Introduction

The guide addresses challenges faced by wealth holders seeking impact-oriented wealth managers. Many experience insufficient advisor knowledge, leading to weak support beyond initial enthusiasm. The guide helps clarify investor needs, improve transparency on wealth managers’ sustainability and impact capabilities, highlight practices for broader adoption, strengthen the impact ecosystem, and outline emerging models valued by impact-focused clients.

Based on survey responses from 13 wealth managers (selected from 25), all participants serve high- and ultra-high-net-wealth clients, manage at least USD 1bn, and offer sustainable and impact investment capabilities including private market access. The survey followed the investor journey: wealth manager discovery, client onboarding, portfolio implementation, and ongoing relationship management. Results highlight diversity rather than establishing benchmarks.

Wealth manager discovery

Effective manager searches begin with investors understanding their goals, risk appetite, wealth level, and readiness to operate across the Spectrum of Capital. A checklist supports this initial work.

Six criteria guide shortlisting: organisational type, penetration of sustainable/impact strategies, thematic focus, breadth of sustainability and impact strategy, balance of in-house versus external products, and capability to work across the Spectrum of Capital. Among respondents, an average of 30% of AuM was invested in sustainable strategies and 3.3% in impact strategies, with wide variation (<1% to 18%). This indicates that impact investing remains comparatively early-stage compared with sustainable investing.

Client onboarding

Wealth managers vary significantly in onboarding depth. Common approaches include value-based planning, proprietary surveys, structured dialogues, thematic and asset-class education, and access to sustainability, impact, philanthropy, and specialist experts. For family offices, multistakeholder alignment workshops help reconcile intergenerational priorities.

The Investment Policy Statement (IPS) documents financial needs and sustainability and impact preferences. IPS components include mission and purpose, motivation, preferred sustainable investment approaches (exclusions, ESG integration, thematic, impact), risk profile, liquidity needs, and time horizon.
Some wealth managers provide digital tools that illustrate wealth trajectories and potential deployment of surplus wealth. Lombard Odier’s “your wealth outlook” tool informs the construction of private market allocations.

Portfolio implementation

Differentiation arises through private market access, thematic depth, and the ability to integrate sustainability and impact across asset classes. Some firms provide structures with lower minimums or semi-liquid private market opportunities. Team models include centralised sustainability teams supporting asset specialists, group-level sourcing structures, working groups, and individual impact curators in smaller firms.

Partnerships with impact advisory platforms such as CapShift broaden access to catalytic and market-rate opportunities.
In public markets, managers use ESG integration, thematic strategies, and active ownership. The report cautions against “impact washing”, noting that most public market transactions do not provide investor impact except through engagement or specific channels such as IPO participation.

Philanthropy and catalytic capital offerings vary. Some firms provide blended finance products, donor-advised fund solutions, or strategic philanthropy advisory, while others integrate catalytic funds directly into investment mandates.

Ongoing relationship management

Most firms anchor sustainability responsibilities at senior levels and maintain sustainability teams, governance committees, and oversight mechanisms. External experts are sometimes engaged for additional challenge.

Impact measurement remains constrained by fragmented data. Eleven of thirteen firms provide impact reporting. Common frameworks include the UN SDGs and the Impact Management Project (IMP). Cazenove Capital applies the IMP framework comprehensively, including investor contribution assessments, and externally verifies its own processes. Firms such as AlTi, Cape Capital, Cazenove, BNP Paribas, and Cambridge Associates demonstrate an ability to translate complex impact data into accessible client reporting.

Around two-thirds participate in public advocacy through networks such as PRI and B Corp, while smaller firms contribute via thought leadership, education, and community-building.

How to put this guide into action

The guide recommends that wealth holders clarify their impact goals, financial needs, and preferred role across the Spectrum of Capital; use the provided criteria to compare wealth managers’ organisational models and sustainability integration; evaluate onboarding quality and clarity of IPS documentation; assess private market access, catalytic capital options, and impact reporting capabilities; and consider governance, specialist expertise, and industry engagement when selecting or mandating a wealth manager.