Visual representation of Articles 6, 8, and 9 under SFDR and their key characteristics.

Categorisation of Financial Products Under SFDR: A Detailed Overview

The European Commission’s Platform on Sustainable Finance has released a proposal that provides essential guidance for categorising financial products under the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR). This document outlines a structured approach aimed at enhancing transparency and consistency in sustainable finance markets. The insights detailed here are derived from the initial 26 pages of the official proposal, focusing on foundational principles, key categorisation criteria, and implications for market participants.

1. Background and Context

The SFDR, introduced as part of the European Union’s broader sustainable finance strategy, mandates financial market participants (FMPs) to disclose sustainability-related information. The regulation serves two primary purposes:

• Combatting Greenwashing: By establishing uniform disclosure standards, SFDR reduces the risk of misrepresenting the sustainability profile of financial products.
• Enhancing Comparability: The regulation enables investors to make informed decisions by comparing products based on consistent sustainability metrics.

The categorisation framework proposed by the Platform on Sustainable Finance seeks to address ambiguities in SFDR’s existing implementation. It delineates clear boundaries and criteria for financial products classified under Articles 6, 8, and 9 of the SFDR.

2. Core Principles of the Proposal

The document identifies five core principles underpinning the categorisation framework:

1. Alignment with Regulatory Objectives: The categorisation aligns with the overarching goals of the SFDR, including transparency, investor protection, and market integrity.
2. Consistency with the Taxonomy Regulation: Products must demonstrate adherence to the EU Taxonomy’s technical screening criteria, where applicable.
3. Focus on Materiality: The framework emphasises the material impact of sustainability objectives on financial products, ensuring relevance and accountability.
4. Proportionality: The requirements are tailored to the size and scale of market participants to avoid disproportionate compliance burdens.
5. Flexibility: The framework accommodates innovation and evolution in sustainable finance practices.

3. Key Categorisation Criteria

The categorisation framework distinguishes between the three primary categories of financial products under SFDR:

	Article 6 Products	Article 8 Products	Article 9 Products
Definition	Products that do notintegrate sustainability objectives as a core feature but providebasic transparency onsustain ability risks.	Products that promote environmental and/or social characteristics while ensuring good governance practices.	Products with sustainable investment as their explicit objective.
Exigences clés	Disclosures on how sustainability risks are integrated into investment decisions. Statements on the likely impact of these risks on product returns.	Detailed disclosures on the environmental and social characteristics promoted by the product. Alignment with the EU Taxonomy for activities contributing to environmental objectives. Reporting on adverse sustainability impacts (Principal Adverse Impacts or PAIs).	Mandatory alignment with at least one environmental or social objective defined in the EU Taxonomy. Periodic reporting to demonstrate progress toward sustainable objectives. Rigorous due diligence to substantiate sustainability claims.
Target Audience	Investors seeking conventional financial returns with limited consideration of sustainability factors.	Investors prioritising balanced financial and sustainability outcomes.	Investors seeking to allocate capital toward high-impact sustainable investments.

4. Challenges Addressed by the Proposal

The proposal acknowledges key challenges faced by stakeholders in implementing SFDR requirements:

Ambiguity in Definitions	Investors seeking conventional financial returns with limited consideration of sustainability factors.
Data Availability	Limited access to reliable and comparable data hinders compliance and decision-making.
Integration with Other Regulations	Ensuring coherence with the EU Taxonomy and broader ESG regulations requires meticulous alignment.

The categorisation framework provides clarity on these issues, ensuring that market participants can comply with SFDR requirements while maintaining operational efficiency.

5. Implications for Financial Market Participants

Market participants must assess their product portfolios against the categorisation framework to determine appropriate classification and disclosure requirements. Key actions include:

• Conducting gap analyses to identify discrepancies between existing disclosures and proposed criteria.
• Enhancing data collection and reporting mechanisms to meet transparency obligations.
• Training internal teams to ensure alignment with regulatory expectations and mitigate risks of non-compliance.

6. Indicators to Be Used

The effective application of sustainability indicators is fundamental to the implementation of SFDR requirements. Indicators serve as measurable data points that enable financial market participants (FMPs) to assess, compare, and report the environmental, social, and governance (ESG) impacts of their financial products. The proposal provides detailed guidance on the selection, implementation, and reporting of these indicators, ensuring alignment with the EU’s sustainable finance objectives.

Types of Indicators

Environmental Indicators
	Carbon Footprint	Measurement: The total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions of a portfolio, expressed in tonnes of CO2 equivalent, relative to the total market value of investments. Methodology: Use Scope 1, Scope 2, and, where available, Scope 3 emissions data from investee companies. Reporting Requirements: Provide clear methodologies and disclose assumptions, particularly when Scope 3 data are estimated.
	Water Usage Efficiency	Metrics: The volume of water consumed by investee companies, measured per unit of revenue. Importance: Critical for sectors with significant water dependencies, such as agriculture and manufacturing.
	Waste Management	Indicators: The percentage of portfolio companies engaged in recycling, waste-to-energy practices, or other circular economy strategies. Relevance: Demonstrates alignment with circular economy principles and reduction of environmental impacts. Importance: Critical for sectors with significant water dependencies, such as agriculture and manufacturing.
Social Indicators	Labour Practices	Metrics: Workforce turnover rates, gender representation across all employee levels, and the presence of collective bargaining agreements. Data Collection: Use company-reported data validated through audits or third-party assessments.
	Community Engagement	Indicators: The extent of local community involvement, measured by contributions to community projects or the percentage of suppliers adhering to fair trade practices. Applicability: Relevant for industries with significant local footprints, such as mining and energy.
Governance Indicators	Executive Remuneration	Metrics: Ratio of CEO pay to median employee pay, and alignment of executive bonuses with ESG performance.
	Ethical Business Practices	Indicators: Presence and enforcement of anti-corruption policies, and the number of reported legal or ethical violations.

Methodological Framework for Indicators

Selection Criteria	Relevance to financial products’ objectives and alignment with the EU Taxonomy’s technical screening criteria. Availability of reliable and verifiable data for consistent measurement.
Data Sources	Investee company disclosures, ESG rating agencies, and independent auditors. Use of proxies or estimates only when validated against industry benchmarks.
Reporting Standards	Align with established frameworks such as GRI, SASB, or the TCFD.

Role of Indicators in Principal Adverse Impacts (PAIs)

Indicators form the backbone of PAI reporting by providing measurable data on the adverse sustainability impacts of investments. The proposal specifies:

• Mandatory Indicators: Core metrics such as GHG emissions, biodiversity impacts, and water consumption must be included for transparency.
• Supplementary Indicators: Optional metrics tailored to specific sectors or client preferences can enhance disclosures.
• Transparency: Detailed methodologies, including data sources and assumptions, must be disclosed for each indicator.

7. Sustainability Preferences and Clients’ Needs

The integration of sustainability preferences into financial products is not merely a compliance requirement but a means of fostering client trust and achieving sustainability objectives. The proposal outlines how FMPs can systematically align product offerings with client preferences while maintaining regulatory adherence.

Addressing Sustainability Preferences

Preference Elicitation	Structured Questionnaires	Develop comprehensive surveys to capture client preferences for specific sustainability objectives, such as climate action, biodiversity preservation, or social equity.
	Advisory Tools	Use decision-support systems that guide clients through the process of identifying their sustainability priorities.
Integration into Product Design	Customised Portfolios	Construct portfolios that align with client-stated objectives, integrating both positive screening (selecting sustainable investments) and negative screening (excluding harmful industries).
	Dynamic Adjustments	Enable real-time portfolio adjustments based on changes in client preferences or regulatory updates.
Transparency and Communication	Rapport d'impact	Provide periodic reports detailing the alignment of investments with client preferences, supported by quantitative data and visual dashboards.
	Education	Offer educational resources to help clients understand the implications of their sustainability preferences on investment outcomes.

Monitoring and Review Mechanisms

• Periodic Reviews: Reassess client preferences at regular intervals to ensure continued alignment with financial products.
• Feedback Loops: Establish mechanisms for clients to provide input on the performance and alignment of their investments with stated preferences.

8. Disclosure and Naming

The naming conventions and disclosure requirements under SFDR are designed to enhance investor clarity and confidence. The proposal provides a detailed framework for ensuring that product names and disclosures accurately reflect their sustainability objectives.

Naming Rules

Article 6 Products	Restrictions: Prohibit the use of terms like “sustainable” or “green” unless backed by specific disclosures on sustainability risk management. Focus: Highlight transparency on sustainability risks without implying positive sustainability outcomes.
Article 8 Products	Consistency: Ensure product names clearly describe the environmental or social characteristics being promoted. Quantifiable Claims: Back any claims with measurable data, such as the percentage of taxonomy-aligned activities.
Article 9 Products	Align with established frameworks such as GRI, SASB, or the TCFD.

Disclosure Requirements

Pre-Contractual Disclosures	Include detailed information on sustainability objectives, investment strategies, and the role of indicators. Provide clarity on alignment with client preferences and the EU Taxonomy.
Periodic Reporting	Report on the progress of achieving sustainability objectives, supported by indicator data and case studies. Highlight any deviations from stated objectives and the corrective measures taken.

Monitoring and Compliance

• Third-Party Audits: Engage independent auditors to validate the accuracy of disclosures and naming practices.
• Regulatory Oversight: Implement mechanisms for monitoring compliance, with penalties for misleading claims or inadequate disclosures.

9. Process of Categorisation

The categorisation of financial products under the Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation (SFDR) is a rigorous and methodical process. It ensures that products are transparently classified based on their sustainability characteristics, promoting consistency across the market and adherence to regulatory requirements. This section outlines the categorisation framework and delineates responsibilities and assurance mechanisms to maintain the integrity of the process.

Introduction of Categorisation Scheme

The categorisation scheme provides a structured methodology to classify financial products into SFDR categories (Articles 6, 8, and 9). This framework ensures clarity for investors and compliance with the EU’s sustainable finance objectives.

Addressing Sustainability Preferences

1	Preliminary Product Analysis	Objective Assessment: Evaluate the product’s investment objectives to identify its sustainability integration. For instance: Article 6: Products that address sustainability risks but do not promote specific environmental or social characteristics. Article 8: Products promoting environmental and/or social characteristics while ensuring governance standards. Article 9 : Products explicitly targeting sustainable investment objectives. Example: A green bond fund investing primarily in renewable energy projects may qualify as Article 9 if it explicitly aims to reduce carbon emissions.
2	Alignment with EU Taxonomy	Taxonomy Compliance: Verify that the product’s underlying investments comply with the EU Taxonomy’s technical screening criteria. For Article 8 products: Ensure a significant portion of investments promote environmental or social objectives. For Article 9 products: Demonstrate substantial alignment with at least one environmental or social objective defined in the Taxonomy. Do No Significant Harm (DNSH): Confirm that none of the underlying investments harm other sustainability objectives. For example, a solar energy project should not significantly disrupt local biodiversity.
3	Indicator Integration	Establish relevant and measurable indicators to evaluate the product’s performance against sustainability objectives. Examples include: Carbon footprint reduction for climate-focused funds. Gender diversity ratios for socially oriented investments. Waste recycling rates for circular economy projects.
4	Disclosure Preparation	Pre-Contractual Disclosures: Clearly articulate the product’s sustainability objectives, investment strategies, and reliance on sustainability indicators. Periodic Reporting: Develop templates for ongoing updates, including indicator-based performance and alignment with client preferences.
5	Validation and Review	Conduct internal reviews to ensure the product’s classification aligns with SFDR requirements and the EU Taxonomy. Any deviations must be documented and rectified promptly.

Benefits of the Scheme

• Consistency: Establishes uniform criteria across the market, enhancing comparability.
• Investor Confidence: Provides clear and accurate sustainability claims to build trust.
• Regulatory Compliance: Streamlines adherence to SFDR and EU Taxonomy requirements.

10. Responsibilities and Assurance

The successful implementation of the categorisation scheme depends on the defined roles and responsibilities of stakeholders and robust assurance mechanisms to uphold transparency and accountability.

Stakeholder Responsibilities

Financial Market Participants (FMPs)	Data Collection	Gather reliable data from investee companies, including sustainability metrics and alignment with Taxonomy criteria. Example: Obtain Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions data for carbon-intensive sectors.
	Product Classification	Objectively classify products under Article 6, 8, or 9 based on sustainability attributes. Maintain comprehensive documentation to justify the classification.
	Disclosures	Prepare detailed pre-contractual and periodic disclosures, ensuring alignment with SFDR templates.
Independent Auditors	Verification of Sustainability Claims	Conduct audits to validate the accuracy of sustainability metrics, taxonomy alignment, and disclosures.
	Compliance Assurance	Confirm that the categorisation process adheres to SFDR and EU Taxonomy standards, highlighting any discrepancies.
Regulators	Monitoring and Oversight	Regularly review FMPs’ disclosures and sustainability claims to ensure compliance.
	Enforcement	Impose penalties for misleading claims or non-compliance with the categorisation framework.

Assurance Mechanisms

1. Third-Party Certification:

• Engage ESG certification agencies or consultants to independently assess and verify sustainability claims.
• Example: Certification from a recognised body on the alignment of a green bond fund with the EU Taxonomy.

2. Internal Governance:

• Establish dedicated sustainability committees or officers to oversee the categorisation and disclosure processes.
• Implement robust internal controls to prevent errors or inconsistencies.

3. Technological Integration:

• Use advanced tools, such as blockchain for data traceability or AI for predictive analytics, to enhance the reliability of sustainability data and streamline reporting.

4. Technological Integration:

• Develop channels for receiving feedback from stakeholders, including investors and regulators, to continuously refine categorisation processes.

Continuous Improvement

Regular Updates: Reassess product classifications periodically to align with evolving regulatory standards or market developments.

Training Programs: Equip teams with up-to-date knowledge on SFDR requirements, EU Taxonomy criteria, and best practices for sustainability reporting.

11. Guidance on Setting Thresholds and Supporting Data

General Data Overview	Liquid Funds Classified as Article 8 and 9	Classification Requirements: Funds must demonstrate alignment with sustainability characteristics (Article 8) or explicit sustainable investment objectives (Article 9). Data Needs: Quantitative metrics like taxonomy-aligned revenue share for investees. Qualitative disclosures on how sustainability risks are managed. Example: A liquid fund focusing on clean energy would require taxonomy-aligned metrics showing at least 70% of investments contribute to renewable energy projects.
	Terms and Fund Names	Consistency: Ensure fund names accurately reflect their sustainability objectives, avoiding misleading terms. Key Principle: For Article 8 products, use phrases like “promoting environmental characteristics.” For Article 9, include explicit objectives, such as “Net Zero 2050 Equity Fund.”
	Asset Class Splits	Transparency: Clearly disclose the allocation of investments by asset class (e.g., equities, bonds) and their sustainability contribution. Thresholds: For Article 8, define the minimum percentage of investments promoting sustainability characteristics.
Sustainable Category – Contribution	SI Performance	Metrics for Sustainable Investments: Develop specific metrics to evaluate performance, such as greenhouse gas reductions, biodiversity preservation, or social impact indicators. Example: A public equity fund aligned with the Paris Agreement could measure its carbon footprint reduction trajectory against a 1.5°C pathway.
	Taxonomy Data for Public Market Funds	Alignment Checks: Ensure public market funds report on taxonomy compliance using validated data sources. Example: A fund investing in electric vehicle manufacturers should validate revenue shares from taxonomy-compliant activities.
Sustainable Category – Do No Significant Harm (DNSH)	Validation	Ensure that investments do not undermine other sustainability objectives (e.g., water-intensive renewable energy projects harming biodiversity). Data Requirements: Environmental impact assessments (EIAs). Stakeholder engagement records.
Transition Category	Definition	Funds investing in transition activities (e.g., decarbonisation projects) must explicitly define their pathway and timeline for achieving alignment with sustainability objectives. Example: A transition bond fund supporting coal plant retrofitting should specify carbon intensity reductions over time.
Exclusions	Screening Criteria	Clearly exclude investments in activities with significant negative environmental or social impacts, such as fossil fuel extraction or arms manufacturing. Disclosure: Provide a detailed exclusion list in pre-contractual documents.

12. Principle Aspects and Objectives

Transparency Principles:

• Ensure all sustainability-related claims are substantiated with robust data and methodologies.
• Avoid subjective or vague claims, instead focusing on measurable and verifiable indicators.

Integration of Objectives:

• Align fund objectives with SFDR’s dual focus: addressing sustainability risks and contributing to sustainability goals.

Practical Guidance:

• Provide worked examples illustrating how funds align with sustainability objectives and address risks.

13. SFDR vs. IDD/MiFID – Difference in Scope

• SFDR Focus:

  Primarily targets financial products and disclosures by FMPs.

• IDD/MiFID Scope:

  Focuses on the advisory process and suitability assessments, ensuring that client preferences are incorporated into investment recommendations.

• Harmonisation:

  Integrate SFDR-aligned disclosures into MiFID advisory processes, ensuring consistency in client-facing documents.

14. Testing of Categories

• Objective:
• Validate the categorisation framework by testing its application across various financial products and scenarios.
• Testing Methodology:
• Use real-world case studies to assess whether products meet the classification criteria for Articles 6, 8, and 9.
• dentify edge cases where categorisation is ambiguous and provide resolution guidelines.
• Feedback Loops:
• Incorporate feedback from stakeholders and adjust thresholds, indicators, or methodologies to address practical challenges.

15. Conclusion

The categorisation of financial products under the SFDR marks a turning point in aligning the financial industry with sustainability objectives. This framework provides financial market participants with clear, structured guidance to ensure transparency, consistency, and compliance while fostering trust among investors.

By classifying products into Articles 6, 8, and 9, the SFDR not only defines clear boundaries but also enforces accountability through robust data requirements and measurable indicators. This structured approach directly addresses the challenges of greenwashing and fragmented interpretations, paving the way for a more transparent and trustworthy financial ecosystem. The emphasis on alignment with the EU Taxonomy ensures that the framework operates within a scientifically validated and legally cohesive structure, providing a solid foundation for sustainable investments.

Integrating sustainability preferences into product design and ensuring transparency through rigorous disclosure practices underscores the SFDR\u2019s commitment to investor-centric strategies. The guidelines on naming conventions and periodic reporting further strengthen investor confidence by linking claims to measurable outcomes, eliminating ambiguity, and providing clarity.

The annexes serve as a practical toolkit, offering precise thresholds, data requirements, and testing mechanisms to bridge gaps in implementation. By addressing the intricacies of DNSH principles, exclusions, and transition categories, the annexes enable market participants to refine their approaches and adapt to an evolving regulatory environment. The guidance on integrating SFDR with broader frameworks like MiFID ensures coherence across advisory processes and reinforces the role of financial products in achieving global sustainability targets.

Categorisation of Products under the SFDR: Proposal of the Platform on Sustainable Finance (PDF): Link

---