AlphaValue Corporate Services
This research has been commissioned and paid for by the company and is deemed to constitute an acceptable minor non-monetary benefit as defined in MiFID II

IDI

CR
Bloomberg   IDIP FP
Holding Companies  /  France  Web Site   |   Investors Relation
Private equity players buffeted by macro-economic headwinds

Sustainability score
Company (Sector)
2.9 (5.0)

Sustainability is made of analytical items contributing to the E, the S and the G, that can be highlighted as sustainability precursors and can be combined in an intellectually acceptable way. This is the only scale made available

  Score Weight  
Governance   
Independent directors rate 5/10 25%More ...
Board geographic diversity 0/10 20%
Chairman vs. Executive split 5%
Environment   
CO² Emission 1/1025%More ...
Water withdrawal 1/1010%
Social   
Wage dispersion trend0/105%More ...
Job satisfaction3/105%
Internal communication10/105%


Sustainability score 2.9/10 100%  
Sustainability matters

AlphaValue’s automated Sustainability scoring is not applicable to IDI, given that several data inputs necessary for the computation of the Environment and Social scores do not pertain nor apply to holding company-type structures such as IDI. Hence, the Sustainability score calculation is not relevant in this issuer’s case.


Environmental score
Company (Sector)
1.0 (3.6)
Data sets evaluated as trends on rolling calendar, made sector relative
ParametersScoreSectorWeight
CO² Emission1/105/10 30%
Water withdrawal1/103/10 30%
Energy1/104/10 25%
Waste1/103/10 15%
Environmental score1.0  100%
Environment matters

AlphaValue’s automated Environment scoring is not applicable to IDI, given that several data inputs necessary for the computation of the Environment score do not pertain nor apply to holding company-type structures such as IDI.

Environmental metrics


Energy (GJ) per €m in capital
employed

CO² tons per €m in capital
employed

Cubic meter water
withdrawal per €m in capital
employed

Tons waste generated per €m in
capital employed
IDI Other Financials
Sector figures
Company CountryEnvironment
score
Energy
(total,
in GJ)
CO2
Emissions
(in tons)
CO2
Compensation
(in tons)
Water
Withdrawal
(in m3)
Waste
(total,
(in tons)
        
Ackermans & van Haaren 2/10 672,792   
Adyen 3/10n/a4,561 n/an/a
Amundi 9/1077,6454,875 29,764161
Bolloré 10/10979,880347,629 1,463,06237,675
Bouygues 5/105,466,4991,900,000 1,000,000 
Corporacion Financiera Alba 10/1029,9523,729 39,88319,701
D’Ieteren Group 6/101,952,302145,291  166,600
Deutsche Beteiligungs AG BH 1/10 210   
Deutsche Boerse 7/10278,4208,771 74,63320
DWS 1/10 4,329   
EdenRed 4/1046,1528,474 32,312478
En+ 3/10367,200,00053,700,000 992,900,000199,946,600
Eurazeo 7/109,827,411771,602 36,311,69440,627
Euronext NV 4/1023,5226,687 253,892 
Exor 3/10 351,370   
GBL 4/10 150   
Hal Trust 1/10     
HBM Healthcare Investments BH 1/10     
Heineken Holding 7/108,287,2001,478,000 92,500,0005,238,188
IDICR 1/10     
Industrivärden 4/10 26   
Investor 7/103,66869  49
Kinnevik Investment 6/1059011 n/an/a
London Stock Exchange Group 10/10593,8425,617 893,331
MPC Capital BH 1/10     
Nexi 5/10235,29614,960 857,4002,246
Partners Group BH 1/10 578,076 2,374,472 
Porsche SE 1/10     
Prosus 2/10n/a21,736 n/an/a
Sonae 9/102,902,000171,598 2,185,426102,446
Tessenderlo Group 3/1013,530,000  19,000,000n/a
Vivendi 9/10558,49034,589 28,54820,237
Wendel 4/10 173   
Wise 4/1012,565868 n/a227
Worldline 10/10278,0949,109 17,3722,092

Social score
Company (Sector)
3.9 (5.6)
Social matters

AlphaValue’s automated Social scoring is not applicable to IDI, given that several data inputs necessary for the computation of the Social score do not pertain nor apply to holding company-type structures such as IDI.

Quantitative metrics (67%)
Set of staff related numerical metrics available in AlphaValue proprietary modelling aimed at ranking on social/HR matters
ParametersScoreWeight
Staffing Trend1/10 20%
Average wage trend7/10 35%
Share of added value taken up by staff cost1/10 25%
Share of added value taken up by taxes1/10 20%
Wage dispersion trend0/10 0%
Pension bonus (0 or 1)0
Quantitative score3.1/10 100%
Qualitative metrics (33%)
Set of listed qualitative criterias and for the analyst to tick

ParametersScoreWeight
Accidents at work10/10 25%
Human resources development5/10 35%
Pay0/10 20%
Job satisfaction3/10 10%
Internal communication10/10 10%
  
Qualitative score5.6/10 100%


Sector figures
CompanyCountrySocial Score Quantitative scoreQualitative scoreStaffing
      
Prosus 7.97.39.027,387
Wise 7.78.56.26,032
Adyen 7.47.57.24,302
Worldline 7.37.08.019,620
Investor 7.37.56.916,770
Vivendi 7.16.78.037,000
Tessenderlo Group 6.86.47.65,200
Ackermans & van Haaren 6.25.77.221,858
Industrivärden 6.14.39.714.0
Heineken Holding 6.15.27.987,256
Bouygues 6.06.15.9197,150
Deutsche Boerse 5.94.78.313,000
Eurazeo 5.97.03.719,246
EdenRed 5.85.56.611,621
Kinnevik Investment 5.84.19.345.0
Deutsche Beteiligungs AG BH 5.74.97.687.0
Amundi 5.55.45.65,589
D’Ieteren Group 5.44.47.529,388
London Stock Exchange Group 5.45.25.826,548
En+ 5.35.74.594,694
DWS 5.34.07.94,350
Exor 5.33.88.322.0
Sonae 5.26.13.348,881
Wendel 5.16.42.797,232
Nexi 5.14.95.510,829
Euronext NV 4.93.97.02,330
Hal Trust 4.76.02.132,402
Bolloré 4.65.42.974,459
Porsche SE 4.54.25.137.0
Corporacion Financiera Alba 4.35.12.71,950
MPC Capital BH 4.33.26.7232
GBL 4.34.93.0139,356
Partners Group BH 4.15.61.32,178
HBM Healthcare Investments BH 3.70.89.79.00

Sustainability / ESG by AlphaValue:

Doubt driven, focused on dynamics


AlphaValue was set up in 2009 as an ESG native firm: since inception, no research could be published without filling up the ESG relevant items. ESG has always been there as a natural building block of the research effort.

Without much pretence, AlphaValue has accumulated 11 years of proprietary, practical data in a consistent way that has been made to “talk” with financial data. The efforts have been aimed at solving the main conundrum of ESG analytics: avoiding useless and noisy data. AlphaValue ESG data is intimately connected to the fundamental research work and its continuous updating process. In other words, AlphaValue ESG data can be made to resonate at will in terms of financial implications for those investors with the willingness to do so.

Over the last 3 years, this data, or rather the dynamic of this data, has been put at work so that it impacts directly and consistently on valuations across AlphaValue’s 450 + stocks universe. This is considerable progress vs. the dominant “consumption” of ESG raw data: ESG-type conclusions are sitting next to valuation fundamentals but hardly any investor is in a position to bridge effectively the two in a consistent and repeatable way. It takes more than a spreadsheet to get stable and auditable results that work 100% of the time.

AlphaValue reckons that it currently is the only equity research provider in Europe to have reached this stage: a perfectly smooth on-boarding of ESG data, on a continuing basis, impacting valuation fundamentals day and night.

This is available on every stock, every sector, every stock selection, every day.


Heretical ESG opinions?


ESG is a contradiction in terms. Without a good Governance, the Social and Environment items will never show progress. Social is for stakeholders and thus unlikely to please shareholders. The long-term view that good pay/working conditions are ultimately good for shareholders is, like any promise, better left to those who want to believe in it. It does not work for normal investment horizons

Environmental gains will not happen without good Governance but this is not enough as environmental progress will not happen without coercion from governments/supra-governments. There is no reason why a corporate will spend more for a possible collective gain tomorrow when it can have better returns now for its shareholders.

The environment is a cost of massive complexity and a universal one as data improves and allows for intricate tracking of what corporates are up to. There is no practical way a corporate can be valued through a web of changing definitions of environmental data. AlphaValue holds the view that all corporates are made to pay through lower GDP growth expectations resulting from friction costs. The only dimension that really matters from an investment perspective is whether a given corporate makes an extra effort vs. peers. A good ‘E’ rating shall not be driven by absolute levels but by the dynamic of emission controls relative to peers. Dumping cement stocks because they spit out carbon is a narrow view of what ESG implies.

Sustainability scores only

AlphaValue always refused to supply a pecking order of its coverage along some improbable ESG scale. It just does not make sense to mix opposing signals in a single ranking.

Sustainability is a different proposition where analytical items contributing to the E, the S and the G can be highlighted as sustainability precursors and combined in an intellectually acceptable way. This is the only scale made available by AlphaValue.

Sustainability impacts target prices

From 1-12-2020, AlphaValue substituted sustainability metrics for its Governance and Social ones when it comes to impacting valuations;

Indeed since 2019, all DCF (or DCF equivalents for Financials) have been impacted by Governance and Social metrics to connect directly ESG-type findings into share price targets and bring consistency across the board. The impact is driven by adjusting the small ‘g’ conventionally used to assess the growth to infinity. This is being tweaked to recognise, say, that good governance ultimately pays off.

The same procedure is now stemming from Sustainability metrics instead.

For the record, this has been made possible as AlphaValue has finalised its proprietary E scoring, now extended to 4 items (GHG, Waste, Water, Energy) on which a degree of data stability seems to emerge.