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 study compares return and volatility performance of exchange-traded funds (ETFs) with high-ESG (Environment, Social, and Governance) rating vs. low-ESG rating. The paper also examines time-series data predictability by identifying their positive dependence and volatility asymmetry properties, and examines the performance of two combinations of short-memory models i.e., autoregressive moving average and exponential generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARMA-EGARCH); autoregressive moving average and asymmetric power autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARMA-APARCH) and two long-memory models, autoregressive moving average and fractionally integrated exponential generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARFIMA-FIGARCH); and autoregressive fractionally-integrated moving average and asymmetric power autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity (ARFIMA-APARCH). The study found that low-ESG rating ETFs on average have slightly significant higher returns and also lower volatility compared to their high-ESG rating counterparts. Evidence of asymmetric volatility properties are also present on both high-ESG and low-ESG rating ETFs returns. The study also observed that for both high-ESG and low-ESG rating ETFs denote a stationarity, but non-invertible process in their returns. Results can provide fresh understanding in the topic of leverage effects and volatility that can open future research channels to academicians.

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.