carbon portfolio report

Copyright © 2020 Sustainalytics. All rights reserved. This document is strictly private and confidential.

Carbon Portfolio Report

Portfolio Information Carbon Risk Rating Coverage

Name Number ofConstituents By Portfolio Weight By Number of Constituents

Portfolio 10.263.20_Growth Portfolio 29 29

Benchmark 09.30.20 SP500 503 501

Copyright © 2020 Sustainalytics. All rights reserved. This document is strictly private and confidential.

Overview The Carbon PortfolioReport provides a deeperunderstanding of aportfolio’s position withregards to the transitiontowards a low-carboneconomy. It compares theportfolio with a benchmarkacross five carbonassessments: Carbon RiskRating, Carbon Intensity,Fossil Fuel Involvement,Stranded Assets Exposure,and Carbon SolutionsInvolvement. Thecombination of theseassessments provides amulti-dimensional view ofthe portfolio’s performanceversus the benchmark andprovide useful insightsabout the portfolio holdings.

Carbon Risk Rating Page 3-7

The Carbon Risk Rating quantifies the company’s exposure and management of material carbon issuesin its own operations as well as its products and services.

Overall, the portfolio falls into the Low

carbon risk category, and has 36% lowercarbon risk than the benchmark.

Score Category

Low

Low

Carbon Intensity Page 8

Carbon intensity is a relative metric used to compare company emissions across industries.Sustainalytics divides the absolute emissions by total revenue, meaning the figure is expressed intonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per million USD of total revenue.

Overall, the portfolio is 64% less

carbon intensive than thebenchmark.

tCO2e/Mil USD

Portfolio

Benchmark

Fossil Fuels Page 9

Fossil Fuel Involvement measures the percentage of revenue that companies derive from thermal coalextraction, coal-based power generation, oil & gas production, oil & gas-based power generation, and oil& gas-related products and services.

Weighted percentage

Stranded Assets Page 10

The Stranded Assets Exposure Score assesses the financial risk associated with fossil fuel productionand reserves, and any specific involvement in high-cost fossil fuel projects.

Weighted percentage

Carbon Solutions Page 11

Carbon Solutions Involvement measures the percentage of revenue that companies derive from greentransportation and renewable energy.

Overall, the portfolio has 55% less

exposure to Carbon Solutions thanthe benchmark.

Weighted percentage

Copyright © 2020 Sustainalytics. All rights reserved. 3

Sustainalytics Carbon Portfolio Report

Carbon Risk Rating

Portfolio The Carbon Risk Rating quantifies the company’s exposure and management of material carbon issuesin its own operations as well as its products and services. At each value chain stage, a company’svulnerability to carbon risks is assessed. This is followed by an assessment of how much of this risk ismanageable as opposed to systemic, with a final step of evaluating the degree to which managementpolicies are already in place.

Benchmark

Overall, the portfolio falls into the Low

carbon risk category, and has 36% lowercarbon risk than the benchmark.

Overall Carbon Risk Score Category

Low

Low

Carbon Risk Categories Negligible: 0 The portfolio has little to no materialcarbon risk Low: 0 - 10 The portfolio has carbon risk that couldhave material impact Medium: 10 - 30 The portfolio has carbon risk that ismaterial High: 30 - 50 The portfolio has carbon risk that is highlymaterial Severe: > 50 The portfolio has severe carbon risk

Carbon Risk category by aggregate portfolio weight

Negligible Low Medium High Severe

Carbon Exposure

Exposure considers a company’s sensitivity or vulnerability to carbon risks. Very low exposure suggeststhat an issue is not material to a company; higher exposure suggests that the issue is material.

Overall, the portfolio has 26% less exposure

to carbon risk factors than the benchmark,and falls into the Low exposure category.

Overall Exposure Score Category

Low

Low

Carbon Management

Management considers a company’s commitments and actions to determine how a companyapproaches and handles carbon issue through policies, programmes, quantitative performance andinvolvement in controversies. Higher scores indicate stronger management.

Overall, the portfolio has 4% weaker

management of carbon risk than thebenchmark, and falls into the Averagemanagement category.

Overall Management Score Category

Average

Average



Operations Operations Exposure Management Score Category Score Category Score Category

Low Low Average

Low Low Average

Portfolio Overall, the portfolio fallsinto the Low operationscarbon risk category, andhas 6% lower operationscarbon risk than thebenchmark.

Overall, the portfolio has3% less exposure tocarbon risk factors inoperations than thebenchmark.

Overall, the portfolio has5% stronger managementof carbon risk in operationsthan the benchmark.

Benchmark

Products & Services Products & Services Exposure Management Score Category Score Category Score Category

Low Low Weak

Low Low Weak

Overall, the portfolio fallsinto the Low product andservices carbon riskcategory, and has 87%lower products andservices carbon risk thanthe benchmark.

Overall, the portfolio has82% less exposure tocarbon risk factors inproducts and services thanthe benchmark.

Overall, the portfolio has54% weaker managementof carbon risk in productsand services than thebenchmark.

Sector ContributionLooks at the Carbon Risk Rating score across sectors. Lower scores equal lower risk.

Sector ScoreContribution

Portfolio Weight Carbon Risk Contribution

Consumer Discretionary 0.2 13.7% 4.3%

Consumer Staples 1.0 12.2% 25.0%

Healthcare 0.5 24.2% 14.2%

Industrials 1.8 11.1% 45.5%

Information Technology 0.4 38.9% 11.0%



Companies with the Highest Carbon Risk in the PortfolioIdentifies the 10 companies with the highest carbon risk score.

Company Name Sector PortfolioWeight

Carbon Risk

Score Weighted Score Category Exposure Mngmt

United Parcel Service Inc Industrials 3.0% 22.2 0.7 Medium Risk 35.0 60.8

3M Co Industrials 5.1% 19.4 1.0 Medium Risk 37.8 60.8

Amphenol Corp Information Technology 0.5% 19.2 0.1 Medium Risk 26.4 27.1

General Mills Inc Consumer Staples 3.6% 12.1 0.4 Medium Risk 22.8 46.8

Stryker Corporation Healthcare 4.7% 9.3 0.4 Low Risk 11.4 18.3

Waste Management Inc Industrials 1.0% 8.6 0.1 Low Risk 16.8 61.4

Texas Instruments Incorporated Information Technology 2.1% 6.8 0.1 Low Risk 21.0 67.9

Pepsico, Inc. Consumer Staples 6.5% 6.5 0.4 Low Risk 16.8 61.4

Procter & Gamble Co. Consumer Staples 2.1% 4.9 0.1 Low Risk 13.2 63.1

The Home Depot Inc Consumer Discretionary 2.0% 4.0 0.1 Low Risk 10.8 63.0

Companies with the Lowest Carbon Risk in the PortfolioIdentifies the 10 companies with the lowest carbon risk score.

Company Name Sector PortfolioWeight

Carbon Risk

Score Weighted Score Category Exposure Mngmt

Microsoft Corp Information Technology 7.1% 0.0 0.0 Negligible Risk 0.0 0.0

Johnson & Johnson Healthcare 5.7% 0.0 0.0 Negligible Risk 0.0 0.0

Nike Inc. Consumer Discretionary 4.9% 0.0 0.0 Negligible Risk 0.0 0.0

Accenture PLC Information Technology 4.7% 0.0 0.0 Negligible Risk 0.0 0.0

UnitedHealth Group Inc Healthcare 4.2% 0.0 0.0 Negligible Risk 0.0 0.0

Pfizer Inc Healthcare 3.9% 0.0 0.0 Negligible Risk 0.0 0.0

Cognizant Technology SolutionsCorp. Information Technology 3.4% 0.0 0.0 Negligible Risk 0.0 0.0

Intuit Inc Information Technology 3.2% 0.0 0.0 Negligible Risk 0.0 0.0

Broadridge Financial Solutions Inc Information Technology 2.5% 0.0 0.0 Negligible Risk 0.0 0.0

Mastercard, Inc. Information Technology 2.4% 0.0 0.0 Negligible Risk 0.0 0.0



Attribution Analysis - Carbon Risk Rating

Looks at the attribution of Carbon Risk across sectors. Lower scores equal lower risk.

SectorWeight Carbon Risk*

ActiveWeight

Effect**

Port Bench Port Bench Sector Allocation Stock Selection Interaction Total

Consumer Discretionary 13.7% 14.4% 1.2 2.8 -0.8% 0.02 -0.22 0.01 -0.19

Consumer Staples 12.2% 7.4% 7.9 6.8 4.8% 0.04 0.08 0.05 0.17

Energy 0.0% 2.1% 0.0 37.4 -2.1% -0.65 -0.78 0.78 -0.65

Financials 0.0% 9.6% 0.0 8.5 -9.6% -0.24 -0.82 0.82 -0.24

Healthcare 24.2% 14.1% 2.3 1.9 10.1% -0.42 0.05 0.04 -0.33

Industrials 11.1% 8.1% 15.8 16.6 3.0% 0.32 -0.06 -0.02 0.24

Information Technology 38.9% 34.6% 1.1 1.5 4.3% -0.19 -0.14 -0.02 -0.35

Materials 0.0% 2.3% 0.0 15.3 -2.3% -0.21 -0.35 0.35 -0.21

Real Estate 0.0% 2.6% 0.0 12.3 -2.6% -0.16 -0.32 0.32 -0.16

Telecommunication Services 0.0% 1.9% 0.0 7.1 -1.9% -0.02 -0.14 0.14 -0.02

Utilities 0.0% 3.0% 0.0 19.7 -3.0% -0.41 -0.59 0.59 -0.41

* By aggregated weighted score(normalized) 100% 100% 3.8 6.0 0% -1.92 -3.28 3.05 -2.15

Effect**:. Sector Allocation Effect: Impact of portfolio’s sector weighting decisions with regard to the benchmark’s sector weights and total carbon risk. Anegative allocation effect for a sector means the portfolio either overweighted a sector that has a low risk relative to the total benchmark risk orunderweighted a sector with higher risk than the total benchmark risk.. Selection Effect: Impact of the portfolio’s security selection decisions relative to the holdings of the benchmark. A negative selection effect for a sectormeans that the portfolio, relative to the benchmark, selected companies with lower carbon risks.. Total Effect: Sum of the sector allocation effect, the stock selection effect, and the residual effect that results from the interaction between the sectorallocation effect and the stock selection effect. The higher the value (positive or negative) the greater the effect (increasing or decreasing portfoliocarbon risk).



Decisions that Increase Active RiskIdentifies the 10 constituents that increase active risk the most.

Company Name Sector Carbon RiskScore

Carbon RiskCategory

Contribution toActive Risk

PortfolioWeight

BenchmarkWeight

ActiveWeight

3M Co Industrials 19.4 Medium Risk 0.64 5.1% 0.3% 4.8%

United Parcel Service Inc Industrials 22.2 Medium Risk 0.42 3.0% 0.4% 2.6%

General Mills Inc ConsumerStaples 12.1 Medium Risk 0.21 3.6% 0.1% 3.5%

Stryker Corporation Healthcare 9.3 Low Risk 0.15 4.7% 0.2% 4.4%

Apple Inc InformationTechnology 1.8 Low Risk 0.09 4.5% 6.7% -2.2%

Amphenol Corp InformationTechnology 19.2 Medium Risk 0.05 0.5% 0.1% 0.4%

Pepsico, Inc. ConsumerStaples 6.5 Low Risk 0.03 6.5% 0.7% 5.8%

Waste Management Inc Industrials 8.6 Low Risk 0.02 1.0% 0.2% 0.9%

Texas InstrumentsIncorporated

InformationTechnology 6.8 Low Risk 0.01 2.1% 0.5% 1.6%

Omnicom Group Inc. ConsumerDiscretionary 0.0 Negligible Risk -0.01 0.2% 0.0% 0.2%

Decisions that Decrease Active RiskIdentifies the 10 constituents that decrease active risk the most.

Company Name Sector Carbon RiskScore

Carbon RiskCategory

Contribution toActive Risk

PortfolioWeight

BenchmarkWeight

ActiveWeight

Nike Inc. ConsumerDiscretionary 0.0 Negligible Risk -0.26 4.9% 0.6% 4.3%

Johnson & Johnson Healthcare 0.0 Negligible Risk -0.26 5.7% 1.4% 4.3%

Accenture PLC InformationTechnology 0.0 Negligible Risk -0.25 4.7% 0.5% 4.2%

Becton, Dickinson & Co. Healthcare 1.9 Low Risk -0.22 5.7% 0.2% 5.4%

Cognizant TechnologySolutions Corp.

InformationTechnology 0.0 Negligible Risk -0.20 3.4% 0.1% 3.3%

Pfizer Inc Healthcare 0.0 Negligible Risk -0.19 3.9% 0.7% 3.1%

UnitedHealth Group Inc Healthcare 0.0 Negligible Risk -0.19 4.2% 1.1% 3.1%

Intuit Inc InformationTechnology 0.0 Negligible Risk -0.18 3.2% 0.3% 2.9%

Broadridge FinancialSolutions Inc

InformationTechnology 0.0 Negligible Risk -0.14 2.5% 0.1% 2.4%

VF Corp ConsumerDiscretionary 0.0 Negligible Risk -0.14 2.4% 0.1% 2.3%



Carbon Intensity

Portfolio Carbon intensity is a relative metric used to compare company emissions across industries.Sustainalytics divides the absolute emissions by total revenue, meaning the figure is expressed intonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per million USD of total revenue. Although we try to base this onreported emissions, the vast majority of companies still fail to report, so in many cases the emissionsare based on proprietary estimation models. These models are carried out at subindustry and peergroup level for Scope 1 and 2 separately.

Benchmark

Overall, the portfolio is 63.74% less

carbon intensive than thebenchmark.

tCO2e/Mil USD

Differential

Top Carbon Emissions ContributorsIdentifies the 5 companies with the highest contribution to the portfolio's carbon emissions' intensity

Company Name SectorCarbon Emissions* Carbon Intensity**

Scope 1 Scope 2 Total Intensity Weighted Intensity Category

Waste Management Inc Industrials 16,272,144 246,091 16,518,235 1,107.6 11.4 E

3M Co Industrials 4,790,000 1,860,000 6,650,000 203.0 10.4 B

United Parcel Service Inc Industrials 13,851,000 784,000 14,635,000 203.7 6.2 B

Pepsico, Inc. Consumer Staples 3,577,266 1,629,973 5,207,239 80.5 5.2 B

General Mills Inc Consumer Staples 898,654 570,840 1,469,494 93.4 3.4 C

* metric tonne CO2e

** metric tonne CO2e per million USD revenue

Category Range Definition

A 81-100% The company's carbon emissions intensity is well below theindustry average

B 61-80% The company's carbon emissions intensity is below the industryaverage

C 41-60% The company's carbon emissions intensity is in line with theindustry average

D 21-40% The company's carbon emissions intensity is above the industryaverage

E 0-20% The company's carbon emissions intensity is well above theindustry average



Fossil Fuel Involvement

Portfolio Fossil Fuel Involvement measures the percentage of revenue that companies derive from thermal coalextraction, coal-based power generation, oil & gas production, oil & gas-based power generation, and oil& gas-related products and services.

Benchmark

0% of the portfolio's weight

has involvement in fossilfuels. This is lower than thebenchmark's involvement.

Count of companies involved Weighted percentage

Differential

Top Fossil Fuel ContributorsIdentifies the 5 companies with the highest contribution to the portfolio's fossil fuel involvement.

Company Name Sector Fossil FuelRange*

Oil & Gas* Thermal Coal* Oil Sands*

Production Generation Prods &Servs Extraction Power

Generation Extraction

* By revenue percent



Stranded Assets Exposure

Portfolio The Stranded Assets Exposure Score assesses the financial risk associated with fossil fuel productionand reserves, and any specific involvement in high-cost fossil fuel projects.

Benchmark

Weighted averagesum

Count ofcompaniesexposed

% of portfolioweight

Differential

Top Stranded Assets ExposureIdentifies the 5 companies with the highest exposure to stranded assets in the portfolio

Company Name SectorStranded Assets

Exposure* Weighted Exposure Oil & GasProduction Oil & Gas Reserves

* Exposure score out of 100



Carbon Solutions

Portfolio Carbon Solutions Involvement measures the percentage of revenue that companies derive from greentransportation and renewable energy.

Benchmark Overall, 5% of the portfolio's

weight has involvement incarbon solutions. This islower than the benchmark'sinvolvement.

Count of companies Weighted percentage

Differential

Top Carbon Solutions Contributors

Identifies the 5 companies with the highest contribution to the portfolio's carbon solutionsinvolvement.

Company Name Sector RevenueRange

RenewableEnergy* Green Transportation* Green Buildings* Energy Efficiency*

RE.1 RE.2 GT.1 GT.2 GT.3 GT.4 GB.1 GB.2 GB.3 EE.1 EE.2 EE.3 EE.4

Apple Inc InformationTechnology 25-49.9% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25-

49.9% 0 0 0

Amphenol Corp InformationTechnology 5-9.9% 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5-

9.9% 0 0 0

* By revenue percent

** A company is considered 'involved' in Carbon Solutions when it has 5% or more of revenues from aparticular theme; therefore, 0 indicates that we have not found involvement over 5%

Renewable Energy Green Transportation Green Buildings Energy Efficiency

RE.1 Production GT.1 Infrastructure Range GB.1 Development EE.1 Consumer Products

RE.2 SupportingProd&Serv GT.2 Services Range GB.2 Management EE.2 Distribution and

Management

GT.3 Techs & Equipment GB.3 Techs &Materials

EE.3 Ind. Systems &Processes

GT.4 Vehicles Range EE.4 Materials Range



Glossary of Terms Absolute Carbon Emissions

In this report, absolute carbon emissions cover scope 1 and scope 2 emissions of the various types ofgreenhouse gases, expressed in tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. Reporting requirements arestandardized under the GHG Protocol by the World Resources Institute and World Business Council forSustainable Development. This lists the greenhouse gases that companies are expected to account foras: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs),perfluorocarbons (PFCs), sulphur hexafluoride (SF6), and nitrogen triflouride (NF3). Emissions are broken down into the following categories:Scope 1 covers the direct emissions associated with the energy that a company produces for its ownuse.Scope 2 covers the indirect emissions associated with the energy that a company purchases from third-party providers.Scope 3 covers all other emission sources throughout the value chain (e.g., purchased goods, use ofsold products, investments, business travel, etc.) but these are not quantified in this report.

Carbon Intensity

A relative metric suitable for comparing companies’ performance. Sustainalytics divides absoluteemissions by total revenues, which enables comparison of companies in different industries. Carbonintensity is expressed in tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent per million USD of total revenue.

Carbon Risk

A risk related to a company’s challenge to transition towards a low-carbon economy. A popular synonymis transition risk. This may cover a variety of risk sources including policy and legal, technology, market,and reputation. Climate change risk is a broader concept, comprising transition and physical climate-related risk.

Carbon Risk Exposure

One of the two dimensions of the Carbon Risk Rating, this reflects the extent to which a company isexposed to material carbon risks. Exposure can be considered as a sensitivity or vulnerability to carbonrisks.

Carbon Risk Management

The second dimension of the Carbon Risk Rating, this measures a company’s handling of materialcarbon issues through policies, programmes, quantitative performance and involvement incontroversies.

Carbon Risk Rating Score (Unmanaged Risk Score)

The company’s final score in the Carbon Risk Rating; it applies the concept of risk decomposition toderive the level of unmanaged risk for a company.

Stranded Assets Stranded Assets are oil and gas assets that are unlikely to be commercially viable in a low carbon

economy. They are high cost projects such as arctic exploration and oil sands development.

Unmanaged Risk

Material ESG risk that has not been managed by a company. This includes two types of risk. Firstly,unmanageable risks that stem from the intrinsic nature of the products or services of a company and/orthe nature of a company’s business. Secondly, risks that could be managed by a company throughsuitable initiatives, but which are yet unmanaged.

Weighted Scores

Sustainalytics normalizes the security weights of the matched security results within the selectedportfolio and benchmark to equal 100% of the total portfolio weight, by evenly redistributing unmatchedsecurity weights and by combining the weights of securities matched to the same company. If there areno security weights available, Sustainalytics will assign equal weights to all securities. Weighted Scoresare calculated by aggregating normalized security weighted scores.



About This Report

Sustainalytics’ Carbon Risk Ratings are designed to help investors identify and understand financiallymaterial carbon risks at the security and portfolio level and how they might affect the long-termperformance for equity and fixed income investments. The Carbon Risk Ratings combined withqualitative analyses, provide clients with a differentiated risk signal and deeper insights into themateriality of certain carbon issues for a company and what the company is or is not doing to managethem effectively. Sustainalytics normalizes the security weights of the matched security results within the selectedportfolio and benchmark to equal 100% of the total portfolio weight, by evenly redistributing unmatchedsecurity weights and by combining the weights of securities matched to the same company. If there areno security weights available, Sustainalytics will assign equal weights to all securities.

Notice and Disclaimer

Sustainalytics is not responsible for information supplied by you, regardless if derived from you or from athird party, provided for the purpose of this report and/or included herein and you bear all risksassociated with the use and (re)distribution of such information. Moreover, Sustainalytics will notassume any responsibility for the reliability, completeness or accuracy of such information and makesno representation or warranty as to any of the information, including, without limitation, anyrepresentation or warranty that the information or any portion of it is accurate or complete. Sustainalyticsshall have no liability hereunder for any use of the information provided by you. You agree andacknowledge that it is your responsibility to obtain all relevant licenses for use, reproduction, extractionand redistribution of any information made available to Sustainalytics. Copyright © 2020 Sustainalytics. All rights reserved. The information, methodologies, data and opinions contained or reflected herein are proprietary ofSustainalytics and/or its third parties suppliers (Third Party Data), intended for internal, non-commercialuse, and may not be copied, distributed or used in any way, including via citation, unless otherwiseexplicitly agreed in writing. They are provided for informational purposes only and (1) do not constitutean endorsement of any product or project; (2) do not constitute investment advice; (3) cannot beinterpreted as an offer or indication to buy or sell securities, to select a project or make any kind ofbusiness transactions; (4) do not represent an assessment of the issuer’s economic performance,financial obligations nor of its creditworthiness. These are based on information made available by third parties, subject to continuous change andtherefore are not warranted as to their merchantability, completeness, accuracy or fitness for a particularpurpose. The information and data are provided “as is” and reflect Sustainalytics` opinion at the date oftheir elaboration and publication. Sustainalytics nor any of its third-party suppliers accept any liability fordamage arising from the use of the information, data or opinions contained herein, in any mannerwhatsoever, except where explicitly required by law. Any reference to third party names or Third PartyData is for appropriate acknowledgement of their ownership and does not constitute a sponsorship orendorsement by such owner. A list of our third-party data providers and their respective terms of use isavailable on our website. For more information, visit http://www.sustainalytics.com/legal-disclaimers.

About Sustainalytics

Sustainalytics is a leading independent ESG and corporate governance research, ratings and analyticsfirm that supports investors around the world with the development and implementation of responsibleinvestment strategies. For over 25 years, the firm has been at the forefront of developing high-quality,innovative solutions to meet the evolving needs of global investors. Today, Sustainalytics works withhundreds of the world’s leading asset managers and pension funds who incorporate ESG and corporategovernance information and assessments into their investment processes. Sustainalytics also workswith hundreds of companies and their financial intermediaries to help them consider sustainability in thepolicies, practices and capital projects. With 16 offices globally, Sustainalytics has more than 600 staffmembers, including over 200 analysts with varied multidisciplinary expertise across more than 40industry groups. For more information, visit www.sustainalytics.com.

carbon portfolio report

Documents