Investment funds are increasingly focusing on ESG issues, seeking to contribute to improving environmental, social, and governance concerns. ESG-focused investing involves promoting good ESG performance and may result in a decrease in expected financial returns. This may lead to a conflict between solely profit-focused shareholders and ESG-focused investors, who may respond accordingly. As such, a firm's ESG commitment may trigger several events that can affect the stock price. A firm's ESG commitment may increase its stock price; however, the end of such commitment may also positively affect the stock price. Hedge funds may consider this in their activism which may reshape the way hedge funds target firms and influence their actions accordingly.

This paper specifically underscores the disparities among various ESG rating systems in China, highlighting their varied interpretations and emphasis on corporate financial factors. Analyzing data on Chinese listed firms from 2009-2022, we observe that while company size and leverage ratio uniformly correlate with ESG scores across rating agencies such as Bloomberg, Huazheng, Wind, and Hexun, the influence of factors like return on assets, cash flow, company age, and Tobin's Q is markedly inconsistent among these agencies. For instance, while operational cash flow and company age are positively associated with ESG ratings from Bloomberg, Huazheng, and Wind, they hold an inverse relationship with Hexun's ratings. This divergence underscores the unique data collection, weighting, and evaluation methodologies employed by each rating system. The study emphasizes the criticality of comprehending the nuances of each rating agency's approach when interpreting ESG scores and crafting ESG strategies. Moreover, it advocates for integrating insights from multiple rating systems to cater to the diverse expectations of stakeholders.