Macquarie Group

Does the core business genuinely avoid or reduce emissions, or build climate resilience? Share of revenue that is actually 'green'. Fossil-dependent models score low.

Macquarie's Green Investments team manages a substantial renewable energy portfolio (90+ GW in development/construction/operations globally) including solar, wind, and BESS, but the group simultaneously increased on-balance-sheet oil and gas exposure by 70% in FY24 to $3.4 billion and is backing major new gas fracking developments, so net avoided emissions at the group level are materially diluted.

Credible, science-based targets (SBTi), a real net-zero plan with progress to date, and CDP disclosure — not just a dated press release.

Macquarie references SBTi guidance for its own operations Scope 1 and 2 net-zero ambition and has been a CDP signatory since 2008, but it has no SBTi-validated targets on record, exited the Net Zero Banking Alliance in early 2025, and does not require fossil fuel clients to have Paris-aligned transition plans — lagging all four major Australian bank peers on this metric.

Operational footprint, labour and social practices, and governance quality across the company's own operations and supply chain.

Macquarie has meaningful operational ESG infrastructure — board-level ESG governance, PwC-assured Scope 1/2/3 operational emissions, RE100 membership, LEED/BREEAM-rated offices, and a 38% electricity reduction since FY2014 — but governance quality is clouded by ASIC litigation for alleged misleading conduct on short-selling reporting and weak social/supply-chain disclosures.

Quality of disclosure, independent third-party verification, and how much hard data backs the company's claims.

Green investments data is independently assured by EY (reasonable assurance) and PwC (limited assurance on operational emissions), and Macquarie publishes detailed TCFD and CDP disclosures; however, IEEFA found that disclosed on-balance-sheet fossil fuel exposure of ~$1.2 billion materially understates total group exposure of $5–8 billion by exploiting NZBA off-balance-sheet reporting loopholes, and fossil fuel exposure disclosure has lagged peers.

Controversies, litigation, pollution, fossil-fuel lobbying, conflict-zone involvement and governance scandals. Higher means cleaner.

Macquarie faces a significant cluster of integrity concerns: ASIC litigation for alleged misleading conduct; IEEFA-documented exploitation of reporting loopholes to understate fossil fuel exposure; a reversal of its metallurgical coal exclusion policy; active backing of Beetaloo Basin fracking companies with no transition plans; exit from NZBA; and a record 35.2% shareholder vote in favour of a climate accountability resolution at its 2025 AGM — the highest at any Australian bank.