Donald Trump’s return to the White House dented green investment, but for a contrarian minority, it had the opposite effect.
A Swiss Finance Institute study finds US green allocations dipped after the 2024 election, as some investors viewed climate-themed funds as riskier and less profitable.
However, those who strongly disapproved of Trump’s climate stance increased their exposure, treating them less as a financial bet, than a moral statement.
For them, going green became less about alpha, more about impact.
Government digital wallet could be a PR disaster in the making
How vaping hits your life assurance and the tax changes to watch for in 2026
If RTÉ feels it is under pressure then it should look at what is happening across Europe
Will aunt’s possible ‘lost child’ have claim on her estate years after she died?
One respondent bluntly said: “Trump’s win will have a serious effect on the environment, and I’d want to make that choice that has even a tiny impact.”
The less they believed others cared, the more compelled they felt to act. ETF flows suggest this wasn’t just talk.
Investors became less sensitive to performance and more motivated by values, seeking meaning or “warm glow” over financial gain – an investment choice that felt “emotionally rewarding”, even if not financially so.
There are two problems, however. First, green investing can only partly offset weak climate policy, the researchers caution.
Second, it’s a shaky investment rationale. Panmure Liberum strategist Joachim Klement supports ESG investing, but warns politics and investing don’t mix.
“Investing in green funds as a form of virtue signalling or to spite Trump”, he says, “is about the worst reason to invest.”
