Copy article

Impact investing

ended 10. March 2026

For an article in a major consumer financial news site. Keen to get views from wealth managers, traders and financial advisers on what impact investing is and how it differs to ESG investing (if at all)? Is impact investing getting more popular with your clients / investors more widely — and which asset managers are strongest in this field (if going down the pooled route)? Is it more popular with millennials, for example, or another demographic? Also, given ongoing events in the Middle East, do investments focused on social and/or environmental impact underperform during times of geopolitical certainty or can they be a good hedge? Any insights and intel on impact funds, and their historical performance relative to standard funds, send it across by COB.

2 responses from the Newspage community

Copy all

Copy

Editor
Nouran Moustafa
Practice Principal & IFA at Roxton Wealth
Impact investing and ESG investing are constantly spoken about as if they are interchangeable, but in reality they are not. ESG is often more about assessing risks, governance and sustainability factors within a fund or business, whereas impact investing is far more intentional. For me, the key difference is purpose. Impact investing is about actively allocating capital to opportunities that are meant to deliver a measurable social or environmental outcome alongside financial return. I am seeing more interest in this space from clients who want more than just performance on a factsheet. They want to understand what their money is doing in the real world. That tends to resonate strongly with younger investors, but it is definitely not limited to them. In more uncertain geopolitical periods, I do not think impact funds should be dismissed or romanticised. Like any investment, strength comes down to what sits underneath, how robust the strategy is, and whether the impact story is backed.
Copy

Rohit Parmar-Mistry
Founder at Pattrn Data
Impact investing is only meaningful if you can point to a real world change, not just a nicer label on the same portfolio.

The simplest difference from much ESG is this: ESG often screens or scores risk. Impact claims an outcome. That means you need evidence. What was the goal, what was the baseline, and what moved because the money was allocated or the company was pushed to change? If the answer is a brochure and a few stories, treat it as marketing.

In financial services, including wrap platforms, the demand is real, but so is the confusion. Many “impact” funds are just familiar factor exposures with an impact narrative attached. In volatile periods they can perform like any other equity theme.

If investors want impact, they should ask for three things in plain English: what the fund does, how it measures success, and what it will do when the data shows it is not delivering.