After I wrote my piece on Friday – the left and media’s current chant about “investors targeting Target”, which showed that the three firms that the Strib was crowing about amount to .0015, or fifteen ten-thousandths, of Target’s market capitalization – I wondered; how do the various “Socially Responsible Investment” (SRI) firms stack up against a company like Target? Which, let us not forget, is Minnesota’s second-largest corporate donor to charity and one of the most PC-friendly companies in the business, but can afford to be, because they kick market ass?
I figured it’d be interesting to compare Target’s market performance to that of the three SRI funds mentioned in the Strib piece.
But I can only do two. Because try as I may, I can’t find a ticker symbol for Trillium.
Here’s the comparative performance so far this year. Target (TGT) is blue, Walden (WSEFX) red, Calvert (CAAAX) yellow:
Walden’s about even on this dismal year; Calvert is off about four (after being down nearly ten a month ago). Target is up a couple, after being up fifteen this spring, before the consumer confidence numbers tanked much of the retail market (which the press also spun as anti-Emmer news!)
So – so far in 2010, both of the SRI funds are dogs, and Target is at least holding its own. Indeed, the earnings of all three firms seem to follow a similar curve – with the SRIs just a point or two below Target.
So how about over the past couple of years?
Wow. That’s pretty amazing. Since the beginning of 2008, when the recession really sank in, all three companies took a dive…after Obama’s election. All three dropped by 40-50%. Target is back up 5% over the period; Walden and Calvert are both 20-30% off.
Seems like Target stock – with or without contributions to MNForward – may be the only solid performer in Walden or Calvert’s portfolios.
Whose advice are you going to take?