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

Chargeurs

CR
Bloomberg   CRI FP
Support Services  /  France  Web Site   |   Investors Relation
From an industrialist to a luxury player?

Sustainability score
Company (Sector)
2.3 (5.4)

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 4/10 25%More ...
Board geographic diversity 0/10 20%
Chairman vs. Executive split 5%
Environment   
CO² Emission 1/1025%More ...
Water withdrawal 2/1010%
Social   
Wage dispersion trend6/105%More ...
Job satisfaction0/105%
Internal communication10/105%


Sustainability score 2.3/10 100%  
Sustainability matters
Chargeurs’ sustainability strategy

The Chargeurs Group’s sustainability strategy is in alignment with the UN Sustainable Development Goals. The Group has been a signatory of the UN Global Compact since 2017. In 2020, the Group launched a sustainability-linked Euro PP issue with two KPIs: reducing the frequency of work accidents and increasing the share of revenue from sustainable products and services. The Group’s strategy is built on 2 additional KPIs: reducing CO2 emissions and water consumption by production units. The progression in the group’s ESG performance is assessed by the independent rating agency EthiFinance (GAIA rating). Overall, Chargeurs is doing-well as testified by a 77/100 score in 2020 (vs 69 in 2019) outperforming the average 51/100 of the 230 companies in the Gaïa panel.


Governance score
Company (Sector) Independent board Help
5.4 (6.9) No
ParametersCompanySectorScoreWeight
Number of board members79 9/10 5.0%
Board feminization (%)4240 8/10 5.0%
Board domestic density (%)10054 0/10 10.0%
Average age of board's members6060 5/10 5.0%
Type of company : Small cap, controlled 4/10 10.0%
Independent directors rate4250 4/10 20.0%
One share, one vote 10.0%
Chairman vs. Executive split 0.0%
Chairman not ex executive 5.0%
Full disclosure on mgt pay 5.0%
Disclosure of performance anchor for bonus trigger 5.0%
Compensation committee reporting to board of directors 5.0%
Straightforward, clean by-laws 15.0%
Governance score 5.4/10 100.0%
     
Governance matters

Since October 2015, the change of control has led to a change of governance with Mr Michaël Fribourg acting as Chairman and CEO whereas the previous set up was to split the Chairman and CEO positions. There are five new board members: Mr Fribourg, Mr Coquoin (an asset manager for the Habert-Dassault family office), Mr Urbain as a Columbus representative, Ms Cecilia Ragueneau and Ms Isabelle Guichot.

Mr Fribourg took over the full management of Chargeurs in a remarkably short time span by late 2015 and has since been shifting gears in the right direction with impressive results.

The striking aspect of the “new” Chargeurs is that it is new in its management style with a CEO keen to rebuild the growth potential of existing businesses through positive, entrepreneurial management. The eye remains keenly focused on the financial performance and a defensive balance sheet which is a hard act for anyone to execute.

Michaël FRIBOURG M President/Ch... 2021 1982 2015 0.00 (2022)
Emmanuel COQUOIN M Member 2022 1961 2015 77.8 (2022)
Isabelle GUICHOT F Member 2022 1966 2016 77.8 (2022)
Anne-Gabrielle HEILBRONNER F Member 2025 1954 2022 31.1 (2022)
Cecilia RAGUENEAU F Member 2023 1973 2017 77.8 (2022)
Nicolas URBAIN M Member 2023 1960 2015 77.8 (2022)
Georges RALLI M Secretary 2022 1948 2013 46.7 (2022)
Eduardo MALONE M President/Ch... 2018 1949 2015
Salim Meir IBRAHIM M Member 2013 2007 2013 6.00 (2013)
Martine ODILLARD F Member 2017 1954 2011 2015
Giuseppe PIROLA M Member 2014 2014 10.0 (2012)
Catherine SABOURET F Member 2017 1950 2014 2017 48.8 (2016)
Jérôme SEYDOUX M Member 2016 1934 2015 10.0 (2012)
Maria VARCIU F Member 2022 1973 2019 2022 31.1 (2022)
Changes to Board of directors : 15/09/2023
Name (7) Indep.
(3/7)
Challenged
(conflicted interests, distant or current)
Die hard
(7 years or more)
Improbable
(too young, disconnected profile)
Overloaded
(too many boards, too old)
Specific agenda
(gov. or staff rep)
Tied
(family, business relations, executive)
Unknown
(lack of history, short CV)
Michaël FRIBOURG
Emmanuel COQUOIN
Isabelle GUICHOT
Anne-Gabrielle HEILBRONNER
Cecilia RAGUENEAU
Nicolas URBAIN
Georges RALLI
Michaël FRIBOURG M CEO 1982 2015 1,553 (2022)
Olivier BUQUEN M CFO 2016 ND (2022)
Matthieu BALESCUT M Member of the ... 1976 2018
Joelle FABRE-HOFFMEISTER F Member of the ... 2016
Angela CHAN F Executive Officer 1967 2017
Laurent DEROLEZ M Executive Officer 1958
Sampiero LANFRANCHI M Executive Officer 1983 2017 ND (2022)
Federico PAULLIER M Executive Officer 1960 2013
Changes to Management : 15/09/2023
Existing committees
  • Audit / Governance Committee
  • Compensation committee
  • Financial Statements Committee
  • Litigation Committee
  • Nomination Committee
  • Safety committee
  • SRI / Environment

Environmental score
Company (Sector)
2.0 (4.7)
Data sets evaluated as trends on rolling calendar, made sector relative
ParametersScoreSectorWeight
CO² Emission1/105/10 30%
Water withdrawal2/105/10 30%
Energy2/105/10 25%
Waste4/105/10 15%
Environmental score2.0  100%
Environment matters

On the environment pillar, Chargeurs registered a score of 92/100 in 2020 on the back of good management of water, air, land and waste. Chargeurs is aiming to increase the share of revenue generated by sustainable products and services. As of 2020, Chargeurs generated 15% of sales from sustainable products and services and is targeting a 100% share of revenue by 2030. The group is also aiming to improve its carbon footprint. In 2020, Chargeurs emissions amounted to c.52t of CO2, a 2% decrease compared to 2019. Concerning water consumption, Chargeurs’ goal is to reduce its consumption and implement integrated water resources management at all levels by 2030. In 2020, Chargeurs achieved a 28% decrease in its water consumption.

Environmental metrics

1,893
Energy (GJ) per €m in capital
employed
143
CO² tons per €m in capital
employed
1,060
Cubic meter water
withdrawal per €m in capital
employed
25
Tons waste generated per €m in
capital employed
Chargeurs Support Services
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)
        
Adecco 3/10 48,535   
Bureau Veritas 5/10986,069151,4173,5731,077,000 
ChargeursCR 2/10782,67759,260 438,31510,372
DKSH 4/10434,07062,686   
Eurofins Scientific 5/102,679,250180,779200,0001,500,000 
Experian 7/10248,40021,200   
Randstad Holding 7/101,188,37958,200 280,0001,500
Rentokil Initial 4/103,355,866216,757   
Securitas 5/10 153,633   
SGS 4/103,411,256116,505 1,985,96578,560

Social score
Company (Sector)
6.7 (6.2)
Social matters

Chargeurs social pillar is even more impressive than its environment pillar with a 100/100 score. Chargeurs is committed to a social strategy which revolves around four targets: safety of employees, diversity and inclusion, upholding human rights and employee training. To achieve these goals, the Group has developed a new on-site-based safety approach as well as a culture of safety with the Global Safety Day. It also has a talent sponsorship program and provides 100% of its full-time employees with health insurance. Chargeurs has also donated 80,000 masks and 10,000 liters of hand sanitizer to hospitals, nursing homes and non-profit organizations.

Quantitative metrics (67%)
Set of staff related numerical metrics available in AlphaValue proprietary modelling aimed at ranking on social/HR matters
ParametersScoreWeight
Staffing Trend6/10 15%
Average wage trend6/10 30%
Share of added value taken up by staff cost5/10 20%
Share of added value taken up by taxes4/10 15%
Wage dispersion trend6/10 20%
Pension bonus (0 or 1)0
Quantitative score5.5/10 100%
Qualitative metrics (33%)
Set of listed qualitative criterias and for the analyst to tick

ParametersScoreWeight
Accidents at work10/10 25%
Human resources development10/10 35%
Pay10/10 20%
Job satisfaction0/10 10%
Internal communication10/10 10%
  
Qualitative score9.0/10 100%


Sector figures
CompanyCountrySocial Score Quantitative scoreQualitative scoreStaffing
      
Rentokil Initial 7.06.48.356,751
Randstad Holding 6.75.59.342,690
Securitas 6.77.94.2295,396
Bureau Veritas 6.45.38.686,768
Experian 6.05.57.222,041
DKSH 5.96.15.527,603
SGS 5.83.99.797,228
Adecco 5.75.46.439,363
Eurofins Scientific 5.35.94.159,019

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.