Regression analysis finds varying CFP-ESG relationships by sector among 748 public companies, indicating sector-specific impacts.
This study examines whether the relationship between corporate financial performance (CFP) and environmental, social, and governance (ESG) ratings varies across Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) sectors. Using ESG ratings from LSEG Data & Analytics and financial data from Yahoo Finance for a sample of 748 publicly listed companies, the study estimates separate OLS regressions of the Total ESG score on ten financial, valuation, ownership, and firm-characteristic variables within each of the eleven GICS sectors. The results reveal substantial heterogeneity: Information Technology and Healthcare show the highest explanatory power (R² = 0.54 each), followed by Industrials (R² = 0.49), while the Consumer Discretionary model is not statistically significant (R² = 0.08). Market capitalisation is the most consistent positive predictor across sectors, while the P/S ratio and ownership concentration are consistently negative where significant. The findings indicate that the CFP–ESG relationship is not uniform but strongly conditioned by sector-specific structural and ownership characteristics.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Svetlin Minev (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: