No.PZ2024021802000073
When using standardized frameworks to assess materiality, analysts are most likely to:
A、include factors that are not financially material.
B、stop using proprietary materiality assessments.
C正确、、consider different ESG factors for companies in the same sector.
这里说实质性分析的时候不应该选A，不应包含考虑财务上的非实质性因素。
No.PZ2024021801000033
When applying an exclusionary ESG investing strategy, investors are most likely to:
A、exclude ideological criteria when selecting ESG factors.
B正确、consider ESG factors that are not necessarily financially material.
C、focus exclusively on ESG factors that are material in terms of likelihood and impact.
这里说采用ESG排除策略的时候选B，投资人应该考虑财务上的非实质性因素，C选项考虑ESG因素实质性的可能性和影响又变的不对了。
虽然，确实题干不一样，但还是希望解读下，财务上非实质性的因素到底该不该考虑？或者在哪些场景要考虑，哪些场景不应该考虑？
同时虽然题干不同，但是这两道题关于这个财务非实质性因素的解读却是同一句话，
materiality is typically measured in terms of both the likelihood and magnitude of impact. Many practitioners focus exclusively on material ESG factors. Determining which ESG issues are most material involves judgment and is not an exact science. Frameworks such as the materiality maps provided by SASB (now part of the ISSB) provide guidance, but investment professionals often develop their own view on what is most material.
materiality is typically measured in terms of both the likelihood and magnitude of impact. Note that while many practitioners focus exclusively on material ESG factors, some exclusionary investing strategies must also consider factors that are not necessarily financially material (e.g., exclusion of companies that sell pork-based products by certain religious investors even if those products account for a small percentage of revenues).
让人感觉，某一题中，为了选这个答案，在解析的时候就把话说全了。另一道题换了个答案，解析的时候就特意只说那一半有利于答案的原文。
