Claims assessment · Fund naming claim
Sustainable fund” (product name)
Typical treatment across five regimes. Every verdict below is tied to a stated legal hook.
Market comparison
How this claim is typically treated
Five major markets · one reviewed comparison
| Market | Typical treatment | Legal basis | What is required |
|---|---|---|---|
| European UnionEU | Restricted | View legal reasoningESMA fund-names guidelines (2024/3852): 80% of investments meeting sustainability characteristics + exclusions; SFDR context | 80% evidence; PAB/CTB exclusions; SFDR pre-contractual consistency |
| United KingdomUK | Restricted | View legal reasoningFCA SDR PS23/16 — 'sustainable' in name requires label (Focus/Improvers/Impact/Mixed) or unnamed-product conditions; 70% test | Label + 70% test + consumer-facing disclosures; ESG 4.3 anti-greenwashing rule |
| United StatesUS | Restricted | The cited source is recorded in the assessment. View legal reasoningSEC Names Rule (80% policy); marketing rule; enforcement (DWS $19m, BNY $1.5m) | 80% basket compliance; prospectus consistency |
| CanadaCA | Restricted | The cited source is recorded in the assessment. View legal reasoningCSA/CIRO fund naming guidance (2022) | Investment policy consistency |
| AustraliaAU | Restricted | The cited source is recorded in the assessment. View legal reasoningASIC INFO 271; ASIC v Mercer/Vanguard precedents | Screens disclosed and actually applied |