Institutional Grade ESG Data Providers: A Comparative Review
Do you feel lost in the maze of ESG data? Learn a secret about choosing the right provider.
Picture making billion-dollar investment decisions with wrong data. Do you trust your environmental, social, and governance information?
What if a guide showed you the differences among ESG data giants? It gives you strength for smarter investment choices.
Today, financial numbers alone are not enough. Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) factors guide investment decisions. Demand for institutional-grade ESG data providers grows. Many options exist. Methodologies are complex. How do you choose a provider that meets your needs? How do you get real insights, not just numbers? This article guides you through this complex area.
Investors integrate ESG criteria into strategies. Many face a big challenge: telling superficial data from deep analysis that offers real value. This key question guides us. You will learn about the main players. More importantly, you will learn to think like an ESG expert. You will seize opportunities and avoid hidden pitfalls.
Quick browse:
- What Makes ESG Data 'Institutional Grade'? What Is Wrong With Most Data You See?
- How Do You Choose Between ESG Giants Like MSCI and Sustainalytics?
- Can Refinitiv and Bloomberg Offer a Hidden Competitive Edge?
- What Are Common Mistakes in Interpreting ESG Scores? How Do You Avoid Them?
- How Do You Build a Strong Framework to Choose an ESG Data Provider?
- Risks, trade-offs, and blind spots
- What this means for you
- Main points
What Makes ESG Data 'Institutional Grade'? What Is Wrong With Most Data You See?
Before discussing providers, understand the idea of 'institutional-grade' ESG data. Why is this distinction important? How does it differ from collecting general information? The answer lies in deep methodology, strict verification, and the ability to provide widely applicable insights for large investment portfolios.
Why? Superficial data misleads. It creates danger. You base a billion-dollar investment decision on a self-reported company statement. It has no strict audit. Or you use data that ignores sector-specific risks. Institutional data moves beyond this surface level. It gives informed analysis of non-financial risks and opportunities. These impact a company's financial performance directly over time.
How? You achieve institutional quality through core pillars. First, use a strong, transparent methodology. A clear framework, supported by wide research, must define how you collect, assess, and record data. Second, ensure comprehensive, reliable coverage. Looking at a few companies is not enough. The provider must cover thousands of companies across diverse sectors and regions. It needs regular updates. Third, confirm auditability and accountability. Institutional data is not a black box. It must be verifiable. It needs clear paths to sources and assumptions. Finally, focus on forward-looking insights. Do not just describe past events. Analyze how ESG factors impact a company's future performance.
What if? What if you rely on non-institutional data? You invest in companies with high, undeclared ESG risks. Or you miss promising investment opportunities in sustainability leaders. Worse, you fall into the 'greenwashing' trap. Companies appear more sustainable than they are. This risks your reputation and trust. This is the core difference. Institutional quality gives you confidence and tools. You move wisely in this complex area.
A common mistake is assuming all available ESG data has equal quality. Much free or low-cost data relies on company self-disclosures. These may lack audit. They may be biased. This data serves as a good starting point. But it cannot be the basis for institutional investment decisions. These decisions demand high accuracy and reliability.
Always remember, institutional ESG data gives you a magnified view. You see hidden risks and opportunities. These do not appear in traditional financial reports. It is a strategic tool to improve risk-adjusted returns. It builds more resilient, sustainable portfolios long-term. Therefore, investing in a reliable data provider is not a luxury. It is a strategic requirement.
A Secret: Beyond the Overall ESG Score!
Do not let the overall score deceive you. Look deeper. Explore raw data and individual metrics. A company gets a high score due to strong environmental performance. But it has serious governance weaknesses. True understanding comes from details.
How Do You Choose Between ESG Giants Like MSCI and Sustainalytics?
Two major names come to mind for institutional ESG data providers: MSCI ESG Research and Sustainalytics. Both lead their field. They offer very different insights and methodologies. Choosing one becomes a strategic decision. It depends on your specific investment goals. Let us analyze their differences.
MSCI ESG Research: Focus on Financial Risks
Why choose MSCI? MSCI's method assesses a company's exposure to material ESG risks. It evaluates how the company manages these risks. They do not necessarily focus on a company's 'goodness' in sustainability broadly. Instead, they focus on how ESG factors impact its financial position and shareholder value long-term. This approach appeals to investors. These investors focus on risk management and improving risk-adjusted returns. For example, MSCI scores a traditional energy company well. This happens if the company manages energy transition and emission risks effectively. This is true even if its operations have a high carbon footprint.
How does their method work? They analyze thousands of public and private data points. They use an industry-based model. This model identifies the most important risks for each sector. Water scarcity risk for beverage companies is one example. Companies get scores from AAA to CCC. Their strong point is clear methodology. Investors understand how they arrive at scores. They also have wide global coverage.
What if you do not choose MSCI? You miss strong insights into material ESG financial risks. Your main goal is to identify companies facing regulatory, operational, or reputational challenges. These challenges impact market value due to ESG management. MSCI gives you a very strong tool for this. If you seek companies with overall positive social or environmental impact, MSCI might not be the only tool you need.
Sustainalytics (Morningstar): Focus on Unmanaged Risks
Why choose Sustainalytics? In contrast, Sustainalytics assesses company exposure to unmanaged ESG risks. Their method is more comprehensive. It considers a wide range of ESG issues. This includes controversial company behavior. They look beyond what a company manages. They also examine its response to broader ethical and social issues. This makes them preferred by investors. These investors focus on broad responsible and sustainable investment. They want to avoid companies with controversial records.
How does their method work? Companies get an ESG risk score. This score ranges from 'negligible' to 'severe'. They focus strongly on transparency and accountability. They pay special attention to analyzing controversies companies face. They also cover small and medium-sized companies well. This expands the scope of responsible investing. Another strength is their focus on companies that show sustainability leadership. They go beyond risk management.
What if you do not choose Sustainalytics? You might overlook companies. These companies appear good financially. But they carry significant reputational or ethical risks due to irresponsible practices. Your investment values lead you to support companies. These companies contribute positively to society and the environment. You avoid those engaging in controversial practices. Sustainalytics gives you the required analytical depth. Their scores might be more conservative. They might not focus as much on analyzing ESG's direct impact on explicit financial performance.
The choice between MSCI and Sustainalytics reflects your investment approach. Are you an investor driven by financial risks? Or do you seek investments aligned with broader sustainability and responsibility values? Both providers give high-quality institutional data. But their analytical perspectives differ fundamentally.
A Secret: Bias in Your Benchmarks!
Each ESG data provider has a unique method and assessment model. This means the same company gets very different scores from different providers. Understand your provider's methodological biases. This is key to avoiding misleading comparisons.
| Provider | Main Methodology | Strengths | Weaknesses | Primary Users |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MSCI ESG Research | Measures risk exposure and financial impact | Strong financial risk analysis, wide global coverage, clear methodology | Does not always reflect positive impacts, less focus on direct social impact | Asset managers, pension funds, institutional investors |
| Sustainalytics (Morningstar) | Assesses unmanaged ESG risks | Focus on transparency and accountability, comprehensive risk analysis, SME coverage | Scores can be conservative, some reports are complex, standardization challenges | Responsible investors, sustainable development funds, universities |
| Refinitiv (LSEG) ESG | Raw data and transparency-based approach | Large data, wide coverage, ability to integrate data with trading tools | Lacks deep analysis for some qualitative aspects, relies on reported data | Financial analysts, trading platforms, risk management firms |
| Bloomberg ESG | Integrates ESG data within Bloomberg Terminal | Immediate, comprehensive data, advanced research and analysis capabilities, diverse data sources | High cost, is often complex for new users, requires Terminal subscription | Large institutional investors, investment houses, investment banks |
| S&P Global ESG Scores | Corporate Sustainability Assessment (CSA) | Recognized industry standard, deep sector analysis, insights on best practices | Requires extensive company data, assessment process is often long | Global indices, investors focusing on industry standards |
Can Refinitiv and Bloomberg Offer a Hidden Competitive Edge?
Beyond specialized ESG rating giants, other large players offer ESG data within broader financial platforms. These include Refinitiv (part of LSEG) and Bloomberg. These providers give a unique benefit. They integrate ESG data with traditional financial market information. This offers a full view to investors. But does this 'hidden' benefit give you a true edge?
Refinitiv ESG: Large Data and Integrated Analytics
Why choose Refinitiv? Refinitiv, through its Thomson Reuters origins, has a large database and wide coverage. Its strength lies in providing raw, transparent ESG data. Institutions use and customize this data based on their internal models. This approach appeals to institutions with strong internal analysis teams. They want to build their own assessments. They prefer this over relying completely on one provider's scores. It also excels at integrating ESG data with a wide range of other trading and financial analysis tools.
How does their hidden competitive edge work? The real advantage here is data flexibility and customization. Refinitiv offers thousands of individual data points across hundreds of metrics. You get this instead of just a final score. This lets you build your own metrics. You tailor them to your unique investment thesis. You define what truly matters to you. For example, you focus on specific Scope 3 emissions metrics for companies in certain sectors. Or you analyze board diversity in startups. This gives you a detailed edge. Other providers offering aggregated scores do not easily provide this.
What if you do not use Refinitiv? Your view limits to one ESG perspective. You miss the chance to build analytical models that fit your strategy precisely. Your institution seeks comprehensive raw data for its own deep analysis. Or it wants seamless ESG integration into existing trading or risk management systems. Refinitiv gives you the platform and tools for this. This might require a larger investment in internal analytical resources. This ensures you get the most from this large data.
Bloomberg ESG: Immediate Intelligence and Integrated Analytics
Why choose Bloomberg? Institutional investors rely heavily on the Bloomberg Terminal for all market information. Integrating ESG data within this platform offers a huge advantage. Bloomberg does not just offer ESG scores. It also provides a wide range of raw data, immediate news coverage, and advanced analytics. All are available in one place. This integration provides operational efficiency and real-time insights.
How does their hidden competitive edge work? Bloomberg's hidden advantage is its ability to link ESG data immediately with traditional financial data and market news. You see how a company's ESG score reacts to its stock performance after a news announcement. Or you see how an environmental policy change impacts credit risk assessment. This allows dynamic, integrated analysis. It is essential for quick decision-makers in volatile markets. They also gather data from diverse sources. This includes AI for news analysis. This adds another layer of depth.
Refinitiv and Bloomberg offer strong solutions. They differ from pure rating providers. They empower you to integrate ESG into your core financial operations. ESG becomes an integral part of investment decision-making, not just an external factor.
A Secret: The Customization Versus Standardization Trap!
Full data customization appears attractive. Remember, standardized criteria allow comparison. Seek balance. Customize what your investment needs require. But keep a framework that allows measurement and comparison across companies and sectors.
What Are Common Mistakes in Interpreting ESG Scores? How Do You Avoid Them?
Interpreting ESG scores remains a big challenge. This is true even with the best institutional ESG data providers. It requires deep understanding and knowledge of common pitfalls. Making these mistakes leads to wrong investment decisions. You miss opportunities. You even face unexpected risks. Let us explore these mistakes. We give you strategies to avoid them.
Why do we make mistakes? It often comes from a desire to simplify. Or from over-reliance on one number, the overall score. Or from failing to understand the data's underlying context. Human cognitive biases play a big role. One is confirmation bias. We seek information that confirms our existing beliefs. We ignore what contradicts them.
Mistake One: Focusing Only on the Overall Score.
Why is it a mistake? The overall ESG score is a weighted average of many underlying metrics. A company gets a high overall score. This happens because it excels in the environmental (E) dimension. But it struggles with serious weaknesses in governance (G) or social (S) aspects. Your investment strategy focuses on governance. Relying on the overall score misleads you.
How do you avoid it? Go to the details. Analyze sub-scores for each dimension (E, S, G) separately. Look at the most important metrics for you within each dimension. Use provider data that offers this detail. Avoid providers who offer only a 'black box'.
Mistake Two: Ignoring the Importance of Materiality.
Why is it a mistake? Not all ESG issues matter equally to all companies or sectors. For instance, water management matters much more for a beverage company than a software company. You assess all companies with the same set of metrics. You might miss real risks. Or you overestimate others that do not matter.
How do you avoid it? Use a Materiality Matrix. Many providers offer industry-specific materiality analysis. Understand which ESG issues matter most for the sectors you invest in. Focus your analysis on them. This ensures you focus on what truly impacts financial value.
Mistake Three: Not Understanding Provider Methodology and Underlying Biases.
Why is it a mistake? As stated, methodologies differ greatly among providers. A company gets a high score from MSCI. This happens because it manages financial risks effectively. But it gets a low score from Sustainalytics due to involvement in controversial issues. If you do not understand the provider's philosophy, you misinterpret the scores.
How do you avoid it? Read the methodological documents carefully. Do not take scores as absolute facts. See them as informed opinions. They base these opinions on specific assumptions and criteria. Use several providers for a broader perspective. Or at least understand the similarities and differences among the providers you use.
Mistake Four: Falling into the 'Greenwashing' Trap.
Why is it a mistake? Some companies give exaggerated or inaccurate ESG disclosures. They do this to attract 'green' investors. You rely only on self-reported data without independent audit. You fall victim to these practices.
How do you avoid it? Seek audited and verified data. Rely on providers with strong processes. They gather data from multiple, reliable sources. These include third-party reports, media, and NGOs. They do not just use company reports. Always be skeptical of claims that sound too good to be true.
Interpreting ESG data is not just a technical process. It also requires critical thinking and bias awareness. Understanding these common mistakes and how to avoid them empowers you. You will gain more accurate and valuable insights from institutional ESG data.
A Secret: Integrate ESG into Your Investment Thesis!
ESG data is not an extra 'layer'. Integrate it deeply into investment decision-making. This spans from initial research and asset selection to portfolio monitoring and risk management. Consider how this data changes return and risk dynamics.
| Category | Data Point Examples | Why Is It Important for Investors? | Potential Challenges |
|---|---|---|---|
| Environmental (E) | Carbon emissions, water consumption, waste management, renewable energy | Assess regulatory and material risks, innovation opportunities, environmental compliance | Hard to standardize measurement, reliance on self-disclosures, long-term impacts |
| Social (S) | Employee treatment, product safety, human rights, community relations | Impacts company reputation, litigation risks, talent attraction, customer loyalty | Subjectivity in assessment, varying cultural norms, hard to track globally |
| Governance (G) | Board independence, executive compensation, shareholder rights, anti-corruption | Ensures effective, responsible management, reduces fraud risks, protects shareholder interests | Legal complexity, varying practices across countries, unseen impacts |
How Do You Build a Strong Framework to Choose an ESG Data Provider?
We reviewed institutional ESG data. We examined leading providers and interpretation mistakes. Now, make an action plan. Building a strong framework to choose an ESG data provider is a strategic process. It goes beyond comparing prices or features. It requires deep understanding of your institution's needs and long-term goals.
Why do you need a framework? Choosing the wrong provider costs you valuable time and financial resources. It leads to sub-optimal investment decisions. A framework ensures you make an informed decision. You base it on clear, measurable criteria. This happens instead of relying on first impressions or unsupported recommendations.
Step One: Clearly Define Your Needs and Goals.
How? Before searching for providers, sit with your team. Precisely define your ESG integration goals. Is it risk management? Improving returns? Regulatory compliance? Building sustainable portfolios? Defining these goals helps narrow your search. For example, your main goal is managing regulatory and financial risks. A provider focusing on financial materiality, like MSCI, fits better. If your goal is impact investing, you need a provider focused on social and environmental impact metrics.
What if you ignore this step? You start your search without direction. You risk choosing a provider that does not meet your core needs. Or you buy features you do not use. This adds costs without value.
Step Two: Evaluate Methodologies and Transparency.
How? Ask for detailed methodology documents from potential providers. Do not settle for marketing summaries. Look for clarity in how they collect, process, normalize data. Understand how they build final scores. Ask how they handle missing data, data review, and external verification sources. Transparency here is not a luxury. It is essential for your trust in the data.
What if you fail to evaluate? You rely on a 'black box' of data. You do not understand how it works. This raises bias risks. It removes your ability to defend investment decisions to shareholders or regulators.
Step Three: Assess Data Quality and Coverage.
How? Check the provider's coverage depth and breadth. How many companies do they cover? Do they cover all sectors and regions where you invest? Is the data updated regularly? Request data samples. Test them against your current investment portfolios. Ask about the completeness of their historical data. Historical data is often essential for quantitative analysis and model building.
What if coverage is insufficient? You use multiple sources. This adds complexity and cost. Or parts of your portfolio lack enough ESG analysis. This exposes them to undetected risks.
Step Four: Consider Integration and Customization Options.
How? Does the provider's data integrate easily into your existing portfolio management systems? Do they offer strong APIs? Are there options to customize metrics and reports for your unique needs? Seamless integration reduces operational burden. It increases data use efficiency.
What if integration is hard? You face big operational challenges. You have data processing delays. You lose some ESG data value because you do not use it effectively in daily workflows.
Step Five: Understand Pricing Structure and Customer Service.
How? Ask for full pricing details. Include hidden costs. Is it an annual subscription fee? Does it vary based on the number of companies or assets under management? Assess technical support and customer service quality, especially for institutions. A good support partner makes a big difference. This applies when you face issues or need analytical help.
What if you do not understand pricing? You discover unexpected costs later. Or you find the service does not fit your long-term budget. Weak customer service hinders your ability to use data effectively.
Choosing an ESG data provider is a long-term investment. Follow a structured, systematic framework. This ensures you choose the right partner. This partner supports both your investment and sustainability goals.
A Secret: The Future of AI in ESG Data!
The field moves towards using AI and machine learning. This processes vast amounts of unstructured data. Examples include news, social media, and company reports. Be ready for this change. It provides deeper, faster insights. But it also requires new understanding of biases and algorithms.
| Service Scope | Approximate Cost (Annually) | Customization Level | Suitable For |
|---|---|---|---|
| Basic Reports (Summarized) | Low (Thousands of Dollars) | Very limited | Individual investors, small startups |
| Standard Subscription (Full Platform) | Medium (Tens of Thousands of Dollars) | Medium (metric selection, basic filters) | Mid-sized asset managers, specific investment funds |
| Institutional Services (Deep Analysis) | High (Hundreds of Thousands of Dollars) | High (custom models, raw data, consulting) | Hedge funds, investment banks, sovereign wealth funds |
| Integrated Solutions (API, Integration) | Very high (Millions of Dollars) | Very high (direct client system integration, AI tools) | Large financial institutions, FinTech companies, index providers |
Risks, trade-offs, and blind spots
No investment tool is risk-free or without limits. Institutional ESG data is no exception. It offers great value. Still, many risks, trade-offs, and blind spots exist. Institutional investors must clearly recognize these. This ensures truly informed decisions.
Bias Risks in Data and Methodologies: Bias presents one of the biggest challenges. Each data provider has a specific methodology. These methods often reflect certain perspectives and values. This leads to big differences in how providers rate the same company. For example, one provider focuses on carbon emissions. Another focuses on worker rights in supply chains. The blind spot here is assuming an 'ESG score' is a universal objective truth. It is an interpretation. It bases this interpretation on a set of criteria and assumptions. The trade-off is choosing a provider whose methodological biases align with your investment goals. Be aware you might miss other aspects.
Challenge of Unstandardized Data and Self-Reported Disclosures: Standardization of ESG disclosure remains a global challenge. This is true despite progress. Many provider data points rely on company self-disclosures. These can be incomplete, conflicting, or even biased (greenwashing). They aim to paint a positive picture. The risk is this data might not reflect a company's actual practices. The trade-off here is between wide coverage and thorough scrutiny. Deeper scrutiny often requires more resources. It limits coverage scope. The blind spot is failing to integrate independent verification from multiple sources.
Limitations of Historical Data and Future Prediction: Most ESG data tends to be historical. It reflects a company's past performance. This is useful. Sustainable investment requires forward-looking insights. You need to know how a company manages future risks and opportunities. The risk is over-reliance on historical data. You use it to assess rapidly evolving future risks. These include climate change or social shifts. The trade-off is balancing available data with qualitative analysis of a company's future path. The blind spot is neglecting the power of scenario analysis and qualitative assessment of company management.
The Problem of Changing Materiality: What matters for one sector does not always matter for another. Importance shifts over time. This happens even within the same sector. Standards and societal expectations evolve. The risk lies in using a fixed set of materiality metrics for every investment. This leads to misjudging risks or opportunities. The trade-off is between simplifying analysis and customizing it for each case. The blind spot is not regularly reviewing your materiality matrix.
Costs and Operational Complexity: Getting high-quality institutional ESG data is not free. It often requires significant investment in subscriptions. It also needs human and technical resources for analysis and integration. The risk is that costs exceed benefits, especially for smaller institutions. The trade-off lies in finding the optimal point. This is between cost and the analytical depth you can afford and use. The blind spot is ignoring indirect costs of data integration and maintenance.
Reliance on Technology and Cyber Risks: ESG data collection and processing increasingly rely on complex technologies and AI. This brings new security and cyber risks related to data protection. It also carries algorithmic bias risks if models are not designed carefully. The trade-off here is between technical efficiency and security. The blind spot is neglecting security audits of the provider's operations and how they protect your data.
Institutional ESG data is essential. However, working with it requires a critical approach. You need constant awareness of its limits and inherent risks. Success comes from deeply understanding these limitations. Develop strategies to reduce their impact.
What this means for you
What does all this mean for you, an institutional investor, asset manager, or financial analyst? Simply put, investing today is no longer just a financial numbers game. It is an art and science. It merges economic thinking with environmental, social, and governance awareness. Deep understanding of institutional ESG data and choosing the right provider is key. It helps you avoid risks. It also achieves sustainable, superior returns.
Power of Informed Decision-Making: You understand the fine differences among providers. You know their methods and how to interpret scores. You gain the ability to make smarter, more confident investment decisions. You will not fall prey to superficial claims or 'greenwashing'. You will see true value and hidden risks.
Build Resilient, Future-Ready Investment Portfolios: This understanding enables you to build portfolios. They align with your institution's values. They are also more resilient to future challenges. These challenges include climate change, regulatory shifts, and social transitions. You invest not just in the present, but in a more sustainable future.
Enhance Investor Reputation and Trust: Today, shareholders and clients expect financial institutions to take social and environmental responsibility seriously. You explain your method for choosing ESG data providers. You show how you integrate this data into your strategy. You boost transparency and build trust. This benefits your institution's long-term reputation.
Achieve Improved Financial Returns: Studies increasingly show companies with strong ESG performance achieve better financial results long-term. Choose the right provider. Interpret data smartly. You identify these companies and seize growth opportunities. You also reduce non-financial risks that negatively impact returns.
Finally, it is not just about compliance or 'doing the right thing'. It is about using data and insights. This opens new growth avenues, reduces risks, and builds a brighter financial future for you and your institution. Armed with this knowledge, you are ready to lead in sustainable investment.
Main points
- Institutional ESG data goes beyond surface-level data. It focuses on strong methodology, transparency, and comprehensive company coverage.
- Main provider methodologies differ significantly. MSCI focuses on financial risks. Sustainalytics focuses on unmanaged risks.
- Refinitiv and Bloomberg offer a competitive edge. They integrate ESG data with broader financial market tools and analytics.
- Avoid common mistakes in interpreting ESG scores. Do not focus on the overall score. Do not ignore materiality. Understand provider methodological biases.
- Building a provider selection framework requires clear goal definition, methodology assessment, data quality, integration capabilities, and pricing structures.
- ESG data has risks. These include methodological biases, standardization challenges, prediction limits, and operational costs.
- Deep understanding of ESG data empowers you. You make informed investment decisions. You build resilient portfolios. You enhance reputation. You achieve improved financial returns.
- AI and machine learning transform ESG data analysis. They provide deeper insights. They require new understanding of biases and algorithms.
- Invest your time. Understand the fine details behind the numbers. Real value lies there.
Are you ready to turn ESG challenges into great investment opportunities? Start your path to excellence today!
![Author](data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/svg" width="240" height="240" viewBox="0 0 240 240" role="img" aria-label="Default profile avatar"%3E%3Cdefs%3E%3ClinearGradient id="g" x1="0" x2="1" y1="0" y2="1"%3E%3Cstop offset="0" stop-color="%236db3f2"/%3E%3Cstop offset="1" stop-color="%234a90e2"/%3E%3C/linearGradient%3E%3Cfilter id="soft" x="-50%25" y="-50%25" width="200%25" height="200%25"%3E%3CfeDropShadow dx="0" dy="6" stdDeviation="12" flood-opacity="0.12"/%3E%3C/filter%3E%3C/defs%3E%3Cg transform="translate(120,120)"%3E%3Ccircle r="108" fill="url(%23g)" filter="url(%23soft)"/%3E%3Ccircle r="88" fill="rgba(255,255,255,0.06)"/%3E%3C/g%3E%3Cg transform="translate(120,120)"%3E%3Ccircle cx="0" cy="-24" r="28" fill="%23ffffff" fill-opacity="0.95"/%3E%3Cpath d="M-56,64 C-56,36 -36,16 0,16 C36,16 56,36 56,64 L56,76 C56,88 44,100 0,100 C-44,100 -56,88 -56,76 Z" fill="%23ffffff" fill-opacity="0.95"/%3E%3Cellipse cx="0" cy="72" rx="52" ry="12" fill="%23000" opacity="0.04"/%3E%3C/g%3E%3C/svg%3E){kind=avatar}