De senaste åren har det uppmärksammats mycket i media hur svenska bolag begått oetiska handlingar utomlands. Syftet med uppsatsen var att undersöka hur svenska investerares investeringsbeslut påverkas av svenska bolags oetiska handlingar i internationella enheter, samt om motivet bakom besluten primärt är etiska eller ekonomiska. För att besvara syftet användes en modifierad modell av Boyle et. al. (1997) som teoretiskt ramverk för att analysera den data som samlats in genom intervjuer, samt studerande av sekundärdata i form av riktlinjer och andra etiskt fokuserade dokument. Studien visade att investerare främst agerar på ekonomisk grund, men att de har vissa etiska ramar, utanför vilka de helt avstår från investeringar. Vidare kunde slutsatsen dras att investerare anser det vara olönsamt att investera oetiskt.

Background: There has been an increase in savings and investment in recent years along with an increased interest in responsible investments. Ethical mutual funds has developed and gained increasingly popularity. Aim: The aim of the study is to examine if ethical mutual funds are an equivalent alternative to traditional mutual funds in terms of return, risk and risk-adjusted return on the Swedish stock market. Theory: Beta, Jensen's Alpha, Sharpe ratio, Treynor ratio, and Modern Portfolio Theory. Method: Quantitative survey method, a statistical study. Conclusion:The study concludes that there is no significant difference between ethical and conventional mutual funds in terms of return, risk and risk-adjusted return. The small differences that exist between the two fund groups are in favor of the ethical fund group, indicating that funds is a comparable investment option compared to traditional mutual funds.

The EU Taxonomy Regulation[1] (“EU Taxonomy”) is a relatively new classification system for determining what economic activities are considered sustainable. By creating a common language between investors, issuers, and policymakers, the regulation aims to increase transparency and help investors assess whether investments meet robust environmental standards. This thesis aims to investigate how the EU Taxonomy, as a legal instrument, aims to serve its legislative objective and secondly identify potential challenges of the regulation.  Findings indicate that the regulation can create an adequate commonly held classification system as long as the technical criteria for each sector keep up with new scientific discoveries and technological advancements. A regulation to develop uniform understanding across the EU and delegated acts to amend the legislation seems like the most appropriate legal instrument. Areas for improvement concern revising the scope of whom it applies, and this process has begun with the proposal of the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). Other areas for improvement concerns the political nature of what sectors should be included in the taxonomy, for instance, whether nuclear energy and gas should be deemed sustainable or not. The taxonomy may strive to be a neutral classification system; however, member states’ economic incentives affect what is included.  Finally, this thesis concludes that it is too early to predict the taxonomy’s breakthrough. In theory, it is a significant idea. Still, we can only know with time whether we have reached a more common understanding, transparency and eventually have facilitated a transition through this regulation.  [1] Regulation (EU) 2020/852 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 June 2020 on the establishment of a framework to facilitate sustainable investment and amending regulation (EU) 2019/288.