 
commonly accepted by academic literature 
that firms which provide greater financial 
informational disclosure have a larger 
analyst following, and thus more accurate 
earnings forecasts which translates to 
less dispersion and lower volatility from 
analysts’ forecasts revisions (for example 
Lang et al.(1996) [9]). Similar conclusions 
have been recently reached by Dal Maso 
(2016) [10] regarding the impact of non-
financial disclosures on analyst forecasts. 
Transparency and Governance are 
inextricably linked, and the relationship 
between these two ESG pillars have been 
well documented. Armstrong et al.(2014) 
[8], suggests that corporate transparency 
can be altered to suit the informational 
demands of a particular board’s structure. 
Despite all publicly traded firms being 
obligated to meet minimum disclosure 
requirements, financial transparency is 
impacted by the discretion concerning the 
disclosure of details to investors; such as 
the information reported in footnotes, press 
releases and contact with analysts. Financial 
transparency may also be enhanced if the 
firm respects accounting best practices 
through clear revenue recognition 
and the sound use of accruals. Non-
financial reporting are in most countries 
non-compulsory, meaning this area of 
transparency is at the discretion of the 
company’s board.    
For professional investors only  -  Promotional document
11

RAM’s Systematic Equity: A leading approach to ESG Integration, 2019 
RAM ESG Pillars
Low information asymmetry leads to positive 
company fundamentals and technical 
characteristics, which subsequently serve 
as a basis for sustainable financing. On the 
technical side, a more informed market 
will increase the number of participants to 
trade the stock, thus increasing the liquidity 
and reducing the bid-ask spread. Krueger 
(2015) [11] reached a similar conclusion on 
the London Stock Exchange following the 
introduction of mandatory carbon reporting 
for publicly-listed firms. 
On the fundamental side,  we have observed 
a negative correlation between the cost 
of capital and information asymmetry. 
Equity and debt investors alike require 
higher returns to compensate for any  
information disadvantage and the difficulty 
in estimating downside risks. Cheng et 
al. (2011) [12] provides evidence that 
reduced informational asymmetry induced 
by increased transparency around ESG 
performance leads to better access to 
finance. 
The below chart shows the backtest results 
of simulated equity portfolios over the last 
11 years (December 2006 – February 2018) 
across a global developed universe. The 
universe is split into quintiles based on their 
financial transparency performance; the top 
quintile (best performers) yield an average 
annualised return of 10.3%, while the bottom 
quintile (worst performers) just 3.8%.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
1
2
3
4
5
Best 
Worst
Financial Transparency (2007 to 2019)
 Simulated Annualised Return Per Quintile
Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance
Source; RAM Active Investments (December 2007 to February 2019)
Annualised  Returns* %
For professional investors only  -  Promotional document
12

RAM’s Systematic Equity: A leading approach to ESG Integration, 2019 
Pillar 3: Climate
According to the Climate Change Report 
(2014) [13], “the continued emission of 
greenhouse gases will cause further 
warming and long-lasting changes in 
all components of the climate system, 
increasing the likelihood of severe, 
pervasive and irreversible impacts for 
people and ecosystems”. Carbon footprint 
metrics are the primary focus of climate 
concerns, subsequently we believe that 
they are the most important data source 
for environmental-related research.
A carbon footprint  is the total set of 
greenhouse gases “GHG” (Carbon Dioxide, 
Methane etc.) a company directly or 
indirectly releases. To help delineate 
direct and indirect emissions sources, 
improve transparency, and provide utility 
for different types of organizations with 
different needs and purposes, three 
‘scopes’ are defined for GHG accounting 
and reporting purposes:
RAM ESG Pillars
Scope 1 
Direct emissions from sources that are owned or controlled by the firm       
                                                                      
Scope 2
Indirect emissions that are caused by the company through the consumption of imported heat, 
electricity, cooling, or steam
Scope 3
Indirect emissions that do not fall into the previous Scope (e.g. transport-related activities in 
vehicles not owned or controlled by the company)
For professional investors only  -  Promotional document
13

RAM’s Systematic Equity: A leading approach to ESG Integration, 2019 
Most company’s activities and inputs 
are either direct or indirect sources of 
carbon emission. We therefore consider 
carbon emissions as a production input, 
akin to the more traditional capital and 
labor, as discussed by Garvey et al.(2018)
[14]. Coming from the management’s 
commitment to lowering its carbon impact 
or its ability to optimize operational 
processes, carbon emissions utilized in 
an efficient way can result in improved 
operational performance. In turn, 
production efficiency will translate into 
lower costs for the same level of top line 
revenues, which can lead directly to high/
stable profit margins and high/sustainable 
bottom line earnings.
RAM ESG Pillars
Carbon Emission 
Efficiency
High Operational 
Performance
High Profit 
Margins
Sustainable 
Earnings
RAM’s measure of GHG emissions includes 
only Scopes 1 and 2. Although adding Scope 
3 would paint a more comprehensive picture 
of the operational side, the available data is 
currently based on many subjective inputs 
and rarely reported by these companies. 
We intend to update our models as the data 
becomes increasingly standardized and 
more commonly disclosed. 
For us to differentiate between a palpably 
efficient use of resources from a structural 
low consumption coming from the activity 
of the company, emissions level needs to 
be adjusted. First we control for the size of 
the company, dividing the total emissions 
by either their market cap (carbon efficiency 
ratio), or the company’s revenue (carbon 
intensity ratio). We then make industry-
based adjustments by modifying the ratios 
based on their peers’ carbon performance. 
Finally, in line with Koch and Bassen (2013) 
[15], we have observed that the distribution 
of those ratios is positively skewed with a 
small number of large emitters.
For Professional investors only  -  Promotional document
14

RAM’s Systematic Equity: A leading approach to ESG Integration, 2019 
RAM ESG Pillars
Top vs Bottom RAM Environmental Scores
Gross Cumulative Simulated Performance 
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Selection - Top Environmental Score
Selection -  Bottom Environmental Score
Growth of $100
Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future performance
Sources: RAM Active Investments (December 2007 to February 2019) & CDP
Top vs Bottom RAM Environmental Scores
Gross Simulated Drawdown Analysis
-60
-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Max Drawdown - Top Score
Max Drawdown - Bottom Score
Maximum Drawdownin %
Source: RAM Active Investments (December 2007 to February 2019) and CDP 
To illustrate the impact of Climate on equity performance, we charted below the cumulative 
backtested performance of the top deciles of stocks (in a global developed universe) ranked by 
carbon intensity ratio vs the bottom decile. It is also interesting to note that carbon efficiency  may 
translate into reduced downside/tail risk for equity investors during periods of market stress.
For professional investors only  -  Promotional document
15

RAM’s Systematic Equity: A leading approach to ESG Integration, 2019 
RAM ESG Pillars
Pillar 4: Diversity 
Our fourth pillar focuses on the importance of 
workplace diversity and assessing whether this 
factor  will favour a company’s long-term growth. 
We can define this pillar through the following 
two dimensions [16]:
A survey by McKinsey in 2012 [17] outlined that the pool of skilled experts and leaders has not 
kept pace with demand, causing significant problems in terms of cost, quality, and time.Diversity 
management is one important means of addressing talent shortages by helping to increase the 
sourcing talent pool.  Additionally, Enchautegui-de-Jesus et al. (2006) [18] suggests that diversity 
reduces staff turnover  by increasing employee satisfaction and fostering positive attitudes and 
behaviours in the workplace.
Workforce & 
Management 
Diversity
Attract and retain 
top talent
Innovation 
efficiency
Sustainable 
Growth
For professional investors only  -  Promotional document
16
Inherent diversity:
gender, ethnic origin & nationality, age, religious & socioeconomic 
background, sexual orientation, disability.
Acquired diversity:
cultural fluency, generational savvy, gender smarts, social media skills, cross-
functional knowledge, global mindset, military experience, language skills.
It has been widely discussed in financial and psychological literature that Workforce and 
Management diversity helps to improve a company’s entire recruitment pipeline; by attracting, 
developing, mentoring, sponsoring, and retaining the next generation of employees at all levels 
across the company.

RAM’s Systematic Equity: A leading approach to ESG Integration, 2019 
RAM ESG Pillars
By encouraging a proliferation of perspectives from the right employees, firms that develop a 
diverse workforce and an inclusionary culture tend to achieve a greater innovative efficiency, which 
can ultimately lead to greater innovation output [19] by:
1.	 Assembling diverse profiles to challenge one another enabling objections and alternatives to 
be explored more efficiently and solutions to emerge more readily. This serves to enhance 
problem solving capabilities and improves the quality of decision making.
2.	 As described by Hewlett et al. (2013) [20], diverse individuals can better understand and 
anticipate the needs of consumers or clients like themselves. Subsequently, their insight is 
critical in identifying and addressing new market opportunities.
For professional investors only  -  Promotional document
17
One of the components of RAM’s proprietary diversity score is based on Gender Diversity  in the 
Workforce, industry adjusted . We present hereunder the performance of the top quintile ranks vs 
bottom quintile ranks on a Global Equity Universe. 
0
50
100
150
200
250
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
Top Quintile Gender Diversity In The Workforce (Induststry Adjusted)
Bottom Quintile Gender Diversity In The Workforce (Induststry Adjusted)
Innovation is a prerequisite for sustainable long term growth of a company whether through the 
development of new products, services, systems, the improvement of competitive strengths, the gain 
of market share and the expansion into new markets.
Despite the clear upside to embracing workforce diversity,  for many organizations there is a 
scarcity of  inclusionary programs. Through biases and heuristics,  behavioral economics and 
social psychology help to explain why.
Subconscious bias: the association of groups of people with certain traits or activities, such as 
men with science and mathematics and women with arts and languages. Also Harvard Business 
School suggests that people unconsciously overestimate the amount of conflict that actually 
exists on diverse teams [21]
Outgroup homogeneity bias: the tendency for an individual to perceive the group of people they 
belong to (their “ingroup”) as more diverse, while their “outgroup” appears more homogeneous.
Fluency Heuristic: Individuals prefer information that is processed more easily, or fluently, 
judging it to carry higher value. Equally, on a homogenous team, people readily understand each 
other and collaboration flows smoothly, giving an overestimation of the progress achieved. [22] 
Top vs Bottom Gender Diversity in the Workforce
Source: Bloomberg (December 2009 to February 2019)

RAM’s Systematic Equity: A leading approach to ESG Integration, 2019 
Conclusion
Conclusion
By avoiding the pitfalls we’ve demonstrated in 
this piece; such as analysis based on unreliable 
data, data mining, reverse causality and 
unintentional factor exposure, it is possible to 
extract the best out of ESG data. The goal of our 
research is to ultimately improve our portfolio’s 
risk/return profile while favoring responsible 
companies with sustainable business models. 
Indeed, our aim is not solely to identify stocks 
which have a material impact on future 
equity performance, but also evaluating the 
implications on company fundamentals. We’ve 
argued our views that a company embracing 
good governance tends to offer higher & more 
sustainable payout, financial and non-financial 
transparency favours sustainable financing and 
the efficient usage of carbon emission leads to 
sustainable earnings.
Our objective is to position RAM as a leading 
player within ESG systematic investing, not only 
through innovative product offerings, but also 
through knowledge transfer to the financial & 
academic communities. Our Research efforts 
continue to focus on ESG themes, with emphasis 
on the Social field which we haven’t discussed in 
this paper. Here we are specifically interested in 
capturing the positive effect of gender diversity, 
which is important for the long term value 
of companies. This area could be the subject 
of a paper release in the coming months. As 
new databases become available, and as the 
data reporting becomes more standardized 
(for example on Scope 3 carbon emission),  
our research team will continue to refine the 
process which underpin our ESG offering.
The ever-expanding availability of ESG data offers RAM’s Quantitative 
Research Team the capability to utilize a broad range of sustainability 
themes across a multitude of data sets.
For professional investors only  -  Promotional document
18

RAM’s Systematic Equity: A leading approach to ESG Integration, 2019 
References
[1] Governance & Accountability Institute, Inc., 2017: http://www.ga-institute.com/press-releases/article/flash-report-
82-of-the-sp-500-companies-published-corporate-sustainability-reports-in-2016.html
[2] KPMG,The KPMG Survey of Corporate Responsibility Reporting, 2017: https://assets.kpmg.com/content/dam/kpmg/
xx/pdf/2017/10/executive-summary-the-kpmg-survey-of-corporate-responsibility-reporting-2017.pdf
[3] CFA Institute, Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) Survey, 2017: https://www.cfainstitute.org/learning/
future/Documents/ESG_Survey_Report_July_2017.pdf
[4] Krueger, Philipp, Corporate Goodness and Shareholder Wealth (July 7, 2014). Journal of Financial Economics (JFE), 
Forthcoming. 
[5]Jensen, Michael C., Agency Cost of Free Cash Flow, Corporate Finance, and Takeovers. American Economic Review, 
Vol. 76, No. 2, May 1986. 
[6] Gompers, Paul A. and Ishii, Joy L. and Metrick, Andrew, Corporate Governance and Equity Prices. Quarterly Journal 
of Economics, Vol. 118, No. 1, pp. 107-155, February 2003. 
[7] Toshihiko Hiura and Junya Ishikawa, Corporate Governance in Japan, 2016.
[8] Armstrong, Chris and Core, John E. and Guay, Wayne R., Do Independent Directors Cause Improvements in Firm 
Transparency? (August 14, 2013). 
 [9] Lang, Mark H. and Lundholm, Russell J., Corporate Disclosure Policy and Analyst Behavior. ACCOUNTING REVIEW, 
Vol 71, No 4, October 1996. 
[10] Dal Maso, Lorenzo and Rees, Bill, Nonfinancial Disclosure and Analyst Forecast Accuracy: Evidences from CO2 
Emission and Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosures in the US (November 30, 2016). 
[11] Krueger, Philipp, Climate Change and Firm Valuation: Evidence from a Quasi-Natural Experiment (February 15, 
2015). Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper No. 15-40. 
[12] Cheng, Beiting and Ioannou, Ioannis and Serafeim, George, Corporate Social Responsibility and Access to Finance 
(May 19, 2011). Strategic Management Journal, 35 (1): 1-23.
[13] IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth 
Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. 
Meyer (Eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151 pp.
[14] Gerald T. Garvey, Mohanaraman Iyer and Joanna Nash, Carbon Footprint and productivity: does the “E” in ESG 
capture Efficiency as well as environment? (2018). Journal Of Investment Management, Vol. 16, No. 1, (2018), pp. 59–69
[15] Koch, Nicolas and Bassen, Alexander, Valuing the Carbon Exposure of European Utilities - The Role of Fuel Mix, 
Permit Allocation and Replacement Investments (November 15, 2012). Energy Economics, Forthcoming.
[16]  Sylvia Ann Hewlett, Melinda Marshall, and Laura Sherbin with Tara Gonsalves, Innovation, Diversity, and Market 
Growth, Center for Talent Innovation, 2013.
[17 ] McKinsey & Company, 2013“Facing a skills shortage? Fix it yourself” 
[18] Noemi Enchautegui-de-Jesus, Diane Hughes, Kristen E. Johnson, and Hyun Joo Oh, “Well-being in the context of 
workplace diversity”, Journal of Community Psychology, 2006, volume 34, number 2, pp. 211–23.
[19] Mayer, Roger C. and Warr, Richard S. and Zhao, Jing, Do Pro-Diversity Policies Improve Corporate Innovation? 
(December 18, 2017). Financial Management, Forthcoming.
[20] Sylvia Ann Hewlett, Melinda Marshall, and Laura Sherbin with Tara Gonsalves, Innovation, Diversity, and Market 
Growth, Center for Talent Innovation, 2013.
[21] Ellemers, Naomi & Rink, Floor. (2016). Diversity in Work Groups. Current Opinion in Psychology. 11. 10.1016/j.
copsyc.2016.06.001.
[22] Liljenquist, Katie and Williams Phillips, Katherine and Neale, Margaret, The Pain is Worth the Gain: The Advantages 
and Liabilities of Agreeing with Socially Distinct Newcomers, 2009.
For professional investors only  -  Promotional document
19

RAM’s Systematic Equity: A leading approach to ESG Integration, 2019 
IMPORTANT INFORMATION:
This document has been drawn up for information purposes only. It is neither an offer nor an invitation to buy or sell 
the investment products mentioned herein and may not be interpreted as investment advice. It is not intended to 
be distributed, published or used in a jurisdiction where such distribution, publication or use is forbidden, and is not 
intended for any person or entity to whom or to which it would be illegal to address such a document. In particular, 
the investment products are not offered for sale in the United States or its territories and possessions, nor to any US 
person (citizens or residents of the United States of America). The opinions expressed herein do not take into account 
each customer’s individual situation, objectives or needs. Customers should form their own opinion about any security 
or financial product mentioned in this document. Prior to any transaction, customers should check whether it is suited 
to their personal situation, and analyse the specific risks incurred, especially financial, legal and tax risks, and consult 
professional advisers if necessary. The information and analyses contained in this document are based on sources 
deemed to be reliable. However, RAM AI Group cannot guarantee that said information and analyses are up-to-date, 
accurate or exhaustive. All information and assessments are subject to change without notice. Subscriptions will be 
accepted only if they are made on the basis of the most recent prospectus, Key investor information document (KIID) 
and the latest annual or half-year reports for the financial product. The value of shares and income thereon may rise 
or fall and is in no way guaranteed. The price of the financial products mentioned in this document may fluctuate and 
drop both suddenly and sharply, and it is even possible that all money invested may be lost. 
If requested, RAM AI Group will provide customers with more detailed information on the risks attached to specific 
investments. Exchange rate variations may also cause the value of an investment to rise or fall. Whether real or 
simulated, past performance is not a reliable guide to future results. Without prejudice of the due addressee’s own 
analysis, RAM understands that this information should be regarded as a minor non-monetary benefit according to 
MIFID regulations. The prospectus, KIID, constitutive documents and financial reports are available free of charge from 
the SICAVs’ and Management Company’s head office, its representative and distributor in Switzerland, RAM Active 
Investments S.A. and the relevant local representatives in the distribution countries. This marketing document has not 
been approved by any financial Authority, it, is confidential and addressed solely to its intended recipient; its partial 
or total reproduction and distribution are prohibited. Issued in Switzerland by RAM Active Investments S.A. which is 
authorised and regulated in Switzerland by the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA). Issued in the 
European Union and the EEA by the Management Company RAM Active Investments (Luxembourg) S.A., 51 av. John 
F. Kennedy L-1855 Luxembourg, Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. The reference to RAM AI Group includes both entities, 
RAM Active Investments S.A. and RAM Active Investments (Luxembourg) S.A.
For professional investors only  -  Promotional document
20

RAM Active Investments SA
Geneva
Rue du Rhône 8 
1204 Geneva – SWITZERLAND
Tel : +41 58 726 87 00 
contact@ram-ai.com
ram-ai.com	
© RAM Active Investments 2018. All rights reserved. Private & Confidential.
RAM Active Investments AG
Zurich
Talstrasse 65 
8001 Zurich – SWITZERLAND
Tel : +41 58 717 97 97 
RAM Active Investments (Europe) SA
Luxembourg
51, avenue John F. Kennedy 
1855 Luxembourg – LUXEMBOURG
Tel : +352 28 56 14 1 
RAM Active Investments (Europe) SA - Succursale Milano
Milan
Via Montenapoleone 14 
20121 Milan – ITALY
Tel : +39 02 7788 4001