Sustainable finance · responsible investment
Exclusion list
A named list of companies, sectors or activities that an investor or fund refuses to hold, giving effect to negative or exclusionary screening.
Expert review openNo editor-accepted expert review yetDefinition
An exclusion list is the operative instrument of negative (exclusionary) screening: it enumerates the issuers, sectors, products or behaviours — such as tobacco, controversial weapons, thermal coal or severe norm violations — that are barred from a portfolio or lending book. Exclusions may be values-based (ethical screens), norms-based (breaches of international conventions) or risk-based, and are typically defined by thresholds such as percentage of revenue from the excluded activity. PRI, GSIA and CFA Institute classify exclusionary screening as one of the core responsible-investment approaches.
References
negative/exclusionary screening definition, classification among RI approaches
exclusions terminology in UK practice
Overview
What it means
The list converts a policy statement into enforceable portfolio rules: index providers build ex-sector indices around it, asset owners audit managers against it, and disclosure regimes increasingly ask funds to state what they exclude and why. Threshold choice (e. g. 0% vs 10% of revenue) materially changes what the list excludes in practice.
How it is used
Used by pension funds, asset managers, banks and faith-based or ethical funds; referenced in mandates, prospectuses and stewardship policies, and increasingly in ESG fund labelling regimes.
Why it matters
Exclusion lists are the oldest and most transparent responsible-investment tool; their scope and thresholds determine real-economy signalling and are a common flashpoint in greenwashing scrutiny when labels promise more than the list delivers.
Review
Public comments appear only after editor acceptance. Draft comments stay in the review queue.
Reviewers choose the definition or an overview paragraph, leave a comment or replacement, and attach evidence or a source link.
Editors compare reviewer cards side by side. AI may help find agreement, conflicts, unsupported claims and possible source issues.
Only an editor-accepted synthesis changes the public page. Reviewer identities are shown only with consent and verification.
Submitted reviews stay private until accepted.
Loading verified endorsements… Endorsements are not votes and never determine publication.
Endorse this definition
Endorse the exact version shown here. This is not a vote, and publication remains an editorial decision.
Review board
Comment on a specific line. Each reviewer stays separate until an editor accepts a merged draft.
Each person comments on the definition or overview in their own draft card, with role, evidence and suggested wording kept together.
AI can compare comments against the current text, flag conflicting claims, surface missing evidence and identify where reviewers agree.
An editor merges compatible suggestions into a draft change, checks sources, records disagreements and decides what can be published.