A ranking of large banks based on their animal welfare policies and practices finds a state of overall decline – 58% of the 80 banks tracked by Sinergia Animal have lower scores than last year.
However, the Banks for Animals
The report is the result of an analysis of how banks finance industries such as factory farming, fur and cosmetics companies that test products on animals. "The financial sector must do more to prevent the systemic funding of industries responsible for animal suffering, environmental destruction and public health threats," Sinergia Animal said in a statement when it released the report in early May.
Animal welfare is a growing area of focus for activist investors. In 2023, 2024 and 2025,
These motions were filed by John Harrington, president and CEO of Harrington Investments, an investment firm based in Napa, California. Harrington argued that the mismanagement of animal welfare issues — including animal testing, factory farming and potential liabilities related to food safety, such as diseases passed from animals to humans — present "material financial, operational and reputational risks" for companies that get loans from these banks, as well as for the banks themselves.
Effects of factory farming
Factory farms, or concentrated animal feeding operations as they are sometimes called, raise an estimated 1.7 billion animals in confinement each year and provide 99% of the food supply. In addition to animal suffering, the financing of such operations increases the risk of zoonotic diseases, antimicrobial resistance, biodiversity loss and environmental damage, according to Sinergia Animal.
"The driving force behind factory farming is the pursuit of economies of scale for maximum profits, and such intensive industrial production methods impose a substantial toll on animals," the Banks for Animals report states.
These businesses depend on unrestricted funding from financial institutions, according to the report.
"There is nothing about factory farming, either flora or fauna, that is good for humans or the environment," Ken LaRoe, founder, CEO and chairman of Climate First Bancorp in St. Petersburg, Florida, told American Banker.
One aspect that disturbs LaRoe is that he believes factory farming has led to obesity among many Americans.
"It's not their fault," he said. "They could do the research. They could try to eat right. But even if they try to eat right, there's no nutritional value in even the food that's labeled organic anymore. So as Americans, we're screwed."
Morgan Stanley leads among U.S. banks
While most U.S. banks in the Banks for Animals scorecard received a score of zero, Morgan Stanley received a score of 5% for its Indigo Group Animal Welfare Strategy. A bank spokesman declined a request for an interview or comment, but confirmed the report was accurate.
According to Morgan Stanley's website, its Indigo Group Animal Welfare Strategy is an investment portfolio that does not invest in companies that exploit animals through animal testing, factory farms, live animal entertainment or exhibiting or breeding animals.
Wells Fargo,
According to the Banks for Animals report, Bank of America offers transition finance for alternative protein and regenerative agriculture.
Later this month, a federal judge will hear arguments over whether an animal rights group may proceed with its lawsuit that says an industrial ag company violated state and federal animal-protection laws and as a result must repay its Paycheck Protection Program loan.
"We see opportunities to deploy capital into nature-positive areas aligned with our commitment to mobilize and deploy $1.5 trillion in sustainable finance by 2030 such as climate-smart and regenerative agriculture, alternative protein, sustainable aquaculture, circular economy models and nature-based solutions," states the bank's September 2024 Sustainability at Bank of America report.
Wells Fargo, according to the Banks for Animals report, has finance lines for sustainable agriculture and fisheries. Wells Fargo did not respond to a request for comment.
"Transition finance is low-hanging fruit,"
The U.S. financial firms that received a score of zero, meaning they have no public policies to prevent the financing of practices harmful to animals, include BNY, BlackRock, Capital Group Companies, Dimensional Fund Advisors, Fidelity Management & Research, Geode Capital Management,
Eleven banks in other countries improved their animal welfare score, mostly by offering transition finance. Bank Mandiri and BMO were credited for beginning to finance more animal-friendly food systems. Standard Chartered Bank improved its policy on slaughter practices and using animals for medical testing.
The banks at the top of Sinergia's ranking are ethical banks like de Volksbank, based in the Netherlands, which scored 93%; Triodos, also based in the Netherlands (also 93%); and Australian Ethical Bank (79%).
"For them, it's really a matter of principle," van der Mark said. "They strongly believe that you should not be financing animal cruelty. So it's very intrinsic to the mandate of the bank to have policies on this."
The next several banks are in the Netherlands, Australia and the U.K. "For these banks, it's probably public pressure that has played an important role in developing policies," van der Mark said.
How banks can improve
Van der Mark's first priority for banks would be to get them to stop financing factory farms.
"That is core, and extreme confinement in these facilities is what causes most suffering," she said.
Sinergia Animal recommends that banks recognize animal welfare in their policies. For instance, one of the group's criteria is what it calls "five freedoms" – recognizing that animals should have space to move, to express natural behavior, to be safe from heat and cold, and have access to clean water and food.
"It starts by recognizing that this is an issue, and it can help start conversations with farmers as well," van der Mark said. "If the bank was speaking with a client and said, 'Look, we care about animals, so what are you doing to address this?' One of the things we ask is, what are you doing to shift completely away from this model? Because it's not sustainable, it's not animal-friendly."
Van der Mark draws inspiration from anti-smoking campaigns, which for years looked like they weren't accomplishing anything.
"When I look back 20 years ago, I would go to a bar and everybody was smoking, and you couldn't talk about it," she said. "And now, at least in Europe, it's forbidden, and the numbers of people that smoke have gone down dramatically. It was a change I hadn't seen coming, and it seemed very sudden, despite the fact that there were decades of campaigning going for that. Sometimes change can take a long time, and then suddenly there's momentum, and you have to seize it and jump on it.
"But it helps if you start preparing early," van der Mark said. "We're in those years that we're laying the groundwork, hoping for some momentum to come along."
