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

Quoniam Asset Management GmbH

PRI reporting framework 2020

Export Public Responses

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

(Proxy) voting and shareholder resolutions

LEA 12. Typical approach to (proxy) voting decisions

12.1. Indicate how you typically make your (proxy) voting decisions.


Based on

12.2. Provide an overview of how you ensure that your agreed-upon voting policy is adhered to, giving details of your approach when exceptions to the policy are made.

The investor has the sole discretion as to which party (e.g. the KVG, portfolio manager, external service provider) is given the power to exercise voting rights.

Quoniam exercises voting rights independently, acting exclusively in the best interests of our investors or the respective mandate. Our organisational setup ensures that all precautions necessary are taken in order to avoid conflicts of interest that may arise during the voting process. Upon the request of the investor, Quoniam exercises regular influence on management and operating policies of public companies via participation in general meetings. Any supportive measures taken will aim to foster long-term value creation within the company.

Our service provider communicates to their external research provider, who in return provides voting analysis and recommendations for every single point of agenda/resolution and for every AGM attended. The voting recommendations are strictly based on the voting policy. However, the final voting decision is made by the sustainability and engagement team, who again adhere to the voting policy. Every exception from the policy must be documented and justified in the internal system. If an exception is made, the explanation for the exception is controlled by a second person. The exceptions need to be discussed with the respective sector research analyst to make the most appropriate decision and to be in compliance with investor's interest.

12.3. Additional information.[Optional]

It is common practice in the German market that voting rights are exercised by a “Master KAG” (fund administrator), and Quoniam has no authorisation to do so. Therefore all answers and the guidelines in the following paragraphs apply only to those mandates where Quoniam is commissioned with voting and creditor rights, along with the respective mandate-specific agreements. They also apply to the Quoniam Funds Selection SICAV, where voting rights are exercised by the Union Investment group, taking into account guidelines formulated by Quoniam.

LEA 13. Percentage of voting recommendations reviewed (Not Applicable)

LEA 14. Securities lending programme (Private)

LEA 15. Informing companies of the rationale of abstaining/voting against management

15.1. Indicate the proportion of votes participated in within the reporting year in which where you or the service providers acting on your behalf raised concerns with companies ahead of voting.

15.2. Indicate the reasons for raising your concerns with these companies ahead of voting.

15.3. Additional information. [Optional]

LEA 16. Informing companies of the rationale of abstaining/voting against management

16.1. Indicate the proportion of votes where you, and/or the service provider(s) acting on your behalf, communicated the rationale to companies for abstaining or voting against management recommendations. Indicate this as a percentage out of all eligible votes.

16.2. Indicate the reasons why your organisation would communicate to companies, the rationale for abstaining or voting against management recommendations.

16.3. In cases where your organisation does communicate the rationale for abstaining or voting against management recommendations, indicate whether this rationale is made public.

16.4. Additional information. [Optional]

Union Investment personally delivers a speech at approximately 15-20 AGMs every year and explains the reasons for voting against an agenda item in detail. Thus, the reasons for these AGMs are accessible to the public and the media.

LEA 17. Percentage of (proxy) votes cast

17.1. For listed equities in which you 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%)

54 %

Specify the basis on which this percentage is calculated

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

17.3. Additional information. [Optional]

LEA 18. Proportion of ballot items that were for/against/abstentions

18.1. Indicate whether you track the voting instructions that you or your service provider on your behalf have issued.

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

Voting instructions
Breakdown as percentage of votes cast
For (supporting) management recommendations
64 %
Against (opposing) management recommendations
30 %
6 %

18.3. In cases where your organisation voted against management recommendations, indicate the percentage of companies which you have engaged.


18.4. Additional information. [Optional]

LEA 19. Proportion of ballot items that were for/against/abstentions

19.1. Indicate whether your organisation has a formal escalation strategy following unsuccessful voting.

19.3. Additional information. [Optional]

LEA 20. Shareholder resolutions (Private)

LEA 21. Examples of (proxy) voting activities (Private)