Rising demand for sustainable bonds is being met by robust supply. But balancing sustainability and value requires careful assessment of each opportunity.
Demand is growing for investments that have the potential both to do well and do good – not only in equity markets, but across the board. Sustainable fixed income globally saw €59 billion of inflows in 2020, representing a 39% increase vs 2019¹.
A broadening opportunity set
The same trends that are driving demand are also boosting supply. As investors, companies, regulators and governments rapidly align behind the goals of the Paris Agreement, issuance of green, social and sustainable bonds is soaring, from US$565 billion in 2019 to US$732 billion in 2020². What has previously been a European-dominated market is now broadening out, with the US dollar looking set to become the primary currency for sustainable financing in 2021, at the current pace. Beyond the developed world, sustainable issuance from both sovereigns and corporates in emerging markets is also growing.
On a sector basis, too, the market is becoming increasingly varied, with issuance no longer confined to industries under particular scrutiny for the sustainability of their practices. Recent issuance has come from a wide range of sectors, led by utilities, banks, REITs and technology. Some companies, particularly utilities, have gone further, stating that they are unlikely to ever issue another ‘non-green’ bond since all of their financing will be linked to sustainable programmes.
Companies are issuing sustainable bonds for a wide range of purposes, from banks funding construction, refurbishment and/or preservation of affordable housing in low-income communities to auto companies funding research and development for electric vehicles. Government issuers have raised funds for the transition to a lower-carbon economy, to support climate resilience, and for investment in science, technology and public education.
Balancing sustainability and value
For investors in this growing part of the bond market, there are two key questions: how to assess sustainability, and how to assess value.
Some companies embed sustainability into bond covenants. For example, in the utilities sector, Italian gas and electricity provider Enel has committed to a step-up coupon programme linked explicitly to sustainability targets. For one recent sterling issuance of a seven-year bond linked to the UN Sustainable Development Goals, if the company does not achieve its installed renewable energy capacity target of 60% by the end of 2022, the coupon increases by 25 basis points (bps).
The utilities sector was one of the earliest issuers of green bonds, and best practices around accountability are becoming established, with most companies making similar commitments based on energy transition goals. In sectors where ESG initiatives align less clearly with the objectives of the sector, evaluating sustainability can be more challenging. We believe that the next stage of development for ESG-linked bonds will be more independent oversight, similar to that provided by credit rating agencies, to ensure companies are held accountable.
When it comes to assessing value, active investors need to evaluate each sustainable bond on its own merit, as they do with traditional bonds. For us, that means looking at fundamentals, technical factors and quantitative valuations. Many sustainable bonds tick the fundamental box, and we have already discussed the positive technical factors for the sector, with investor demand growing. However, some fall short on valuations.
It is reasonable to expect a green or sustainable bond to yield slightly less than its non-green counterpart. But today, with index spreads so tight, the challenge is that ‘slightly less’ is a significant discount. With less room for spreads to compress, every basis point of yield counts.
So how to identify value? Consider the following examples³, using two green bonds issued in 2020.
Verizon, a US telecoms company, came to the US dollar market with a 10-year green bond in September 2020. The company has reasonable fundamentals, and management has a demonstrated commitment to sustainability. The deal was announced with initial pricing expectations of 110 bps in spread (secondary bonds were trading around 90-95 bps at the time, so 110 bps would have represented an attractive new issue premium). For context, the same company had priced a non-green 10-year bond in March, at the height of Covid-19 volatility, at 225 bps. In the September issuance, the green deal actually priced at 83 bps, significantly less than initial price thoughts: not only below the company’s existing bond with a similar maturity, but importantly, offering limited upside given outright spread levels. As a result, the valuation did not look attractive.
Excel Energy Inc., a US utility, came to market in June 2020 with a green bond priced at 105 bps. We believe the company has a solid fundamental outlook, and it tends to score particularly highly from an ESG perspective due to its commitment to transition towards renewables. We felt that the deal, pricing as it did, had scope to outperform other outstanding 30-year secured bonds of peers, because of the company’s favourable ESG credentials in this part of the capital structure. Subsequently, this did come to pass as the bond outperformed during the late 2020 rally.
As these examples show, a clear commitment to sustainable business practices is commendable, but total return investors also need to scrutinise valuations. Investors need to evaluate where green bonds are pricing in relation to non-green bonds, and evaluate fundamentals and the risk-return profile accordingly.
Beyond green bonds
Of course, sustainable bond investing does not need to be confined to bonds labelled as ‘green’ or ‘sustainable’. Improved disclosure from companies around ESG considerations – from climate risk to diversity – is supporting more informed investment decisions across the board. By looking at the whole market, traditional as well as green bonds, through the lens of sustainability, fund managers are able to construct sustainable portfolios from a wide range of types of debt.
Evidence suggests that considering sustainability as part of the investment decision does pay off in performance. More than 89% of studies find that ESG strategies generate better risk-adjusted returns over the long run.4 And in the extreme volatility of early 2020, sustainable funds markedly outperformed the competition. With sustainable fixed income funds allowing investors to align the goals of doing well and doing good, we expect demand – and issuance to meet that demand – to continue to grow.
1. Source: Morningstar, 2019- 2020
2. Source: BloombergNEF, January 2021.
3. These securities are shown for illustrative purposes only. Their inclusion should not be interpreted as a recommendation to buy or sell.
4. Gunnar Friede, Timo Busch and Alexander Bassen, “ESG and financial performance: aggregated evidence from more than 2000 empirical studies,” Journal of Sustainable Finance & Investment, 5:4 (2015), 210-233, https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/20430795.2015.1118917
NOT FOR RETAIL DISTRIBUTION: This communication has been prepared exclusively for institutional, wholesale, professional clients and qualified investors only, as defined by local laws and regulations.
The views contained herein are not to be taken as advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any investment in any jurisdiction, nor is it a commitment from J.P. Morgan Asset Management or any of its subsidiaries to participate in any of the transactions mentioned herein. Any forecasts, figures, opinions or investment techniques and strategies set out are for information purposes only, based on certain assumptions and current market conditions and are subject to change without prior notice. All information presented herein is considered to be accurate at the time of production. This material does not contain sufficient information to support an investment decision and it should not be relied upon by you in evaluating the merits of investing in any securities or products. In addition, users should make an independent assessment of the legal, regulatory, tax, credit and accounting implications and determine, together with their own financial professional, if any investment mentioned herein is believed to be appropriate to their personal goals. Investors should ensure that they obtain all available relevant information before making any investment. It should be noted that investment involves risks, the value of investments and the income from them may fluctuate in accordance with market conditions and taxation agreements and investors may not get back the full amount invested. Both past performance and yield are not a reliable indicator of current and future results. J.P. Morgan Asset Management is the brand for the asset management business of JPMorgan Chase & Co. and its affiliates worldwide. To the extent permitted by applicable law, we may record telephone calls and monitor electronic communications to comply with our legal and regulatory obligations and internal policies. Personal data will be collected, stored and processed by J.P. Morgan Asset Management in accordance with our privacy policies at https://am.jpmorgan.com/global/privacy. This communication is issued by the following entities: In the United States, by J.P. Morgan Investment Management Inc. or J.P. Morgan Alternative Asset Management, Inc., both regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission; in Latin America, for intended recipients’ use only, by local J.P. Morgan entities, as the case may be; in Canada, for institutional clients’ use only, by JPMorgan Asset Management (Canada) Inc., which is a registered Portfolio Manager and Exempt Market Dealer in all Canadian provinces and territories except the Yukon and is also registered as an Investment Fund Manager in British Columbia, Ontario, Quebec and Newfoundland and Labrador. In the United Kingdom, by JPMorgan Asset Management (UK) Limited, which is authorized and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority; in other European jurisdictions, by JPMorgan Asset Management (Europe) S.à r.l. In Asia Pacific (“APAC”), by the following issuing entities and in the respective jurisdictions in which they are primarily regulated: JPMorgan Asset Management (Asia Pacific) Limited, or JPMorgan Funds (Asia) Limited, or JPMorgan Asset Management Real Assets (Asia) Limited, each of which is regulated by the Securities and Futures Commission of Hong Kong; JPMorgan Asset Management (Singapore) Limited (Co. Reg. No. 197601586K), this advertisement or publication has not been reviewed by the Monetary Authority of Singapore; JPMorgan Asset Management (Taiwan) Limited; JPMorgan Asset Management (Japan) Limited, which is a member of the Investment Trusts Association, Japan, the Japan Investment Advisers Association, Type II Financial Instruments Firms Association and the Japan Securities Dealers Association and is regulated by the Financial Services Agency (registration number “Kanto Local Finance Bureau (Financial Instruments Firm) No. 330”); in Australia, to wholesale clients only as defined in section 761A and 761G of the Corporations Act 2001 (Commonwealth), by JPMorgan Asset Management (Australia) Limited (ABN 55143832080) (AFSL 376919). For U.S. only: If you are a person with a disability and need additional support in viewing the material, please call us at 1-800-343-1113 for assistance. Copyright 2021 JPMorgan Chase & Co. All rights reserved. 0903c02a82b036c