CDP 2009 Industry Snapshots Global 500/S&P 500/FTSE

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

CDP 2009 Industry Snapshots Global 500/S&P 500/FTSE CDP 2009 Industry Snapshots Global 500/S&P 500/FTSE 350 Report written for Carbon Disclosure Project Carbon Disclosure Project by: [email protected] +44 (0) 20 7970 5660 www.cdproject.net Industry snapshots Contents Consumer Discretionary sector report 2 Consumer Staples sector report 15 Energy sector report 26 Financials sector report 37 Health Care sector report 55 Industrials sector report 65 Information Technology sector report 79 Materials sector report 91 Telecommunications sector report 102 Utilities sector report 112 1 Consumer Discretionary sector report Covering Global 500, S&P 500 and FTSE 350 listed respondents Introduction At the moment, In 2009, the Carbon Disclosure Project specific analysis of the responses and there are three different (CDP) received the highest response has chosen to present this in a series institutions to regulate rate to date, the highest level of of sector reports. fuel economy standards disclosed emissions and greater detail than ever before on the activities being This sector report, prepared by in the United States. undertaken by the largest corporations PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC), First, there is a federal around climate change mitigation summarizes responses to the 2009 standard released by and adaptation. In parallel, CDP data Carbon Disclosure Project Information Request from Consumer Discretionary the US Environmental is increasingly being applied as a catalyst for changing business behavior companies in the FTSE Global Equity Protection Agency. and is becoming more integrated into Index Series (Global 500), Standard Beneath that, there are mainstream financial analysis. & Poor’s 500 Index (S&P 500) and the FTSE 350 Index (FTSE 350). National Highway Traffic This year, CDP has responded to Safety Administration feedback from its signatories and other Responses to CDP 2009 are grouped standards and a stakeholders for more industry- according to the Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS). California Air Resources Board standard. The last one is the most stringent one for BMW. Because Summary table of the economic crisis, especially for the Big GICS sector Consumer Discretionary Three in Detroit, and the new US president, it is Response rate1 66% (103 of 156) not very clear how strict Global 500 76% (28 of 37) S&P 500 59% (47 of 80) the new laws will be. FTSE 350 72% (44 of 61) BMW Bayerische Overall sector rank (1-10)2 10th Motoren Werke Highest disclosure score 87 Lowest disclosure score 0 Average disclosure score 50 All Carbon Disclosure Overall emissions disclosure3 Project reports Scope 1 emissions 81% (68 million Mt/CO2-e) are available at Scope 2 emissions4 82% (139 million Mt/CO2-e) Scope 3 emissions 52% (425 million Mt/CO2-e) www.cdproject.net Average emissions intensity5 99 (Mt CO2-e/US$ million revenue) 1 The overall response rate will not equal the sum of total 3 Percentage of respondents who reported emissions and respondents for each index (Global 500, S&P 500 and total disclosed emissions for the sector. FTSE 350) because respondents can be listed on more 4 Gross Scope 2 emissions represent the sum of all grid than one index. averages, not adjusted for contractual arrangements. 2 The rank order of the sector among ten sectors analyzed. 5 Disclosed Scopes 1 and 2 grid average emissions totals The rank is determined by the average disclosure score divided by annual US$ million revenues. Revenues based for each sector. on data retrieved from Bloomberg on June 18, 2009. 2 CDP Consumer Discretionary sector report 2009 Fig. A: Year-on-year disclosure rates, as a proportion of total Consumer Carbon disclosure Discretionary companies (Global 500, S&P 500 and FTSE 350) trends in the Consumer Discretionary sector CDP 2009 Diversity is a hallmark of the Consumer Total population 156 (100%) Discretionary sector. Respondents represent businesses ranging from advertising agencies to big-box retailers and cruise lines, to windshield wiper manufacturers. Consequently, industry Responses 103 (66%) views on energy efficiency and climate Report on GHG emissions in change issues vary according to the Disclose GHG emissions 85 (54%) annual corporate reporting 86 (55%) unique idiosyncrasies, demands and expectations of each industry. Publicly available 70 (45%) Disclose emissions reduction targets 55 (35%) A look at the types of respondents that make up the Consumer Discretionary Verify emissions 44 (28%) 43 (28%) Disclose forecasts sector reveals the sector’s variety. The five Consumer Discretionary industries are automobiles and components (auto and motorcycle manufacturers, auto parts); consumer durables and apparel (household items including electronics, appliances, home furnishings, clothing and accessories, luxury items); consumer services (restaurants and leisure, diversified services); media (advertising, TV, movies and entertainment, publishing); and retailing (distributors, Internet and catalog retail, CDP 2008 multiline and specialty retailers). Total population 178 (100%) Many companies within the Consumer Discretionary sector operate or rely on extensive retail networks or own large real estate portfolios and therefore recognize the physical risks related to Responses 107 (60%) severe-weather events. Many also operate within razor-thin margins that Report on GHG emissions in make minor price increases in utilities or annual corporate reporting 78 (44%) raw material costs significant concerns. Disclose GHG emissions 73 (41%) Publicly available 66 (37%) Although the Consumer Discretionary Verify emissions 48 (27%) sector as a whole had the lowest average carbon disclosure score Disclose emissions reduction targets 45 (25%) among all ten sectors reporting and the third-lowest response rate, a closer look at the individual company scores that make up the sector reveals a more complex picture. Within the group, Disclose forecasts 10 (6%) respondents that manufacture automobiles and consumer durables along with Internet and catalog retailers have higher disclosure scores than their sector peer group does. Across geographies, a higher percentage of Consumer Discretionary companies responded6 to the CDP in 2009, up six percentage points from 2008. The proportion of Consumer Discretionary companies responding at 6 The response rate represents all responding companies for this sector. Statistics in the remainder of this report are each disclosure level also increased in based on the number of analyzed responses only and do not represent companies that responded after the deadline 2009 for all key areas of disclosure (see for analysis. Figure A). 3 Carbon disclosure trends in the Consumer Discretionary sector Few Consumer Discretionary help identify and track opportunities The US Congress respondents reported that the poor for increased energy efficiency, or economy was causing them to delay they may form office programs to help and several states carbon reduction plans. In fact, the shift employee behaviors to effectively are currently pursuing anticipated increase in utility costs reduce overall carbon emissions. climate change seemed to justify spending more now Externally, some respondents legislation. NIKE is to reduce future energy needs. Also, are working with nongovernmental some respondents noted that they organizations to actively monitor working at both the committed to carbon reduction plans and support relevant legislation. state and federal levels in 2006 or 2007 and had already made to secure their passage, the majority of their capital expenditures Consumer Discretionary leaders for before the recession began. carbon disclosure are listed below preferably in advance in the order of their disclosure score. of the COP15 United A number of respondents are addressing While the remaining Consumer Nations Climate climate change issues proactively from Discretionary respondents ranked both internal and external perspectives. lower than these companies, they Change Conference Internally, those respondents may are nonetheless commended for in Copenhagen in 2009. calculate the carbon footprint of their their disclosures and participation. NIKE also works with operations and their supply chains to bodies to monitor and support legislation. In 2008, NIKE worked with CERES to create a coalition of businesses called Business for Innovative 7 Climate & Energy Policy Fig. B. Disclosure score leaders for the sector (BICEP), which presses Global 500 leaders for the passage of comprehensive climate Company name Disclosure score change and energy Carnival 87 legislation in the BMW Bayerische Motoren Werke 79 Toyota Motor 77 United States Reed Elsevier 76 News Corporation 75 NIKE S&P 500 leaders Company name Disclosure score Carnival 87 News Corporation 75 Stanley Works 75 Limited Brands 74 Darden Restaurants 69 Johnson Controls 69 FTSE 350 leaders Company name Disclosure score Carnival 87 Reed Elsevier 76 N Brown Group 75 7 The companies in this list are leaders in their sector for each of the indexes. However, they may not appear Wetherspoon 75 in the CDLI for the index overall when all ten sectors Berkeley Group Holdings 72 are considered. 4 CDP Consumer Discretionary sector report 2009 One-third of Consumer Discretionary Fig. C: Largest non-respondents companies (34%, or 53 companies) chose not to participate. The largest Largest non-respondents by market capitalization8 non-respondents are listed in Fig. C based on their market capitalization. Company name Index When compared with a cross section Comcast Global 500, S&P 500 of global leaders for carbon disclosure,
Recommended publications
  • 2017 Contributing Editors Joshua Ford Bonnie and Kevin P Kennedy
    GETTING THROUGH THE DEAL Initial Public Offerings Initial Public Offerings Public Initial Contributing editors Joshua Ford Bonnie and Kevin P Kennedy 2017 Law Business Research 2017 © Law Business Research 2016 Initial Public Offerings 2017 Contributing editors Joshua Ford Bonnie and Kevin P Kennedy Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP Publisher Law The information provided in this publication is Gideon Roberton general and may not apply in a specific situation. [email protected] Business Legal advice should always be sought before taking Research any legal action based on the information provided. Subscriptions This information is not intended to create, nor does Sophie Pallier Published by receipt of it constitute, a lawyer–client relationship. [email protected] Law Business Research Ltd The publishers and authors accept no responsibility 87 Lancaster Road for any acts or omissions contained herein. Although Senior business development managers London, W11 1QQ, UK the information provided is accurate as of July 2016, Alan Lee Tel: +44 20 3708 4199 be advised that this is a developing area. [email protected] Fax: +44 20 7229 6910 Adam Sargent © Law Business Research Ltd 2016 Printed and distributed by [email protected] No photocopying without a CLA licence. Encompass Print Solutions First published 2015 Tel: 0844 2480 112 Dan White Second edition [email protected] ISSN 2059-5484 © Law Business Research 2016 CONTENTS Global overview 5 Japan 51 Joshua Ford
    [Show full text]
  • Does the Glass Ceiling Exist? a Longitudinal Study of Women's
    The Journal of Applied Business Research – May/June 2014 Volume 30, Number 3 Does The Glass Ceiling Exist? A Longitudinal Study Of Women’s Progress On French Corporate Boards Rey Dang, La Rochelle Business School, France Duc Khuong Nguyen, IPAG Business School, France Linh-Chi Vo, EM Normandie, France ABSTRACT In this article, we conduct a longitudinal study of women’s progress on French corporate boards of directors. We particularly focus on the extent to which women directors have circumvented the glass ceiling. Using a sample of SBF 120 companies over a 10-year period from 2000 to 2009, our results provide evidence of a significant increase in the number of women on French corporate boards. However, the corporate glass ceiling hypothesis is consistently rejected whatever the considered measure of female directors; i.e., the number of board seats held by women, the number of firms with a critical mass of female directors, and the number of directorships held by each women director. Keywords: Boards of Directors; Gender; Diversity; Corporate Governance 1. INTRODUCTION ver the period 2000-2009, the average participation rate of women in the labor market increased from 60 to 64 percent across the European Union’s 27 Members States. More specifically, in France, it went up from 60.3 to 64.9 percent.1 However, despite this notable progress, women remain under-represented Oin senior or executive positions (ILO, 2009).2 This lack of female representation on corporate boards of directors, which is commonly referred to as glass ceiling in practice and past academic studies, seems to be a global phenomenon because women on corporate boards (WOCB) represents less than 15% of board members in the United States, United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and many European countries (Dang & Vo, 2012).3 Morrison et al.
    [Show full text]
  • FRC Board Diversity and Effectiveness in FTSE 350
    Leadership Institute Board Diversity and Effectiveness in FTSE 350 Companies July 2021 Acknowledgements Report written by: Mary Akimoto, Osman Anwar, Molly Broome, Dragos Diac, Dr Randall S Peterson, Dr Sergei Plekhanov, Simon Osborne and Vyla Rollins We thank the following individuals on the joint LBSLI/SQW research team for their contributions to this research: • Ruth Cluness, LBSLI • Tom Gosling, LBSLI • Brent Hamerla, LBSLI • Letitia Joseph, LBSLI • Barbara Moorer, LBSLI • Andrei Visiteu, LBSLI • Desi Zlatanova, LBSLI We also give a special thank you to our team of research interviewers: • Eva Beazley • Helen Beedham • Christine de Largy • Kathryn Gordon • Dr JoEllyn Prouty McLaren The London Business School Leadership Institute expresses its thanks to all of our stakeholder and collaborators, who supported our research efforts. We would like to express our specific gratitude to the following individuals, for their invaluable guidance, comments, suggestions and support throughout this project: Kit Bingham, Charlie Brown, Gerry Brown, Sue Clark, Louis Cooper, John Dore, Lisa Duke, Roshy Dwyer, Farrer & Co (Anisha Birk, Natalie Rimmer, Peter Wienand), Louise Fowler, Dr Julian Franks, Dr Karl George MBE, Dr Tom Gosling, Dr Byron Grote, Fiona Hathorn, Jonathan Hayward, Susan Hooper, Dr Ioannis Ioannou, Bernhard Kerres, LBS Accounts department (Akposeba Mukoro, Janet Nippard), LBS Advancement department (Luke Ashby, Susie Balch, Nina Bohn, Ian Frith, Sarah Jeffs, Maria Menicou), LBS Executive Education, LBS Research & Faculty Office and
    [Show full text]
  • Examining Drivers of Trading Volume in European Markets
    Received: 28 July 2016 Accepted: 19 December 2017 DOI: 10.1002/ijfe.1608 RESEARCH ARTICLE Examining drivers of trading volume in European markets Bogdan Batrinca | Christian W. Hesse | Philip C. Treleaven Department of Computer Science, Abstract University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK This study presents an in‐depth exploration of market dynamics and analyses potential drivers of trading volume. The study considers established facts from Correspondence Bogdan Batrinca, Department of the literature, such as calendar anomalies, the correlation between volume and Computer Science, University College price change, and this relation's asymmetry, while proposing a variety of time London, Gower Street, London WC1E series models. The results identified some key volume predictors, such as the 6BT, UK. Email: [email protected] lagged time series volume data and historical price indicators (e.g. intraday range, intraday return, and overnight return). Moreover, the study provides empirical evi- Funding information dence for the price–volume relation asymmetry, finding an overall price asymme- Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (EPSRC) UK try in over 70% of the analysed stocks, which is observed in the form of a moderate overnight asymmetry and a more salient intraday asymmetry. We conclude that JEL Classification: C32; C52; C58; G12; volatility features, more recent data, and day‐of‐the‐week features, with a notable G15; G17 negative effect on Mondays and Fridays, improve the volume prediction model. KEYWORDS asymmetric models, behavioural finance, European stock market, feature selection, price volume relation, trading volume 1 | INTRODUCTION which was $63tn in 2011 (World Federation of Exchanges, 2012) and $49tn in 2012 (World Federation of Exchanges, This study investigates the drivers affecting the trading 2013).
    [Show full text]
  • Local Market Index Indicator Codes in Numerical
    ® COMPUSTAT (Global) Data Part III: Reference Codes Local Market Index Indicator Codes What are Local Market Index Indicator Codes? These codes allow you to identify those issues that make up a local market index. For example, the following formula identifies all issues that make up the Toronto Stock Exchange 300: @SET($GI+$FI,LMII=81) Up to two different codes may be used for each issue, determined primarily by the exchange on which the issue trades. Not all Local Market Index Indicators are currently available. Local Market Index Indicator Codes in Numerical Order *** Indicates the codes that are currently available in GLOBAL Vantage Code Index Country 01 Affarsvarlden General Index Sweden 02 Banco Totta & Acores Index Portugal 03 BCI All Share Index Italy 04 FT/S&P Actuaries World Index Other 05*** CBS All Share Index Netherlands/UK 06 CBS Total Return General Index Netherlands/UK 07*** DAX Composite Index Germany 08 FTSE 100 Index United Kingdom 09 FTSE Non-Financials Index United Kingdom 10*** S&P Industrial Index - Last United States Trading Day 11*** FTSE All-Share Index United Kingdom 12 Bombay SE Natl Index India 13 FTSE 250 Index United Kingdom 14*** Vienna Stock Exchange Index Austria 15 FTSE SmallCap EX IT Index United Kingdom 16 FT/S&P Actuaries World Index - United Kingdom UK 17 Irish Stock Exchange General Ireland Index 18 Istanbul Stock Exchange Index Turkey 19 HSBC Argentina Argentina 20 Copenhagen Stock Exchange Index Denmark 21*** SBF 250 Index France 22 Hex General Index Finland 23 Oslo Stock Exchange General Norway
    [Show full text]
  • Financial Market Data for R/Rmetrics
    Financial Market Data for R/Rmetrics Diethelm Würtz Andrew Ellis Yohan Chalabi Rmetrics Association & Finance Online R/Rmetrics eBook Series R/Rmetrics eBooks is a series of electronic books and user guides aimed at students and practitioner who use R/Rmetrics to analyze financial markets. A Discussion of Time Series Objects for R in Finance (2009) Diethelm Würtz, Yohan Chalabi, Andrew Ellis R/Rmetrics Meielisalp 2009 Proceedings of the Meielisalp Workshop 2011 Editor Diethelm Würtz Basic R for Finance (2010), Diethelm Würtz, Yohan Chalabi, Longhow Lam, Andrew Ellis Chronological Objects with Rmetrics (2010), Diethelm Würtz, Yohan Chalabi, Andrew Ellis Portfolio Optimization with R/Rmetrics (2010), Diethelm Würtz, William Chen, Yohan Chalabi, Andrew Ellis Financial Market Data for R/Rmetrics (2010) Diethelm W?rtz, Andrew Ellis, Yohan Chalabi Indian Financial Market Data for R/Rmetrics (2010) Diethelm Würtz, Mahendra Mehta, Andrew Ellis, Yohan Chalabi Asian Option Pricing with R/Rmetrics (2010) Diethelm Würtz R/Rmetrics Singapore 2010 Proceedings of the Singapore Workshop 2010 Editors Diethelm Würtz, Mahendra Mehta, David Scott, Juri Hinz R/Rmetrics Meielisalp 2011 Proceedings of the Meielisalp Summer School and Workshop 2011 Editor Diethelm Würtz III tinn-R Editor (2010) José Cláudio Faria, Philippe Grosjean, Enio Galinkin Jelihovschi and Ri- cardo Pietrobon R/Rmetrics Meielisalp 2011 Proceedings of the Meielisalp Summer Scholl and Workshop 2011 Editor Diethelm Würtz R/Rmetrics Meielisalp 2012 Proceedings of the Meielisalp Summer Scholl and Workshop 2012 Editor Diethelm Würtz Topics in Empirical Finance with R and Rmetrics (2013), Patrick Hénaff FINANCIAL MARKET DATA FOR R/RMETRICS DIETHELM WÜRTZ ANDREW ELLIS YOHAN CHALABI RMETRICS ASSOCIATION &FINANCE ONLINE Series Editors: Prof.
    [Show full text]
  • FTSE UK Index Series Family
    Benchmark Statement FTSE UK Index Series Family September 2021 v1.6 FTSE Russell An LSEG Business | FTSE UK Index Series Family This benchmark statement is provided by FTSE International Limited as the administrator of the FTSE UK Index Series Family. It is intended to meet the requirements of EU Benchmark Regulation (EU2016/1011) and the supplementary regulatory technical standards and the retained EU law in the UK (The Benchmarks (Amendment and Transitional Provision) (EU Exit) Regulations 2019) that will take effect in the United Kingdom at the end of the EU Exit Transition Period on 31 December 2020. The benchmark statement should be read in conjunction with the FTSE UK Index Series Ground Rules and other associated policies and methodology documents. Those documents are italicised whenever referenced in this benchmark statement and are included as an appendix to this document. They are also available on the FTSE Russell website (www.ftserussell.com). References to “BMR” or “EU BMR” in this benchmark statement refer to Regulation (EU) 2016/1011 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on indices used as benchmarks in financial instruments and financial contracts or to measure the performance of investment funds. References to “DR” in this benchmark statement refer to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/1643 of 13 July 2018 supplementing Reguorlation (EU) 2016/1011 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards specifying further the contents of, and cases where updates are required to, the benchmark statement to be published by the administrator of a benchmark.
    [Show full text]
  • FTSE 350 Climate Change Report 2013
    01 Are UK companies prepared for the international impacts of climate change? FTSE 350 Climate Change Report 2013 9 October 2013 Report writer and global advisor 02 03 The evolution of CDP Contents With great pleasure, CDP announced an exciting change this year. CEO Foreword 4 Executive Summary 6 Over ten years ago CDP pioneered the only global disclosure system for companies to report their environmental impacts and strategies to investors. In that time, 2013 Climate Performance and Disclosure Leaders 8 and with your support, CDP has accelerated climate change and natural resource 2013 Leadership Criteria 10 issues to the boardroom and has moved beyond the corporate world to engage Investor insight - the “Aiming for A” coalition 11 with cities and governments. FTSE 350 companies have a global footprint 12 The CDP platform has evolved significantly, supporting multinational purchasers Companies’ focus on climate change risks and opportunities needs broadening 12 to build more sustainable supply chains. It enables cities around the world to exchange information, take best practice action and build climate resilience. We Scientific Insight - Professor Sir Brian Hoskins 17 assess the climate performance of companies and drive improvements through Companies’ understanding of their value chain is limited 20 shareholder engagement. Corporate insight - Reckitt Benckiser 22 Our offering to the global marketplace has expanded to cover a wider spectrum of FTSE 100 companies have a more sophisticated response the earth’s natural capital, specifically water and forests, alongside carbon, energy to climate change than FTSE 250 companies 23 and climate. Preparing for climate change: Comparing FTSE 100 and FTSE 250 companies 26 For these reasons, we have outgrown our former name of the Carbon Disclosure PwC commentary – Celine Herweijer 28 Project and rebranded to CDP.
    [Show full text]
  • Lowland Investment Company
    Lowland Investment Company plc Registered as an investment company in England and Wales Registration number: 670489 Registered office: 201 Bishopsgate, London EC2M 3AE. SEDOL/ISIN number: 0536806/GB00 053680 62 London Stock Exchange (TDIM) Code: LWI Global Intermediary Identification Number (GIIN): 2KBHLK.99999.SL826 Legal Entity Identifier (LEI): 2138008RHG5363FEHV19 Telephone: 0800 832 832 Email: [email protected] www.lowlandinvestment.com Lowland Investment Company plc – Annual Report for the year ended 30 September 2018 Lowland Investment Company plc Shareholder Shareholder Communication Communication Awards Awards 2017 2018 WINNER WINNER Winner UK Equity Income Fund of the Year This report is printed on cocoon silk 60% recycled, a recycled paper containing 60% recycled waste and 40% virgin fibre and manufactured at a mill certified with ISO 14001 environmental management standard. The pulp used in this product is bleached using an Elemental Chlorine Free process (ECF). The FSC® logo identifies products which contain wood from well managed forests certified in JHI9222/2018 accordance with the rules of the Forest Stewardship Council®. Annual Report 2018 Typeset by 2112 Communications, London. Printed by PurePrint JHI9222/2018 Lowland Investment Company plc Annual Report 2018 Contents Strategic Report Corporate Report Key Data 3 Report of the Directors 26 Historical Performance 4 Statement of Directors’ Responsibilities 27 Chairman’s Statement 5-6 Directors’ Remuneration Report 28-29 Performance 5 Corporate Governance Statement
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Key Drivers of Trading Performance
    Analysis of Key Drivers of Trading Performance Bogdan Batrinca A dissertation submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of University College London Department of Computer Science University College London 2016 2 Declaration I, Bogdan Batrinca, confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. …………………………………………… Bogdan Batrinca 3 Abstract This thesis is an applied study for understanding the key factors of trading volume, providing an in-depth investigation of liquidity demand and market impact. This research was conducted in collaboration with Deutsche Bank and presents a series of empirical studies, which examine several underlying factors affecting trading volume when executing orders algorithmically in the European equity markets, which ultimately translates into trading performance and liquidity modelling. This addresses several aspects: the size of the liquidity demand relative to the predicted or actual volumes traded in the market; the choice of execution strategy given the liquidity properties of the stock; and the timing of the trade, given the market circumstances and released or anticipated company news. All of these reflect the investment skill of the portfolio manager and the execution skill of the trader, and to some extent the quality of the execution algorithm being used. The motivation is to investigate various factors that adversely affect the trading performance of algorithms, causing them to have excessive market impact or to under-participate when the market experiences periods of higher volatility. Although measuring the market fairness and efficiency is a crucial component for understanding the execution style and improving trading performance, the research into how to model and decompose trading performance requires further investigation.
    [Show full text]
  • Link to the Full List
    FullerTreacyMoney.com Global Equity Valuations Tables ranked by P/E in ascending order December 10th 2014 November 6th 2014 December 10th 2014 Name DY% P/E P/B P/CF Name DY% P/E P/B P/CF RUSSIAN RTS INDEX $ 4.28 4.87 0.56 1.66 RUSSIAN RTS INDEX $ 4.08 4.81 0.5 1.41 HONG KONG (H-Shares) 4.16 7.3 1.11 4.8 HK HANG SENG MAINLAND 25 3.79 7.98 1.2 4.94 HK HANG SENG MAINLAND 25 3.95 8.37 1.34 4.71 HONG KONG HANG SENG INDEX 3.89 8.62 1.4 4.63 S&P ASIA 50 INDEX CME 2.92 9.94 1.4 6.53 HONG KONG (H-Shares) 3.83 9.96 1.3 8.56 TURKEY ISE NATIONAL 100 2.02 10.17 1.45 N/A S&P ASIA 50 INDEX CME 2.9 10.15 1.4 6.77 HONG KONG HANG SENG INDEX 3.8 10.24 1.33 8.9 TURKEY ISE NATIONAL 100 1.78 10.28 1.5 N/A PAKISTAN KARACHI 100 INDEX 4.81 10.64 1.88 11.86 PAKISTAN KARACHI 100 INDEX 4.66 10.95 1.9 10.38 LITHUANIA OMX VILNIUS INDEX 6.75 10.71 1.2 N/A ARGENTINA MERVAL INDEX 1.01 11.07 1.4 7.1 CHINA SE SHANGHAI A 2.75 11.5 1.5 10.52 LITHUANIA OMX VILNIUS INDEX 8.3 11.42 1.1 N/A CHINA SHANGHAI NEW COMPOSITE 2.77 11.57 1.52 10.47 NORWAY OBX STOCK INDEX 4.61 11.66 1.4 4.07 VENEZUELA STOCK MKT INDX 2.15 12 4.56 13.3 USA OIL SERVICE SECTOR INDEX 2.6 11.70 1.5 7.57 NORWAY OBX STOCK INDEX 4.53 12.27 1.49 4.32 VENEZUELA STOCK MKT INDX 1.8 12.60 2.5 12.8 ESTONIA OMX TALLINN INDEX 4.75 12.82 1.09 5.44 SINGAPORE STRAITS TIMES INDEX 3.31 13.49 1.4 10.77 SINGAPORE STRAITS TIMES INDEX 3.29 13.4 1.36 10.67 CHINA SE SHANGHAI A 2.26 13.98 1.8 12.23 USA OIL SERVICE SECTOR INDEX 2.06 14.03 1.8 9.27 CHINA SHANGHAI NEW COMPOSITE 2.28 14.03 1.8 12.11 ARGENTINA MERVAL INDEX 0.79 14.15 1.82 9.71 ESTONIA OMX TALLINN INDEX 5.18 14.49 1.1 5.58 JAPAN TSE2 TOPIX 2ND SECT INDX 1.57 14.7 0.86 8.28 COLOMBIA IGBC GENERAL INDEX 3.6 14.55 1.3 7.5 TAIWAN TAIEX INDEX 3.21 15.01 1.7 9.85 JAPAN TSE2 TOPIX 2ND SECT INDX 1.5 14.89 0.9 7.97 JAPAN JASDAQ: STOCK INDEX 1.46 15.21 N/A 11.62 TAIWAN TAIEX INDEX 3.23 14.95 1.7 9.22 SWEDEN OMX STOCKHOLM 30 INDEX 3.65 15.72 2.23 23.72 JAPAN JASDAQ: STOCK INDEX 1.45 15.51 1.3 11.62 USA DOW JONES INDUS.
    [Show full text]
  • FTSE UK Index Series Ground Rules Following the March Quarterly Review and Will Become Effective from the June Annual Review
    Ground Rules FTSE UK Index Series v15.1 ftserussell.com An LSEG Business June 2021 Contents 1.0 Introduction ................................................................................................... 3 2.0 Management Responsibilities ..................................................................... 5 3.0 FTSE Russell Index Policies ........................................................................ 7 4.0 Security Inclusion Criteria ........................................................................... 9 5.0 Nationality ....................................................................................................11 6.0 Screens Applied to Eligible Securities.......................................................13 7.0 Index Qualification Criteria .........................................................................15 8.0 Periodic Review of Constituents ................................................................17 9.0 Corporate Actions and Events ...................................................................22 10.0 Treatment of Dividends ...............................................................................25 11.0 Industry Classification Benchmark (ICB) ..................................................26 12.0 Announcing Changes ..................................................................................27 Appendix A: Index Opening and Closing Hours .................................................28 Appendix B: Status of Indices ..............................................................................29
    [Show full text]