Research coverage and model

Over seven years, companies under coverage have grown steadily. To maintain the quality and relevance of our research, we regularly initiate coverage on stocks that come onto the radar of institutional investors. Equally, we stop coverage of those that become less investable or fall out of favour. As such, we continually refine our coverage base to the stocks most closely followed by our clients.

We have 80 stocks under coverage across all sectors. Since we cover most of the JSE’s dual-listed companies, we are familiar with ESG best-practice requirements and legislation in most geographical regions significant for investors.

INTEGRAM Research: coverage by sector^

Source: Integram Research
^At August 2025

INTEGRAM Research: dual-listed vs JSE^

Source: Integram Research
^At August 2025

INTEGRAM Research by sustainability rankings^

Source: Integram Research
^At August 2025

Our research model

Although most of our work involves companies listed on the JSE, our research model and evaluation processes can just as easily be applied to private companies and state-owned corporations.

Graphically, our research model resembles a house: the funding structure is the foundation on which five pillars of sustainability are built. The pillars support the roof, ie the end goal of responsible investment and sustainable value-creation.

Under the guidance of Dominique Laroque and Syd Vianello, our team researched legislation, practices, industry codes and best-practice guidelines in all industries and geographies across the globe to develop a robust scoring methodology for evaluating a company’s sustainability strength.

Our research process includes detailed scoring of an entity’s ability to create long-term value in an ethical, sustainable manner. Scoring highlights potential risks and facilitates comparison between companies on various different levels.

Robust, integrated scoring model quantifies the intangible

Schematic diagram of our scorecard

Please click the + icon below to read more

Five pillars of sustainability (governance) +

When we analysed the data, we identified patterns that spanned industries, geographies and types of company. It became evident that there were five main areas of corporate governance (our five pillars) without which sustainability is impossible:

  • Pillar 1: Ethical culture
  • Pillar 2: Historical (achieved) performance
  • Pillar 3: Future (envisioned) performance
  • Pillar 4: Adequate and effective controls
  • Pillar 5: Trust, good reputation and legitimacy
Foundation for sustainability in the funding structure +

The way an entity is funded (capital structure) has a significant influence on the way it embraces or flouts governance, so different areas of governance are more or less important depending on the way a company is funded. For example:

  • When there is a control structure (through a concentration of voting rights or a dominant debt/equity funder), there is a greater chance that corporate governance is suppressed. In these situations, governance controls are more important than under a balanced funding structure.
  • Conversely, if a company’s equity is owned by a very high number of small shareholders (dispersed shareholding), a passive attitude to governance is a risk as shareholders tend to stand back and wait for someone else to resolve issues. This situation also requires strong governance controls, but not to the same extent as under a control structure.
  • A balanced capital structure normally provides the best foundation for effective governance
Scoring the five pillars +

To evaluate an entity’s sustainability and the strength of its governance, we score the five pillars and then weight them according to the funding structure (below). The final score is the sum of weighted pillar totals. Companies can then be compared by score and by area of sustainability.

Rigorous process +

We assign values to dozens – sometimes hundreds – of metrics behind each pillar to calculate the total value for that pillar. This process allows us to attach values to qualitative and quantitative items while the high number of data points reduces the margin for error.

As shown below, when we score an entity, we provide:

  • A summary showing pillar totals and overall score
  • A comprehensive scoresheet showing scores for the main components of each pillar.

We have six score categories that we apply to individual pillars and to overall scores:

  • Most listed companies fall in our MODERATE category
    • This is to be expected as the listing requirements of stock exchanges generally demand good governance and ethical treatment of communities and the environment
  • 5-10% of listed companies have STRONG overall sustainability
    • Our scoring mechanism approximates a logarithmic scale, making it harder to achieve incremental increases as the overall score increases. This makes sense intuitively as companies with poor governance can improve their sustainability dramatically by putting in place fairly ordinary controls, but companies with very good governance generally have less scope to improve (low-hanging fruit is easier to pick)
    • Companies in sectors with strict industry ESG codes and tight legislation (including proper monitoring and swift consequences for non-compliance) tend to score higher. So far, the only companies to have breeched the 80% threshold into our STRONG category are financial services companies and large global miners
  • We have never identified a company with SUPERIOR governance
    • It is not uncommon to see individual pillar scores over 80%, but rare to see scores over 85% due to the logarithmic nature of our scoring
  • We have only once scored a company in our UNSUSTAINABLE category
    • The circumstances were specific: poor board governance, a weak balance sheet and a foray into new markets without the necessary management expertise.
Consistency +

When we score an entity, we provide:

  • A summary showing pillar totals and overall score
  • A comprehensive scoresheet showing scores for the main components of each pillar.
Sustainability scoring according to our proprietary methodology +

We score each of the five main areas of sustainability (our five pillars) separately and then calculate the total score. Pillar weights are determined by the way a company is funded to include the effect on governance of control structures or their absence. The scores will evaluate the company’s ability to create long-term sustainable value from Unsustainable to Superior.