Environmental, Social and

Governance scores from LSEG

October 2024
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 2

Contents
Executive summary.................................................................................................................................................. 3
Data process............................................................................................................................................................ 5
Frequency of updates .............................................................................................................................................. 6
Global coverage ....................................................................................................................................................... 6
Scores overview....................................................................................................................................................... 7
Scores structure ....................................................................................................................................................... 8
Scores calculation methodology..............................................................................................................................10
Step 1: ESG category scores ..................................................................................................................................10
Step 2: Materiality matrix.........................................................................................................................................11
Step 3: Overall ESG score calculation and pillar score ...........................................................................................15
Step 4: Controversies scores calculation ................................................................................................................16
Step 5: ESGC score ................................................................................................................................................17
Step 6: Feedback and Changes..............................................................................................................................18

Appendix A - Category Score Example .............................................................................................................................. 19

Appendix B – ESG Magnitude (Materiality) Matrix ..................................................................................................21
Appendix C – ESG Category Weights Matrix ..........................................................................................................24
Appendix D – Pillar Scoring Example......................................................................................................................26
Appendix E – Pillar Weights Matrix .........................................................................................................................27
Appendix F – Category Score Definitions................................................................................................................29
Appendix G – Controversies data Measures...........................................................................................................30
Appendix H – Controversies Scoring Example .......................................................................................................32
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 3

Executive summary
LSEG recognises the increasingly critical importance of transparent, accurate and comparable environmental,
social and governance (ESG) data and analytics for the financial industry. We strive to be the trusted and
preferred partner in the transition to sustainable finance and are committed to bringing to the market an array of
best-in-class data, analytics and workflow solutions, which allow customers to use LSEG data as the backbone of
their investment processes.
LSEG offers one of the most comprehensive ESG databases in the industry, covering over 90% of the global
market cap, across more than 870 different ESG metrics, with history dating back to 2002.
With LSEG, you can easily integrate ESG factors into portfolio analysis, equity research, screening or quantitative
analysis. We offer users the possibility to combine and analyse ESG data using cutting-edge applications for in-
depth analysis.
ESG scores from LSEG are designed to transparently and objectively measure a company’s relative ESG
performance, commitment and effectiveness, based on company-reported data. This covers 10 main themes
including emissions, environmental product innovation, human rights, shareholders and so on. We also provide
an overall ESG combined (ESGC) score, which is discounted for significant ESG controversies impacting the
corporations we cover. ESG data is available for close to 16,000 public and private companies globally, with time
series data going back to 2002. The percentile rank scores are simple to understand (available in both
percentages and letter grades from D- to A+). They are benchmarked against The LSEG Business Classifications
(TRBC – Industry Group) for all environmental and social categories, as well as the controversies score. They are
also measured against the country of incorporation for all governance categories.
The LSEG ESG scores are data-driven, accounting for the most material industry metrics, with minimal company
size and transparency biases.
The scores are based on relative performance of ESG factors with the company’s sector (for environmental and
social) and country of incorporation (for governance). LSEG does not presume to define what ‘good’ looks like;
we let the data determine industry-based relative performance within the construct of our criteria and data model.
LSEG ESG scoring methodology has a number of key calculation principles set out below.

1. Unique ESG magnitude (materiality) weightings have been included – as the importance of ESG factors
differs across industries, we have mapped each metric’s materiality for each industry on a scale of 1 to 10.
2. Transparency stimulation – company disclosure is at the core of our methodology. With applied weighting,
not reporting ‘immaterial’ data points doesn’t greatly affect a company’s score, whereas not reporting on ‘highly
material’ data points will negatively affect a company’s score.

3. ESG controversies overlay – we verify companies’ actions against commitments, to magnify the impact of
significant controversies on the overall ESG scoring. The scoring methodology aims to address the market cap
bias from which large companies suffer by introducing severity weights, which ensure controversy scores are
adjusted based on a company’s size.

4. Industry and country benchmarks at the data point scoring level – to facilitate comparable analysis within
peer groups.

5. Percentile rank scoring methodology – to eliminate hidden layers of calculations. This methodology enables
LSEG to produce a score between 0 and 100, as well as easy-to-understand letter grades.
Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 4
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 5

Data process
With over 600 content research analysts trained to collect ESG data, we have one of the largest ESG content
collection operations in the world. With local language expertise and operating from different locations across the
globe, we process numerous publicly available information sources with the aim of providing up-to-date, objective
and comprehensive coverage. There are over 870 ESG measures, which our analysts process manually for each
company within the ESG universe. Each measure undergoes a careful process to standardise the information and
guarantee it is comparable across the entire range of companies.
The database is updated on a continuous basis – aligned with corporate reporting patterns – and data is
refreshed on products every week, including the recalculation of the ESG scores. Updates could include a brand
new company being added to the database, the latest fiscal year update or the inclusion of new controversy
events. In most cases, reported ESG data is updated once a year in line with companies’ own ESG disclosure.
We refresh data more frequently in exceptional cases, usually when there is a significant change in the reporting
or corporate structure during the year. ESG news and controversies are updated on a continuous basis, as and
when such events occur and get picked up by global media.

Annual Company 600+ content research analysts trained to collect ESG data
reports websites across the globe in Beijing, Bangalore and Manila

NGO ESG database

Stock exchange
websites filings

NGO

CSR News
reports sources

Data quality is a key part of the collection process; that is why we use a combination of both algorithmic and
human processes to make sure we achieve as close to 100% data quality as possible. Below is an overview of
the various methods we use to achieve this goal.
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 6

Frequency of updates
All LSEG ESG scores, including controversies scores, are updated on a weekly basis.

Definitive scores
Scores will be marked as ‘definitive’ for all historical years excluding the five most recent. For instance, if the most
recent fiscal year is FY2023, then all historical scores prior to FY2019 will be considered definitive – but not those
between FY2023 and FY2019. Definitive scores remain unchanged, even if there are changes to the underlying
data due to company restatements or data corrections.

Global coverage
ESG data is available for close to 16,000 public and private companies. ESG scores and metrics are available for
circa 14,500 public entities with time series from 2002. ESG metrics are available for 1,300 private companies
globally. A regional breakdown of coverage is provided in the illustration below.
Our coverage has evolved over time and is continuously expanding as we include more indices. We review the
constituents of these indices on a quarterly basis when additional companies are also included in our coverage.
The timeline in the illustration breaks down the various indices’ which form part of our ESG universe and when
coverage commenced for them.
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 7

Scores overview
LSEG ESG scores reflect the underlying ESG data framework and are a transparent, data-driven assessment of
companies’ relative ESG performance and capacity, integrating and accounting for industry materiality and
company size biases. LSEG ESG scoring methodology follows a number of key calculation principles (set out
below). An overall ESGC score is also calculated, which discounts the ESG score for news controversies that
materially impact corporations. The underlying measures are granular enough to differentiate effectively between
companies that have limited reporting and are not transparent, or deliver minimal implementation and execution,
versus companies that ‘walk the talk’ and emerge as leaders in their respective industries or regions.
ESG scores are calculated and available for all companies and historical fiscal periods in the ESG global
coverage, i.e., back to fiscal year 2002 for approximately 1,000 companies (mainly US and European).
The model comprises two overall ESG scores:

1. ESG score – measures the company’s ESG performance based on verifiable reported data in the public domain.

2. ESGC score – overlays the ESG score with ESG controversies to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the
company’s sustainability impact and conduct over time.
The availability of the two overall scores and underlying category assessments allows users to adopt and apply
the scoring that meets their requirements, mandates or investment criteria.
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 8

Scores structure
The model is fully automated, data-driven and transparent, which makes it free from subjectivity and hidden
calculations or inputs.

ESG score
LSEG captures and calculates over 870 company-level ESG measures, of which a subset of 186 (details in the
ESG glossary, available on request) of the most comparable and material per industry, power the overall
company assessment and scoring process.
These are grouped into 10 categories that reformulate the three pillar scores and the final ESG score, which is a
reflection of the company’s ESG performance, commitment and effectiveness based on publicly-reported information.
The category scores are rolled up into three pillar scores – environmental, social and corporate governance. The
ESG pillar score is a relative sum of the category weights, which vary per industry for the environmental and
social categories. For governance, the weights remain the same across all industries. The pillar weights are
normalised to percentages ranging between 0 and 100 (for further details, refer to Appendix C on page 19 of
this document).

Category definitions are available in Appendix F.

ESGC score
ESGC scores provide a rounded and comprehensive scoring of a company’s ESG performance, based on the
reported information pertaining to the ESG pillars, with the ESG controversies overlay captured from global
media sources. The main objective of this score is to discount the ESG performance score based on negative
media stories. It does this by incorporating the impact of significant, material ESG controversies in the overall
ESGC score.
When companies are involved in ESG controversies, the ESGC score is calculated as the weighted average of
the ESG scores and ESG controversies score per fiscal period, with recent controversies reflected in the latest
completed period. When companies are not involved in ESG controversies, the ESGC score is equal to the
ESG score.

ESG controversies category

The ESG controversies score is calculated based on 23 ESG controversy topics. During the year, if a scandal
occurs, the company involved is penalised and this affects their overall ESGC score and grading. The impact of
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 9

the event may still be seen in the following year if there are new developments related to the negative event, for
example, lawsuits, ongoing legislation disputes or fines. All new media materials are captured as the controversy
progresses. The controversies score also addresses the market cap bias from which large-cap companies suffer,
as they attract more media attention than smaller-cap companies.

Easily identify companies with strong ESG practices or exposure to

ESG risks
ESG scores are available on LSEG Workspace and Eikon for seamless integration into users’ workflows. They
are accessible via ESG company views, the Screener app, Workspace/Eikon for Office and the Portfolio Analytics
(PORTF) app. The ESG views show the scores letter grades to show at a glance how companies are performing
relative to their peers, and where a company’s ESG weaknesses and strengths lie.
ESG scores are available on LSEG Workspace, Eikon, the Microsoft® Excel® add-in, LSEG Datastream and via
Datastream Data Loader (DDL). Plus, LSEG Quantitative Analytics offers automated processing and integration
of all ESG data and scores into users’ quant models and analytics tools. The scores, as well as all underlying
ESG data and analytics, are also available via a cloud-based delivery solution on the LSEG Data Platform.
The conversion from a percentile score to a letter grade is based on the logic in the table below.

Score range Grade Description

0.0 <= score <= 0.083333 D- ‘D’ score indicates poor relative ESG performance ESG
and insufficient degree of transparency in reporting laggards
0.083333 < score <= 0.166666 D
material ESG data publicly.
0.166666 < score <= 0.250000 D+
0.250000 < score <= 0.333333 C- ‘C’ score indicates satisfactory relative ESG
performance and moderate degree of transparency in
0.333333 < score <= 0.416666 C
reporting material ESG data publicly.
0.416666 < score <= 0.500000 C+
0.500000 < score <= 0.583333 B- ‘B’ score indicates good relative ESG performance
and above- average degree of transparency in
0.583333 < score <= 0.666666 B
reporting material ESG data publicly.
0.666666 < score <= 0.750000 B+
0.750000 < score <= 0.833333 A- ‘A’ score indicates excellent relative ESG performance
0.833333 < score <= 0.916666 A
and high degree of transparency in reporting material ESG
ESG data publicly. leaders
0.916666 < score <= 1 A+
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 10

Scores calculation
methodology
We believe that ESG data is fundamentally relevant to informed investment decision making and as such,
transparency is a key component of our customers’ trust and confidence in the data we provide to them. This
section describes the LSEG ESG scoring methodology in detail.
The LSEG ESG scoring methodology can be summarised and illustrated by means of a five-step process flow.

Step 1: ESG category scores

Treatment of underlying data points – Boolean and numeric
1. Boolean data
Boolean questions are typically answered with ‘Yes’ ‘No’ or ‘Null’. For instance, the answer to ‘Does the company
have a water efficiency policy?’ can be ‘Yes’ (which is equal to a value of 1) if this is indeed the case, or ‘No’ if the
company in question does not have such a policy, or if it reports only partial information (which is equivalent to
‘No’). In such cases, a default value of 0 is automatically assigned by the system. In other words, a default value
of 0 is assigned for Boolean data points when no relevant data is found in the public disclosure of companies.
Each measure has a polarity indicating whether a higher value is positive or negative. For instance, having an
emissions reduction policy is positive, but having environmental controversies is negative.
Based on the polarity of the data point (i.e., is having a higher value ‘better’ or ‘worse’?), Boolean data points are
converted to numeric values for the percentile score calculation. Details are available in the table below:
Default values
Positive Yes = 1 No/Null = 0
Negative Yes/Null = 0 No = 1
Note: only for TR.CriticalCountry1 is a default value of 1 assigned for ‘Null’, assuming those companies do not
have operations in the listed critical countries.
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 11

2. Numeric data
A relative percentile ranking is only applied if a numeric data point is reported by a company, while all the
companies in an industry group report that respective data point.
Again, each measure has a polarity indicating whether a higher value is positive or negative. For instance, more
water recycled is positive, but more emissions is negative.
Industry group relevancy
Some indicators are industry-specific and thus not relevant for all companies. If an indicator is irrelevant for a
particular sector, then it is excluded from the calculation and its value will be deemed not relevant (N/R).
Example: the indicator Environmental Assets Under Management is relevant only for the financial sector.

Category scores calculation methodology

Percentile rank scoring methodology is adopted to calculate the 10 category scores and the ESG controversies
score. It is based on three factors:

– How many companies are worse than the current one?

– How many companies have the same value?

– How many companies have a value at all?

Percentile rank score is based on the rank, and therefore is not very sensitive to outliers.
𝑛𝑜. 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑠𝑎𝑚𝑒 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 𝑖𝑛𝑐𝑙𝑢𝑑𝑒𝑑 𝑖𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑐𝑢𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑛𝑡 𝑜𝑛𝑒
𝑛𝑜. 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑎 𝑤𝑜𝑟𝑠𝑒 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒 + 2
𝑠𝑐𝑜𝑟𝑒 =
𝑛𝑜. 𝑜𝑓 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑛𝑖𝑒𝑠 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑎 𝑣𝑎𝑙𝑢𝑒

Peer group/category and benchmark

To calculate the environmental and social category scores, as well as the controversies score, the TRBC
industry group is used as the benchmark, as these topics are more relevant and material to companies within the
same industries.
To calculate the governance categories, the country of incorporation is used as the benchmark, as best
governance practices are more consistent within countries.

Step 2: Materiality matrix

To apply an objective, impartial and trusted assessment of the importance of each ESG theme to different
industries, the LSEG ESG magnitude matrix was developed as a proprietary model and is applied at the category
level. Importantly, the magnitude values are automatically and dynamically adjusted as ESG corporate disclosure
evolves and matures.

Introduction to LSEG ESG materiality matrix

Materiality for LSEG ESG is defined in the form of category weights. Category weights are calculated based on
an objective and data-driven approach to determine the relative importance of each theme to each individual
industry group. Based on the themes covered in each category, data points with sufficient disclosure are used as
a proxy for industry magnitude. Themes and data points have a one-to-one relationship; in other words, there is
one data point identified per theme. For some themes, there are no data points that may be used as good proxies
of relative importance, due primarily to insufficient disclosure. These themes are not included in the scoring
methodology to derive the materiality matrix but are present in corporate ESG reporting and the LSEG ESG
database. Listing all the individual themes enables LSEG to identify critical data points across the themes where
reporting is sufficient, to use as a proxy of materiality.
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 12

The table below provides a detailed view on the ESG themes covered in each category, with the respective data
points evaluated as proxies of ESG magnitude per industry group.

Pillars Categories Themes Data points Weight method

Environmental Emission Emissions TR.AnalyticCO2 Quant industry
median
Waste TR.AnalyticTotalWaste Quant industry
median
Biodiversity*
Environmental management
systems*
Innovation Product innovation TR.EnvProducts Transparency weights
Green revenues, research and TR.AnalyticEnvRD Quant industry
development (R&D) and capital median
expenditures (CapEx)
Resource use Water TR.AnalyticWaterUse Quant industry
median
Energy TR.AnalyticEnergyUse Quant industry
median
Sustainable packaging*
Environmental supply chain*
Social Community Equally important to all industry Equally important to
groups, hence a median weight all industry groups
of five is assigned to all
Human rights Human rights TR.PolicyHumanRights Transparency weights
Product Responsible marketing TR.PolicyResponsibleMarketing Transparency weights
responsibility
Product quality TR.ProductQualityMonitoring Transparency weights
Data privacy TR.PolicyDataPrivacy Transparency weights
Workforce Diversity and inclusion TR.WomenEmployees Quant industry
median
Career development and TR.AvgTrainingHours Transparency weights
training
Working conditions TR.TradeUnionRep Quant industry
median
Health and safety TR.AnalyticLostDays Transparency weights
Governance CSR strategy CSR strategy Data points in governance Count of data points
category and governance pillar in each governance
ESG reporting and
category/all data
transparency
points in governance
pillar
Management Structure (independence, Data points in governance Count of data points
diversity, committees) category and governance pillar in each governance
category/all data
Compensation
points in governance
pillar
Shareholders Shareholder rights Data points in governance Count of data points
category and governance pillar in each governance
Takeover defenses
category/all data
points in governance
pillar

*No data points available that may be used as a proxy for ESG magnitude/materiality
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 13

Category weight highlights

Below are a few highlights regarding how category weights are calculated:

– The category weights are normalised to percentages ranging between 0 and 100

– Across categories of more than one theme and respective data point, the scoring methodology takes the
average of each data point per industry group to calculate the weight at a category level

– The default category weights start at five points, which is the median, with the points’ distribution ranging from
1 to 10. The adjustment is determined on the basis of the industry group data point median

– For environmental and social categories, a combination of industry medians and transparency (see 1 and 2
below) is applied to arrive at the category weights, based on the weight method described in the table above

– The community category is given equal weight across all industry groups as it is equally important to all
of these

– As all the data points are equally important to the calculation of magnitude weights for corporate governance in
all industry groups, this calculation is based not on themes but rather on underlying data points. The default
category weights are assigned at five points, with the points’ distribution ranging from 1 to 10. Since
governance comprises three categories, the total points under governance would be 15. To derive the
magnitude weight for governance, all data points per category are divided by the total of governance data
points (part of scoring) and then multiplied by the total of 15 points. For example, the shareholders’ category
gains three points, i.e., (12/56) x 15 = 3

– In the innovation category, the availability of ‘environmental’ R&D expenditure data for roughly half of the
industry groups does not meet the 5% transparency threshold; thus, a default weight of one is assigned

– As responsible product marketing is a sector-specific data point, and the data availability for roughly 80% of
industry groups does not meet the 7% transparency threshold, a default weight of one is assigned in the
product responsibility category

Two methods for calculating the magnitude matrix

The magnitude matrix is calculated using the following two methods for numeric and Boolean data points, used as
a proxy of magnitude for environmental and social pillars.
1. Industry median
Primarily used for numeric data points with environmental and social impact. Materiality weighting is to be based
on the relative proportion that a particular sector contributes to the overall gross number in the full ESG universe.
– The question of materiality, or in other words, the relative weight, is determined by the relative median value for
a company in that industry group. The relative median values for each industry group to which the data point is
material are compared, and decile ranks are assigned. The decile rank determines the relative weight
assigned to that data point in determining the industry weight – from 1 to 10
2. Transparency weights
Primarily used for Boolean data points. Boolean data points are measures with a value of ‘Yes’ or ‘No’ (see page
9). Magnitude weights are based on the level of disclosure of each data point in a given industry group.

– The question of materiality, or in other words, the relative weight, is determined based on the disclosure of
relative level in that industry group. The disclosure percentage for each industry group to which the data point
is material is identified, and decile ranks are assigned. The decile rank determines the relative weight assigned
to that data point in determining the industry weight – from 1 to 10
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 14

Category weight calculation

The magnitude weights of all 10 categories are summed up for each respective industry group. Each category’s
magnitude weight is divided by the sum of the magnitude weights of the respective industry group to derive the
category weight.
𝑀𝑎𝑔𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑒 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑎 𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑜𝑟𝑦
𝐶𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑜𝑟𝑦 𝑤𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑛 𝑖𝑛𝑑𝑢𝑠𝑡𝑟𝑦 𝑔𝑟𝑜𝑢𝑝 =
𝑆𝑢𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑎𝑔𝑛𝑖𝑡𝑢𝑑𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑓 𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑐𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑔𝑜𝑟𝑖𝑒𝑠

To summarise, below are the steps involved in the calculation of category weights for the environmental and
social pillars:

– Data points that are a good proxy for assessing industry impact across environmental and social topics are
used for the calculation of materiality (magnitude matrix)

– Industry medians per data point, per industry group, are calculated and a relative median is derived. The
relative median is equal to the median value of an industry group, divided by the sum of the medians of all
industry groups for the respective data point. Deciles are identified on relative median values and deciles’
weights are applied between 0 and 10 accordingly

– If a category has more than one data point, the average of decile weight is considered to derive the magnitude
weight for that category

– The magnitude weights for corporate governance are calculated by a count of data points in each governance
category/total data points in the governance pillar, multiplied by the default category weights of 15

– Category weights are then derived using the magnitude weights of all the categories for an industry group
Note: relevancy, category weights and pillar weights will be calculated against the latest data for all companies
within LSEG ESG coverage (FY0). Once defined, the analysis behind the weights will be run on an annual basis
and the results benchmarked against preset thresholds to determine if an adjustment to the weights is required.
The revisions will be applied only to active fiscal years (where data collection for fiscal years is still in process).
Only large- and mid-cap companies are considered to identify relevancy and category weights, as small-cap
companies tend to report less data, which might impact the relevancy percentage and weights.
For further details, refer to Appendix B – magnitude matrix and Appendix C – category weights matrix.
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 15

Step 3: Overall ESG score

calculation and pillar score
To calculate the overall pillar and ESG scores, category weights per industry are applied using data-driven and
objective logic.

Calculation of overall ESG score

ESG scores are aggregated based on the 10 category weights, which are calculated based on the LSEG
magnitude matrix. Detailed ESG score calculations are available here.
Environmental Social Governance
Industry Emission Innovation Resource Human Product Workforce Community Management Shareholders CSR ESG scores
group use rights responsibility strategy
Water and 0.15 0.13 0.15 0.05 0.04 0.13 0.09 0.17 0.05 0.03
related
utilities
ABC 0.66 0.00 0.44 0.05 0.58 0.89 0.34 0.99 0.84 0.56 0.571146184
CBD 0.71 0.96 0.38 0.00 0.69 0.66 0.70 0.37 0.01 0.56 0.547913483
DEF 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.11 0.21 0.14 0.54 0.150536652
EFG 0.00 0.31 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.59 0.89 0.94 0.00 0.327824384
EMJ 0.87 0.31 0.68 0.20 0.86 0.84 0.98 0.33 0.87 0.68 0.639400132
EMQ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.02 0.88 0.08 0.01 0.194782046
ENR 0.92 0.81 0.85 0.75 0.97 0.93 0.66 0.40 0.49 0.86 0.756319427
GPQ 0.24 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.02 0.16 0.56 0.56 0.00 0.223443757
HIJ 0.61 0.31 0.50 0.65 0.42 0.80 0.80 0.48 0.27 0.37 0.54145808
IBD 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.30 0.51 0.49 0.00 0.145398367
JKL 0.50 0.73 0.74 0.00 0.78 0.43 0.93 0.62 0.89 0.26 0.611504799
LMN 0.76 0.31 0.56 0.00 0.47 0.48 0.48 0.17 0.24 0.26 0.415151441
MNO 0.82 0.31 0.91 0.40 0.58 0.61 0.07 0.33 0.52 0.63 0.539888776
MSE 0.55 0.00 0.62 0.85 0.17 0.75 0.84 0.77 0.35 0.91 0.581805891
OPQ 0.29 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.17 0.16 0.48 0.15 0.42 0.08 0.212906948
PQR 0.45 0.65 0.79 0.55 0.78 0.52 0.75 0.76 0.76 0.16 0.640379494
PSF 0.97 0.88 0.97 0.95 0.92 0.98 0.89 0.15 0.73 0.34 0.776142465
RST 0.08 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.20 0.59 0.42 0.42 0.00 0.228111754
UVW 0.34 0.00 0.26 0.20 0.58 0.70 0.39 0.26 0.16 0.31 0.316400123
VPF 0.16 0.31 0.15 0.00 0.17 0.11 0.25 0.88 0.90 0.00 0.325828115
XYZ 0.39 0.00 0.21 0.40 0.17 0.39 0.48 0.95 0.73 0.51 0.429105164
YQM 0.16 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.36 0.34 0.20 0.69 0.34 0.00 0.25005416

Calculation of pillar scores

ESG pillar scores are the relative sum of the category weights. Calculations to derive pillar scores are
illustrated below:
Pillar Category Category Category Sum of category Formula: sum of New category Formula: new Pillar Formula:
scores* weights weights category weights weights* category weights scores pillar scores

Environmental Emissions 0.98 0.15 0.35 (0.15/0.44) (0.98*0.35)+

Environmental Resource use 0.97 0.15 0.44 (0.15+0.15+0.13) 0.35 (0.15/0.44) 0.94 (0.97*0.35)+
Environmental Innovation 0.85 0.13 0.29 (0.13/0.44) (0.85*0.29)

Social Community 0.89 0.09 0.28 (0.09/0.31) (0.89*0.28)+

Social Human rights 0.95 0.05 (0.09+0.05+0.04+0.13) 0.17 (0.05/0.31) (0.95*0.17)+
0.31 094
(0.92*0.13)+
Product
Social 0.92 0.04 0.13 (0.04/0.31) (0.98*0.43)
responsibility
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 16

Pillar Category Category Category Sum of category Formula: sum of New category Formula: new Pillar Formula:
scores* weights weights category weights weights* category weights scores pillar scores

Social Workforce 0.98 0.13 0.43 (0.13/0.31)

Corporate
Shareholders 0.73 0.05 0.20 (0.05/0.26)
governance
(0.73*0.20)+
Corporate 0.26 0.32 (0.34* 0.13)+
CSR strategy 0.34 0.03 (0.05+0.03+0.17) 0.13 (0.03/0.26)
governance (0.19*0.67)
Corporate
Management 0.19 0.17 0.67 (0.17/0.26)
governance

*Decimal places to be considered

See example in Appendix D.

Step 4: Controversies scores

calculation
ESG controversies score is calculated based on 23 ESG controversy topics, with recent controversies reflected in
the latest complete period (for further details, refer to Appendix G of this document).

– Default value of all controversy measures is 0

– All recent controversies are counted in the latest closed fiscal year and no controversy is double-counted

– Controversies are benchmarked on industry group

– Companies with no controversies will get a score of 100

– Controversy score calculation addresses the market cap bias from which large-cap companies suffer, as they
attract more media attention than smaller-cap companies

– Severity weights are applied to address market cap bias and are applicable for the calculation of current
and historical periods. The calculation of controversy scores based on the market cap grouping is defined
as follows:

Global benchmark Cap class Severity rate*

>=10 billion Large 0.33
>=2 billion Mid 0.67
<2 billion Small 1

*Logic to derive weights: large = 1/3 or 0.33, mid = 0.67, small = 0.33+0.67 = 1.

Recent controversies are accounted as follows:

– For instance, the last completed fiscal year for a company is 31 December 2019. If there is one controversy on
1 May 2020, and another on 1 March 2021, both are accounted under ‘recent controversies’ and included in
the scoring for FY2019

– Once FY2020 is completed, the two recent controversies are moved to FY2020. The controversy related to 1
May 2020, is moved to the ‘normal’ controversy data point, while the controversy related to 1 March 2021
remains under ‘recent’ but is accounted for in FY2020

– When FY2021 is completed, the controversy related to 1 March 2021 will be removed from ‘recent’ controversy
within FY2020 and added to the ‘normal’ controversy data point in FY2021
See example in Appendix H.
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 17

Step 5: ESGC score

The ESGC score is calculated as the average of the ESG score and ESG controversies score when there are
controversies during the fiscal year. When the controversies score is greater than the ESG score, then the ESG
score is equal to the ESGC score.
Environmental Social Governance

Industry Emission Innovation Resource Human Product Workforce Community Management Shareholders CSR ESG scores Controversy Combined
group use rights responsibility strategy scores scores

Water and 0.15 0.13 0.15 0.05 0.04 0.13 0.09 0.17 0.05 0.03
related
utilities

ABC 0.66 0.00 0.44 0.05 0.58 0.89 0.34 0.99 0.84 0.56 0.571146184 1 0.571146184

CBD 0.71 0.96 0.38 0.00 0.69 0.66 0.70 0.37 0.01 0.56 0.547913483 1 0.547913483

DEF 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.11 0.21 0.14 0.54 0.150536652 1 0.150536652

EFG 0.00 0.31 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.59 0.89 0.94 0.00 0.327824384 1 0.327824384

EMJ 0.87 0.31 0.68 0.20 0.86 0.84 0.98 0.33 0.87 0.68 0.639400132 0.25 0.444700066
EMQ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.02 0.88 0.08 0.01 0.194782046 1 0.194782046

ENR 0.92 0.81 0.85 0.75 0.97 0.93 0.66 0.40 0.49 0.86 0.756319427 1 0.756319427

GPQ 0.24 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.02 0.16 0.56 0.56 0.00 0.223443757 1 0.223443757

HIJ 0.61 0.31 0.50 0.65 0.42 0.80 0.80 0.48 0.27 0.37 0.54145808 1 0.54145808

IBD 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.30 0.51 0.49 0.00 0.145398367 1 0.145398367

JKL 0.50 0.73 0.74 0.00 0.78 0.43 0.93 0.62 0.89 0.26 0.611504799 1 0.611504799

LMN 0.76 0.31 0.56 0.00 0.47 0.48 0.48 0.17 0.24 0.26 0.415151441 0.75 0.415151441

MNO 0.82 0.31 0.91 0.40 0.58 0.61 0.07 0.33 0.52 0.63 0.539888776 1 0.539888776

MSE 0.55 0.00 0.62 0.85 0.17 0.75 0.84 0.77 0.35 0.91 0.581805891 1 0.581805891

OPQ 0.29 0.00 0.32 0.00 0.17 0.16 0.48 0.15 0.42 0.08 0.212906948 1 0.212906948

PQR 0.45 0.65 0.79 0.55 0.78 0.52 0.75 0.76 0.76 0.16 0.640379494 1 0.640379494

PSF 0.97 0.88 0.97 0.95 0.92 0.98 0.89 0.15 0.73 0.34 0.776142465 1 0.776142465

RST 0.08 0.31 0.00 0.00 0.17 0.20 0.59 0.42 0.42 0.00 0.228111754 1 0.228111754

UVW 0.34 0.00 0.26 0.20 0.58 0.70 0.39 0.26 0.16 0.31 0.316400123 1 0.316400123

VPF 0.16 0.31 0.15 0.00 0.17 0.11 0.25 0.88 0.90 0.00 0.325828115 1 0.325828115
XYZ 0.39 0.00 0.21 0.40 0.17 0.39 0.48 0.95 0.73 0.51 0.429105164 1 0.429105164

YQM 0.16 0.00 0.09 0.00 0.36 0.34 0.20 0.69 0.34 0.00 0.25005416 1 0.25005416

Refer to the below table for combined score logics:

Scenario ESG controversies score ESG score ESGC score

If controversies score is >=ESG score, then ESG 100 89 89
score = ESGC score
If controversies scores is <ESG score, then ESGC 48 49 48.5
score = average of ESG and controversies score
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 18

Step 6: Feedback & Changes

How to raise a query
LSEG Data & Analytics clients can raise questions about our ESG scoring model via the link below.
Environmental, Social & Governance scores from LSEG are refreshed weekly and any changes applied because
of client feedback will be factored into this cycle.

Product and Content Support | MyAccount (refinitiv.com)

Scoring Methodology Changes

The relevance and suitability of our ESG scoring methodology is reviewed periodically to ensure its effectiveness
and alignment with the evolving needs of clients and the industry. However, changes to our scoring methodology
are implemented cautiously and infrequently, with the aim of maintaining stability and minimizing disruption to the
users of the data. This approach is adopted to maintain consistency, allow for accurate trend analysis and to
preserve confidence in the scoring model among LSEG D&A customers.

Should any iterations be required to the ESG scoring methodology, we follow a systematic process before
releasing. This ensures enhancements are implemented in a thoughtful and responsible manner. As new
regulations are introduced and reporting standards evolve, the data metrics and methodology used for scoring is
periodically evaluated to ensure its relevance and accuracy. Similarly, when new logic is developed, or existing
logic modified, impact analysis is performed to understand the potential effects on the scoring system and its
outputs. This analysis helps in identifying any potential limitations, biases, or unintended consequences that may
arise from the changes.

Changes, enhancements, and impact analysis is thoroughly documented to maintain transparency and
accountability. These documents are shared via client notifications which can be subscribed to via the Product &
Content Support url listed above. Client notifications are typically issued with a 30–90-day advance notice
depending on the complexity of change introduced. This allows our customers to review and understand changes
then make any necessary preparations to accommodate them.
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 19

Appendix A
Category scoring example
This section illustrates how a category score is calculated, using the data available in the ESG database as of
March 2020 for all water and related utilities industry companies (e.g., the emission category score for FY2017
across the 22 companies in this industry).
Detailed calculations of emission category scores are available here.

Step-by-step illustration
– There are 22 metrics that are considered in calculating emission category scores

– Values are extracted for all 22 metrics

– Numeric metrics are considered only if reported by the company

– Relevant numeric values are assigned and calculated for Boolean metrics

– Percentile score calculation formulas are applied for each measure

The following illustrates how the percentile formula is applied for a numeric data point ‘TR.AnalyticCO2’, which is
a negative polarity data point (i.e., the lower the better).

Description JKL ABC

No. of companies
10 9
with worse value
No. of companies
1 1
with same value
No. of companies
11 11
with value

Company name Eikon code DFO codes Value Score Percentile score
formula applied
JKL TR.AnalyticCo2 ENERO03V 0.000005 0.954545 (10+(1/2))/11
ABC TR.AnalyticCo2 ENERO03V 0.000123 0.863636 (9+(1/2))/11
LMN TR.AnalyticCo2 ENERO03V 0.000182 0.772727 (8+(1/2))/11
PQR TR.AnalyticCo2 ENERO03V 0.000189 0.681818 (7+(1/2))/11
ENR TR.AnalyticCo2 ENERO03V 0.00019 0.590909 (6+(1/2))/11
MSE TR.AnalyticCo2 ENERO03V 0.000211 0.5 (5+(1/2))/11
MNO TR.AnalyticCo2 ENERO03V 0.000218 0.409091 (4+(1/2))/11
EMJ TR.AnalyticCo2 ENERO03V 0.000314 0.318182 (3+(1/2))/11
UVW TR.AnalyticCo2 ENERO03V 0.000438 0.227273 (2+(1/2))/11
CBD TR.AnalyticCo2 ENERO03V 0.001081 0.136364 (1+(1/2))/11
PSF TR.AnalyticCo2 ENERO03V 0.001142 0.045455 (0+(1/2))/11
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 20

The following illustrates how the percentile formula is applied for a Boolean data point ‘TR.PolicyEmissions’,
which is a positive polarity data point (i.e., the higher the better).

Company Eikon code DFO codes Value Default value Percentile Percentile score
name for Boolean score formula applied
JKL TR.PolicyEmissions ENERDP0051 Yes 1 0.791666667 (7+(5/2))/12
ABC TR.PolicyEmissions ENERDP0051 Yes 1 0.791666667 (7+(5/2))/12
LMN TR.PolicyEmissions ENERDP0051 Yes 1 0.791666667 (7+(5/2))/12
PQR TR.PolicyEmissions ENERDP0051 Yes 1 0.791666667 (7+(5/2))/12
ENR TR.PolicyEmissions ENERDP0051 Yes 1 0.791666667 (7+(5/2))/12
MSE TR.PolicyEmissions ENERDP0051 No 0 0 0
MNO TR.PolicyEmissions ENERDP0051 No 0 0 0
EMJ TR.PolicyEmissions ENERDP0051 No 0 0 0
UVW TR.PolicyEmissions ENERDP0051 Null 0 0 0
CBD TR.PolicyEmissions ENERDP0051 Null 0 0 0
PSF TR.PolicyEmissions ENERDP0051 Null 0 0 0
XYZ TR.PolicyEmissions ENERDP0051 Null 0 0 0

– The same steps are applied to all other data points in the category

– After deriving percentile scores at a data point level, percentile scores are summed up at a company level as
described in the table below

Company name Eikon code DFO codes Values Percentile scores

ABC TR.AnalyticCO2 ENERO03V 0.000166844 0.833333333
ABC TR.PolicyEmissions ENERDP0051 1 0.7
ABC TR.TargetsEmissions ENERDP0161 1 0.9
ABC TR.BiodiversityImpactReduction ENERDP019 1 0.766666667
ABC TR.WasteReductionInitiatives ENERDP062 1 0.933333333
ABC TR.EnvPartnerships ENERDP070 1 0.766666667
ABC TR.EnvRestorationInitiatives ENERDP076 1 0.8
ABC TR.ClimateChangeRisksOpp ENERDP089 1 0.733333333
ABC TR.PolicyWaterEfficiency ENRRDP0121 0 0
ABC TR.PolicyEnergyEfficiency ENRRDP0122 0 0
ABC TR.TargetsWaterEfficiency ENRRDP0191 0 0
ABC TR.NOxSOxEmissionsReduction ENERDP033 0 0
ABC TR.eWasteReduction ENERDP063 0 0
Sum of all percentile scores 6.433333

– Percentile scores at company level are sorted from highest to lowest

– Apply percentile scores formula to derive emission category score

 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 21

Appendix B
The table below provides an indicative ESG magnitude (materiality) matrix based on assessment of sample ESG
data. It is not a definitive matrix to be used in the final scoring.
Environmental Social Governance

TRBC Industry Industry Emission Innovation Resource Human Product Workforce Community Management Shareholders CSR
Group Name Group use rights responsibility strategy
code
Aerospace & 521010 4 4 3 7 3 5 5 10 3 2
Defense
Automobiles & Auto 531010 6 10 5 9 5 6 5 10 3 2
Parts
Banking Services 551010 1 4 1 4 4 8 5 10 3 2
Beverages 541010 8 3 8 9 7 6 5 10 3 2
Biotechnology & 562020 4 1 6 1 5 3 5 10 3 2
Medical Research
Chemicals 511010 9 9 9 10 5 6 5 10 3 2
Coal 501010 10 1 10 3 1 5 5 10 3 2
Collective 555010 1 1 1 1 2 3 5 10 3 2
Investments
Communications & 571020 2 4 3 2 5 3 5 10 3 2
Networking
Computers, Phones 571060 3 8 2 10 6 6 5 10 3 2
& Household
Electronics
Construction & 522010 8 8 5 7 3 6 5 10 3 2
Engineering
Construction 512020 10 8 10 7 3 7 5 10 3 2
Materials
Consumer Goods 544010 7 9 7 9 5 6 5 10 3 2
Conglomerates
Containers & 513020 9 6 9 10 5 6 5 10 3 2
Packaging
Diversified Industrial 522020 3 7 4 9 1 6 5 10 3 2
Goods Wholesale
Diversified Retail 534020 6 2 6 2 4 4 5 10 3 2
Electric Utilities & 591010 10 8 9 4 3 8 5 10 3 2
IPPs
Electronic 571040 7 6 8 5 2 4 5 10 3 2
Equipment & Parts
Financial 573010 1 1 1 1 4 3 5 10 3 2
Technology
(Fintech) &
Infrastructure
Food & Drug 543010 6 3 4 5 8 6 5 10 3 2
Retailing
Food & Tobacco 541020 8 2 8 7 8 6 5 10 3 2
Freight & Logistics 524050 7 6 6 4 4 7 5 10 3 2
Services
Healthcare 561010 3 3 2 5 6 4 5 10 3 2
Equipment &
Supplies
Healthcare Providers 561020 3 1 4 3 6 4 5 10 3 2
& Services
Homebuilding & 532030 6 9 6 8 5 6 5 10 3 2
Construction
Supplies
Hotels & 533010 6 1 7 4 9 5 5 10 3 2
Entertainment
Services
Household Goods 532040 6 10 5 7 5 5 5 10 3 2
Insurance 553010 1 3 1 3 4 6 5 10 3 2
Investment Banking 551020 1 3 1 1 3 4 5 10 3 2
& Investment
Services
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 22

Environmental Social Governance

TRBC Industry Industry Emission Innovation Resource Human Product Workforce Community Management Shareholders CSR
Group Name Group use rights responsibility strategy
code
Investment Holding 556010 7 2 8 2 1 2 5 10 3 2
Companies
Leisure Products 532050 2 3 2 4 9 3 5 10 3 2
Machinery, Tools, 521020 5 10 4 6 5 4 5 10 3 2
Heavy Vehicles,
Trains & Ships
Media & Publishing 533020 2 2 2 4 6 5 5 10 3 2
Metals & Mining 512010 10 2 10 10 2 7 5 10 3 2
Miscellaneous 631010 6 1 6 1 3 4 5 10 3 2
Educational Service
Providers
Multiline Utilities 591040 10 9 9 6 4 7 5 10 3 2
Natural Gas Utilities 591020 7 7 8 5 5 8 5 10 3 2
Office Equipment 571050 4 10 3 10 7 5 5 10 3 2
Oil & Gas 501020 7 7 9 10 4 8 5 10 3 2
Oil & Gas Related 501030 8 3 7 8 2 6 5 10 3 2
Equipment and
Services
Paper & Forest 513010 10 9 10 6 1 7 5 10 3 2
Products
Passenger 524060 7 3 7 5 4 8 5 10 3 2
Transportation
Services
Personal & 542010 6 4 6 8 10 7 5 10 3 2
Household Products
& Services
Pharmaceuticals 562010 5 2 5 7 5 6 5 10 3 2
Professional & 631030 4 2 4 1 2 4 5 10 3 2
Business Education
Professional & 522030 4 3 4 6 4 5 5 10 3 2
Commercial
Services
Real Estate 601010 6 4 6 2 2 8 5 10 3 2
Operations
Renewable Energy 502010 6 6 6 1 3 3 5 10 3 2
Residential & 601020 8 2 8 1 3 5 5 10 3 2
Commercial REITs
Semiconductors & 571010 6 7 6 9 5 6 5 10 3 2
Semiconductor
Equipment
Software & IT 572010 1 2 2 2 4 2 5 10 3 2
Services
Specialty Retailers 534030 3 2 3 3 5 4 5 10 3 2
Telecommunications 574010 4 4 4 8 9 8 5 10 3 2
Services

The table below provides an indicative ESG magnitude (materiality) matrix based on assessment of sample ESG
data. It is not a definitive matrix to be used in the final scoring.
Environmental Social Governance
TRBC Industry Industry Emission Innovation Resource Human Product Workforce Community Management Shareholders CSR
Group Name Group use rights responsibility strategy
code
Telecommunications 574010 4 4 4 8 9 8 5 10 3 2
Services
Textiles & Apparel 532020 3 4 4 8 7 8 5 10 3 2
Transport 524070 7 2 7 6 3 9 5 10 3 2
Infrastructure
Uranium 503010 10 1 10 1 3 3 5 10 3 2
Water & Related 591030 9 8 9 3 2 8 5 10 3 2
Utilities
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 23

Note: Materiality matrix is not derived for the below four industry groups as currently there are no ESG companies
forming part of these industry groups in our coverage. Once there are sufficient number of companies under
these industry groups, materiality matrix would be derived according to the defined methodology.
Integrated Hardware & Software
Institutions, Associations & Organizations
Government Activity
School, College & University
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 24

Appendix C
The table below provides an indicative ESG category weights matrix based on assessment of sample ESG data.
It is not a definitive matrix to be used in the final scoring.
Environmental Social Governance

TRBC Industry Industry Emission Innovation Resource Human Product Workforce Community Management Shareholders CSR
Group Name Group use rights responsibility strategy
code
Aerospace & 521010 0.09 0.09 0.06 0.15 0.07 0.11 0.11 0.22 0.06 0.04
Defense
Automobiles & Auto 531010 0.10 0.16 0.08 0.15 0.09 0.10 0.08 0.16 0.05 0.03
Parts
Banking Services 551010 0.02 0.10 0.02 0.10 0.09 0.19 0.12 0.24 0.07 0.05
Beverages 541010 0.12 0.04 0.13 0.15 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.17 0.05 0.03
Biotechnology & 562020 0.09 0.03 0.14 0.03 0.12 0.08 0.13 0.26 0.08 0.05
Medical Research
Chemicals 511010 0.13 0.13 0.13 0.15 0.07 0.09 0.07 0.15 0.04 0.03
Coal 501010 0.20 0.02 0.19 0.06 0.02 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.06 0.04
Collective 555010 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.08 0.09 0.17 0.34 0.10 0.07
Investments
Communications & 571020 0.05 0.10 0.07 0.05 0.14 0.07 0.13 0.26 0.08 0.05
Networking
Computers, Phones 571060 0.06 0.14 0.04 0.18 0.11 0.11 0.09 0.18 0.06 0.04
& Household
Electronics
Construction & 522010 0.14 0.14 0.09 0.12 0.05 0.11 0.09 0.18 0.05 0.04
Engineering
Construction 512020 0.15 0.12 0.15 0.11 0.04 0.11 0.08 0.16 0.05 0.03
Materials
Consumer Goods 544010 0.11 0.15 0.11 0.15 0.08 0.09 0.08 0.16 0.05 0.03
Conglomerates
Containers & 513020 0.13 0.09 0.14 0.16 0.07 0.09 0.08 0.16 0.05 0.03
Packaging
Diversified Industrial 522020 0.06 0.14 0.08 0.18 0.02 0.12 0.10 0.20 0.06 0.04
Goods Wholesale
Diversified Retail 534020 0.13 0.03 0.14 0.05 0.10 0.09 0.12 0.23 0.07 0.05
Electric Utilities & 591010 0.16 0.13 0.14 0.07 0.05 0.13 0.08 0.17 0.05 0.03
IPPs
Electronic 571040 0.13 0.11 0.15 0.10 0.04 0.08 0.10 0.20 0.06 0.04
Equipment & Parts
Financial 573010 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.13 0.08 0.16 0.33 0.10 0.07
Technology
(Fintech) &
Infrastructure
Food & Drug 543010 0.11 0.05 0.08 0.10 0.15 0.12 0.10 0.20 0.06 0.04
Retailing
Food & Tobacco 541020 0.13 0.03 0.13 0.12 0.13 0.11 0.09 0.17 0.05 0.03
Freight & Logistics 524050 0.12 0.11 0.10 0.08 0.08 0.12 0.10 0.19 0.06 0.04
Services
Government 621010 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
Activity**
Healthcare 561010 0.06 0.06 0.05 0.12 0.14 0.09 0.12 0.24 0.07 0.05
Equipment &
Supplies
Healthcare 561020 0.07 0.02 0.09 0.07 0.15 0.10 0.12 0.25 0.07 0.05
Providers & Services
Homebuilding & 532030 0.09 0.15 0.09 0.14 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.17 0.05 0.03
Construction
Supplies
Hotels & 533010 0.12 0.02 0.13 0.08 0.18 0.09 0.10 0.20 0.06 0.04
Entertainment
Services
Household Goods 532040 0.10 0.16 0.08 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.17 0.05 0.03
Institutions, 611010 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
Associations &
Organizations**
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 25

Environmental Social Governance

TRBC Industry Industry Emission Innovation Resource Human Product Workforce Community Management Shareholders CSR
Group Name Group use rights responsibility strategy
code

Insurance 553010 0.03 0.08 0.03 0.08 0.11 0.15 0.13 0.27 0.08 0.05
Integrated Hardware 571070 0.06 0.14 0.04 0.18 0.11 0.11 0.09 0.18 0.06 0.04
& Software*
Investment Banking 551020 0.03 0.08 0.03 0.03 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.31 0.09 0.06
& Investment
Services
Investment Holding 556010 0.16 0.04 0.19 0.05 0.02 0.05 0.12 0.24 0.07 0.05
Companies
Leisure Products 532050 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.10 0.22 0.07 0.12 0.24 0.07 0.05
Machinery, Tools, 521020 0.09 0.18 0.08 0.11 0.09 0.08 0.09 0.19 0.06 0.04
Heavy Vehicles,
Trains & Ships
Media & Publishing 533020 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.10 0.15 0.12 0.13 0.25 0.08 0.05
Metals & Mining 512010 0.16 0.03 0.16 0.16 0.04 0.12 0.08 0.16 0.05 0.03
Miscellaneous 631010 0.13 0.02 0.15 0.02 0.08 0.10 0.12 0.24 0.07 0.05
Educational Service
Providers
Multiline Utilities 591040 0.15 0.13 0.14 0.09 0.06 0.10 0.08 0.16 0.05 0.03
Natural Gas Utilities 591020 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.08 0.08 0.13 0.08 0.17 0.05 0.03
Office Equipment 571050 0.06 0.16 0.05 0.17 0.12 0.09 0.09 0.17 0.05 0.03
Oil & Gas 501020 0.11 0.10 0.13 0.16 0.06 0.12 0.08 0.16 0.05 0.03
Oil & Gas Related 501030 0.15 0.05 0.13 0.15 0.04 0.11 0.09 0.19 0.06 0.04
Equipment and
Services
Paper & Forest 513010 0.15 0.14 0.16 0.10 0.02 0.11 0.08 0.16 0.05 0.03
Products
Passenger 524060 0.12 0.06 0.13 0.09 0.08 0.14 0.09 0.19 0.06 0.04
Transportation
Services
Personal & 542010 0.09 0.07 0.09 0.14 0.16 0.11 0.08 0.17 0.05 0.03
Household Products
& Services
Pharmaceuticals 562010 0.09 0.03 0.10 0.14 0.10 0.12 0.10 0.21 0.06 0.04
Professional & 631030 0.11 0.06 0.11 0.03 0.05 0.10 0.14 0.28 0.08 0.06
Business Education
Professional & 522030 0.08 0.07 0.09 0.13 0.08 0.10 0.11 0.22 0.07 0.04
Commercial
Services
Real Estate 601010 0.12 0.08 0.12 0.04 0.04 0.16 0.11 0.22 0.07 0.04
Operations
Renewable Energy 502010 0.14 0.13 0.13 0.02 0.07 0.07 0.11 0.23 0.07 0.05
Residential & 601020 0.16 0.04 0.17 0.02 0.07 0.10 0.11 0.21 0.06 0.04
Commercial REITs
School, College & 631020 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10
University**
Semiconductors & 571010 0.10 0.12 0.10 0.16 0.09 0.10 0.09 0.17 0.05 0.03
Semiconductor
Equipment
Software & IT 572010 0.03 0.06 0.05 0.06 0.11 0.07 0.15 0.31 0.09 0.06
Services
Specialty Retailers 534030 0.08 0.05 0.06 0.08 0.12 0.10 0.13 0.26 0.08 0.05
Telecommunications 574010 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.14 0.16 0.14 0.09 0.18 0.05 0.04
Services
Textiles & Apparel 532020 0.05 0.07 0.07 0.15 0.13 0.15 0.10 0.19 0.06 0.04
Transport 524070 0.12 0.04 0.13 0.11 0.06 0.16 0.09 0.19 0.06 0.04
Infrastructure
Uranium 503010 0.21 0.02 0.21 0.02 0.07 0.07 0.10 0.21 0.06 0.04
Water & Related 591030 0.15 0.13 0.15 0.05 0.04 0.13 0.09 0.17 0.05 0.03
Utilities

* Currently there is no ESG coverage under Integrated Hardware & Software, default weights of Computers, Phones &
Household Electronics are assigned until there is sufficient universe to derive category weights as per the defined methodology
and both industry groups belong to technology.
**These are newly introduced industry groups and currently there are no ESG companies forming part of these industry groups,
hence uniform weights are assigned across all industry groups. Once there are sufficient number of companies under these
industry groups, category weights would be derived according to the defined methodology.
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 26

Appendix D
Pillar scoring example
In this section is an illustration of how pillar scores are calculated for the water and related utilities industry group,
using the data available in the ESG database for FY2017.
Water and related utilities Illustration of calculation of pillar scores

Industry Emission Innovation Resource Environmental Human Product Workforce Community Social Management Shareholders CSR Governance
group use pillar scores rights responsibility pillar strategy pillar scores
scores

Pillar 0.35 0.29 0.35 0.17 0.13 0.43 0.28 0.67 0.20 0.13
weights

ABC 0.66 0.00 0.44 0.39 0.05 0.58 0.89 0.34 0.56 0.99 0.84 0.56 0.90

CBD 0.71 0.96 0.38 0.67 0.00 0.69 0.66 0.70 0.57 0.37 0.01 0.56 0.32

DEF 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.57 0.11 0.27 0.21 0.14 0.54 0.24

EFG 0.00 0.31 0.03 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.25 0.59 0.27 0.89 0.94 0.00 0.78

EMJ 0.87 0.31 0.68 0.64 0.20 0.86 0.84 0.98 0.77 0.33 0.87 0.68 0.48

EMQ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.30 0.02 0.13 0.88 0.08 0.01 0.60

ENR 0.92 0.81 0.85 0.86 0.75 0.97 0.93 0.66 0.83 0.40 0.49 0.86 0.48

GPQ 0.24 0.31 0.00 0.17 0.00 0.17 0.02 0.16 0.08 0.56 0.56 0.00 0.49

HIJ 0.61 0.31 0.50 0.48 0.65 0.42 0.80 0.80 0.72 0.48 0.27 0.37 0.43

IBD 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.07 0.30 0.11 0.51 0.49 0.00 0.43

JKL 0.50 0.73 0.74 0.65 0.00 0.78 0.43 0.93 0.54 0.62 0.89 0.26 0.63

LMN 0.76 0.31 0.56 0.56 0.00 0.47 0.48 0.48 0.40 0.17 0.24 0.26 0.20

MNO 0.82 0.31 0.91 0.70 0.40 0.58 0.61 0.07 0.42 0.33 0.52 0.63 0.41

MSE 0.55 0.00 0.62 0.41 0.85 0.17 0.75 0.84 0.72 0.77 0.35 0.91 0.71

OPQ 0.29 0.00 0.32 0.22 0.00 0.17 0.16 0.48 0.22 0.15 0.42 0.08 0.20

PQR 0.45 0.65 0.79 0.63 0.55 0.78 0.52 0.75 0.62 0.76 0.76 0.16 0.68

PSF 0.97 0.88 0.97 0.95 0.95 0.92 0.98 0.89 0.94 0.15 0.73 0.34 0.29

RST 0.08 0.31 0.00 0.12 0.00 0.17 0.20 0.59 0.27 0.42 0.42 0.00 0.36

UVW 0.34 0.00 0.26 0.21 0.20 0.58 0.70 0.39 0.52 0.26 0.16 0.31 0.25

VPF 0.16 0.31 0.15 0.20 0.00 0.17 0.11 0.25 0.14 0.88 0.90 0.00 0.77

XYZ 0.39 0.00 0.21 0.21 0.40 0.17 0.39 0.48 0.39 0.95 0.73 0.51 0.85

YQM 0.16 0.00 0.09 0.09 0.00 0.36 0.34 0.20 0.25 0.69 0.34 0.00 0.53

Steps:

– Sum of category weights: sum each category weight of respective pillars. The calculation to derive the sum
of category weights is illustrated below:

– Environmental pillar categories = resource use (0.08) + emissions (0.10) + innovation (0.16) = 0.34
– Social pillar categories = workforce (0.10) + human rights (0.15) + community (0.08) + product responsibility
(0.09) = 0.42
– Corporate governance categories = management (0.16) + shareholders (0.05) + CSR strategy (0.03) = 0.24

– New category weights: new category weights are calculated based on the sum of the category weights
calculated above. New category weights = category weights divided by the sum of the category weights of the
respective pillar. The calculation of new category weights for environmental pillar is as below:

– New category weight for resource use = 0.08 divided by 0.34 = 0.24
– New category weight for emissions = 0.10 divided by 0.34 = 0.29
– New category weight for innovation = 0.16 divided by 0.34 = 0.48
(new category weights for social and corporate governance are similarly calculated)

– Pillar score calculation: category scores multiplied by new category weights = pillar scores.
The calculation of the environmental pillar score is shown below:
– (Resource use score*0.24) + (emission score*0.29) + (innovation score*0.48) = 0.91 (environmental pillar
score). Social and corporate governance pillar scores are calculated similarly
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 27

Appendix E
The table below provides an indicative ESG pillar weights matrix, based on an assessment of sample ESG data.
It is not a definitive matrix to be used in the final scoring.
Environmental Social Governance

TRBC Industry Industry Emission Innovation Resource Human Product Workforce Community Management Shareholders CSR
Group Name Group use rights responsibility strategy
code
Aerospace & 521010 0.36 0.36 0.27 0.34 0.16 0.25 0.25 0.67 0.20 0.13
Defense
Automobiles & Auto 531010 0.29 0.48 0.24 0.35 0.21 0.24 0.20 0.67 0.20 0.13
Parts
Banking Services 551010 0.17 0.67 0.17 0.19 0.18 0.39 0.24 0.67 0.20 0.13
Beverages 541010 0.42 0.14 0.44 0.33 0.27 0.23 0.18 0.67 0.20 0.13
Biotechnology & 562020 0.35 0.10 0.55 0.07 0.34 0.22 0.37 0.67 0.20 0.13
Medical Research
Chemicals 511010 0.32 0.34 0.34 0.39 0.18 0.23 0.20 0.67 0.20 0.13
Coal 501010 0.49 0.05 0.46 0.22 0.07 0.35 0.36 0.67 0.20 0.13
Collective 555010 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.09 0.21 0.25 0.45 0.67 0.20 0.13
Investments
Communications & 571020 0.24 0.47 0.29 0.13 0.36 0.17 0.34 0.67 0.20 0.13
Networking
Computers, Phones 571060 0.24 0.60 0.16 0.37 0.22 0.21 0.19 0.67 0.20 0.13
& Household
Electronics
Construction & 522010 0.38 0.38 0.24 0.34 0.13 0.29 0.24 0.67 0.20 0.13
Engineering
Construction 512020 0.36 0.28 0.36 0.33 0.12 0.32 0.23 0.67 0.20 0.13
Materials
Consumer Goods 544010 0.30 0.41 0.30 0.37 0.19 0.24 0.20 0.67 0.20 0.13
Conglomerates
Containers & 513020 0.37 0.24 0.39 0.39 0.18 0.23 0.20 0.67 0.20 0.13
Packaging
Diversified Industrial 522020 0.21 0.50 0.29 0.43 0.05 0.29 0.24 0.67 0.20 0.13
Goods Wholesale
Diversified Retail 534020 0.42 0.12 0.46 0.13 0.28 0.26 0.33 0.67 0.20 0.13
Electric Utilities & 591010 0.37 0.29 0.33 0.21 0.15 0.38 0.26 0.67 0.20 0.13
IPPs
Electronic 571040 0.33 0.28 0.38 0.31 0.12 0.26 0.31 0.67 0.20 0.13
Equipment & Parts
Financial 573010 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.08 0.32 0.20 0.40 0.67 0.20 0.13
Technology
(Fintech) &
Infrastructure
Food & Drug 543010 0.46 0.21 0.33 0.21 0.32 0.26 0.21 0.67 0.20 0.13
Retailing
Food & Tobacco 541020 0.45 0.09 0.45 0.27 0.30 0.24 0.19 0.67 0.20 0.13
Freight & Logistics 524050 0.36 0.33 0.31 0.21 0.21 0.33 0.26 0.67 0.20 0.13
Services
Government 621010 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.33 0.33 0.33
Activity**
Healthcare 561010 0.36 0.36 0.29 0.25 0.30 0.19 0.25 0.67 0.20 0.13
Equipment &
Supplies
Healthcare Providers 561020 0.40 0.13 0.47 0.17 0.33 0.22 0.28 0.67 0.20 0.13
& Services
Homebuilding & 532030 0.28 0.44 0.28 0.34 0.21 0.23 0.21 0.67 0.20 0.13
Construction
Supplies
Hotels & 533010 0.44 0.07 0.48 0.18 0.40 0.20 0.22 0.67 0.20 0.13
Entertainment
Services
Household Goods 532040 0.30 0.48 0.23 0.31 0.24 0.23 0.22 0.67 0.20 0.13
Institutions, 611010 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.33 0.33 0.33
Associations &
Organizations**
Insurance 553010 0.20 0.60 0.20 0.17 0.23 0.31 0.29 0.67 0.20 0.13
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 28

Environmental Social Governance

TRBC Industry Industry Emission Innovation Resource Human Product Workforce Community Management Shareholders CSR
Group Name Group use rights responsibility strategy
code
Integrated Hardware 571070 0.24 0.60 0.16 0.37 0.22 0.21 0.19 0.67 0.20 0.13
& Software*
Investment Banking 551020 0.22 0.56 0.22 0.08 0.21 0.32 0.39 0.67 0.20 0.13
& Investment
Services
Investment Holding 556010 0.41 0.09 0.50 0.20 0.10 0.22 0.49 0.67 0.20 0.13
Companies
Leisure Products 532050 0.27 0.45 0.27 0.19 0.43 0.13 0.24 0.67 0.20 0.13
Machinery, Tools, 521020 0.25 0.53 0.22 0.31 0.24 0.20 0.25 0.67 0.20 0.13
Heavy Vehicles,
Trains & Ships
Media & Publishing 533020 0.40 0.30 0.30 0.20 0.30 0.24 0.25 0.67 0.20 0.13
Metals & Mining 512010 0.44 0.09 0.47 0.41 0.09 0.29 0.20 0.67 0.20 0.13
Miscellaneous 631010 0.44 0.08 0.48 0.07 0.25 0.31 0.37 0.67 0.20 0.13
Educational Service
Providers
Multiline Utilities 591040 0.35 0.31 0.33 0.28 0.19 0.30 0.23 0.67 0.20 0.13
Natural Gas Utilities 591020 0.33 0.33 0.35 0.22 0.22 0.35 0.22 0.67 0.20 0.13
Office Equipment 571050 0.22 0.59 0.19 0.37 0.26 0.19 0.18 0.67 0.20 0.13
Oil & Gas 501020 0.32 0.30 0.39 0.37 0.15 0.29 0.19 0.67 0.20 0.13
Oil & Gas Related 501030 0.46 0.14 0.40 0.38 0.11 0.28 0.23 0.67 0.20 0.13
Equipment and
Services
Paper & Forest 513010 0.33 0.32 0.35 0.32 0.05 0.37 0.26 0.67 0.20 0.13
Products
Passenger 524060 0.39 0.18 0.42 0.23 0.20 0.35 0.23 0.67 0.20 0.13
Transportation
Services
Personal & 542010 0.37 0.27 0.37 0.27 0.33 0.22 0.17 0.67 0.20 0.13
Household Products
& Services
Pharmaceuticals 562010 0.41 0.14 0.45 0.31 0.21 0.26 0.22 0.67 0.20 0.13
Professional & 631030 0.40 0.20 0.40 0.09 0.15 0.31 0.45 0.67 0.20 0.13
Business Education
Professional & 522030 0.33 0.29 0.38 0.31 0.19 0.23 0.26 0.67 0.20 0.13
Commercial
Services
Real Estate 601010 0.38 0.24 0.38 0.12 0.12 0.45 0.30 0.67 0.20 0.13
Operations
Renewable Energy 502010 0.35 0.32 0.32 0.08 0.25 0.25 0.42 0.67 0.20 0.13
Residential & 601020 0.43 0.11 0.46 0.07 0.24 0.34 0.36 0.67 0.20 0.13
Commercial REITs
School, College & 631020 0.33 0.33 0.33 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.33 0.33 0.33
University**
Semiconductors & 571010 0.31 0.39 0.31 0.36 0.20 0.23 0.20 0.67 0.20 0.13
Semiconductor
Equipment
Software & IT 572010 0.22 0.44 0.33 0.15 0.28 0.17 0.39 0.67 0.20 0.13
Services
Specialty Retailers 534030 0.40 0.27 0.33 0.18 0.28 0.24 0.30 0.67 0.20 0.13
Telecommunications 574010 0.35 0.30 0.35 0.27 0.31 0.26 0.17 0.67 0.20 0.13
Services
Textiles & Apparel 532020 0.26 0.37 0.37 0.29 0.25 0.28 0.18 0.67 0.20 0.13
Transport 524070 0.42 0.13 0.45 0.26 0.13 0.38 0.22 0.67 0.20 0.13
Infrastructure
Uranium 503010 0.48 0.05 0.48 0.08 0.26 0.26 0.40 0.67 0.20 0.13
Water & Related 591030 0.35 0.29 0.35 0.17 0.13 0.43 0.28 0.67 0.20 0.13
Utilities

*Currently there is no ESG coverage under Integrated Hardware & Software, default weights of Computers, Phones &
Household Electronics are assigned until there is sufficient universe to derive category weights as per the defined methodology
and both industry groups belong to technology.
**These are newly introduced industry groups and currently there are no ESG companies forming part of these industry groups,
hence uniform weights are assigned across all industry groups. Once there are sufficient number of companies under these
industry groups, category weights would be derived according to the defined methodology.
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 29

Appendix F
Category scores
The table below lists the category scores and their definitions.

Score Definition
LSEG ESG resource use score The resource use score reflects a company’s performance and capacity to reduce the
use of materials, energy or water, and to find more eco-efficient solutions by improving
supply chain management.
LSEG ESG emissions The emission reduction score measures a company’s commitment and effectiveness
reduction score towards reducing environmental emissions in its production and operational processes.
LSEG ESG innovation score The innovation score reflects a company’s capacity to reduce the environmental costs
and burdens for its customers, thereby creating new market opportunities through new
environmental technologies and processes, or eco-designed products.
LSEG ESG workforce score The workforce score measures a company’s effectiveness in terms of providing job
satisfaction, a healthy and safe workplace, maintaining diversity and equal opportunities,
and development opportunities for its workforce.
LSEG ESG human rights score The human rights score measures a company’s effectiveness in terms of respecting
fundamental human rights conventions.
LSEG ESG community score The community score measures the company’s commitment to being a good citizen,
protecting public health and respecting business ethics.
LSEG ESG product The product responsibility score reflects a company’s capacity to produce quality goods
responsibility score and services, integrating the customer’s health and safety, integrity and data privacy.
LSEG ESG management score The management score measures a company’s commitment and effectiveness towards
following best practice corporate governance principles.
LSEG ESG shareholders score The shareholders score measures a company’s effectiveness towards equal treatment of
shareholders and the use of anti-takeover devices.
LSEG ESG CSR strategy score The CSR strategy score reflects a company’s practices to communicate that it integrates
economic (financial), social and environmental dimensions into its day-to-day decision-
making processes.
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 30

Appendix G
Controversy measures
List of all controversy measures that make up the ESG controversy category score.

Category Name (N) Label (L) Description (D)

Community TR.ControvAntiCompetition Anti- Number of controversies published in the media linked to
competition anti-competitive behaviour (e.g., anti-trust and monopoly),
controversy price-fixing or kickbacks.
Community TR.ControvBusinessEthics Business ethics Number of controversies published in the media linked to
controversies business ethics in general, political contributions or bribery
and corruption.
Community TR.ControvCopyrights Intellectual Number of controversies published in the media linked to
property patents and intellectual property infringements.
controversies
Community TR.ControvCriticalCountries Critical Number of controversies published in the media linked to
countries activities in critical, undemocratic countries that do not
controversies respect fundamental human rights principles.
Community TR.ControvPublicHealth Public health Number of controversies published in the media linked to
controversies public health or industrial accidents harming the health and
safety of third parties (non-employees and non-customers).
Community TR.ControvTaxFraud Tax fraud Number of controversies published in the media linked to
controversies tax fraud, parallel imports or money laundering.
Human rights TR.ControvChildLabor Child labour Number of controversies published in the media linked to
controversies use of child labour issues.
Human rights TR.ControvHumanRights Human rights Number of controversies published in the media linked to
controversies human rights issues.
Management TR.ControvMgtComp Management Number of controversies published in the media linked to
compensation high executive or board compensation.
controversies
count
Product TR.ControvConsumer Consumer Number of controversies published in the media linked to
responsibility controversies consumer complaints or dissatisfaction directly linked to the
company’s products or services.
Product TR.ControvCustomerHS Customer Number of controversies published in the media linked to
responsibility health and customer health and safety.
safety
controversies
Product TR.ControvPrivacy Privacy Number of controversies published in the media linked to
responsibility controversies employee or customer privacy and integrity.
Product TR.ControvProductAccess Product access Number of controversies published in the media linked to
responsibility controversies product access.
Product TR.ControvRespMarketing Responsible Number of controversies published in the media linked to
responsibility marketing the company’s marketing practices, such as over-marketing
controversies of unhealthy food to vulnerable consumers.
Product TR.ControvResponsibleRD Responsible Number of controversies published in the media linked to
responsibility R&D responsible R&D.
controversies
Resource TR.ControvEnv Environmental Number of controversies related to the environmental
use controversies impact of the company’s operations on natural resources or
local communities.
Shareholders TR.ControvAccounting Accounting Number of controversies published in the media linked to
controversies aggressive or non- transparent accounting issues.
count
Shareholders TR.ControvInsiderDealings Insider dealings Number of controversies published in the media linked to
controversies insider dealings and other share price manipulations.
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 31

Category Name (N) Label (L) Description (D)

Shareholders TR.ControvShareholders Shareholder Number of controversies published in the media linked to
rights shareholder rights infringements.
controversies
Workforce TR.ControvDiversityOpportunity Diversity and Number of controversies published in the media linked to
opportunity workforce diversity and opportunity (e.g., wages, promotion,
controversies discrimination and harassment).
Workforce TR.ControvEmployeesHS Employee Number of controversies published in the media linked to
health and workforce health and safety.
safety
controversies
Workforce TR.ControvWorkingCondition Wages or Number of controversies published in the media linked to
working the company’s relations with employees or relating to
conditions wages or wage disputes.
controversies
Workforce TR.Strikes Strikes Has there has been a strike or an industrial dispute that led
to lost working days?
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 32

Appendix H
Controversies scoring example
This section illustrates how a controversy score is calculated for a water and related utilities industry group, using
the data available in the ESG database for FY2017.

Company Market cap TRBC industry Count of Severity Value after Controversies Grade
name class group name controversies weight applying score
per company severity weight
PSF Large Water and related 0 0.33 0 100% A+
utilities
ENR Mid Water and related 0 0.67 0 100% A+
utilities
MNO Mid Water and related 0 0.67 0 100% A+
utilities
CBD Small Water and related 0 1 0 100% A+
utilities
ABC Mid Water and related 0 0.67 0 100% A+
utilities
HIJ Mid Water and related 0 0.67 0 100% A+
utilities
MSE Mid Water and related 0 0.67 0 100% A+
utilities
JKL Mid Water and related 0 0.67 0 100% A+
utilities
PQR Large Water and related 0 0.33 0 100% A+
utilities
XYZ Mid Water and related 0 0.67 0 100% A+
utilities
UVW Small Water and related 0 1 0 100% A+
utilities
OPQ Small Water and related 0 1 0 100% A+
utilities
GPQ Small Water and related 0 1 0 100% A+
utilities
VPF Small Water and related 0 1 0 100% A+
utilities
RST Small Water and related 0 1 0 100% A+
utilities
EMQ Mid Water and related 0 0.67 0 100% A+
utilities
IBD Small Water and related 0 1 0 100% A+
utilities
YQM Small Water and related 0 1 0 100% A+
utilities
DEF Mid Water and related 0 0.67 0 100% A+
utilities
EFG Small Water and related 0 1 0 100% A+
utilities
LMN Mid Water and related 1 0.67 0.67 75% B+
utilities
EMJ Small Water and related 1 1 1 25% D+
utilities
 Environmental, social and governance scores from LSEG 33

Steps:

– Extract values pertaining to controversies for all companies of FY2017 and get the count of controversies
per company

– Based on the market cap class, multiply the count of controversies by the severity weight

– Sort the companies from lowest to highest (lowest being better) considering the values after applying the
severity weights

– Apply percentile rank formula to derive the ESG controversies scores

Company Market Count of Severity Value after Controversies Percentile formula applied Grade
name cap class controversies weight applying score only for companies with
per company severity weight controversies
PSF Large 0 0.33 0 100% 100% A+
ENR Mid 0 0.67 0 100% 100% A+
YQM Small 0 1 0 100% 100% A+
DEF Mid 0 0.67 0 100% 100% A+
EFG Small 0 1 0 100% 100% A+
LMN Mid 1 0.67 0.67 75% (1+(1/2))/2 B+
EMJ Small 1 1 1 25% (0+(1/2))/2 D+