<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>The Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance</title>
	<atom:link href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/02/16/us-proxy-voting-trends-2025-in-review/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu</link>
	<description>The leading online blog in the fields of corporate governance and financial regulation.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2026 11:30:48 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.5.8</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>US Proxy-Voting Trends: 2025 in Review</title>
		<link>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/02/16/us-proxy-voting-trends-2025-in-review/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=us-proxy-voting-trends-2025-in-review</link>
		<comments>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/02/16/us-proxy-voting-trends-2025-in-review/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2026 12:32:46 +0000</pubDate>
<!-- 		<dc:creator><![CDATA[]]></dc:creator> -->
				<category><![CDATA[Practitioner Publications]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Asset Managers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Corporate governance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shareholder resolutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Shareholders]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/?p=179140?d=20260213171840EST</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Key Observations We analyzed proxy-voting records of 50 of the largest US managers of equity and allocation funds for companies in the Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Index over the 2023, 2024, and 2025 proxy years. We also assessed votes by eight European asset managers and 601 US sustainable funds. There was a slight increase in [&#8230;]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<hgroup><em>Posted by Lindsey Stewart, Morningstar, Inc., on Monday, February 16, 2026 </em><div class='e_n' style='background:#F8F8F8;padding:10px;margin-top:5px;margin-bottom:10px;text-indent:2.5em;'><strong style='margin-left:-2.5em;'>Editor's Note: </strong> <p style="margin:0; display:inline;"><a href="https://www.morningstar.com/people/lindsey-stewart" target="_blank" rel="nofollow noopener">Lindsey Stewart</a> is the Director of Investment Stewardship Research at Morningstar, Inc. This post is based on his Morningstar report.</p>
</div></hgroup><h2>Key Observations</h2>
<ul>
<li>We analyzed proxy-voting records of 50 of the largest US managers of equity and allocation funds for companies in the Morningstar US Large-Mid Cap Index over the 2023, 2024, and 2025 proxy years. We also assessed votes by eight European asset managers and 601 US sustainable funds.</li>
<li>There was a slight increase in shareholder support for management resolutions: Average support rose to 95.6% in 2025, from 95.0% in 2024 and 95.1% in 2023.</li>
<li>Average support for shareholder resolutions on governance remained steady at around 30%.</li>
<li>Meanwhile, average support for environmental and social, or E&amp;S, shareholder resolutions fell from 18.8% in the 2023 proxy year to 11.6% in 2025.</li>
<li>Votes by the top 10 US managers of equity and allocation fund assets were more supportive of management compared with the other 40 US firms.</li>
<li>The top 10 comprises the Big Three index managers— BlackRock, State Street, and Vanguard—alongside Capital Group, Dimensional, Fidelity (including funds subadvised by Geode), Invesco, J.P. Morgan, Schwab, and T. Rowe Price.</li>
<li>These firms showed above-market-average support for management resolutions and below-marketaverage support for shareholder resolutions every year. The reverse is true for the next 40 US firms.</li>
<li>Voting decisions by US sustainable funds showed much lower support for management resolutions and much higher support for E&amp;S shareholder resolutions compared with the US firms overall.</li>
<li>European firms dissented from the management view more often than any of the US peer groups, reflecting a transatlantic gap in voting patterns.</li>
</ul>
<p> <a href="https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/02/16/us-proxy-voting-trends-2025-in-review/#more-179140" class="more-link"><span aria-label="Continue reading US Proxy-Voting Trends: 2025 in Review">(more&hellip;)</span></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2026/02/16/us-proxy-voting-trends-2025-in-review/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
