Greenwashing: These “green” funds changed their names rather than giving up investing in oil

From 2019 to 2022, it was fashionable to add terms evoking the protection of the planet to the name of one's fund. Over the past year, this trend has reversed. Expressions that evoke concern for the environment and sustainability are becoming rarer. This is particularly true in Europe, where, since May 21, the use of these names has been regulated by strict rules enacted a year earlier by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA).

To be called "transition " or "impact," funds must now devote at least 80% of their portfolio to environmental, social, or sustainable assets. As a result, between May 2024 and July 2025, nearly a quarter of European funds in the ESG universe—the acronym for "environment, social, and governance"—have removed or modified these terms and their equivalents. That's more than 1,300 funds out of 5,500, according to the sustainable investment research firm Morningstar Sustainalytics, calculated at the end of June.

The terms "ESG" and "sustainable" are disappearing first, notes Hortense Bioy, director of research at Morningstar. These terms imply stronger obligations , such as banning companies whose revenues come from oil for more than 10% of their revenue.

You have 72.11% of this article left to read. The rest is reserved for subscribers.