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

de Pury Pictet Turrettini & Cie

PRI reporting framework 2020

Export Public Responses
Pdf-img

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.

Approach

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.

Voting provides our portfolio managers with valuable information about the quality of a company’s governance. It is also a necessary first step before engaging with the management. Few professionals would deny that the skills, independence and availability of a board of directors are critical to a company’s future. The effects of a capital increase, for example, will be felt immediately. For PPT, exercising the right to vote is first and foremost a financial responsibility.
 
The Cadmos portfolio managers define their voting positions by studying the analyses of annual general meetings (AGMs) and the voting recommendations supplied by various proxy advisory firms. They have the rights and the duty to deviate from the proxy’s recommendations, should they find that these do not take full account of the companies’ business models and particularities or do not correspond to their respective internal voting guidelines, which are available on request. For the European, Swiss and the Peace Investment Fund, the selected proxy advisor is Glass Lewis. This independent agency is a leading provider of governance assessment and voting advice and covers more than 23,000 companies in more than a hundred countries. It can supply consistent assessments throughout all the countries represented in the Fund. For the Cadmos Emerging Markets Engagement Fund, Comgest works with Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) and benefits from its global reach: ISS has nineteen offices worldwide and an experienced research team fluent in twenty-five languages.

12.3. Additional information.[Optional]

Portfolio managers exercise their votes directly based on internal guidelines.


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


LEA 14. Securities lending programme

14.1. Does your organisation have a securities lending programme?

14.2. Describe why your organisation does not lend securities.

Securities Lending is not authorised within the Cadmos Funds.

We have developed a proprietary ESG investment strategy called "Buy & Care".

Please refer to the methodology and results as described within our integrated performance reports: https://www.ppt.ch/buycare/ 

Since 2006, Cadmos has succeeded in simultaneously delivering financial performance and tangible impact. It has done so by engaging with the portfolio companies and helping them to integrate their most material environmental, social and governance (ESG) topics into their corporate strategy. The Cadmos performance and impact report shows that all the Cadmos Funds have outperformed their benchmarks since 2006 and that in 170 cases, companies have implemented our progress recommendations.

The portfolio managers’ participation in the engagement meetings together with our sustainability experts who together formulate progress recommendations remains Cadmos’ unique selling proposition. Through this dialogue, the portfolio managers obtain a deeper insight into the sustaina- bility of each company’s business model while creating additional social impacts potentially contributing to the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG’s).

Our engagement goes well beyond simple dialogue with the company’s management. Each year we make clear progress recommendations and provide a thorough analysis of the gaps in the reporting.

Voting provides our portfolio managers with valuable information about the quality of a company’s governance. It is also a necessary first step before engaging with the management. Few professionals would deny that the skills, independence and availability of a board of directors are critical to a company’s future. The effects of a capital increase, for example, will be felt immediately. For PPT, exercising the right to vote is first and foremost a financial responsibility.

14.4. Additional information. [Optional]


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]

Mainly due to lack of transparency or poor reporting.


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]

Our rationale for voting against management is made public at a fund level. For individual companies, this infomratoin is avaible to our investors only or on demand.


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%)

99 %

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
90.25 %
Against (opposing) management recommendations
9.75 %
Abstentions
00 %
100%

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

80

18.4. Additional information. [Optional]

We have developed a proprietary ESG investment strategy called "Buy & Care".

Please refer to the methodology and results as described within our integrated performance reports:

https://ppt.ch/en/cadmos/buyandcare/


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.

19.2. Indicate the escalation strategies used at your organisation following abstentions and/or votes against management.

19.3. Additional information. [Optional]

All of the above can be actionated on a case by case basis.


LEA 20. Shareholder resolutions (Private)


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


Top