Financial Times, September 17, 2024, article: "Vanguard experiment in shareholder democracy finds investors prefer to defer" [Most investors who delegate choice of investments inclined to also delegate voting choices]

Forum Home Page [see Broadridge note below]

 The Shareholder ForumTM`

Fair Investor Access

This public program was initiated in collaboration with The Conference Board Task Force on Corporate/Investor Engagement and with Thomson Reuters support of communication technologies. The Forum is providing continuing reports of the issues that concern this program's participants, as summarized  in the January 5, 2015 Forum Report of Conclusions.

"Fair Access" Home Page

"Fair Access" Program Reference

 

Related Projects 2012-2019

For graphed analyses of company and related industry returns, see

Returns on Corporate Capital

See also analyses of

Shareholder Support Rankings

 
 
 

Forum reference:

 Most investors who delegate choice of investments inclined to also delegate voting choices


For previous Forum attention to projects offering control of shareholder voting rights to investors in professionally managed funds, see

 

Source: Financial Times, September 17, 2024, article

Corporate governance

Vanguard experiment in shareholder democracy finds investors prefer to defer

Nearly half of participants in pilot programme allowed to vote their shares chose to let the asset manager do it for them

Asset managers have sought ways to transfer responsibility for voting to individual shareholders amid controversy over ESG initiatives © AP

Madison Darbyshire in New York  SEPTEMBER 17 2024


Vanguard gave investors in a handful of its funds the chance to vote their shares last year, part of a revolutionary push to give people a say in the governance of America’s largest companies.

Instead, almost half of investors opted to let Vanguard do it for them after all.

Nearly 45 per cent of shareholders chose to let the $9.7tn asset manager vote their shares, data shows, the default option for investors who have not been offered the chance to vote their shares at all.

The move comes as the largest index investment providers deal with political pressure from both the left and right for the amount of control they have over US companies through the assets they manage. Critics contend the index firms have too much power because they control 15 per cent to 20 per cent of shares in many US-listed companies.

As the political backlash to environmental, social and governance shareholder initiatives has intensified, asset managers have rushed to find ways to transfer responsibility for voting to individual shareholders in their funds, whom they previously voted on behalf of. BlackRock and State Street also recently launched programmes to allow some individual investors to vote their shares. The firms already gave some institutional investors the ability to choose how their shares were voted.

But many investors have shown they are happy to let their investment firms speak for them.

“It is a data-driven answer to the question that some have raised about, ‘What do investors actually want?’ and ‘Is it appropriate that the asset manager is picking how their shares are voted?’,” said John Galloway, global head of investment stewardship at Pennsylvania-based Vanguard, who heads the proxy pilot programme. The data shows that for many investors, “that seems totally appropriate because they are choosing to pick that same policy”.

Vanguard’s policy for voting shares is clear and supports measures that create value for shareholders, Galloway said. It’s “gratifying to see that policy is something that resonates with investors”.

The Vanguard pilot programme, launched in early 2023 and expanded this year, allowed investors in five funds to participate in proxy voting on company proposals. Investors in the funds with more than $100bn in combined assets could select blanket voting options such as to abstain, vote with an ESG focus, vote alongside the company’s board or allow Vanguard to vote their shares. Participation in the programme was voluntary.

Nearly a quarter of the 40,000 retail investors in the programme voted to support ESG shareholder proposals, according to the data, while 30 per cent opted to vote in line with the recommendations of company boards. But the largest number of investors chose to vote their shares in line with Vanguard’s recommendations, the way their shares were voted before the programme.

“The fact that the retail investors opted to allow Vanguard to vote their own shares is quite meaningful . . . it shows they value the decision-making practices that their institutional investors adopt with regards to these issues,” said Matteo Tonello, the managing director of ESG research at The Conference Board, a US think-tank.

The individual proxy voting initiatives were largely a response to the heavy politicisation of ESG in the US, as asset managers came under fire and politicians questioned the ability of asset managers to vote in a way that was representative of the interests of their underlying shareholders.

“The next time Republicans complain about non-representative corporate democracies, the asset managers are going to turn around and say look at the data,” said Shiva Rajgopal, a professor at Columbia Business School.


Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2024. All rights reserved.

 

 

This Forum program was open, free of charge, to anyone concerned with investor interests in the development of marketplace standards for expanded access to information for securities valuation and shareholder voting decisions. As stated in the posted Conditions of Participation, the purpose of this public Forum's program was to provide decision-makers with access to information and a free exchange of views on the issues presented in the program's Forum Summary. Each participant was expected to make independent use of information obtained through the Forum, subject to the privacy rights of other participants.  It is a Forum rule that participants will not be identified or quoted without their explicit permission.

This Forum program was initiated in 2012 in collaboration with The Conference Board and with Thomson Reuters support of communication technologies to address issues and objectives defined by participants in the 2010 "E-Meetings" program relevant to broad public interests in marketplace practices. The website is being maintained to provide continuing reports of the issues addressed in the program, as summarized in the January 5, 2015 Forum Report of Conclusions.

Inquiries about this Forum program and requests to be included in its distribution list may be addressed to access@shareholderforum.com.

The information provided to Forum participants is intended for their private reference, and permission has not been granted for the republishing of any copyrighted material. The material presented on this web site is the responsibility of Gary Lutin, as chairman of the Shareholder Forum.

Shareholder Forum™ is a trademark owned by The Shareholder Forum, Inc., for the programs conducted since 1999 to support investor access to decision-making information. It should be noted that we have no responsibility for the services that Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc., introduced for review in the Forum's 2010 "E-Meetings" program and has since been offering with the “Shareholder Forum” name, and we have asked Broadridge to use a different name that does not suggest our support or endorsement.