Management
| ISIN | LU2257474663 |
|---|---|
| Share Class | Accumulation |
| Ongoing Charge | 0.70843% |
| Annual Management Charge | 0.49984% |
| Manager Company | AXA IM |
|---|---|
| Fund Type | SICAV |
| Benchmark | Other Bond |
| Domicile | LUX |
| For Sale in | Austria, Belgium, Switzerland, Germany, Denmark, Spain, Finland, France, United Kingdom, Italy, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Sweden |
| Name | Robert Houle |
|---|---|
| Since | 13 August 2021 |
| Bio | Rob is a Portfolio Manager/ Analyst within the US High Yield team, a role he has held since 2008. In addition to managing core high yield portfolios, he is also responsible for research coverage of the basic industry sector. Rob joined AXA IM in 2005 as a US High Yield Credit Analyst. Before joining AXA IM, he was a Trader for three years on the institutional equity trading desk at Lehman Brothers where he traded energy related stocks. Robert holds a Bachelor’s degree in Economics and Psychology from Williams College; and is also a CFA charterholder. |
| Name | Michael Graham |
|---|---|
| Since | 13 August 2021 |
| Bio | Mike is a Portfolio Manager within the US High Yield team, a role he has held since 2010. Prior to his current role managing US Core High Yield portfolios, he was responsible for re-search covering the energy sector. Mike joined AXA IM in 2007. Prior to AXA IM, he was an Analyst for two years in the fixed income division of Bear Stearns, where he performed financial analyses and quantitative support for the Public Power group. Michael holds a Bachelor's degree in Economics from Williams College; and he is also a CFA charter-holder. |
Investment Objective To seek high income in USD from an actively managed bond portfolio whose carbon footprint is at least 20% lower than that of the ICE BofA US High Yield Index (Benchmark). As a secondary extra-financial objective, the water intensity of the portfolio aims at being at least 20% lower than the Benchmark. Investment Policy The Sub-Fund is actively managed and references the Benchmark by seeking to achieve its extra-financial objectives. The investment manager has full discretion over the composition of the portfolio and may take exposure to companies, countries or sectors not included in the Benchmark, even though the Benchmark constituents are generally representative of the portfolio. The deviation from the Benchmark is likely to be significant. The investment manager uses an "extra-financial indicator improvement" approach in relation to the investable universe, the average of each extrafinancial indicator calculated at Sub-Fund's level being at least 20% better than that calculated for the Benchmark. The Sub-Fund adopts a sustainable investment approach according to which carbon intensity and water intensity apply bindingly at all times in the securities selection process. The Sub-Fund excludes from its investment universe the majority of securities within carbon intensive sub-sectors including Metals, Mining and Steel Producers and most sub-sectors within the Energy and Utility sectors. Firstly, the investment manager analyses carbon intensity and water intensity data to ensure that the average of KPI carbon intensity and water intensity calculated at Sub-Fund's level is at least 20% better than that calculated for the investable universe, followed by the application of a second exclusion filter, described in AXA IM's Sectorial Exclusion Policies and ESG Standards Policies (https://www.axa-im.com/responsible-investing/sector-investment-guidelines.). The coverage rate for the carbon intensity indicator and the ESG analysis rating within the portfolio are each at least 90% of the net assets of the Sub- Fund, while the coverage rate for the water intensity indicator within the portfolio will be at least 70% of the net assets of the Sub-Fund. Secondly, the investment manager conducts an evaluation of market views: of economic, valuation, technical analysis of the markets based on a number of factors, including macro- and microeconomic analysis and credit analysis of issuers, and management of the credit curve positioning and the exposure to different sectors. The ESG data used in the investment process are based on methodologies relying in part on third-party data and in some cases are internally developed, are subjective and may change over time. The lack of harmonised definitions can make ESG criteria heterogeneous. As such, the different investment strategies using ESG criteria and ESG reporting are difficult to compare with each other.