We assess whether the business model or investment strategy is clear, credible, and capable of operating through changing economic & market conditions. This includes considering where returns come from, what could disrupt them, and whether the approach appears sustainable over the long term

We examine whether a business can generate profits & cash consistently, meet its financial commitments, and continue investing in its future. Strong reported profits are less reassuring where cash flow is weak, debt is excessive, or finances are unstable

We consider the experience, judgement, and track record of the people responsible for the business, fund, or investment strategy. Good management should allocate capital carefully, manage risks effectively, and communicate decisions honestly

We review the charges, underlying costs, and structure of the investment against the service & potential benefits provided. A lower-cost investment is not automatically better, but higher costs must be justified by additional value, expertise, or outcomes

We consider whether the business or investment strategy can respond to changes in markets, regulation, technology, customer behaviour, and the wider economy. An approach that worked previously may not remain effective if circumstances change

We review how the investment has performed over relevant periods and compare it with suitable market indices, peer groups, or stated targets. Past performance provides useful context but does not predict or guarantee future results

We examine measures that help explain how much risk has been taken & how the investment has behaved during difficult periods. These may include volatility, previous falls in value, recovery periods, credit risk, concentration, and sensitivity to market changes

We assess whether the potential return appears reasonable for the level & type of risk being taken. The aim is not simply to identify the highest possible return, but to judge whether the expected reward justifies the uncertainty & potential loss

We consider how the investment affects the natural world through its products, operations, supply chains, and use of resources. We look for evidence of genuine environmental benefit rather than relying only on policies, targets, or marketing claims

We assess exposure to greenhouse-gas emissions, fossil fuels, and businesses that may be affected by the transition to a lower-carbon economy. This includes both physical climate risks & financial risks arising from changing regulation, technology, and demand

We consider whether the investment’s activities support or undermine the environmental & social priorities set out within the UN Sustainable Development Goals. Alignment should be supported by meaningful business activity or investment outcomes, rather than a broad or unsupported claim

We assess how the investment relates to the UN Global Compact principles covering human rights, labour standards, the environment, and anti-corruption. Serious or repeated breaches may indicate weak controls, harmful practices, or unacceptable business conduct

We examine whether the investment is connected to sectors, products, or practices that conflict with our responsible investment standards. Exposure may be direct or indirect and can arise through underlying funds, subsidiaries, supply chains, or mixed business activities

We assess how investment managers use their influence as owners, including voting, meeting company leadership, and challenging poor practice. Effective engagement should have clear objectives, evidence of follow-up, and consequences where progress is not made

We consider whether the investment provides clear, timely, and meaningful information about its holdings, risks, costs, decisions, and outcomes. Good reporting should help investors understand what is owned, how it is managed, and whether stated objectives are being met

We examine how a company or investment manager is directed, controlled, and held accountable. This can include board quality, executive pay, treatment of stakeholders, risk controls, business ethics, and the handling of misconduct

We test whether environmental or social claims are specific, balanced, and supported by reliable evidence. Vague language, selective reporting, or exaggerated claims may indicate greenwashing

We look beneath the investment’s name or label to understand what it actually owns & how underlying businesses generate their revenue. The holdings should be reasonably consistent with the strategy, exclusions, and responsible investment claims presented to investors

We consider whether managers actively address concerns or simply continue holding investments without meaningful action. Credible stewardship should show when issues were raised, what improvement was requested, and what happens if the response is inadequate

We consider whether the investment’s costs, risks, management approach, financial prospects, and wider impacts support suitable long-term client outcomes. An investment may appear attractive in one area but still fail this test when assessed as a whole