A self-directed research framework for building a sustainable, impact-aware equity portfolio — a diversified ESG ETF core, a thematic-impact bridge, and hand-picked mid- and small-cap satellites, each held to the same valuation discipline as any other position.
The screen is, at root, a quality screen. Exclusions and norms-based filters remove controversy and litigation risk; best-in-class and integration tilt toward governance and capital discipline — the same earnings-quality signals a disciplined investor would run anyway.
Where this earns its keep is the satellite layer: small/mid impact names carry idiosyncratic risk that a broad ESG ETF dilutes away, so they reward the bottom-up valuation work.
Evidence over conviction, structure over stock-picking, and an honest accounting of what "sustainable" actually buys you. Values and returns aren't opposites here — but pretending there's never a trade-off is its own kind of greenwashing.
This desk runs on the same evidence-based foundations as any disciplined equity book: most of the work is in construction, not selection. A cheap, diversified core does the heavy lifting; satellites exist only where concentration is genuinely rewarded.
The sustainability layer is treated as a quality and risk screen first, a values statement second. Exclusions strip out tail and litigation risk; norms-based and governance signals overlap with earnings-quality red flags; best-in-class tilts behave like a low-tracking-error quality factor. The ethics and the fundamentals reinforce each other rather than fighting.
Impact is held to a higher bar than ESG. A label on a fund is not a thesis — intentional, measurable, additional outcomes are scarce in liquid public markets, so the genuine impact names are few and named honestly, tensions and all.
The base provides cheap, diversified, screened beta; the satellites concentrate conviction where the screen creates genuine pure-plays rather than diluted tilts.
Broad ESG-integrated / best-in-class equity ETFs. Diversified, low-MER, the ballast of the sleeve. Screens out controversy without surrendering market breadth.
illustrative · 55–75% of sleeveSingle-theme impact ETFs — clean energy, green bonds. Concentrated and volatile, so they sit between core and satellite: an impact dial you can turn without single-name risk.
illustrative · 0–20% of sleeveHand-selected mid- and small-cap equities with a defensible impact thesis. The alpha-seeking layer. Each name earns its slot through bottom-up valuation, not a label.
illustrative · 10–40% of sleeveA sustainable screen isn't one filter — it's a stack of approaches you can layer, from blunt exclusions to demanding impact tests. Toggle the lenses you want; the note below adapts.
Removes tobacco, controversial weapons, thermal coal, and UN Global Compact violators — the blunt, transparent first cut.
Drops companies breaching international norms — labour, human rights, anti-corruption. A governance/integrity signal in disguise.
Keeps sector exposure but overweights the top ESG scorers within each industry. Preserves diversification; reduces tracking error.
Folds ESG factors into the financial model rather than as a bolt-on filter — controversies as a discount-rate input.
Targets a structural theme — decarbonisation, water, the circular economy. Where the bridge ETFs and many satellites live.
Demands intentional, measurable real-world outcomes alongside return — the most demanding lens, scarce in public mid/small caps.
Diversified screened beta plus optional thematic-impact dials. Canadian-listed where it matters for withholding tax; US-listed where the product depth is. Verify current holdings and MER against fact sheets — these drift.
| Ticker / Fund | Mandate & lens | MER* | Layer |
|---|
A curated candidate set, not a portfolio. Each name has a real impact thesis and a flagged tension — because honest impact investing names the trade-offs. Run your own DuPont / DCF before sizing. Cap tags: S <$2B M $2–10B L $10B+.
| Ticker / Company | Impact thesis | Cap | Theme |
|---|
Drag to set how much of the sleeve concentrates into thematic + single-name satellites. Higher tilt = more impact intentionality and more tracking error — symmetric on the up and downside.
Who's behind the desk, and why a custodian-side product builder writes about portfolio construction in public.
I work at the intersection of finance, data, and technology — turning complex institutional investment data into intuitive tools that help asset managers and pension funds make better decisions. I currently lead the development of a data platform at a global custodian that spans custody, securities lending, performance and risk — including ESG metrics — taking it from concept through delivery to pilot clients: shaping the vision, architecting the data model, and working directly with institutional clients on what they actually need.
What I bring is a hybrid lens. I understand the institutional domain deeply — performance attribution, risk analytics, custody operations, regulatory context — and I pair it with a builder's instinct for product, data architecture, and user experience. The best tools in financial services come from people who can speak both languages fluently.
This site is where I think out loud about portfolio construction. The sustainable & impact sleeve here applies the same discipline I use professionally — evidence-based structure, valuation grounded with a balance of quantitative and qualitative factors, and a clear-eyed view of trade-offs — to the question of how to invest in line with values without abandoning rigour. It's a personal research notebook, not a product and not advice.