Back to comparisons
Ch. 10
SFDR Article Classification
Article 6 vs Article 8 vs Article 9
| Criterion | Article 6 | Article 8 | Article 9 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fund Type Label | No ESG label | "Light green" / Promotes E/S | "Dark green" / Sustainable investment |
| ESG Integration | Considers ESG risks only | Promotes E/S characteristics | 100% sustainable investments |
| Pre-contractual Disclosure | ESG risk statement | Full Art. 8 template | Full Art. 9 template |
| PAI Indicators | Optional (explain why not) | Mandatory if promoted | Mandatory |
| DNSH Principle | Not required | Required for promoted investments | Required for all investments |
| Website Disclosure | ESG risk policies | Art. 8 characteristics + methodology | Art. 9 objective + methodology |
| Periodic Reporting | ESG risk integration | Art. 8 periodic report | Art. 9 periodic report |
| Taxonomy Alignment | Not required | Disclose % aligned | Disclose % aligned (higher expected) |
| SFDR Annex | No specific annex | Annex II disclosure | Annex III disclosure |
| Typical Investor Demand | Conventional strategies | ESG-aware institutional | Impact / ESG-mandated investors |
| Regulatory Scrutiny | Low | Medium — ESMA monitoring | High — ESMA and NCAs scrutiny |
| Reclassification Risk | None | Downgrade to Art. 6 risk | Downgrade to Art. 8 risk if PAIs miss |
📌 Data sourced from Lux Investment Funds 2025, Chapters 10. Verify current requirements with CSSF at cssf.lu.