Original, independent, thought leadership
Act Now
Search LinkedIn Facebook Instagram
Search Linkedin Instagram
Search Linkedin Instagram

Sustainable Fund Quality Ratings

Useful for screening funds and constructing sustainable portfolios, SRA Fund Quality Ratings combine qualitative and quantitative evaluations expressed along a five-point scale that runs from A (highest quality) to E (lowest quality).

Sustainable Bottom Line: Fund quality ratings can be used by investors, financial intermediaries and other stakeholders to screen, select funds and construct sustainable investment portfolios. SRA Fund Quality Ratings-An Explanation Fund quality ratings are assigned to funds within their designated investment category/segment. The investment category/segment for which the displayed ratings have been assigned falls into the focused sustainable Foreign Large Blend investment category, defined as mutual funds and ETFs that primarily invest in a variety of big international stocks. Most of these portfolios divide their assets among a dozen or more developed markets, including Japan, Britain, France, and Germany. These portfolios primarily invest in stocks that have market caps in the top 70% of each economically integrated market (such as Europe or Asia ex-Japan). The blend style is assigned to portfolios where neither growth nor value characteristics predominate. These portfolios typically will have less than 20% of assets invested in U.S. stocks. Performance results are evaluated relative to the MSCI EAFE NR USD Index that serves as their primary index. Morningstar’s universe of sustainable funds consists of funds whose official documents indicate a focus on sustainability, impact investing, or environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors, and it uses binding ESG criteria for investment selection. Funds that only use limited exclusions or non-binding ESG considerations are not categorized as sustainable by Morningstar. It should be noted that Morningstar’s definition of a sustainable fund may be widely used but is not universally embraced. That said, the definition is transparent and its adaptation in the context of SRA Fund Quality Ratings facilitates the assignment of such ratings based on Morningstar’s investment categorization. Focused sustainable Foreign Large Blend funds: 36 funds, $32.1 billion in assets The focused sustainable large-cap segment covered by SRA Fund Quality Ratings consists of 36 funds, 72 funds/share classes with $32.1 billion in net assets as of July 31, 2025, excluding funds that employ leverage. These funds include actively managed and passively managed mutual funds as well as ETFs. Fund quality ratings, which are expressed along a five-point scale that runs from A (highest quality) to E (lowest quality), can be used to screen and select funds and to construct sustainable investment portfolios by investors and financial advisors. Ratings combine qualitative as well as quantitative considerations and are derived based on an assessment of five fundamental factors Ratings combine qualitative as well as quantitative considerations and are derived based on an assessment of five fundamental factors. These are: (a) Management company. A fund should be offered and managed by an established firm with a positive reputation, to ensure effective fund operations and impart trust and confidence in the organization. (b) Years in operation. The fund should be in operation for at least three years and managed pursuant to the same investment strategy or approach—to provide a sufficiently long but not excessively long view against which to evaluate the fund’s operations, strategy, and performance. Some exceptions may apply. (c) Fund size. The fund’s total net assets should generally exceed around $30 million (all share classes combined in the case of mutual funs)—so that it may be managed more efficiently and provide some protection against the fund’s early liquidation or closure. Some exceptions may apply, particularly in the case of funds offered by larger, established firms. (d) Total returns. The fund’s performance results, achieved by adhering to a relatively consistent investment strategy and sustainability approach, are evaluated relative to an appropriate securities market index over a one year, three year and five-year intervals, and (e) Expense ratios. A fund’s expense ratio is evaluated relative to other funds in the same investment category/segment. Factors d and e above are evaluated and scored quantitatively, based on a fund’s investment results over the trailing one-, three- and five-year time intervals relative to a designated benchmark as well as a fund’s expense ratio relative to its investment category/segment. Once scored, factors a, b and c are considered, and funds may be excluded from the rated funds universe based on these considerations. Fund quality ratings are then assigned to all remaining funds based on the following distribution: Top 15%=A, next 20%=B, next 30%=C, next 20%=D and final 15%=E. NA indicates that a rating has not been assigned to the fund due to its use of leverage or the fund's exclusion due to the consideration of factors a, b or c, for example, fund size. How to use the ratings? Funds assigned A and B quality ratings are considered primary candidates for the selection of funds and in the construction of a portfolio consisting entirely or partially of sustainable funds. That said, additional research to qualify a fund may be in order. In the case of thematic funds, such as renewable energy funds, investors should keep in mind that some funds may be even more narrowly focused, for example, funds investing in solar or wind energy, while others are broader based, for example, renewable energy. Fund selections should be consistent with an investor’s financial goals and objectives and sustainability preferences. Fund quality ratings are derived based on a qualitative and quantitative evaluation of fundamental factors but do not address a fund's sustainable investing approach and methodology. While certainly relevant, such considerations should be evaluated relative to each individual investor's sustainability preferences, which tend to vary from one investor to the next. Fund Quality Ratings in the A and B rating categories A rated funds Within the focused sustainable large-cap segment, five funds, 10 funds/share classes, were assigned fund quality ratings in the highest A category. On a combined basis, these funds managed almost $6.0 billion in net assets. Their average expense ratio is 87 basis points (bps), ranging from a low of 9 basis points to a high of 192 bps. (The average expense ratio is reduced to 62 bps when three funds with the highest expense ratios, >1%, are excluded). A rated funds posted average annual returns of 15.41%, 15.11% and 10.74% over the trailing 12-months, 3-years and 5-years ending on July 31, 2025. B rated funds Within the focused sustainable large-cap segment, eight funds, 11 funds/share classes, were assigned fund quality ratings in the second highest B category. On a combined basis, these funds manage $8.2 billion in net assets. Their average expense ratio is 40 basis points, ranging from a low of 1 bps to a high of 102 bps. B rated funds posted average annual returns of 13.64%, 12.40% and 9.23% over the trailing 12-months, 3-years and 5-years ending on July 31, 2025. VIEW AS FULL TABLE

Read More

Sustainable Bottom Line: Fund quality ratings can be used by investors, financial intermediaries and other stakeholders to screen, select funds and construct sustainable investment portfolios. SRA Fund Quality Ratings-An Explanation: Fund quality ratings are assigned to funds within their designated investment category/segment. The investment category/segment for which the displayed ratings have been assigned falls into the focused sustainable large-cap investment category, defined as mutual funds and ETFs that primarily invest in large US companies, specifically those within the top 70% of the US equity market's capitalization. Morningstar’s universe of sustainable funds consists of funds whose official documents indicate a focus on sustainability, impact investing, or environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors, and it uses binding ESG criteria for investment selection. Funds that only use limited exclusions or non-binding ESG considerations are not categorized as sustainable by Morningstar. It should be noted that Morningstar’s definition of a sustainable fund may be widely used but is not universally embraced. That said, the definition is transparent and its adaptation in the context of SRA Fund Quality Ratings facilitates the assignment of such ratings based on Morningstar’s investment categorization. Focused sustainable large-cap funds: 73 funds, $144.5 billion in assets The focused sustainable large-cap segment covered by SRA Fund Quality Ratings consists of 73 funds, The focused sustainable large-cap segment covered by SRA Fund Quality Ratings consists of 73 funds, 161 funds/share classes with $144.5 billion in net assets as of May 30, 2025, excluding funds that employ leverage. These funds include actively managed and passively managed mutual funds as well as ETFs. Fund quality ratings, which are expressed along a five-point scale that runs from A (highest quality) to E (lowest quality), can be used to screen and select funds and to construct sustainable investment portfolios by investors and financial advisors. Ratings combine qualitative as well as quantitative considerations and are derived based on an assessment of five fundamental factors Ratings combine qualitative as well as quantitative considerations and are derived based on an assessment of five fundamental factors. These Ratings combine qualitative as well as quantitative considerations and are derived based on an assessment of five fundamental factors. These are: (a) Management company. A fund should be offered and managed by an established firm with a positive reputation, to ensure effective fund operations and impart trust and confidence in the organization. (b) Years in operation. The fund should be in operation for at least three years and managed pursuant to the same investment strategy or approach—to provide a sufficiently long but not excessively long view against which to evaluate the fund’s operations, strategy, and performance. Some exceptions may apply. (c) Fund size. The fund’s total net assets should generally exceed around $30 million—so that it may be managed more efficiently and provide some protection against the fund’s early liquidation or closure. Some exceptions may apply, particularly in the case of funds offered by larger, established firms. (d) Total returns. The fund’s performance results, achieved by adhering to a relatively consistent investment strategy and sustainability approach, are evaluated relative to an appropriate securities market index over a one year, three year and five-year intervals, and (e) Expense ratios. A fund’s expense ratio is evaluated relative to other funds in the same investment category/segment. Factors d and e above are evaluated and scored quantitatively, based on a fund’s investment results over the trailing one-, three- and five-year time intervals relative to a designated benchmark as well as a fund’s expense ratio relative to its investment category/segment. Once scored, factors a, b and c are considered, and funds may be excluded from the rated funds universe based on these considerations. Fund quality ratings are then assigned to all remaining funds based on the following distribution: Top 15%=A, next 20%=B, next 30%=C, next 20%=D and final 15%=E. NA indicates that a rating has not been assigned to the fund due to its use of leverage or the fund's exclusion due to the consideration of factors a, b or c, for example, fund size. How to use the ratings? Funds assigned A and B quality ratings are considered primary candidates for the selection of funds and in the construction of a portfolio consisting entirely or partially of sustainable funds. That said, additional research to qualify a fund may be in order. In the case of thematic funds, such as renewable energy funds, investors should keep in mind that some funds may be even more narrowly focused, for example, funds investing in solar or wind energy, while others are broader based, for example, renewable energy. Fund selections should be consistent with an investor’s financial goals and objectives and sustainability preferences. Fund quality ratings are derived based on a qualitative and quantitative evaluation of fundamental factors but do not address a fund's sustainable investing approach and methodology. While certainly relevant, such considerations should be evaluated relative to each individual investor's sustainability preferences, which tend to vary from one investor to the next. Fund Quality Ratings in the A and B rating categories A rated funds Within the focused sustainable large-cap segment, 14 funds, 22 funds/share classes, were assigned fund quality ratings in the highest A category. On a combined basis, these funds managed $41.8 billion in net assets. Their average expense ratio is 57 basis points (bps), ranging from a low of 2 basis points to a high of 132 bps. These funds posted average annual returns of 14.04%, 15.44% and 15.84% over the trailing 12-months, 3-years and 5-years ending in May 2025. B rated funds Within the focused sustainable large-cap segment, 12 funds, 22 funds/share classes, were assigned fund quality ratings in the second highest B category. On a combined basis, these funds managed $8.8 billion in net assets. Their average expense ratio is 43 basis points, ranging from a low of 1 bps to a high of 75 bps. These funds posted average annual returns of 10.76%, 13.70% and 16.28% over the trailing 12-months, 3-years and 5-years ending in May 2025. VIEW AS FULL TABLE

Read More

Sustainable Bottom Line:  Fund quality ratings, ranging from A to E, can be used to screen and construct sustainable investment portfolios by investors and advisors. SRA quality ratings-An Explanation: Fund quality ratings are assigned to funds within their designated investment category/segment. The investment category/segment for which the the displayed ratings have been assigned falls into the thematic renewable energy segment, defined as mutual funds and ETFs that aim to invest in companies across sectors that will drive and benefit from the energy transformation. The segment covers 38 funds/share classes with $4.2 billion in net assets as of May 30, 2025, excluding funds that employ leverage. Fund quality ratings, which are expressed along a five-point scale that runs from A (highest quality) to E (lowest quality), can be used to screen and construct sustainable investment portfolios by investors and financial advisors. Ratings combine qualitative as well as quantitative considerations and are derived based on an assessment of five factors. The first three, which are evaluated qualitatively, are: (a) Management company. The fund should be offered and managed by an established firm with a positive reputation, to ensure effective fund operations and instill trust and confidence in the organization. (b) Years in operation. The fund should be in operation for at least three years and managed pursuant to the same investment strategy—to provide a sufficiently long but not excessively long view against which to evaluate the fund’s operations, strategy, and performance. Some exceptions may apply.  (c) Fund size. The fund’s total net assets should exceed $30 million—so that it may be managed more efficiently and to provide some protection against the fund’s early liquidation or closure. Some exceptions may apply in the case of funds offered by larger, established firms. The next two factors, which are evaluated quantitatively via a scoring methodology, are: (d) Total returns. The fund’s performance results, achieved by adhering to a relatively consistent investment strategy and sustainability approach, are evaluated relative to an appropriate securities market index over a one year, three year and five-year intervals, and (e) Expense ratio. The fund’s expense ratio is evaluated relative to other funds in the same investment category/segment. One evaluated and scored, fund quality ratings are distributed as follows: Top 15%=A, next 20%=B, next 30%=C, next 20%=D and final 15%=E. NA indicates that a rating has not been assigned to the fund due to its use of leverage or the fund's failure to meet one of the minimum requirements, for example, fund size. How to use the ratings? Funds with quality ratings in the “A” and “B” category levels are  considered primary candidates in constructing a portfolio consisting entirely or partially of sustainable funds. That said, additional research to qualify a fund may be in order.  In the case of thematic funds, such as renewable energy funds, investors should keep in mind that some funds are even more narrowly focused, for example, funds investing in solar or wind energy, while others are broader based, for example, renewable energy. Fund selections should be consistent with an investor’s financial and sustainability goals and objectives. It should be noted that the ratings do not address the fund's sustainable investing approach and methodology.   While certainly relevant, such considerations should be evaluated relative to each individual investor's sustainability preferences which tend to vary from one investor to the next. VIEW AS FULL TABLE

Read More

Sustainable Bottom Line:  Fund quality ratings, ranging from A to E, can be used to screen and construct sustainable investment portfolios by investors and advisors. SRA quality ratings-An Explanation: Fund quality ratings are assigned to funds within their designated investment category/segment. The investment category/segment for which the the displayed ratings have been assigned falls into the thematic renewable energy segment, defined as mutual funds and ETFs that aim to invest in companies across sectors that will drive and benefit from the energy transformation. The segment covers 38 funds/share classes with $4.2 billion in net assets as of May 30, 2025, excluding funds that employ leverage. Fund quality ratings, which are expressed along a five-point scale that runs from A (highest quality) to E (lowest quality), can be used to screen and construct sustainable investment portfolios by investors and financial advisors. Ratings combine qualitative as well as quantitative considerations and are derived based on an assessment of five factors. The first three, which are evaluated qualitatively, are: (a) Management company. The fund should be offered and managed by an established firm with a positive reputation, to ensure effective fund operations and instill trust and confidence in the organization. (b) Years in operation. The fund should be in operation for at least three years and managed pursuant to the same investment strategy—to provide a sufficiently long but not excessively long view against which to evaluate the fund’s operations, strategy, and performance. Some exceptions may apply.  (c) Fund size. The fund’s total net assets should exceed $30 million—so that it may be managed more efficiently and to provide some protection against the fund’s early liquidation or closure. Some exceptions may apply in the case of funds offered by larger, established firms. The next two factors, which are evaluated quantitatively via a scoring methodology, are: (d) Total returns. The fund’s performance results, achieved by adhering to a relatively consistent investment strategy and sustainability approach, are evaluated relative to an appropriate securities market index over a one year, three year and five-year intervals, and (e) Expense ratio. The fund’s expense ratio is evaluated relative to other funds in the same investment category/segment. One evaluated and scored, fund quality ratings are distributed as follows: Top 15%=A, next 20%=B, next 30%=C, next 20%=D and final 15%=E. NA indicates that a rating has not been assigned to the fund due to its use of leverage or the fund's failure to meet one of the minimum requirements, for example, fund size. How to use the ratings? Funds with quality ratings in the “A” and “B” category levels are  considered primary candidates in constructing a portfolio consisting entirely or partially of sustainable funds. That said, additional research to qualify a fund may be in order.  In the case of thematic funds, such as renewable energy funds, investors should keep in mind that some funds are even more narrowly focused, for example, funds investing in solar or wind energy, while others are broader based, for example, renewable energy. Fund selections should be consistent with an investor’s financial and sustainability goals and objectives. It should be noted that the ratings do not address the fund's sustainable investing approach and methodology.   While certainly relevant, such considerations should be evaluated relative to each individual investor's sustainability preferences which tend to vary from one investor to the next. VIEW AS FULL TABLE

Read More
Go Back

Research

Research and analysis to keep sustainable investors up to-date on a broad range of topics that include trends and developments in sustainable investing and sustainable finance, regulatory updates, performance results and considerations, investing through index funds and actively managed portfolios, asset allocation updates, expenses, ESG ratings and data, company and product news, green, social and sustainable bonds, green bond funds as well as reporting and disclosure practices, to name just a few.

A continuously updated Funds Directory is also available to investors.  This is intended to become a comprehensive listing of sustainable mutual funds, ETFs and other investment products along with a description of their sustainable investing approaches as set out in fund prospectuses and related regulatory filings.

Getting started

Many questions have surfaced in recent years regarding sustainable and ESG investing.  Here, investors and financial intermediaries will find materials that describe the various approaches to sustainable investing and their implementation.  While sustainable investing approaches vary and they have thus far defied universally accepted definitions, many practitioners agree that they fall into the following broad categories:  Values-based investing, investing via exclusions, impact investing, thematic investments and ESG integration.  In conjunction with each of these approaches, investors may also adopt various issuer engagement procedures and proxy voting practices.  That said, sustainable investing approaches will continue to evolve.

In addition to periodic updates regarding sustainable investing and how this form of investing is evolving, investors and financial intermediaries interested in implementing a sustainable investing approach will also find source materials that cover basic investing themes as well as asset allocation tactics.

Inesting ideas

Thoughts and ideas targeting sustainable investing strategies executed through various registered and non-registered sustainable investment funds and products such as mutual funds, Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs), Exchange Traded Notes (ETNs), closed-end funds, Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) and Unit Investment Trusts (UITs). Coverage extends to investment management firms as well as fund groups. 

Independent source for sustainable investment management company research, analysis, opinions and sustainable fund disclosure assessments