LPs, what do you think of ESG and impact investing?

There has been a lot of discussion in recent years about the rise of ESG and impact investing. Many firms such as the MFs have started raising impact specific vehicles that take into account impact criterias as well as financial criterias for investments.

It seems to be a common opinion that these new impact vehicles are just a way for these firms to capitalize LP interest in the area and raise more money. For those who work at impact funds as well as those on the LP side, what is your honest opinion of these funds and how do they play in your portfolios?

7 Comments
 

Aswath damodaran, a well-known nyu professor has quality takes on this exact topic. I have a few friends on the LP side, and from their point of view, there isn’t much value put on this, especially from FoFs and family offices. An elite firm is an elite firm, and no LP is deciding if they are going into a fund with stellar returns based on if they have a formal ESG policy or not. Obviously larger pensions and endowments may have a formal mandate to target ESG conscious firms but I have yet to see a name like Bain Double Impact or Two Sigma Impact really knock it out of the park from a returns perspective over time. Solid firms and respect the people that work there but it’s truly impossible to quantify these metrics of socially responsible investing across the board.

 

Vistria is another, lesser-known name, I’d add that seems to have a targeted focus on impact. But take a look at their portfolio, specifically healthcare and financial services, and you’ll see a lot of typical run of the mill traditional buyouts with maybe a small impact component to the transaction. The term impact is truly whatever your firm wants it to mean.

 
Most Helpful

I think you need to start by separating out ESG versus impact investing. I am all for ESG as a diligence framework if you are using it as a risk mitigation tool and asking what things might arise to cause problems with your investment that you can't understand just from the financial statements. The focus should be on material issues only there. The SASB standards, for instance, do a good job of tracking what ESG issues are material for a given industry.

I used to be more enthusiastic about impact than I am now. So far, the returns from "impact investors" have by and large disappointed, although there are a couple impact managers that have really outperformed their non-impact peers. You can still make money with an impact strategy but it seems increasingly apparent that there is  a concessionary element to it. There are plenty of LPs that are okay with that trade and they're happy as long as they're still getting a median return from an impact PE portfolio while being mission-aligned. This directive really comes from the board or whoever is calling the shots, at the end of the day. My perspective at this point is that I want to maximize my risk-adjusted return while also minimizing negative externalities generated by my GPs' investments. This way, my organization has the most possible money to fulfill its mission that's a net positive for society.

The impact funds raised by GPs who have many other strategies are clearly just asset gathering. Let's not kid ourselves. The specialists are more interesting. After all, if you'd invest with a healthcare specialist or an enterprise software specialist, why not a decarbonization specialist? 

 

Sed molestiae et et voluptas tempora ut. Et et vitae qui molestiae. Exercitationem quia omnis ipsum voluptas. Minima laudantium quia est facilis provident. Ipsum veniam voluptates in sed quod dolor et.

Ratione excepturi corrupti odio nobis voluptate nesciunt. Rerum ut eaque ut excepturi consequatur est. Illum reprehenderit et esse nobis mollitia quas.

Ullam fugit est animi laudantium ex dolor voluptatem. Labore nulla veritatis consectetur fuga et. Hic non eveniet perspiciatis et enim aut. Est similique voluptatibus enim quod animi omnis laboriosam. Autem quia a est optio et.

Iusto inventore aspernatur voluptates esse. Quibusdam repellat libero sunt vero doloribus veniam.

Career Advancement Opportunities

July 2026 Private Equity

  • The Riverside Company 99.6%
  • Blackstone Group 99.3%
  • KKR (Kohlberg Kravis Roberts) 98.9%
  • Warburg Pincus 98.5%
  • Vista Equity Partners 98.1%

Overall Employee Satisfaction

July 2026 Private Equity

  • Blackstone Group 99.6%
  • KKR (Kohlberg Kravis Roberts) 99.2%
  • The Riverside Company 98.9%
  • Ardian 98.5%
  • Starwood Capital Group 98.1%

Professional Growth Opportunities

July 2026 Private Equity

  • Bain Capital 99.6%
  • The Riverside Company 99.3%
  • Blackstone Group 98.9%
  • Starwood Capital Group 98.5%
  • Vista Equity Partners 98.1%

Total Avg Compensation

July 2026 Private Equity

  • Principal (9) $653
  • Director/MD (24) $547
  • Vice President (99) $363
  • 3rd+ Year Associate (104) $281
  • 2nd Year Associate (235) $272
  • 1st Year Associate (411) $229
  • 3rd+ Year Analyst (33) $157
  • 2nd Year Analyst (97) $134
  • 1st Year Analyst (272) $124
  • Intern/Summer Associate (38) $81
  • Intern/Summer Analyst (356) $61
notes
16 IB Interviews Notes

“... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

Leaderboard

1
redever's picture
redever
99.2
2
kanon's picture
kanon
99.0
3
Secyh62's picture
Secyh62
99.0
4
BankonBanking's picture
BankonBanking
99.0
5
dosk17's picture
dosk17
98.9
6
CompBanker's picture
CompBanker
98.9
7
Betsy Massar's picture
Betsy Massar
98.9
8
DrApeman's picture
DrApeman
98.9
9
GameTheory's picture
GameTheory
98.9
10
Mimbs's picture
Mimbs
98.8
success
From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

“... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”