转型融资追踪报告——2025年第四季度

A quarterly report on financing theshift to a low-carbon economy Linda-Eling LeeTanguy SénéKatie ToweyRumi MahmoodUmar Ashfaq Fourth quarter 2025 Sections AcknowledgementsHighlightsKey termsForeword What can physical hazard data tell us about the 2026 World Cup?How have climate funds performed?How do tech giants’ energy-related emissions compare?How much low-carbon energy relative to fossil-fuel energy are bond investors financing?How much are companies investing in carbon credits?What percentage of companies have set climate targets?What percentage of companies disclose their emissions?Are companies on track to meet global climate goals?How do companies’ emissions trajectories compare with those of their home countries? Foreword The report also takes a snapshot of two othertopics on investors’ radar. One is wonky: howshould technology giants account for theirenergy purchases—a carbon-accountingquestion that is timely given communityconcerns over power-hungry data centers. Theother is wonkier: calculating a ratio to illuminatehow much low-carbon versus fossil-fuelenergy is financed through corporate bondportfolios. The 2026 World Cup will mark nearly six weeksof nonstop soccer this summer, crisscrossing16 scenic locations across the U.S., Canada andMexico.The breadth of geographies also offersa reminder of the multiplicity of physicalhazards that communities across NorthAmerica now face. Taken together, the data echoes the outlook byour colleagues, who note intheir latest annuallookat sustainability and climate trends that forthe right technologies, declining costs arereinforcing competitiveness and driving thetransition beyond any single policy cycle. In short, there remains more than one energytransition, and capital continues to be guidedby opportunity and risk, creating momentum oftheir own. As this analysis shows, each of the 16 citiesthat will host the games confronts a mix ofnear-and long-term physical hazards. We’veranked them for each of the stadiums, not toforecast the weather but to show location-specific exposure to such hazards. The datawon’t tell you how to dress for the match (ifyou’re fortunate enough to get tickets), but it—and much more granular data like it—couldhelp you analyze the physical risks to yourinvestment if you were in the market to financea stadium or other infrastructure. Along the way, we look at some of the latestdata on the investment performance of climatefunds (up in 2025) and the setting of corporateclimate targets (also up). We highlight demandfor carbon credits (up as well) by companiesthat are using them to both meetdecarbonization commitments and,increasingly, satisfy compliance obligations. Linda-Eling LeeFounding Director,MSCI Institute Highlights 1.AT&T Stadium and SoFi Stadium, Levi’s Stadium andHard Rock Stadiumtop the list of 2026 World Cuplocations based on their exposure to heat waves,rain-induced floodingand lightning, respectively,according to our analysis usingMSCIGeoSpatialAsset Intelligence. Lincoln Financial Field, whichopened in 2003 (hostingasoccermatchbetweenManchester United and FC Barcelona), hasthe highest exposure among World Cuplocationstosubsidence, a long-term riskfor that site. 7.Companies retired carbon credits totaling 202milliontonnesof CO2-equivalent(MtCO2e)emissions in 2025, the fourth consecutive year ofgrowth and the highest total since2021.Shellretired10.4MtCO2eof carbon creditslast year, the most of any company globally and theoil major’s third consecutive year leading globalcarbon-credit retirements. 4.Investors incorporatebondscan have a wide rangeof exposure to financing low-carbonenergyrelativeto fossil-fuel energy.Ahypothetical portfoliotrackingan index designed todecarbonize in line with the goals of the ParisAgreement can finance USD 2.57 oflow-carbonenergy for every dollar of fossil-fuel energy itsupports, while one that tracks an emerging-marketbond index finances USD0.03for every dollar. 8.The emissions trajectories of the world’s listedcompanies imply warming of 3°C (5.4°F) abovepreindustrial levels this century,based on theiraggregate emissions, sector-specificcarbonbudgetsand climate targets as of Dec. 31,2025. 5.Nearly one-fifth (19%) of listed companies had aclimate targetvalidatedby the Science BasedTargets initiative (SBTi) as of Dec. 31, 2025,up from14% a year earlier.Almost a third(32%)ofcompanies have set a net-zero emissionstarget, though not necessarily one validated by theSBTi,roughly unchangedfrom a year earlier. 2.Listed climate-themed funds had a median return of12.2% last year,up from5.2%in 2024.Assetsinthesefunds reached USD 652 billion as of Dec.31, 2025, up 16.4% from a year earlier. 3.The use of emissions credits obtained via power-purchase agreements has enabled tech giantssuch as Amazon, Alphabet, Microsoft and Metatomatch against the overwhelming share of theirreported emissions from purchased energy (Scope2). That could change: A pending proposal by theGreenhouse Gas Pro