For both generic (traditional) investor and socially responsible investors who are actors of the capital market, it is important to compare the performance of socially responsible investments with traditional investments. Although various studies have been conducted in this area, the number of research conducted in Turkey is limited. Therefore, in this study, the performance of socially responsible investments and traditional investments was compared for Turkey.
Istanbul Stock Exchange Sustainability index was used as the representative of socially responsible investments and market index (BIST100) was used as representative of traditional investments. Daily data were used for the period between 2014-2019. For the period in question, the return, risk and risk adjusted return of both indices are compared. Sharpe ratio, Treynor ratio and Jensen alpha are used for risk adjusted return. T tests were used to compare the differences.
3. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
The systematic risk (beta) of the sustainability index is higher than 1 for all years in the data period and the fact that the beta is higher than 1 is significant at the 95% confidence level. Also, the return of sustainability index is higher than the market index for 4 of the 6 years and for whole period but the differences were not statistically significant. The risk adjusted returns of the sustainability index were higher than the market index for 4 of the 6 years and the whole period but the differences weren’t statistically significant. For the whole period, the Sharpe and Treynor ratio of the sustainability index is 0.001 and 0.002 respectively, and the same ratios of the market index are -0.001 and -0.001, respectively. Also, the Jensen alpha of sustainability index is positive (0.002). However, as stated above, the differences between risk-adjusted returns are not statistically significant at 95% confidence level.
4. CONCLUSION, RECOMMENDATION AND LIMITATIONS
The risk and return of the BIST sustainability index for the whole period is higher than the market index, but only high risk is statistically significant. In terms of risk adjusted returns, the performance of the sustainability index is higher than the market index, but the difference isn’t statistically significant. Therefore, these results showed that the concept of sustainability (social responsibility) isn’t yet widespread enough to affect asset pricing/choosing in Turkey. These results also indicate that socially responsible investors have the opportunity to make socially responsible investments without sacrificing financial performance. These findings are consistent with research in the literature. As a matter of fact, the fact that the sustainability index is riskier is a finding obtained in almost every research. However, as it has been interpreted in other studies, this seems to be the result of the companies in the sustainability index being larger companies than others and being more sensitive to macroeconomic developments.
Finally, the first constraint of the research is that some companies are in both the sustainability index and the market index. This situation creates the possibility of bias in the results of the performance comparison between the two indices. The second constraint of the research is that the companies in the sustainability index are larger than the companies in the market index. Clearing the results from the effect of the company size will make the findings obtained more neutral. Also, comparison of socially responsible investments with traditional investments in bear and bull markets will contribute to the literature.
- Becan, C. (2011). Kurumsal Sosyal Sorumluluk Kavramının Paydaş Teorisi ve İletişim Yaklaşımı Açısından Değerlendirilmesi: Bankaların Basın Bültenlerine Yönelik bir İçerik Analizi, Journal of Selcuk Communucation, 7(1), 16-35.
- Gök, İ.Y. & Özdemir, O. (2017). Borsa İstanbul Sürdürülebilirlik Endeksinin Performans Karakteristiği, Sosyoekonomi, 25(34), 87-105.
- Olmedo, E.E., Torres, M.J.M. & Izquierdo, M.Á.F. (2013). Sustainable Development and the Financial System: Society’s Perceptions About Socially Responsible Investing, Business Strategy and the Environment, 22, 410–428.
- Ortas, E., Moneva, J.M. & Salvador, M. (2012). Does Socially Responsible Investment Equity Indexes in Emerging Markets Pay Off? Evidence from Brazil, Emerging Markets Review, 13(4), 581-597.
- Ortas, E., Moneva, J.M. & Salvador, M. (2014). Do Social and Environmental Screens Influence Ethical Portfolio Performance? Evidence from Europa, Business Research Quarterly, 17, 11-21.
- Sauer, D.A. (1997). The Impact of Social-Responsibility Screens on Investment Performance: Evidence from the Domini 400 Social Index and Domini Equity Mutual Fund, Review of Financial Economics, 6 (2), 137-149.
- Schröder, M. (2004). The Performance of Socially Responsible Investments: Investment Funds and Indices, Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, ·18(2), 122-142.
- Schröder, M. (2007). Is there a Difference? The Performance Characteristics of SRI Equity Indices, Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 34(1) & (2), 331–348.
- Selcuk, E.A. (2019). Corporate Social Responsibility and Financial Performance: The Moderating Role of Ownership Concentration in Turkey, Sustainability, MDPI, Open Access Journal, 11(13), 1-10.
- Sudha, S. (2015). Risk-return and Volatility analysis of Sustainability Index in India, Environ Dev Sustain,(17), 1329–1342.
- Zulkafli, A.H., Ahmad, Z. & Emral, E.M (2017). The Performance of Socially Responsible Investments in Indonesia: A Study of the Sri Kehati Index, Gadjah Mada International Journal of Business, 19(1), 59-76.