ESG

burner-1234

Recycling is not something that is regulated at the federal level - it is entirely regulated at the state/local level. I don't see Trump admin 'banning' recycling so I see them as a none factor, I would also look at it from a slightly different lens, Trump admin is NOT opposed to recycling/solving plastics waste (large hunting/conservation contingent) - they are anti ESG/climate change mandates. No one likes plastic waste everywhere. There have been financings needed to get to this point however above upon success they will all be converted. I account for it by doing all my valuations on a fully diluted share count (prefs, convert and warrants) - about 220m shares.

Senior-Preference678

For a $100k portfolio, an SMA that tracks an index (like Russell 3000 Growth) is usually not the optimal choice unless there is a clear, explicit advantage (tax management, customization, or restrictions). In most cases, a low-cost ETF does the job better. 1. What an SMA is actually good for SMAs make sense when you need: Direct security ownership (not a pooled fund). Tax-loss harvesting at the stock level Customization (exclude sectors, ESG screens, legacy positions) Very large portfolios (typically $500k–$1M+). If none of the above applies, the SMA advantage shrinks fast. 2. Red flag: “SMA that tracks an index” If the goal is to track Russell 3000 Growth, then: You are paying active-management fees for index-like returns; you take on manager risk with no expected alpha; you lose the simplicity and transparency of an ETF. An ETF like VUG, IWY, SCHG, or IWF: Tracks the benchmark more accurately; Costs ~0.04–0.08% vs ~0.75–1.25% for many SMAs; Has no manager style drift; Is fully liquid and portable. Over 20–30 years, that fee difference alone can cost six figures. 3. About JGASX specifically JGASX is: actively managed, relatively expensive, not guaranteed to outperform the index it’s benchmarked to, subject to manager turnover and style drift. You’re taking active risk without a clear reason, while your stated goal is diversification, not alpha hunting. 4. Portfolio context matters You already said: You’re aggressive, want growth, you’re diversifying away from employer stock, don’t want crypto or speculative assets. That profile aligns perfectly with: Broad growth ETFs, possibly a tilt (quality, profitability, momentum) NOT with a high-fee index-replicating SMA. 5. A cleaner alternative A simple, professional structure could be: 70–80% US Growth ETF (Russell 1000/3000 Growth); 10–20% International Growth Optional factor tilt (Quality or Profitability); Low cost, scalable, tax-efficient, and easy to rebalance. 6. Key question you should ask your advisor “What specific advantage does this SMA give me over a low-cost ETF, net of all fees and taxes?” If the answer is vague, generic, or fee-defensive, that’s your answer.

Green-Chocolate-2315

You can buy an advanced ESG US total market ETF like XUSR that filters out such companies.

depkentew

You can come up with plenty other instances of state intervention in one economy not requiring a response in another state. E.g., Nation X puts forward a rule that shareholder proposals at public companies must meet certain ESG criteria to receive votes from public pension funds. Nation Y doesn’t have to do anything in response. Nation Y is probably unaffected. Nation Y might slightly benefit by doing nothing; it may be seen as more private investor friendly. I’d argue the situation with China is fairly unique - large-scale subsidies of industry are an unusually threatening trade policy. A few years ago, when China was primarily subsidizing their domestic homebuilding industry, that didn’t require or justify much of a Western response.

Sustainability_Walks

I own several ESG funds, such as IMPAX balanced, VEGN, and others. Research at weaponsfreefunds.org

seabirdddd

i’m new to this! i’m using a financial advisor who will be managing accounts my dad set up for me - but i just saw some evil names on the list and need to change them!! where do i start? what do i do? even the “ESG ethical” investments never are what they claim

SilverPrivateer

ESG blackrock sustainable energy corporate culture DEI boardroom no longer male pale stale new up and coming vibrant talent diverse experiences and culture synergizing

slimdeucer

ESG is so 2016

LuolaLogarius

ESG?

Technical_Balance527

While not exactly ESG directly, there are several states that have already passed EPR laws that will fine every company that produces a physical product with any kind of plastic packaging or components. The fines get more robust and the requirements to avoid fines get more stringent over the next 5-7 years. It will generate billions in fines for states, and it's already generating millions for third party companies that are helping CPG companies with reporting requirements for each state. European countries have already banned single use plastic packaging for many applications. So the E part of ESG is going to live on for the foreseeable future.

chindef

ESG is a big ‘ol marking grift! Do the minimum while advertising the maximum. Do something that has a slight benefit in 1 area, while ignoring the other areas, and turn that benefit into $$$$$.  Perhaps it’s better than nothing, but overall it’s not a step forward or backwards, just a step sideways. 

JoeMcMinkia

ESG was and still a scam.

deployant_100

*Amid AI's sweeping expansion, Microsoft increasingly resembles a “state-owned enterprise among tech giants.” Yet shareholders have clearly granted the company greater autonomy this time.* I don't even understand what that means, and why you would use the word yet. As of ESG, the majority of the market and the USG have, for better or worse, decided that it's irrelevant.

totsnotbiased

Well also that ESG requires either than pro-social behavior will lead to better returns (lol) or a bunch of capital owners who are okay with reduced returns due to moral concerns. There’s a few people who are interested in that (non-profit or college endowments, churches, some retail investors) but obviously the capital class is not deeply moral, that’s why they are in the capital class!

Draemeth

ESG also tarnishes brands - especially overly ideological or fake ESG. E.g. the Budlight saga

ShadowLiberal

IMO ESG had noble goals, but the problem is that measuring ESG is simply impossible, because to most people interested in it the anti-ESG factors that make them dislike a company are qualitative things that you can't just compile into quantitative number data. And so ESG funds end up with a lot of things that make people scratch their heads, or say "This company definitely shouldn't be in there", or "why would you ever exclude that company?". Nestle is often the best example of a company that many view as unforgivably awful for ESG goals because of some of their past scandals, yet they're in most ESG funds. And some ESG funds would exclude Tesla because of the S & G part of ESG which made people argue that they should definitely be in because of their unusually strong Environmental achievements, which shows another problem of grouping 3 unrelated things together.

Long_Interaction_408

ESG may not provide earnings-driving value, but ignoring it can certainly tarnish a brand. Worked out well for Nestle.

psmithrupert

The thing with ESG always was, that companies should behave ecologically and socially responsible (seeing as we all live on the same planet and all that) and should have good corporate governance. There should be laws and social norms for this, just the same as there are for people. But there aren’t really. And when there was a push for tighter oversight: ESG was the consulting firms‘ shiny new solution to avoid actual accountability. It was always a way to try and avoid really having to do something.

GladCheetah6048

No, but you asked what value it has no what the job of companies is. It's not even what ESG is about anyway. It was the idea of reducing financial risk from stuff like climate change and the social and governance risks

Testuser7ignore

That was the theory. In practice, it had little impact on actual manufacturing and brought a lot of value to consultants who the company would pay to label them ESG compliant.

twoManx

I do a lot of work in the ESG space... I can confirm that it's a bunch of virtue signaling. Once companies see costs to implement, they find "better" ways to spend their resources.

Accomplished-Yak7698

Honestly, I feel the same way the market isn’t really paying attention to ESG. Those proposals barely move the stock at all. What everyone’s fixated on right now is whether Microsoft can actually deliver on its upcoming AI revenue. When they raise their AI related sales targets, it’s basically them sending a message: “We know growth is all you care about, and we’re going to give you growth.” In the short term, sentiment definitely follows those targets. ESG is pretty much just background noise at this point.

Rough_Check_5606

no one really cares about ESG, what i care are their revised AI sales targets

Accomplished-Yak7698

I understand your aversion. Relying on the government to “arbitrate” ESG issues does indeed sound like asking an already inefficient system to manage more complex and subjective matters. The result is often misguided regulation, with all the costs borne by businesses and consumers. But my point isn't that the government should define ESG values. Rather, when risks escalate to the point of threatening public interest, regulation inevitably steps in. Especially on hard-hitting issues like AI, data privacy, and supply chains, market self-regulation simply won't hold up. In other words: I don't believe governments can execute ESG well, but I trust even less that large corporations will voluntarily constrain themselves without pressure. Neither side is perfect. We can only seek balance among the least bad options.

leveragedtothetits_

Doing what’s best for the company and stock is what I look for, personally ESG is mostly nonsense and a drag on companies where innovation is key. Regulations will come regardless of the actions of any one company, it’s better to be a dominant player in the space when they do eventually come. The US government is all in on AI for military, surveillance and national security nothing is getting passed anytime soon that puts serious handcuffs on these companies

LostAbbott

They arn't giving up on ESG, just dropping the negative social political parts. Hell just go look up their ghost nets initiate.  They are spending millions of dollars in both employees time and data center clock time to find and clean these things out of the Ocean.  That is just one small recent initiative.

LostAbbott

I was fine until you decide that government should be the arbiter of ESG.  Seriously, can we give up the idea that government could compotently regulate something like ESG?

PoopyisSmelly

Id note the KLD 400 has outperformed the S&P 500 over most time periods. Most studies have shown simply having better Governance has lead to most of that, the G of the ESG.

Leroy--Brown

Regardless of what your stance is on ESG or DEI initiatives, putting this up for a vote from shareholders helps Microsoft make this important choice democratically. After all, shareholders have rights. This is pretty easy to defend against future regulatory changes in the future, "the shareholders voted in it, we are representing their best interests" If you want a perspective on the other side of the coin, look into the Costco vite earlier this year, where shareholders overwhelmingly voted no on an anti DEI initiative.

Accomplished-Yak7698

The strategy you describe going through the motions publicly while avoiding actual cost burdens is indeed common in large corporations, especially when dealing with ESG or sensitive issues. However, Microsoft's case more clearly reflects an overly stable shareholder structure where voting outcomes are largely predictable, making it unnecessary for management to genuinely invest resources in promoting such reporting. As for participation rates, Microsoft's shareholder meetings typically see high turnout, but support for such proposals often remains in the single digits, exerting virtually no influence on corporate strategy. Political maneuvering is even more pragmatic. Regulatory scrutiny of tech giants invariably hinges on who stands to gain leverage from it at any given moment.

Loltoor

ESG was garbage from the get go.

Accomplished-Yak7698

Yes. It's widely acknowledged that many companies' ESG initiatives today are more like “compliance projects cloaked in responsibility,” prioritizing form over substance. But I don't think it's entirely ineffective. The real issue is that the market hasn't yet found a way to measure ESG value, so tangible returns aren't visible in the short term. Naturally, companies won't allocate significant resources to it. Long-term, once regulators incorporate hard metrics like AI, data, and supply chain standards into ESG, it could become an entirely different game. The current chaos feels more like a “transitional phase.” Don't you agree?

Accomplished-Yak7698

Indeed, if ESG issues are continually pushed aside, the risks will ultimately fall back on the company. However, given the current market environment, regulators' focus on big tech has been more concentrated on AI risks, antitrust concerns, and data security rather than ESG in the broader sense. Microsoft's approach this time seems more about keeping its focus on business expansion. Whether this will backfire in the future largely depends on when AI compliance frameworks are truly implemented. Currently, everyone is racing ahead, and regulators haven't caught up yet. Of course, this is just my personal view.

eucariota92

ESG is dead. It never brought any kind of value for companies and consumers... Just for the big 4 making a killing out of it.

Treewetoot

Microsoft's board is playing with fire here. ESG concerns become massive lawsuits when ignored long enough. The market wants profits now but regulators will absolutely hammer them later.

duncanbannatyne

Hello, I hope this is the right place for this, sorry if not. On the 18th December 2024 I invested £8097 (956 units) in the iShares MSCI USA ESG Enhanced ETF. I did not add or withdraw any money in the period (apart from reinvesting about £40 of dividends). My Prosper app is reporting an increase of +3.73% from 18th December 2024 to date (24/11/2025). However, the iShare website (https://www.ishares.com/uk/individual/en/products/307528/ishares-msci-usa-esg-enhanced-ctb-ucits-etf) is reporting an increase of 11.14% over exactly the same period. The pound strengthened against the dollar in the period which accounts for about 3.9% but still leaves about 3.5% unaccounted for. Spread surely wouldn’t take that much? I am sure there is a reasonable explanation for this discrepancy, but what is it? Have tried asking my brother (works in finance), ChatGPT and the broker, to no avail. Broker just states the modified dietz method (not sure what this is).

KaspaRocketMan

Only thing EU companies are working on is GDPR, ESG and compliance policies.

wrapt-inflections

You're not thinking hard enough if you think morality has nothing to do with the stock market. The market constantly expresses and reproduces human culture and intuitions. Tesla appealed to West Coast liberals who bought into the "save the world" shtick, Musk then goes far right oligarch and sales plummet. Funds are segregated by ESG scores, there are even ETFs like VICE, ones based on biblical principles, conservative values etc. Tobacco stocks fell out favour as western attitudes to tobacco shifted. What about BUD? Would you say their share price has never been affected by investors' own moral character or their perception of BUD's customers' morality? At times sales figure changes can be entirely attributed to morality. Palantir investors often justify the valuation by saying things like "this is going to be the real life Skynet, better get in on the ground floor" or "they will be surveilling and then controlling the entire world" or "Thiel controls the government". Thiel openly bases his company on the idiotic, sophomoric "philosophy" of Curtis Yarvin which says many things about morality. He builds mystique by going on any the antichrist. Other than bragging about killing people Karp openly states that his thought essentially boils down to him and Thiel being Nietzschean ubermenschen. And yet still their fundamentals are at *Gamestop* (!) levels. 360 P/E is all about investor perception, and part of that is driven by the idea that they are ushering in a new, previously untenable, moral universe.

Electronic-Buyer-468

I'll pay .50 cents more for cheap items just to have a human get paid and support their families. And up to maybe 2-5% for more expensive items. Capped at around $10-$20 msybe for an expensive item.  #FuckyoBots I'll begin shopping elsewhere. Someone will come up with a database of human friendly companies just like the ESG metrics. For however flawed they are, it's a decent idea. 

Forgiz

Not a popular choice, but Petrobras. It is by far one of the best dividend generators out there, with a massive upside. Greenwashing is starting to bite and even the EU is starting to question its own values on ESG. It is likely that oil is there to say for a little longer.

sowmyhelix

Exactly. But if you look at the capital that's chasing ESG ratings, it's just unbelievable.

Blueflame_1

ESG is bullshit lol. Microsoft is actively sponsoring genocide but it gets good boy points for environmental work?

zspecia1

Seeing a lot of talk about AEC moving into ESG/green projects and this new Shanghai subsidiary. Is the company really turning a corner after that HK$264M loss? Genuine questions: 1. Any chance the Shanghai launch helps them land government-linked projects? 3. Regarding the stock price, is there actual upside or is this just noise? Wait and see.

imnotokayandthatso-k

Gates foundation is so ESG focussed they had to divest from the most evil company ever

Coenn

Thanks for the clear rundown! Yes, so for long term investment that spread is not something I'm worried about. The thing I was worrying about was that the low liquidity would mean I would not be able to sell in the event that I would need the money quick. That doesn't seem to be the case then! Other than that, for me the annual 'loss' of 0.1-0.2% is worth it. And good point that Min Te might mess with the 'purity' of the ESG screening. I'll look into that. It seems that there is not a big thing I've missed according to you. That is something I'm happy about. I might tone down the EU-heavynes soon, but I prefer a good EU presence in my portfolio.

theawarenessfund

Nice work building an ESG portfolio with actual conviction. Here's what to watch: **Liquidity concerns:** Yes, niche ETFs have wider bid-ask spreads (0.2-0.5% vs 0.05% for VT). BUT you're young and long-term focused. This only matters if you panic-sell during crashes. **Test:** Check TradingView for EPA vs TDG spreads during March 2020. If spread stayed <1%, you're fine. **EPA vs TDG strategy:** Smart diversification. DEGIRO's exchange fees matter more than liquidity differences between Paris and Frankfurt. **Math:** If DEGIRO charges €2.50 per trade regardless of exchange, EPA vs TDG doesn't matter. If they charge % fees differently, run the numbers. **Active stewardship premium:** BNP Paribas and Amundi vote at AGMs and engage management. This creates 0.1-0.3% annual drag vs passive screeners. **Is it worth it?** If ESG alignment helps you hold through -40% drawdowns, yes. If you'd sell anyway, save the fees. **What you're missing:** 1. **Tracking error:** Min TE (Minimum Tracking Error) ETFs sacrifice ESG purity for performance. Check if this aligns with your values. 2. **Geographic concentration:** 10% Europe ESG might duplicate world exposure (Europe is \~15% of MSCI World anyway).

Som_Lodhi

Appreciate the breakdown. I’m neither bullish nor bearish, just cautious. If they actually follow through on the tokenised ESG thing, that would definitely make it more interesting. Until then I’m on the sidelines.

AICHEngineer

You are confused > US *expects* to add 32GW That is the demand. Its right there, we are planning to add 32 gigawatts capacity of solar. This is *r/investing*, about *investments*. Investments in the stock market is a purchase of a portion of a companies equity. Ownership of a company and its future cashflows are discounted today at a priced discount rate inversely proportional to the certainty of those future cashflows and proportional to the magnitude of the expected increase in those cashflows. The demand is already priced in. The certainty of those contracts coming through and being built on time at a well known profit margin is also priced in. If you wanted your investment in solar to *perform better than the market*, then there would need to be *more than the expected 32GW of capacity demanded* or the solar companies would need to charge *higher prices* to have a *larger profit margin* to raise the *earnings per share*, without losing order flow due to charging higher prices. The odds of this? Also priced in. Its simple accounting in an un-sexy industry. Produce X solar panels and suppliers are reaping ~12-14% margin, their future order book is well known, theres no catalyst for solar rocketing. Maybe if the government introduced ESG narratives to subsidize demand for solar... (Not happening under trump lmao).

kaapooj

FTC investigation is focused on how proxy advisers steer investors on climate, ESG issues The Federal Trade Commission is investigating whether proxy advisory firms Institutional Shareholder Services and Glass Lewis violated antitrust laws through their business of guiding shareholder votes on contentious topics, people familiar with the matter said.

Ok_Cry7572

When you really stop and think about it, the damage done by Net Zero, ESG, it's staggering. All pushed by Klaus Schwab and the World Economic Forum.

youngmuss666

Check out HIVE In October 2025, HIVE produced ~289 BTC — up ~8% month-over-month (from 267 BTC in Sept) and up ~147% year-over-year from ~117 BTC in Oct 2024. • Average daily production ~9.3 BTC/day in October. • Fleet efficiency: ~17.7 Joules per Terahash (J/TH) in October. • Average hashrate in October: ~21.9 Exahash/s (EH/s), with a peak of ~23.6 EH/s. • The company reports exceeding 2% of the global Bitcoin network hashrate. • Expansion into Tier III+ AI/HPC data-centers via its subsidiary (BUZZ High Performance Computing) and conversion of existing infrastructure: e.g., Swedish site conversion to Tier-3 HPC for ~2,000 NVIDIA GPUs. • Renewable energy focus: The Paraguay hydroelectric power build is the backbone of its mining operations. 1. Production growth and scale HIVE is ramping mining production meaningfully. Getting from ~267 BTC (Sept) to ~289 BTC (Oct) while network difficulty is high shows operational execution. That gives the potential for revenue/cash-flow upside if BTC prices cooperate. 2. Efficiency / Cost advantage 17.7 J/TH is a respectable fleet efficiency (lower is better). Lower electricity cost + efficient hardware = better margin potential. Given HIVE uses hydroelectric (lower power cost, cleaner), that’s a competitive advantage. 3. Dual-engine strategy: mining + HPC/AI HIVE isn’t only a Bitcoin miner; it’s pivoting/expanding into HPC and AI data-centers. This could provide diversification away from pure crypto mining risk (e.g., BTC price, difficulty). The conversion of Tier-1 to Tier-3 data-centres (Sweden) accelerates that strategy. 4. Scaling into network significance Surpassing 2% of the global Bitcoin network is non-trivial. That means HIVE has meaningful presence and scale. As mining becomes more industrialised, scale is important. 5. Green/ESG angle Use of hydro power helps HIVE’s ESG profile, which may appeal to certain funds/strategies, and possibly reduce regulatory or public-relations risk around energy usage.

Salty-Bid1597

When elmo gets his trillion dollar steal all these discretionary funds should dump at once. The index funds have no choice but why the hell is Norway holding 1%+ anyway? It's not even an ESG stock. I suspect they won't because they all use index hugging algos and don't dare make a decision without being able to blame the computer if it goes wrong, but if they had a ounce of self respect they should.

notdonethinkin

Probably not. The chance that ESG remotely aligns with your values is very small

rep3t3

ESG funds also are more expensive, having a heart comes with a massive downside unfortunately

Its_kinda_nice_out

Unfortunately ESG funds have been a ticket to dying broke too. It’s pretty awful when the govt goes out of its way to fuck over anybody that cares about the environment

lex418787

If you have the time to research the ethics of every company, and the capital to invest in their individual stocks, by all means go ahead and do that. Otherwise you have to compromise somewhere. ESG may be a reasonable compromise for OP, or maybe not. I'm not sure you'll get consistent ROI investing outside of the stock market 🤷‍♂️

Interesting-Foot2880

Try to utilise ESG funds and donate a portion of your profits and you'll be making net positive change in the world, however it is unfortunate how necessary investing is to generating wealth when all this is going on.

SuitsOverSwag

Given the ease with which Donald Trump managed to wipe out a great deal of “ESGness” among Big Tech, the concept of ESG seems fleeting and prone to the same institutional hijackings and failures as anything else in this financial system.

Willing-Promotion685

I would recommend OP to look into ESG funds unless they want to end up broke and dying on the Walmart floor.

Willing-Promotion685

What about ESG funds? Seems like the first place to look, since these were designed to meet the needs of investors like OP.

Willing-Promotion685

You might want to check out Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) funds. They’re investment funds that try to make money while putting it into companies that meet certain environmental, social, and corporate governance standards. Some of these funds have gotten heat for being too loose with their criteria, but there are some solid ones out there. Do your own research and stay diversified.

SchwabCrashes

You are dead wrong! You need to go back and do more homework; a lot more! Also, you are making false conclusions about investing. Let me give you a hint: Google ESG investing. Good luck in you life-long contunual learning.

lex418787

If you really feel that way, ESG mutual funds might be for you.

AEStation404

You can look for ESG details. Personally, I only avoid investments that are illegal (i.e. the jurisdiction/company is sanctioned by EU/OFAC). If I'm not buying an "evil company" someone with 1000x my net worth will, and it doesn't change anything. I didn't make the rules, I just got here. Better if I get 1$ dividend and Richie Rich gets 999$ than I get nothing and Richie Rich gets 1000$.

Ok-Sheepherder7898

You can look at ESG companies but that might be too broad for you.  It's hard to think of companies that don't exploit people.  I suppose you could just invest in Costco.

BruceGueswel

Most of the ESG indexes are mostly BS and just lipstick on a pig. Make sure you investigate them. Vital Farms is a great company that is focused on improving the food system through better land management and standards. Also check out Iroquois Valley REIT, they do investments as low as $10,000 and are doing incredible work to help fund the transition to regenerative agriculture. And farmland is an amazing investment, especially when you treat the land properly. Once Upon A Farm is another awesome CPG food company that is IPOing this year or early next, keep an eye on that one.

Zealousideal-Fix8399

That’s a good suggestion. ESG and B-Corp lists are a good starting point. I’ve also found it helps to look through each fund’s holdings yourself since “ethical” can mean different things depending on who’s rating it.

BezisDaMan

You might want to look into ESG or “socially responsible” index funds. They screen for companies with decent environmental and labor practices so you don’t have to hand-pick everything. They won’t be perfect, but it’s a good starting point if you want your investments to line up with your values. Also worth checking out B-Corp certified companies... those are held to certain standards too.

IntrepidFig1609

I wouldn’t touch them…. But you asked: Vanguard ESG ETF (ESGV): Excludes companies involved in controversial weapons, civilian firearms, nuclear power, fossil fuels, and tobacco. iShares ESG Aware ETFs (e.g., EAOK): Incorporate ESG metrics into a broadly diversified portfolio. Thematic ESG ETFs: Focus on specific areas like clean energy, gender equality, or sustainable water.

Anxious-Writing-7909

According to this line of thought, you should invest in an ESG mutual fund or ETF that reflects your values. Let the managers do the work and you get diversification.

SmackEh

No. ESG’s “G” for governance tries to measure actual corporate controls and compliance, while a corruption sentiment index would measure public suspicion (even before anything is proven or documented). ESG is about policies and structures while a corruption sentiment would be about how sketchy people think those corporations are... it'd be a sketchiness index.

Bangin_Gears

There's already a score like this called ESG. Most people believe it is environmentally conscious in nature, but I've watched it over the last 5 years morph into a pay for play system. One of the most famous examples is Elon/Tesla, who refused to bow to the ridiculous demands of these programs, so they now have a very low ESG score, despite being one of the cleanest (environmental) companies on record.

Delta_2_Echo

I dont know anything about the stock (just saw this post), but not for nothing despite the dilution the market cap (~$544M) *is* going up.... to me that suggests sustained buying pressure. it has 5957BTC which works out to be ~$583M so technically a $40M discount exists....but after looking into the company more its a bunch of redpilled crypto bros who want to end ESG & DEI so... there is that.

JoshuaSimmonsWolf478

Love that “decarbonization without disruption” idea. It’s practical, profitable, and aligns perfectly with where ESG capital wants to go next-efficiency over idealism.

MasonReedShadow832

Under-$100M cap with +200% revenue growth and institutional ESG appeal? That combo doesn’t stay unnoticed for long. This looks early, not overhyped.

GreyVessel

Most ESG plays are slow and overpriced-this one’s fast, lean, and underfollowed. Perfect setup before bigger money notices.

AndrewPetersonAsh176

Hard to find small caps that actually earn their ESG label-NXXT’s numbers speak louder than any marketing pitch. Real growth + real sustainability = real potential.

Usual-Importance-893

Yes, institutions say they want ESG, but for small caps the gate is higher , it’s less about “we’ll happily invest if you tick the ESG box” and more “we’ll invest *only if* you overcome the small‑cap structural barriers around ESG”.

ScottMitchellStone26

ESG + operating leverage is the sweet spot. Hard to find small caps that actually deliver numbers and align with sustainability mandates. NXXT looks like one of the few.

StephenGonzalezWolf3

Exactly-most ESG money is trapped in overvalued megacaps. If institutions start rotating down, they’ll want companies showing real emissions impact and growth like NXXT.

CumminsDeezTurbo

I am pulling for y'all and agree that there is misinformation and manipulation that occurs around this ticker and many others. To what degree is difficult to discern considering how anonymous it is and with how many ways there are to work around things. For example, using this stock in particular, the SSR rule is frequently triggered. It was already placed on the SSR list a few trading sessions ago, but each subsequent trading session since the recent share price peak, it gets re-triggered. Outside dark pool activities/during regular trading hours, this can be attributed to those workarounds, but it is realistic to say that people are also selling their shares and/or closing their call positions at a loss. How much specifically for either of those? It's difficult to estimate in real time, but what we do know for sure is that continued shorting on ticks above the SSR share price limit at 10% below the previous closing is allowable along with influencing a selloff. This increases the potential for the closing share price to be much lower than 10% each trading session. Another way to look at this is that bulls and bears are two sides of the same coin. Everyone wants to profit, spreads real information and inaccurate propaganda, and leverages technology and media/publications in their favor. The reason I refer to the bulls in this case as the underdog is that since Beyond's IPO and initial squeeze years ago, it likely has burned a lot of people as a stock and hasn't been a great business model in terms of profitability. On the other hand, it's interesting to note that while actual beef and chicken products have been increasing, Beyond's costs have stayed pretty much the same. At the same time, there's a current narrative that it hasn't maintained a loyal clientele base, which I disagree with. Its challenge is being based in the US competing with not just other products but perspectives outside the vegan community (keto, IIFYM, cringy "alpha" bros, etc.). There's a reason it was once referred to as a strong candidate as an ESG darling.

Obligation_Still

What's your fee per broker? I have a broker but then I also use a robo investor both do well but my broker is ESG only, I have the option to expand portfolio options and flexibility with him but the rate changes from .9 to 1.5% So when I hear of people having multiple brokers, which would cost more than the 1.5% I wonder if I'm just being too cheap?

Electronic-Soup9658

• Strive was founded in 2022, positioning itself as a firm focused on “shareholder-first” capitalism, anti-ESG investing, and more recently integrating a strategic emphasis on Bitcoin.  • Strive manages a suite of ETFs (via its “Strive Funds” platform) that cover equities, bonds, etc.  • As of May 2025, Strive announced that it has exceeded $2 billion in ETF assets under management (AUM).  • According to one database, Strive’s total AUM (as of March 2025) is ~$2.1 billion.  • Strive is in the process of a merger/combination with Asset Entities Inc. (NASDAQ: ASST) to become a publicly traded entity focused on being an “asset-management + Bitcoin treasury” company. 

Aware_Beezzz

Looks like NEM is a great buy right now after earnings beat yesterday after market. 1. NEM Newmont. GOLD exposure a Real Asset Hedge Newmont is the largest gold mining company in the world. Gold tends to hold or increase its value during inflation, economic uncertainty, or currency weakness — so NEM can act as a hedge in your portfolio. 2. Strong Dividend and Cash Flow NEM pays a reliable dividend, often with a yield between 3–5% (depending on gold prices). That makes it one of the few gold stocks that provides both income and growth potential. 3. Scale and Diversification Operations on five continents: the Americas, Australia, and Africa — which spreads out geopolitical and operational risk. Diverse production across gold, copper, and other metals gives it stability when one commodity price fluctuates. 4. Financial Strength Strong balance sheet and manageable debt. Generates substantial free cash flow, which supports dividends, share buybacks, and reinvestment in new projects. 5. Long-Term Stability Unlike speculative mining startups, Newmont has decades of proven reserves and consistent production. It’s one of the most respected names in the mining sector, with solid ESG.

iebelig

ESG scores are useless if you're actually worried about ESG

DaddyFund

ESG is a concept invented by hard-minded rich guys who noticed and took advantage of a demand for "good" companies on the market. And most of the individual companies with high ESG scores are just trying to play the game so they get included in the funds. There may be some particularly good companies you could buy, but you'd have to research and pick them individually.

RayU_AZ

Fidelity has Sustainable, strong environmental, social and governance, ETF funds avaialble. 1. FRNW-Clean energy 2. FDWM -Women Leadership 3. FSBD -ESG Environmental, social & governance Bond fund 4. FSST -US equity Fund ETF with ESG Fidelity also has custom basket funds you can create yourself.

Much_Willingness4597

I’m explaining why a company like Chevron would have a good ESG rating despite being in a “dirty” industry.

Much_Willingness4597

It’s not about directly about losing money a blind squirrel would’ve made money in the last 10 years… ESG was really never about trying to do “good” it was about avoiding companies that didn’t control asymmetric risk factors. Take BP in oil. I know people who work in oil Fields, and who operate on rigs. They were well known to be absolutely insane cowboy doing dumb shit. On deep water Horizion there were a dozen things they should have done they didn’t and ALL of them at a normal oil offshore operator like Chevron: 1. Required a VP signature.(and no VP would’ve signed off on any of those risks). 2. Would have resulted in an immediate termination if anyone found out you were doing them.

Much_Willingness4597

If those autonomous weapons are keeping the peace in South Korea, and preventing a bloody war that would be pointless with their northern Neighbor… why do I care that they are autonomous? If the Ukrainians are using an autonomous drone, or guidance system to put a missile into a Russian tank, should we fund the company who manufacturers the components? Of all the ESG considerations I’ve never really understood people being mad about weapons providers.

IvanKaramazov99

You need to pick individual stocks to do this properly. Any metric (like ESG) just gets gamed. It's Goodhart's Law; when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure. I pick all my own stocks, and to do that right, you need to do quite a bit of research on the companies. So, just also spend the time and effort to consider the ethical aspects to their business. It's just another aspect of your research. You'll need to accept imperfection. No company is run by angels, and all companies have some negative impact. You'll also make mistakes because you're always working from incomplete information. However, most of the time, it's not that hard to differentiate from companies that are doing their best vs. companies that don't care.

my5cworth

You want to look at Morningstar ratings of various funds, specifically ESG reports and ratings: [https://www.morningstar.com/company/ratings](https://www.morningstar.com/company/ratings)

micron_to_400

You’ll most likely receive lower returns and the fees are usually higher. Moreover, while ESG diversification may help mitigate risk, this is not guaranteed.

brendonts

Brother investing your monthly wages into Raytheon isn't even going to register a tick lol.  ESG is marketing, trying to min/max being ethical as a first world denizen is like trying to find a warm wall in a building made of ice. If you're asking this question, you'd probably be better off just buying a total market fund and leaving ESG scoring and individual stock picking to professionals.  There are ESG focused funds like EVSG but from what I've read it's like a 95%+ overlap with existing total market funds....volunteering would do a lot more for your conscious than overthinking investing.

iebelig

its hard to find something perfect so you invest in weapons? that does not make sense. ESG scores are dumb yea i figured that out

AICHEngineer

Not that your paltry amount of money really matters, but this isnt a zero sum game. Any capital you over allocate to some "ESG" ethical style creates a differential in risk/reward for the companies youre underweighting relative to the index. If you actually introduced a large enough price distortion, such as you investing with many likeminded people, then the companies you underallocate to become comparatively cheap for the same cashflows and risk, thus they will be bought up. You will have achieved nothing. Activist investing does not help anything. If anything, it hurts dirtier companies by causing an increased cost of capital in the short term, making innovation and greenifying harder.

roboboom

As you’ve already discovered, the ESG scores are nonsense. If you have certain convictions, all I can say is you should just pick the companies you think are ethical according to your own beliefs. It’s all about where you personally want to draw the line. Oil is a great example. If you want to avoid pipelines, refiners, producers, etc that’s easy. If you want to avoid any company that uses oil at any point in its supply chain, well that’s impossible.

Much_Willingness4597

The challenge with ESG metrics is… 1. They are generally compared against peer firms. Chevron might be BEST of the oil gas sector but still an oil company… 2. The criteria weighting is all over the place. Someone who sells V8 engines might get a far better score than Tesla because of board governance (The G). 3. Your ethics are different than others. I may consider Nuke good for the environment. You may consider Nukes an ultimately evil that we should replace with Russian gas. (Actual position of European environmentalists). Your best route isn’t outsourcing your ethics. You just end up with whatever the fund managers hypocrisy is.

FamiliarLeadership99

I personally just buy broad market etf’s that incorporate the entire US Market or International and Emerging. It’s virtually impossible to not invest into a company doing something immoral unless you are investing in individuals stocks and-keeping up to date. I personally just refuse to invest in individual stocks that go against my values or in etfs where they have companies I dislike weighted at a high percentage. ESG Scores are a joke since some of those companies who have better ESG scores may manipulate certain areas to make themselves look better when in reality they are doing something shady.

MuchFaithlessness164

Having been in the sustainable investing industry for over twenty years, this report is spot on. So many of the large investment managers simply take an existing index, layer on some ESG risk metrics, and call it sustainable. It's not sustainable, it's a "less bad" version of the original index. There's nothing wrong with that if that's what your goal is, but a truly sustainable portfolio is built from the ground up incorporating companies that are leading us into a cleaner, more resilient, more resource-efficient, and more equitable economy. You can't mail it in, you actually have to put in the due diligence.