今年2月佛羅里達州帕克蘭高中槍擊案造成17人喪生后，沃爾瑪、克羅格和Dick’s Sporting Goods等槍支零售商都加大了槍支銷售限制力度。

在關于控槍的爭論聲中，Dick’s Sporting Goods停止了攻擊性武器的銷售，作為美國最大零售商的沃爾瑪也將購槍最低年齡提高到了21歲。

對于沃爾瑪這樣的公司而言，雖然更為人所知的是開學季商品和低價格，但仍可能會讓一批不斷壯大的投資者敬而遠之，原因就在于它也是美國最大的槍支零售商，而這個投資者群體是基于環境、社會和治理（ESG）原則做出選擇的基金。

Parnassus Investment做出最終投資決策的基礎就是ESG原則。該公司ESG分析師伊亞蘇?埃薩亞斯說，他們“不投資通過槍支獲得大量收入的公司，或者有悖于（我們ESG）精神原則的公司。這是我們避開沃爾瑪的原因之一。”

Parnassus Investment投資決策的第一步是判斷一家公司的估值和經營業績能否通過測試。隨后按ESG標準對目標公司進行檢驗。埃薩亞斯說，盡管沃爾瑪的收入達到4859億美元，但它一直未出現在Parnassus Investment的證券投資中。同時，雖然很難斷定沃爾瑪就是美國最大的槍支銷售商，因為它沒有分別披露過彈藥和槍支的銷售數據，但在第二輪評判中，“槍王”的名號讓沃爾瑪很難受到青睞。

Parnassus Investment銷售和營銷主管喬?辛哈說：“ESG這個概念包含許多因素。但沃爾瑪是最大的[美國槍支銷售商]可能會讓我們將其排除在外，因為這樣的事實對這個品牌來說非常不利，對我們的股東持有沃爾瑪股票而言也非常不好。因此我們不會考慮它。”

與此同時，越來越多的共同基金和指數基金看來都不再袖手旁觀。盡管身為大股東之一，但此前這些基金基本上都不會插手持股公司的經營事務。

對于是否和沃爾瑪有聯系的問題，第二大機構股東道富集團在一份聲明中表示：“我們將和武器制造商以及經銷商溝通，目的是提高其透明度，從而使它們為安全并負責任地使用其產品提供支持。我們還會設法確保：任何用于影響立法和法規以及為其他倡議活動提供資金的股東資源和沃爾瑪的公開態度保持一致。”

作為沃爾瑪大股東之一，貝萊德也發表了類似聲明，稱他們將和武器制造商及經銷商進行溝通。

貝萊德的聲明稱：“有客戶希望把武器制造商以及其他不符合其價值觀的公司排除在證券投資之外，我們正在和這些客戶一同努力。目前我們為客戶管理的資產中，有超過2000億美元資產屬于此類投資。”

這些巨無霸型投資公司以往不插手經營的做法符合邏輯。沃爾瑪等公司納入股市指數的原因是這些指數產品意在為整體經濟或某個行業建立模型。因此，和維權投資者的情況不同，指數基金經理一般不會挑選所持的股票。

就像沃爾瑪的另一位股東解釋的那樣：“長期以來我們的政策一直是不對個股發表評論。先鋒集團持有任何公司股票的原因是我們需要實現自身基金的整體投資目標。舉例來說，先鋒標普500指數基金的投資目標是復制標普500指數，因此該基金的全部、或幾乎全部資產都由標普500指數成份股組成，而且每只股票在該基金中的占比都接近它在標普500指數中的權重。”

對于為什么要賣武器的問題，沃爾瑪表示這樣的決定源于消費者的需求。沃爾瑪已經停售部分攻擊性武器，比如2015年拉斯維加斯槍擊案中罪犯使用的AR-15自動步槍。

沃爾瑪發言人蘭迪?哈格羅夫表示：“受消費需求影響，我們把焦點重新放在了打獵和競技上。”

此外，沃爾瑪在和投資者進行溝通時指出，它在武器銷售方面自行設置了一些限制條件。

哈格羅夫：“我們的做法旨在強調我們對自身責任是多么的認真。”他還說沃爾瑪無法就與股東的具體溝通內容發表評論，“我們所做的已經遠遠超過了法律的要求”。

除了提高購槍年齡，沃爾瑪還給買槍過程錄像，特別是對槍支銷售人員的培訓。該公司還在設法追蹤那些可能為沒有資格持槍的人買槍的消費者。

目前社會意識投資占比仍較低，但其比重正在上升。麥肯錫去年10月的一項研究顯示，2016年ESG占亞洲、澳大利亞、加拿大、歐洲、新西蘭和美國機構投資者管理資產的26%，規模約為23萬億美元。

但華盛頓智囊機構Urban Institute指出，就阻止槍械犯罪而言，增加槍支銷售限制，甚至零售商停止售槍或許并不夠。加大限制力度或決定不再銷售槍支后，其他不那么自律的零售商就會填補沃爾瑪留下的空白。

Urban Institute副總裁兼司法政策中心主管南希?拉維格尼說：“我覺得任何單一改變都不會真的緩解美國的槍支暴力問題。這需要多管齊下，包括限制大威力槍支，從立法上針對濫用槍支的人拿出解決方案以及在槍支暴力頻發的社區開展工作。”（財富中文網）

譯者：Charlie

審校：夏林

Since the school shooting in Parkland, Fla. killed 17 in February, gun retailers includingWalmart, Kroger, and Dick’s Sporting Goods have ramped up restrictions on firearm sales.

Amid a debate about the weapons regulations, Dick’s ended sales of assault-style weapons, while the country’s largest retailer, Walmart, raised the minimum age of such purchases to 21.

Yet, firms like Walmart—better known for its back-to-school supplies and low prices—may still be keeping a growing class of investors at bay with its reputation as the country’s largest gun retailer: funds that choose based on environmental, social, and governance principles (ESG).

Parnassus Investment, which makes its final investment decisions based on ESG principals, does not “invest in companies that derive a significant amount of revenue from guns, or companies that break the spirit (of our ESG) principals,” said Iyassu Essayas, an ESG analyst for the firm. “That’s one of the reasons we strayed away from Walmart.”

Parnassus decides on investments by first determining whether a company’s valuation and financials pass the test. Then, the candidate goes through an ESG filter. Walmart has yet to show up in the firm’s portfolio so far, says Essayas, even with its $485.9 billion in revenue. And though it’s hard to say for certain whether Walmart is indeed the largest firearms seller—the company does not offer a break down of ammunition and gun sales—its “gun king” moniker is a hard sell in round two.

“This notion of ESG has many, many factors. But the fact that Walmart is the biggest [U.S. gun seller] would probably cause us to exclude it because it would be so bad for the brand, and for our shareholders to own it—so we would exclude it,” said Parnassus’ Director of Sales and Marketing, Joe Sinha.

That comes as an increasing number of mutual and index funds, which have largely avoided interfering in the operations of their holdings despite often ranking among companies’ largest holders, appear to be moving out of the sidelines.

“We will be engaging with weapons manufacturers and distributors to seek greater transparency from them on the ways that they will support the safe and responsible use of their products,” State Street, Walmart’s second largest institutional shareholder, said in a statement when asked whether they were in contact with the retailer. “And we will also seek to ensure that any shareholder resources used to influence legislation and regulations or fund other advocacy efforts is consistent with the company’s public views.”

BlackRock, also among Walmart’s largest holders, released a similar statement, saying they would talk with weapons manufacturers and distributors.

“We are working with clients who want to exclude from their portfolios weapons manufacturers or other companies that don’t align with their values,” the company said in a statement. “We currently have more than $200 billion in assets under management for clients in these types of portfolios.”

Such investing titans do have a logic behind this historical non-interference. Companies such as Walmart are included in indexes because such products seek to model the larger economy or an industry. So unlike in the case of activist investors, index funds managers don’t generally pick their holdings.

As another Walmart holder explains, “We have a longstanding policy where we don’t comment on individual securities. Vanguard’s stake in any company is due to our need to meet our funds’ broader investment objectives. For example, our Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund’s investment objective is to replicate the S&P 500 Index, so the fund includes all, or substantially all, of its assets in the stocks that make up the index, holding each stock in approximately the same proportion as its weighting in the index.”

When asked about why the company sells firearms, Walmart, which ended the sale of assault-type weapons like the AR-15 used in Las Vegas back in 2015, says its decision is due to consumer demand.

“We refocused on hunting and sport, driven by customer demand,” said Randy Hargrove, a spokesperson for Walmart.

In conversation with its investors, meanwhile, Walmart has pointed to its self-imposed restrictions on firearm sales.

“Our approach is to highlight how we take our responsibility seriously,” Hargrove said, adding that the company cannot comment on specific chats with its holders. “What we do greatly exceeds what is required by law.”

Aside from increased age restrictions, Walmart also films transactions, and specially trains those behind the guns desk. The company also seeks to keep track of customers who might be buying for others that may not be eligible for owning firearms.

That comes as socially conscious investing remains a small, but growing, size of the pie. According to an October McKinsey study, ESG accounted for 26%, or about $23 trillion, of assets managed by institutional investors in Asia, Australia, Canada, Europe, New Zealand, and the U.S. in 2016.

Still, says the Urban Institute, increasing restrictions and even ending gun sales on the part of the retailers may not be enough when it comes to stopping crime stemming from firearms. Other, less restrictive retailers fill in the void Walmart leaves behind as it increases restrictions or should it decide to stop selling guns.

“I don’t think any one change is going to really make a dent in the gun violence problem in the U.S.,” said Nancy La Vigne, vice president and director of the Justice Policy Center at the Urban Institute. “It’s going to take a combination of efforts, including restricting high power firearms, legislative solutions on people who are misusing firearms, and working in high gun violence communities.”