SIPP portfolio, all equities, what percent in UK?

BLB53

Are you referring to Norway's decision to reduce it's exposure to oil and gas companies in it's wealth fund?

Just the tip of the iceberg.

At the G20 summit next week fund managers with $34 tr of investments - half the global total, are demanding more urgency on climate and demanding the introduction of carbon pricing. It's only a matter of time and will be sooner rather than later so be prepared for divesting of big oil to increase significantly.

Malthusian

BLB53 wrote: »

I believe a lot of investors have not yet realised the huge risks from large pension funds and institutions divesting their portfolios of these big oil companies.

A lot of investors have not realised a lot of things, but divestment is all over the news and is already priced in.

If Shell and BP slide down the indices quicker than markets anticipate then those who dump Shell and BP immediately will outperform, and if it takes them longer or if they don't go bust, they will underperform. There is no evidence that anyone can consistently beat the market by this kind of fortune-telling.

Passives holding Shell and BP are not running a huge risk as they will sell off Shell and BP as they slide down the indices and increase exposure to renewables as they come up.

If people want to exclude Shell and BP for ethical reasons rather than trying to beat the market, then that is a different kettle of dolphins. The thing about ethical arguments is that you can come up with an ethical reason to exclude or include pretty much anything that isn't outright criminal (which wouldn't be available for public investment). I have heard it said that ethical investors shouldn't exclude Shell and BP because if the only investors left holding Shell and BP are selfish bar stewards who want to kill the planet, Shell and BP have no incentive to stop killing the planet.