More than a “nice to have,” investor sentiment is running heavily on the side of environment, social and governance (ESG) factors, according to the latest Thomson Reuters Perception Snapshot.

Feedback from 25 global buy-side investors found that 84 percent evaluate ESG criteria to some degree when making an investment decision.

The remaining 16 percent say ESG issues are not considered until a company’s ability to generate high returns is hindered by these factors.

Some of the selected comments:

“ESG only plays a role to the extent that it is an overhang on the stock. There is no moral component to investing. We are value neutral when it comes to our investment decisions, but we are not value neutral in our lives. We have a fiduciary duty to our clients, to the people who give us money to manage to maximize returns, which means that we can not be limited by our own personal morality. If I see a cigarette company that looks interesting I may invest in it even though I might not like it
personally.” - U.S. Hedge Fund Investor

“I am convinced that companies that follow the philosophy of social and economic responsibility are performing better in the long-term than those that do not.” - European Core Growth Investor

The report dovetails with Tuesday’s push by U.S. President Barack Obama to push for tougher industrial standards aimed at lowering greenhouse gas emissions.

Obama ordered the U.S. auto industry, where the hand of government is firmly in control (GM and Chrysler, but not Ford) to make more fuel-efficient cars to cut emissions and increase gas mileage.

The House of Representatives started its debate on the 946-page Democratic bill on Tuesday. Republicans are arguing the legislation would burden the economy with higher energy costs.

Does that matter, when scientists reported on Tuesday that global warming’s effects this century could be twice as extreme as estimated just six years ago?

Massachusetts Institute of Technology scientists estimate the Earth’s median surface temperature could rise 9.3 degrees F (5.2 degrees C) by 2100. That’s up from the 4.3 degrees F (2.4 degrees C) estimate in 2003.

The U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change said seas would rise by between 18 and 59 cms (7-24 inches) this century. But it pointed to big uncertainties about ice sheets in Greenland or Antarctica — one IPCC estimate was that this ice could add up to 20 cms to sea level rise.

It was the outcome most commentators were expecting.

Even Roger Lawson of the UK Shareholders' Association, which represented 150,000 small investors, admitted it was "not totally unexpected".

But the defeat for hedge funds RAB Capital and SRM Global and other former shareholders claiming damages for the loss of their holdings in Northern Rock when it was nationalised last year is nevertheless a hard blow to bear.

The former shareholders may appeal, but a valuation of the equity at zero or close to zero is now looking entirely possible.

As if that wasn't painful enough, Liberal Democrats economic spokesman Vince Cable, according to the BBC, said today that SRM and RAB "deserve to lose their shirts" and that "we should not reward such cynical and reckless speculation".

Like many investors trying to catch the proverbial falling knife and pick up stocks on the cheap after the onset of the credit crisis, the Northern Rock situation turned out far worse than RAB or SRM expected.

At some point there will come a time when assets -- be they equities, bonds, property or anything else -- will present historic buying opportunities. But as many hedge funds have found out, being early can be far more painful than missing out on some of those tempting bargains.

There's no shortage of bad news in the financial world at the moment.

But one top hedge fund manager believes that equities could soon be heading for a very sharp rally.

Cazenove's Neil Pegrum -- whose fund made 9.4 percent last year while markets were plummeting -- believes UK equities could soon be enjoying a "March 2003" rally.

While it seems a long time ago now after the market's recent woes, March 2003 marked the start of a 4-year bull market which took the FTSE 100 from less than 3,300 to more than 6,700 and saw clever stockpickers reap huge rewards.

Pegrum argues that stocks are already discounting a lot of bad news. He adds that equities look forwards rather than backwards and therefore, as in March 2003, can rally even as analysts are still downgrading corporate earnings forecasts.

His equity long/short fund's net long position is 14 percent, but he's planning to increase that this year.

It's a brave call, especially after so many investors tried to buy stocks on the cheap last year, only to find them getting even cheaper.

But, as John Templeton said, bull markets are born on pessimism. And there's no shortage of that at the moment.

How bad will hedge funds’ year-end performance figures look?

According to Credit Suisse/Tremont, funds fell 6.30 percent in October after a 6.55 percent drop in September, taking losses for the first ten months to 15.54 percent.

Seven strategies are now nursing double-digit losses, with only two — managed futures and dedicated short bias — in positive territory.

Even global macro, which bets on the likes of global equity markets, world currencies, sovereign debt and commodities, is now back in the red. These funds are down 7.10 percent after substantial losses in September and October.

Many investors who have not already pulled out their money will be keenly watching year-end figures as they review their portfolios.

The last time hedge funds lost money over a calendar year, according to Hedge Fund Research, was in 2002 when they fell 1.45 percent.

The questions for hedge funds are how bad will it look in 2008, and will it be any better in 2009?

So star hedge fund manager Greg Coffey has opted to join established firm Moore Capital.

In April, when high-performing, high-earning Coffey resigned from GLG, the market was awash with rumours that he wanted to start up his own firm, pulling in billions from investors.

However, times have changed in the hedge fund industry.

The average fund is down nearly 20 percent so far this year, according to Hedge Fund Research’s HFRX index, while emerging markets funds have taken a particular battering as markets such as Russia and China have fallen.

Fund of funds managers say that top funds that were once able to turn investors away are now open again as investors across the industry withdraw their assets.

So perhaps for Coffey, who forfeited a bonus reportedly worth around $250 million when he resigned from GLG, a start-up has just become too risky for now.

If the shrinkage of the hedge fund industry is giving someone as well-regarded as Coffey reason to think again, then for those without a strong track record times could be very tough indeed.

It was not so long ago that hedge funds and commodities were the two red hot areas to invest in.

The credit crisis has shown that investor interest can quickly cool.

Many hedge funds betting on a so-called “super-cycle” have been caught out by a sharp pullback in commodities after a five-year bull market and are now facing the task of soothing anxious investors.

One of those to have suffered - hedge fund firm RAB Capital - is trying to strike a bargain with investors in its flagship Special Situations strategy, which has plunged 48 percent year-to-date after some bad bets on mining stocks plus a high-profile mistake at Northern Rock.

With investors able to pull out money every three months after giving notice, and with much of its assets in small-caps that will prove much harder to sell in down markets, RAB is in a potentially tricky situation.

Its proposition to investors is for them to tie up their money for three more years, giving it some breathing space and the fund’s holdings time to recover.

In return, RAB will halve its management fee - once a high figure that hedge fund industry investors were only too keen to pay - to 1 percent.

If this doesn’t work, RAB will liquidate the once high-flying fund and give investors their money back.

Only last week Ospraie Management said it would close its flagship hedge fund after it plunged 27 percent in August and said investors would have to wait up to three years to get back some of their cash - not exactly the type of statement that will draw new investors to the industry quickly.

The heat is on for hedge funds with commodities bets.

Earlier this week Ospraie Management told investors it is shutting its flagship fund after it plunged 27 percent in August. The fund’s energy and commodities stock positions fell as investors worried if a global economic slowdown will mean less demand for resources.

And now RAB Capital’s Philip Richards is giving up the CEO role to focus on his funds after an awful period of performance for his once high-flying Special Situations fund.

Losses on small-cap mining stocks, as well as its high-profile error in buying into troubled bank Northern Rock, meant its listed feeder fund fell 38.1 percent from the start of the year to Aug. 21.

One of the potential danger areas for hedge funds in this area is liquidity - how quickly they can dump stocks when investors decide enough is enough and want to pull their cash out.

The problem is that during the commodities boom of the last five years the flood of investor money has encouraged some funds to invest in less crowded areas such as smaller companies. These are easy to trade in a bull market but buyers can quickly disappear in a downturn.

Ospraie has told investors it will give investors their money back in stages, with the least liquid 20 percent taking up to three years to be returned.

Given the size of recent losses in this area, the illiquidity of some hedge funds’ positions and investors’ increasing nervousness as hedge funds continue to struggle, there are likely to be more such closures.

Things are going from bad to worse for hedge funds.

Having only just clawed back their losses after a dreadful March, the closely-watched Credit Suisse/Tremont Hedge Fund Index shows hedge funds lost a hefty 2.61 percent in July after being hit by a double-whammy of market movements.

These freewheeling funds had been betting for some time that banks stocks would fall as the credit crisis ate into their profits, while also betting that commodities would rise as demand for oil, metals and food soared.

This had been working well, but in July banks bounced back because they looked so cheap to some investors, while commodities fell from some of the dizzying heights they had recently reached.

To make matters worse, anecdotal evidence suggests some managers had only recently put these bets on. Having watched them work for months and months and eyed the lucrative returns from a distance, they almost immediately saw them turn sour.

This all means that for the first seven months of the year the industry is down 2.11 percent and could even end the year in negative territory.

If this happens, more investors may reassess why they are putting their money with funds that are supposed to be able to make money in all market conditions – yet can’t deliver.