As Matt Levine often points out, there are two possible cases for ESG

1/ This will bring worse returns, but I'm willing to accept the loss in order to forward values I support

2/ This will bring better returns, since the market underrates risks from bad ESG companies (e.g. the long-term return on capital for coal companies will be worse than the market expects)

People marketing ESG funds (or anti-ESG, same rule applies) usually emphasise the second.

> Anyone claiming they can consistently beat any large index is just delusional, aren't they?

This is obviously not true. RenTech would like a word.