Chubb

The financial institution designates specific functions, teams, or committees to implement its sustainability strategy and actively tracks its Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions.

Chubb has a financial materiality assessment, however, there is no evidence of a disclosed process for identifying and prioritising material sustainability impacts based on objective criteria. It is recommended that performance criteria for senior executive remuneration be linked to specific sustainability targets. An engagement strategy focusing on sustainability risk management is in place, yet there is no evidence of a plan supporting environmental transitions and social best practices. While there is a US Public Policy Engagement and Disclosure of Political Activity, no evidence was found regarding positions taken in lobbying on sustainability themes.

Although policies exist concerning coal, oil, and high-emitting underwriting investees, there is no evidence of disclosure regarding the provision of products and services linked to high-emitting sectors. The institution could transparently detail the methodology for its footprint calculation and disclose that it has established a transition plan covering its own operations, supply chain, and portfolio. It also has the opportunity to ensure its Scope 1-3 emissions are reducing in line with its interim targets and disclose client breakdowns by income group.

Additionally, the institution could strengthen its disclosure by identifying the social risks associated with its financing activities in relation to net zero transition and provide an example of actions taken in the past three years to address salient human rights issues identified through risk assessments related to its products, services, and capital.

This scorecard refers to information in English which was publicly available by July 15 2024. AuM and Total assets are stated in USD for comparability and have been calculated based on reported local currency values multiplied by applicable IMF currency converter values.