Today, there is no uniform definition of what an ethical fund is. Fund management companies choose themselves what they believe is ethical and not. The lack of the definition makes it difficult for consumers to understand why these funds are special compared to other funds. The purpose of this study is to examine three Swedish companies; KPA Pension, Swedbank Robur and Folksam, to obtain a clearer picture of the concept ethical funds and its definition. The study describes each company's view of Ethics and how they may affect other companies to work for a more sustainable world. The paper will also discuss how fund companies make a good balance between ethics and profit. The study is based on interviews with people involved in Corporate Social Responsibility and Responsible Investments. The results suggest that companies themselves have difficulties to define what an ethical fund is, but they all believe they have a good chance to influence the various companies. Research on ethical funds and their returns have shown different results. This makes it difficult to determine if ethics and returns go hand in hand or if ethical funds instead leads to a lower risk, with a smaller yield. / I dagsläget finns det ingen enhetlig definition för vad en etisk fond är. Fondbolagen väljer själva vad de anser är etiskt och inte. Den uteblivna definitionen gör det svårt för konsumenter att förstå vad som utmärker just de här fonderna, gentemot andra. Syftet med den här studien är att undersöka tre svenska företag, KPA Pension, Swedbank Robur och Folksam, för att på så sätt få en klarare bild av etiska fonder och dess definition. Studien beskriver vad de olika företagen har för syn på etik och hur de kan påverka de företag de är delägare i. Uppsatsen kommer även att diskutera hur fondbolagen kan få en bra balans mellan etik och avkastning. Studien bygger på intervjuer med personer som arbetar med Corporate Social Responsibility och ansvarsfulla investeringar. Resultatet tyder på att företagen själva har svårt att definiera vad en etisk fond är, men att de alla anser att de har en bra chans att påverka de olika företagen. Forskningen angående etiska fonder och dess avkastning har visat olika resultat. Vilket gör det svårt att bestämma om etik och avkastning går hand i hand eller om etiska fonder istället medför en mindre risk, med en mindre avkastning.

The sustainability of Social Responsible Investments (SRI) markets is highly dependent on the accuracy of social and environmental information. Surprisingly, and in contrast to financial information, there exists no methodological standard for gathering social and environmental information in SRI markets. This work is a first contribution to the understanding of how SRI-analysts verify the accuracy of social and environmental information. A second aim of this thesis is to evaluate if SRI-analysts can produce an accurate output with their respective methodologies. To do so, a case study was performed comparing the assessment of social and environmental information at SRI-screening firms to the more regulated financial auditing process, using legal a categorization of evidence strengths as a model. The findings of this study suggest that practices are not standardized amongst SRI-analysts. Therefore, investors are unlikely to receive an equal degree of information accuracy from one analyst to the next. Moreover, when comparing SRI-screening and financial auditing using the legal categorization of evidence, it was found that screening firms tend to produce outputs that are less carefully verified than seen in their financial counterparts. Nevertheless, the findings also reveal that SRI-analysts generally acknowledge the importance of assessing sources of evidence when controlling information accuracy. In conclusion, a standardized methodology should be welcomed by SRI-analysts, and the legal categorization of evidence strengths could be a good starting point to manage information accuracy in their screening process.