Get the right experience for you. Please select your location and investor type.
Investing in healthcare: understanding practices and disclosures on animal testing
Can it ever be ethical to inflict pain on animals? If so, under what circumstances? What if their suffering helps to discover a drug with the potential to save or transform millions of lives? What if testing an experimental drug or procedure on one group of animals helps to develop a treatment that will spare countless other animals from suffering? And, where there are viable alternatives, to what lengths should companies go to use them?
These are emotive questions. Their answers, however, carry practical implications for companies – particularly those in the healthcare and personal care sectors – and for their shareholders. Many healthcare companies are directly aligned with Stewart Investors’ desire to invest in companies that contribute to human development. As a result, our portfolios have historically had a significant degree of exposure to this part of the market. At the same time, we are conscious that animal testing remains widespread across the healthcare sector.
Our policy on animal testing is clear but we have encountered a lack of transparency on a company level
We have a clear policy of not investing in companies with “material exposure to harmful or controversial products, services or practices.” And while reasonable opinions may differ as to when animal testing is necessary and when it is not, it is clearly controversial. So we don’t invest in companies that are involved in animal testing other than under the following circumstances:
- Where testing is done in accordance with ethical principles, policies, protocols and standards for the responsible treatment and welfare of animals.
- Where animal testing is required by regulatory agencies to limit the risk to human lives and health.
- Where products require ingredients for which no suitable alternative testing methods are available.
Companies that we invest in comply with that policy. At the same time, we were conscious that we lack insight into precisely where they could be doing better. A lack of public disclosure makes it difficult to find hard facts on this emotive topic. That, in turn, made it challenging for us to answer questions such as:
- How many animals do our companies – and their suppliers – test their products on?
- What are the alternatives to animal testing? And what is preventing their adoption?
- Which companies are leading the adoption of alternatives to animal testing?
- Which companies are the laggards?
- What role do regulators play and what role should they play? Are they impeding change or fostering it?
Initially, we tried to answer these questions for ourselves, talking to companies about their policies in this area and liaising with industry bodies to understand the bigger picture. Finding it hard to gain the level of insight that we wanted, we published a research tender, eventually selecting the University of Technology Sydney’s Institute for Sustainable Futures (ISF) to deepen our understanding and answer our questions. That initiated a process that we hope will ultimately assist us – and other investors – to compare different companies’ approaches to animal testing and to measure the progress they are making towards the use of alternatives.
What the research tells us about animal testing – and what we still don’t know
Through 2024, the researchers dug into this topic while also posing specific questions to a shortlist of 21 companies whose policies and practices in this area are of particular interest to us. The two outputs from this process have now been published.
The first item is a research report1 summarising the current policies and practices relating to animal testing and setting out the alternatives. We want to invest in companies that are on the right side of change and animal testing is an area in which change is happening, albeit fitfully. New approaches highlighted by the report include:
- ‘In silico’ methods, such as computer modelling and simulations.
- In vitro techniques using cells, tissues, organoids (or organs on chips), imaging, biochemical analysis and gene profiling .
- Other approaches such as using human research subjects, subjecting existing trials data to meta-analysis and using artificial intelligence (AI).
Attempts at a governmental level to reduce animal testing seem likely to promote these alternative approaches. So, change is coming, but as the report shows, a lack of public reporting makes it difficult to say which companies are best placed to benefit from it.
Key findings:
- There is a lack of transparency in publicly available information around the use of research animals.
- The majority of companies failed to provide information on the numbers of animals they use and provided no details about their plans for developing or using non-animal approaches.
- There is, at present, limited engagement between companies and regulators to encourage greater use of non-animal testing methods.
- Many companies outsource testing to external contract research organisations (CROs), complicating the task of assessing their practices.
- None of the companies they questioned provided targets for implementing non-animal approaches or reducing their use of animals.
This suggests there is little incentive for companies to actively engage with the issue, with many citing regulatory requirements as a key barrier.
So what comes next? The second output is an investor guide1. This highlights approaches investors may want to prioritise when engaging with companies about their animal-testing practices, such as:
- Encouraging transparency – suggesting companies could do more to showcase their efforts in promoting the ‘3Rs’: replacement, reduction and refinement.
- Promoting supply-chain disclosure – asking companies to disclose the animal-use policies of their subsidiaries and subcontractors.
- Encouraging companies to set time-bound targets for shifting to non-animal testing (where regulations allow) and training employees on alternative testing methods.
- Emphasising that animal testing can influence investment decision-making.
In some ways, the lack of disclosure highlighted by this research is disappointing. This will not, however, discourage us from continuing to engage with companies on this topic. As we have seen in other areas, those companies that can position themselves to anticipate and embrace change often derive material and lasting advantages. These are the companies that we want to invest in on behalf of our clients.
Lorna Logan
June 2025
Subscribe to our updates
To get regular updates and content from Stewart Investors, please register here.
Important Information
This material is a financial promotion / marketing communication but is for general information purposes only. It does not constitute investment or financial advice and does not take into account any specific investment objectives, financial situation or needs. This is not an offer to provide asset management services, is not a recommendation or an offer or solicitation to buy, hold or sell any security or to execute any agreement for portfolio management or investment advisory services and this material has not been prepared in connection with any such offer. Before making any investment decision you should conduct your own due diligence and consider your individual investment needs, objectives and financial situation and read the relevant offering documents for details including the risk factors disclosure.
Any person who acts upon, or changes their investment position in reliance on, the information contained in these materials does so entirely at their own risk.
We have taken reasonable care to ensure that this material is accurate, current, and complete and fit for its intended purpose and audience as at the date of publication. No assurance is given or liability accepted regarding the accuracy, validity or completeness of this material.
To the extent this material contains any expression of opinion or forward-looking statements, such opinions and statements are based on assumptions, matters and sources believed to be true and reliable at the time of publication only. This material reflects the views of the individual writers only. Those views may change, may not prove to be valid and may not reflect the views of everyone at First Sentier Group.
Past performance is not indicative of future performance. All investment involves risks and the value of investments and the income from them may go down as well as up and you may not get back your original investment. Actual outcomes or results may differ materially from those discussed. Readers must not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements as there is no certainty that conditions current at the time of publication will continue.
References to specific securities (if any) are included for the purpose of illustration only and should not be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell the same. Any securities referenced may or may not form part of the holdings of First Sentier Group portfolios at a certain point in time, and the holdings may change over time.
References to comparative benchmarks or indices (if any) are for illustrative and comparison purposes only, may not be available for direct investment, are unmanaged, assume reinvestment of income, and have limitations when used for comparison or other purposes because they may have volatility, credit, or other material characteristics (such as number and types of securities) that are different from the funds managed by First Sentier Group.
Selling restrictions
Not all First Sentier Group products are available in all jurisdictions.
This material is neither directed at nor intended to be accessed by persons resident in, or citizens of any country, or types or categories of individual where to allow such access would be unlawful or where it would require any registration, filing, application for any licence or approval or other steps to be taken by First Sentier Group in order to comply with local laws or regulatory requirements in such country.
About First Sentier Group
References to ‘we’, ‘us’ or ‘our’ are references to First Sentier Group, a global asset management business which is ultimately owned by Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group (MUFG). Certain of our investment teams operate under the trading names AlbaCore Capital Group, First Sentier Investors, FSSA Investment Managers, Stewart Investors and RQI Investors all of which are part of the First Sentier Group. RQI branded strategies, investment products and services are not available in Germany.
This material may not be copied or reproduced in whole or in part, and in any form or by any means circulated without the prior written consent of First Sentier Group.
We communicate and conduct business through different legal entities in different locations. This material is communicated in:
- Australia and New Zealand by First Sentier Investors (Australia) IM Ltd, authorised and regulated in Australia by the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (AFSL 289017; ABN 89 114 194311)
- European Economic Area by First Sentier Investors (Ireland) Limited, authorised and regulated in
- Ireland by the Central Bank of Ireland (CBI reg no. C182306; reg office 70 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Dublin 2, Ireland; reg company no. 629188)
- Hong Kong by First Sentier Investors (Hong Kong) Limited and has not been reviewed by the Securities & Futures Commission in Hong Kong. First Sentier Group, First Sentier Investors, FSSA Investment Managers, Stewart Investors, RQI Investors and Igneo Infrastructure Partners are the business names of First Sentier Investors (Hong Kong) Limited.
- Singapore by First Sentier Investors (Singapore) (reg company no. 196900420D) and this advertisement or material has not been reviewed by the Monetary Authority of Singapore. First Sentier Group (registration number 53507290B), First Sentier Investors (registration number 53236800B), FSSA Investment Managers (registration number 53314080C), Stewart Investors (registration number 53310114W), RQI Investors (registration number 53472532E) and Igneo Infrastructure Partners (registration number 53447928J) are the business names of First Sentier Investors (Singapore).
- United Kingdom by First Sentier Investors (UK) Funds Limited, authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (reg. no. 2294743; reg office Finsbury Circus House, 15 Finsbury Circus, London EC2M 7EB)
- United States by First Sentier Investors (US) LLC, registered with the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC# 801-93167).
- other jurisdictions, where this document may lawfully be issued, by First Sentier Investors International IM Limited, authorised and regulated in the UK by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA ref no. 122512; Registered office: 23 St. Andrew Square, Edinburgh, EH2 1BB; Company no. SC079063).
To the extent permitted by law, MUFG and its subsidiaries are not liable for any loss or damage as a result of reliance on any statement or information contained in this document. Neither MUFG nor any of its subsidiaries guarantee the performance of any investment products referred to in this document or the repayment of capital. Any investments referred to are not deposits or other liabilities of MUFG or its subsidiaries, and are subject to investment risk, including loss of income and capital invested.
© First Sentier Group
