XIANGCAI received a Wind ESG CCC rating, with a comprehensive score of 3.88
I'm LongbridgeAI, I can summarize articles.XIANGCAI received a Wind ESG CCC rating, with a comprehensive score of 3.88, which is below the industry average and ranks last. Compared to the previous period, its comprehensive score decreased by 1.06 points, mainly due to declines in the environmental and social dimensions, with the social dimension dropping by 1.46 points. Although there was an improvement in the governance dimension, the company has shortcomings in areas such as climate change quantitative disclosure, research and innovation, and information security, resulting in poor overall rating performance
According to Tongbi Finance, on May 29, 2026, Xiangcai Co., Ltd. (stock abbreviation: Xiangcai Co., Ltd., code: 600095.SH) received a latest Wind ESG rating of CCC. The company's overall score is 3.88, below the capital market industry average of 6.18 points. It ranks 136th among 136 companies in the capital market industry, placing it at the bottom of the industry. The scores for the environmental, social, and governance dimensions are 0.04, 0.87, and 5.01, respectively.
Compared to the previous rating, the overall score has decreased from 4.94 to 3.88, a drop of 1.06 points. The contribution from management practices decreased from 1.95 to 1.39, a decline of 0.56 points; the contribution from controversy events decreased from 2.99 to 2.49, a drop of 0.50 points. In terms of dimensions, the environmental dimension decreased by 0.07 points, the social dimension decreased by 1.46 points, and the governance dimension increased by 0.56 points.
Rating Observation
In the environmental dimension, the company has shown a positive response to the national "dual carbon" strategy in climate change management, but the disclosed content mainly focuses on goals and planning, lacking support from specific quantitative data. The company mentioned supporting the issuance of green corporate bonds and promoting the precise flow of green financial resources to green fields. However, key indicators such as greenhouse gas emissions, carbon neutrality certification, and risk quantification analysis have not been disclosed, making it difficult to comprehensively assess its actual management capabilities on climate change issues. Additionally, the scope and depth of information disclosure in the sustainable finance field are insufficient, with no specific content on relevant key indicators.
In the social dimension, the company has formed a relatively clear signal chain in employee compensation management, research and innovation, and community public welfare actions. The company regulates its compensation policy through multiple management measures and has set up employee directors on the board, reflecting a certain degree of democratic management mechanism. The average employee compensation is 356,700 yuan, with an average revenue per employee of 1,027,800 yuan. In terms of research and development, the investment amount is 120,600 yuan, accounting for only 0.005% of revenue, with a total of 10 effective patents, indicating relatively limited research and development scale and results. In community public welfare, the company and its subsidiaries have invested a total of 4.65 million yuan, covering diversified actions such as industrial assistance and public welfare assistance, and have established paired assistance relationships with multiple counties in Hunan Province. However, disclosures in areas such as information security and privacy protection, customer management, and details on employee turnover rates and diversity management are still lacking.
In the governance dimension, the company performs relatively well in board independence and audit committee professionalism. The proportion of independent directors on the board is 33.33%, with an attendance rate of 100%, and no director's attendance rate is below 75%. The proportion of independent directors on the audit committee is 66.67%, with the chair being an independent non-executive director and the convener being a professional accountant. The internal control audit received a standard unqualified opinion. However, the arrangement of the CEO also serving as the chairman may pose certain challenges to the checks and balances mechanism, and the overlap of compensation committee members with executive members may affect the independence of compensation decisions. Additionally, there is still significant room for improvement in the disclosure of information regarding ESG governance structure, compensation linkage mechanisms, and anti-corruption management systems Content generated by AI on May 29, 2026, please verify important information
