FCA lambasts ‘poor quality’ ESG product design

23 July 2021

Elizabeth Pfeuti

The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has hit out at “poor quality” product applications for ESG funds and set out detailed guidance for fund managers.
EU regulation

Latest News

SHareholder meeting

Minerva Proxy Update

SHareholder meeting

SBTi 2.0: From targets to disclosure, and what it means for investors

SHareholder meeting

Supreme Court Curbs Activist Lawsuits Against Investment Funds

SHareholder meeting

Minerva Proxy Update

SHareholder meeting

US lawmakers defend “freedom to invest” in pushback against anti‑ESG pressure

SHareholder meeting

FIR’s VOICE framework puts structure around measuring stewardship influence

Featured Briefings

Minerva Briefing

Australia Proxy Season Review 2025

Minerva Briefing

2026 Proxy Season Preview

Minerva Briefing

Diversity Divergence: Shareholders Steadfast Amid Pervasive Political Posturing

FCA lambasts ‘poor quality’ ESG product design

UK watchdog outlines guidance to improve sector credibility as asset managers rush to launch new products

July 23, 2021

The UK’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has hit out at “poor quality” product applications for ESG funds and set out detailed guidance for fund managers.

Asset managers have been rushing to launch new funds as demand for ESG-themed strategies skyrockets. However, the watchdog said many of the applications it had received had fallen “below our standards”. This trend has been exacerbated by the recent timeline published by the FCA signaling mandatory TCFD alignment to be gradually rolled out across much of the financial services sector.

In a letter to the chairmen of authorised fund managers, published on 19 July, Nick Miller, head of the FCA’s asset management supervision department, said that applications for ESG funds must improve.

Miller said that several ESG fund applications his team had reviewed were “poorly drafted” and “often contain claims that do not bear scrutiny”.

The FCA letter acknowledged the rate of innovation within the sustainable investment sector, although Miller said the “rapid pace of change presents the industry with challenges”.

“Against this backdrop, we are concerned by the number of poor-quality fund applications we have seen and the impact this may have on consumers. This must improve,” he said.

The letter cited examples including a passive fund with an ESG-related name but that did not track an ESG-themed index, a fund claiming a “positive environmental impact” that had no way of measuring such impact, and several instances of funds whose holdings did not match their strategy descriptions.

The nine-page letter also outlined newly produced guiding principles, created by the FCA to be in line with prospective future disclosure rules. These described the ESG requirements necessary at pre- and post-authorisation stages.

The first guideline category describes the fund’s documentation, including advice on ensuring that the fund’s name fairly reflects its strategy. The second category outlines the fund’s delivery, ensuring that appropriate skills, technology, resources, and tools are to be used.

The final category relates to the information and disclosures available to potential consumers. It encourages fund managers to avoid jargon and technical terms.

Miller said that such guidance was necessary to ensure that poor products do not “undermine trust and deter consumers from this segment of the market”, which could subsequently result in a “lack of effective competition between the firms providing ESG or sustainable investment funds.”

The UK government recently created a working group to develop a regulatory green taxonomy for ESG products. The Green Technical Advisory Group (GTAG) comprises business and environmental experts and will oversee the development of the framework.

Related Stories

Minerva Proxy Update

June 12, 2026
Read More
Capitol Building

US lawmakers defend “freedom to invest” in pushback against anti‑ESG pressure

June 11, 2026
Read More
EU regulation

EU Inc: simplification, but at what cost for investor protection?

June 10, 2026
Read More
Exon logo

ExxonMobil’s Texas redomicile passes with high dissent

June 5, 2026
Read More

Shell AGM update: quiet climate vote sharpens BP contrast

May 27, 2026
Read More
AGM

BP’s AGM votes: governance opacity, not just protest

April 24, 2026
Read More