Investment funds are increasingly focusing on ESG issues, seeking to contribute to improving environmental, social, and governance concerns. ESG-focused investing involves promoting good ESG performance and may result in a decrease in expected financial returns. This may lead to a conflict between solely profit-focused shareholders and ESG-focused investors, who may respond accordingly. As such, a firm's ESG commitment may trigger several events that can affect the stock price. A firm's ESG commitment may increase its stock price; however, the end of such commitment may also positively affect the stock price. Hedge funds may consider this in their activism which may reshape the way hedge funds target firms and influence their actions accordingly.

This study compares return and volatility performance of exchange-traded funds (ETFs) with high-ESG (Environment, Social, and Governance) rating vs. low-ESG rating. The paper also examines time-series data predictability by identifying their positive dependence and volatility asymmetry properties, and examines the performance of two combinations of short-memory models i.e., autoregressive moving average and exponential generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARMA-EGARCH); autoregressive moving average and asymmetric power autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARMA-APARCH) and two long-memory models, autoregressive moving average and fractionally integrated exponential generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARFIMA-FIGARCH); and autoregressive fractionally-integrated moving average and asymmetric power autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARFIMA-APARCH). The study found that low-ESG rating ETFs on average have slightly significant higher returns and also lower volatility compared to their high-ESG rating counterparts. Evidence of asymmetric volatility properties are also present on both high-ESG and low-ESG rating ETFs returns. The study also observed that for both high-ESG and low-ESG rating ETFs denote a stationarity, but non-invertible process in their returns. Results can provide fresh understanding in the topic of leverage effects and volatility that can open future research channels to academicians.

This paper specifically underscores the disparities among various ESG rating systems in China, highlighting their varied interpretations and emphasis on corporate financial factors. Analyzing data on Chinese listed firms from 2009-2022, we observe that while company size and leverage ratio uniformly correlate with ESG scores across rating agencies such as Bloomberg, Huazheng, Wind, and Hexun, the influence of factors like return on assets, cash flow, company age, and Tobin's Q is markedly inconsistent among these agencies. For instance, while operational cash flow and company age are positively associated with ESG ratings from Bloomberg, Huazheng, and Wind, they hold an inverse relationship with Hexun's ratings. This divergence underscores the unique data collection, weighting, and evaluation methodologies employed by each rating system. The study emphasizes the criticality of comprehending the nuances of each rating agency's approach when interpreting ESG scores and crafting ESG strategies. Moreover, it advocates for integrating insights from multiple rating systems to cater to the diverse expectations of stakeholders.

The performance of ETFs in Hong Kong that apply environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria to make their investment decisions is examined in this study. The performance of these ETFs is assessed against the performance of competitive non-ESG ETFs. The study period spans from 1/12/2022 to 29/2/2024. From a methodological perspective, raw returns, tracking errors and risk-adjusted returns are computed. Raw returns are computed in percentage terms with daily close trade prices. Tracking error is calculated as the difference in daily returns between ETFs and Hang Seng Index, which is used as a proxy for the entire stock market of Hong Kong. Risk-adjusted returns include Sharpe, Treyor, Modigliani & Modigliani, and Information Ratios. A simple regression model is applied too, via which the daily excess return of each ETF, that is the return above the risk-free rate, is regressed on the corresponding return of the market index. The empirical results indicate that the ESG ETFs clearly underperform their non-ESG peers, also being a little riskier and more expensive than them. In particular, the average daily return of ESG ETFs is equal to -0.058%, while the respective return of non-ESG ETFs is slightly better at -0.033%. At the cumulative level, the average return of ESG ETFs is equal to -19.22%, while the respective return of the non-ESG ETFs amounts to -12.41%. When it comes to risk, the ESG group presents an average measure of 1.572%, whereas the non-ESG group has an average risk of 1.490%. In regard to expenses, the average management fee of the ESG ETFs is equal to 0.18%, while the average management fee of the non-ESG peers is 0.09%.

This paper investigates the impact of new quality productivity on corporate innovation, and empirically analyzes it using A-share data from 2012-2022. New quality productivity, which includes emerging industries, future industries and digital transformation of traditional industries, has a significant positive effect on corporate innovation. The study shows that new quality productivity promotes innovation by enhancing innovation incentives and improving ESG performance. Improvements in the institutional environment can enhance its role in promoting innovation. It is recommended to enhance new quality productivity, stimulate innovation in SMEs, focus on ESG performance and develop differentiated strategies to support sustained innovation in corporate technology.