Comparison of fund characteristics: ESG vs. matched conventional funds
| Matching attribute | ESG mean (N = 309) | Conventional mean (N = 309) | Difference | t-statistic | p-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fund Size (TNA €mil) | 513.10 | 508.45 | 4.65 | 0.28 | 0.780 |
| Fund Age (Years) | 27.10 | 26.85 | 0.25 | 0.34 | 0.734 |
| Investment Focus (Score) | 0.720 | 0.718 | 0.002 | 0.15 | 0.881 |
| Matching attribute | ESG mean ( | Conventional mean ( | Difference | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fund Size (TNA €mil) | 513.10 | 508.45 | 4.65 | 0.28 | 0.780 |
| Fund Age (Years) | 27.10 | 26.85 | 0.25 | 0.34 | 0.734 |
| Investment Focus (Score) | 0.720 | 0.718 | 0.002 | 0.15 | 0.881 |
Note(s): The table above reports the mean characteristics for the 309 ESG funds and the 309 matched conventional “rival” funds. Selection is based on the Hoberg et al. (2018) N-dimensional style characteristic vector to approximate ESG fund attributes in terms of size, age, and investment focus. The p-values are derived from a two-sample t-test for equality of means
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.