At ECOFACT, we’ve always believed in developing products in close collaboration with our clients. While we were exploring the needs of banks, a sustainability risk expert at a leading US institution highlighted a very specific challenge: periodically reviewing and benchmarking peer banks’ sustainability risk policies. This recurring effort created a significant workload on top of day-to-day responsibilities. The expert pointed out that every bank was doing this independently, so there were clear efficiency gains to be made if the effort and cost could be shared.

That conversation planted the seed for our Monitoring Peer Policies (MPP) initiative. Today, we analyze the practices of 20 leading banks with varying profiles, from size and geographic reach to the of their sustainability commitments. We also added one of the world’s top ten insurers, known for its high sustainability ambitions, to spot potential gaps the banking sector might overlook.

Fig. 1: Domiciles of the total 21 financial institutions whose policies and commitments we monitor.

I asked our MPP team to highlight recent findings that stood out to them:

• More than half of the institutions we cover now report on nature-related risks in their annual or sustainability reports. Institutions that don’t yet consider these risks material still appear committed to identifying and managing their impacts and dependencies on nature.
• An increasing number of financial institutions are publishing standalone climate transition plans. Alternatively, they are strengthening key components of those plans, such as targets, actions, and metrics, within their broader climate reports.
• Leading institutions are starting to integrate biodiversity and just transition considerations into the frameworks they use to assess their clients’ transition plans.
• Disclosure efforts show no signs of slowing down, even as some institutions try to avoid controversial language or step back from certain public initiatives. Overall, both the scope and quality of disclosures are improving.
• Exceptions can be observed among some US banks, where frameworks and disclosures tend to be less comprehensive. Over time, this could increase liability risks, especially if interpreted by regulators, courts, or other actors as a deliberate choice.

Peer practice matters. It shapes market standards and expected business conduct. Early adopters raise the bar, often to show leadership or steer the direction of change. A good example here is ING, a smaller bank that demonstrated visible sustainability leadership by introducing the first animal welfare policy. The next wave of adopters reset the bar by turning individual efforts into more broadly accepted business practices. Finally, falling behind can harm reputation, raise critical questions from responsible investors, and attract unwanted attention from regulators. That’s why everybody needs to know what their peers are doing and what they believe are appropriate sustainability practices.

Olivier Jaeggi

ECOFACT Monitoring Peer Policies (MPP)

Do you know how your peers are approaching sustainability? Let us help. We’ve turned years of research into a highly valuable, cost-effective solution. Here’s what makes Monitoring Peer Policies (MPP) different:

• More depth, more detail: Our assessments go far beyond typical public benchmarking. We dive into the fine print, down to the exact wording of specific requirements, commitments, and exclusions. This level of rigor is essential, especially for senior management and legal teams.
• From risk policies to strategy: We have taken our ever-expanding expertise in the review of environmental and social risk policies and created a strategic analysis solution. We still examine how institutions handle sensitive areas like oil and gas or human rights, but now we also track how they disclose climate commitments, respond to nature-related risks, and address concerns like greenwashing.

To learn more about MPP, reach out to us at info@ecofact.com; +41 58 520 20 20.