This report shows public data only. Is this your organisation? If so, login here to view your full report.

RobecoSAM AG

PRI reporting framework 2018

You are in Direct - Listed Equity Active Ownership » (Proxy) voting and shareholder resolutions » Outputs and outcomes

Outputs and outcomes

LEA 21. Percentage of (proxy) votes cast

21.1. For listed equities where you and/or your service provider have the mandate to issue (proxy) voting instructions, indicate the percentage of votes cast during the reporting year.

Votes cast (to the nearest 1%)

98 %

Specify the basis on which this percentage is calculated

21.2. Explain your reason(s) for not voting certain holdings

21.3. Additional information. [Optional]

Robeco's policy is to vote in all meetings where we are able to vote. In some specific instances it might not be in the best interest for the shareholders to vote, for instance when shares are blocked for voting and this will restrict trading possibilities. In several markets proxy voting requires share blocking. This means that trading shares is prohibited after sending a voting instruction for an equity position

Therefore, we have developed guidelines to determine if voting is in the best interest of our clients in case of such share blocking. The most important factors in this assessment are the potential impact of our voteable holdings and if anything controversial is on the agenda of the AGM. For these purposes we consider any position above 1% of outstanding voteable shares to be significant. If we have a significant position, we will block shares and vote at the shareholder meeting. In these cases, on a general basis Robeco votes 80% of the equity position. The remaining 20% facilitates ad-hoc trading, if necessary.


LEA 22. Proportion of ballot items that were for/against/abstentions

22.1. Indicate if you track the voting instructions that you and/or your service provider on your behalf have issued.

22.2. Of the voting instructions that you and/or third parties on your behalf issued, indicate the proportion of ballot items that were:

Voting instructions
Breakdown as percentage of votes cast
For (supporting) management recommendations
90.08 %
Against (opposing) management recommendations
9.75 %
0.17 %

22.3. Describe the actions you take in relation to voting against management recommendations.

          Since 2015, Robeco informs companies of the rationale behind "against" votes when they fall under three categories: companies that are under engagement by the Active Ownership Team, companies in which Robeco is a significant shareholder (>1% of issued shares), and all Dutch companies.   

We inform these companies in order to elaborate on our voting rationale and to voice concerns. Often such communication leads to a conversation with the company in question, in which we suggest improvements that the company can make in the future. This process is aimed for improvements in these companies. Given the amount of resources needed for such feedback sessions, we focus on the most relevant holdings, instead of having a standardized or automated process of 'vote against messages' for every single "against" vote. To apply focus, we scope those companies in which we have a significant holding, are already under engagement and in our home market .  

Furthermore,  Robeco aims to achieve maximum transparency in our voting activities, both for the companies in which we invest, our clients and beneficiaries, and the general public. Our voting history is therefor made publicly available via our web disclosure platform, which is updated on a continual basis, and available at the link below.  

In some cases, where persistent ESG issues are identified at a company’s shareholder meetings, the company may be selected for our engagement program, at which point a high intensity dialogue will be initiated.

22.4. Additional information. [Optional]

LEA 23. Shareholder resolutions (Private)

LEA 24. Examples of (proxy) voting activities (Private)