Agefi Luxembourg - octobre 2026

AGEFI Luxembourg 30 Octobre 2026 Marchés &Wealth N ew requirements in the financial sector are res­ haping the role of Internal Audit. ESG is moving rapidly from the margins of regulatory reporting into the core of risk management, stra­ tegy and governance. The European Banking Authority (EBA) Guidelines on the mana­ gement of ESG risks and the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) are expanding the range of risks and processes that inter­ nal auditors may need to consi­ der within their riskbased audit plans. Responding to these new demands requires new skills, more integrated audit procedures and an effec­ tive use of technology. EBAGuidelines place the third line at the center of ESG risk oversight For financial institutions, ESG is no longer only about the information that reaches the published report. It is also about how risks are identified, man­ aged and monitored across the organ­ ization. The European Banking Authority guidelines require institu­ tions to embed ESG risks in their reg­ ular risk management arrange­ ments. (1) As the third line of defense, the Internal Audit function therefore plays an important role in independ­ ently assessing the quality and effec­ tiveness of the overall internal control framework for ESG risks. This includes assessing the arrange­ ments established by the first and second lines of defense, as well as the broader ESG risk governance frame­ work. Although the EBA Guidelines apply to financial institutions within their scope, comparable ESG gover­ nance and control challenges also arise for asset managers, investment firms, insurers and other organiza­ tions subject to sustainabilityrelated requirements. Challenging the transition plan as a management framework A central part of that challenge is the prudential transition plan. It sets out how a financial institution intends to manage ESG risks over the short, mediumand longterm by linking its risk assessment and strategic choices to concrete actions. (2) This makes it a particularly important area for the third line of defense. Internal Audit can assess whether the plan establishes clear responsibilities andwhether its implementation is sup­ ported by credible milestones, measur­ able indicators and escalationprocesses. The key question is whether the insti­ tution has turned its objectives into an executable program. Each action should have clear ownership and a measurable outcome, sufficient to allow management to track delivery and intervene when progress falls behind. Aplanwithout credible imple­ mentation arrangements provides lit­ tle confidence that the institution can manage transition risk effectively. Assessing these elements can be highly resource intensive. The evi­ dence often sits across multiple sys­ tems and functions, while key assumptions may be documented separately from the decisions they support. Internal Audit must follow that evidence from the initial risk assessment through implementation and subsequent monitoring, check­ ing at each stage that the rationale remains traceable and the controls operate as intended. Technology as an enabler of ESG internal audit The volume of ESG data, documenta­ tion and regulatory requirements is growing faster than traditional audit methods can readily accommodate. For Internal Audit, this makes it increasingly difficult to review a broad evidence base without placing signifi­ cant demands on time and resources. Technology offers a way to expand Internal Audit’s capacity and reach while keeping its work focused on the risks that matter most. Tools like ad­ vanced data analytics can widen the scope of testing, identify anomalies and improve the traceability of infor­ mation across processes. Artificial in­ telligence, meanwhile, can assist with benchmarking, document reviews and the analysis of large evidence set. Used effectively, these tools can give auditors a clearer view across a frag­ mented evidence base, helping them identify where inconsistencies, gaps or unusual patterns warrant closer examination. CSRD: beyond the sustainability statement The Corporate Sustainability Report­ ing Directive (CSRD) is often ap­ proached primarily as a compliance and disclosure exercise, with attention focused on the contents of the sustain­ ability statement. In practice, that statement is only the visible output of a much wider ESG framework, bringing together strate­ gy, targets, governance, controls and data collection across Finance, Risk, Sustainability, HR, Compliance and IT. Mandatory external verification places greater expectations on the reporting process itself. Governance, decisions, data flows and review pro­ cedures must be robust and docu­ mented enough to withstand inde­ pendent scrutiny. (3) There are signs that organizations are learning from the first reporting cycles. EY’s CSRD Barometer 2026 records clearer narratives, more focused double materiality assess­ ments and improved data quality in the second year of reporting aligned with the European Sustainability Reporting Standards (ESRS). Yet it also identified uneven integra­ tion with business strategy and weaknesses in areas such as the financial basis of transition plans. (4) As the third line of defense, these are the areas where Internal Audit plays a significant oversight role. Much of the reporting process now relies on dedicated platforms. These tools can strengthen controls by assigning contributors and review­ ers, managing access, retaining evi­ dence and tracking changes. But hav­ ing a platform does not guarantee that the process works effectively. If formal approvals take place out­ side the system, for example by email or on paper, the control may still have been performed, but the audit trail becomes fragmented. The insti­ tution may then find it difficult to show that all required approvals were completed before publication. Internal Audit should therefore focus less on whether a reporting platform is in place and more on whether the overall reporting framework is reli­ able, controlled and traceable. Meeting these expectations requires Internal Audit to develop new skills, adopt new tools and rethink how it works. Build the right combination of skills Internal auditing in the ESG domain requires a combination of sound audit methodology and technical sus­ tainability knowledge. Internal audi­ tors typically focus on governance, risk, the design and effectiveness of controls in place and the supporting evidence. Sustainability specialists understand ESRS requirements, ma­ teriality, emissions methodologies and transition planning. Few Internal Audit functions have all the specialist expertise they need from the start. Institutions must therefore decide which capabilities to develop internally, what level of external spe­ cialist support they require and whether that support should be pro­ vided through a cosourcing arrange­ ment or as part of a fully outsourced Internal Audit model. Where an Internal Audit function is already in place, cosourcing can be particularly useful for a first CSRD audit. The Internal Audit function retains responsibility for the engage­ ment and its conclusions, thereby safeguarding its independence and ownership of the audit process, while external specialists provide targeted expertise or additional capacity in areas such as regulatory require­ ments, testing and methodology. The depth of this support can be adapted to the Internal Audit func­ tion’s existing capabilities and needs. This approach can also strengthen the internal team’s knowledge and help establish an audit program that can be reused in future cycles. Full outsourcing may be more suitable for organizations that do not main­ tain a sufficiently resourced inhouse Internal Audit function. Under this model, an external provider performs the Internal Audit mandate, while the institution retains appropriate governance and oversight responsibilities, including approving the scope, reviewing and challenging the work performed, and monitoring remediation. Independence must also be protected, particularly where the external provider previously helped design the reporting process or the controls being audited. A profession in transformation CSRD and the EBA Guidelines are part of a broader transformation of the Internal Audit function. Periodic reviews and samplebased testing remain important, but they are not always enough to provide broad coverage or timely insight. At the same time, changing expecta­ tions, new technology and regulatory developments are prompting Internal Audit functions to reconsider how they work and where they focus their efforts. This means moving toward more continuous engagement, testing larger populations and providing insight while there is still time to act. Technology supports this shift. Data analytics and AI can help monitor risks, controls and transactions on a more continuous basis. By automat­ ing some routine tasks, they allow au­ ditors to spend more time applying judgment, challenging assumptions and advising the business. Technol­ ogy therefore does not reduce the role of Internal Audit. It allows the func­ tion to focus its expertise where it adds the most value. Atechnologyenabled operatingmodel should combine the right people, processes and tools so that Internal Audit’s work remains relevant as ex­ pectations around ESG and other risks continue to grow. (5) As ESG becomes more deeply embedded in governance, strategy and risk management, Inter­ nal Audit will need to continue adapt­ ing its capabilities and methodologies while preserving the independence, professional discernment, and con­ structive challenge that define its role as the third line of defense. Vanessa MÜLLER, Partner, ESG Lead, Banking and Capital Markets Consulting Lead Thierry GODART, Partner Internal Audit Services Anna ILLARIONOVA, Senior Manager, ESG Consulting EY Luxembourg 1) European Banking Authority, Guidelines on the management of environmental, social and gover­ nance(ESG)risks,EBA/GL/2025/01,paragraph59. 2) Transition plans are crucial to build resilient busi­ nesses|EYGlobal 3)ThreeLinesPositionPaperIIASept.2024Update 4)EYCSRDBarometer2026 5) Internal Audit Transformation services | EY Luxembourg Strengthening ESG Governance: Internal Audit’s expanding role as the Third Line of Defense DASHBOARD ȱȱ AGEFI ȱ Luxembourg ȱ 30 Ȭ Sep Ȭȱ 2026 ȱ 31 Ȭ Dec Ȭȱ 2025 ȱ DIFF ȱȱ % ȱ ȱ ȱȱ Dow ȱ 30 ȱ (DJI) ȱ 50.906,05 ȱ 48.063,29 ȱ 5,91% ȱ ȱ ȱ S&P ȱ 500 ȱ (GSPC) ȱ 7.651,54 ȱ 6.845,50 ȱ 11,77% ȱ ȱ ȱ Euro ȱ Stoxx ȱ 50 ȱ 6.269,02 ȱ 5.796,22 ȱ 8,16% ȱ ȱ ȱ DAX ȱ (GDAXI) ȱ 25.999,19 ȱ 24.490,41 ȱ 6,16% ȱ ȱ ȱ CAC ȱ 40 ȱ (FCHI) ȱ 7.964,51 ȱ 8.149,50 ȱ Ȭ 2,27% ȱ ȱ ȱ FTSE ȱ 100 ȱ (FTSE) ȱ 10.606,00 ȱ 9.931,40 ȱ 6,79% ȱ ȱ ȱ LuxX ȱ index ȱ 1.872,00 ȱ 1.795,46 ȱ 4,26% ȱ ȱ ȱ Nikkei ȱ 225 ȱ (N225) ȱ 66.753,72 ȱ 50.339,48 ȱ 32,61% ȱ ȱ ȱ Shanghai ȱ (SHCOMP) ȱ 3.842,20 ȱ 3.968,84 ȱ Ȭ 3,19% ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ US ȱ Fed ȱ Funds ȱ Rate ȱ 3,75% ȱ 3,72% ȱ 0,03% ȱ ȱ ȱ 3 ȱ Month ȱ US ȱ Treasury ȱ Rate ȱ 4,20% ȱ 3,67% ȱ 0,53% ȱ ȱ ȱ 5 ȱ Year ȱ US ȱ Treasury ȱ Rate ȱ 5,09% ȱ 3,73% ȱ 1,36% ȱ ȱ ȱ 10 ȱ Year ȱ US ȱ Treasury ȱ Rate ȱ 5,29% ȱ 4,18% ȱ 1,11% ȱ ȱ ȱ European ȱ Central ȱ Bank ȱ (ECB) ȱ Refinancing ȱ Rate ȱ 2,65% ȱ 2,15% ȱ 0,50% ȱ ȱ ȱ 5 Ȭ Year ȱ Eurozone ȱ Central ȱ Government ȱ Bond ȱ 3,62% ȱ 2,62% ȱ 1,00% ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Barrel ȱ (West ȱ Texas ȱ Intermediate) ȱ 0,5027 ȱ 0,3075 ȱ 63,51% ȱ ǧȱ West ȱ Texas ȱ Intermediate ȱ (prix ȱ en ȱ euro ȱ par ȱ litre) ȱ Natural ȱ gas: ȱ 1 ȱ m3= ȱ 0,0945 ȱ 0,1111 ȱ Ȭ 14,95% ȱ ǧȱ Natural ȱ Gas, ȱ Henry ȱ Hub Ȭ I ȱ (prix ȱ en ȱ euro ȱ par ȱ m3) ȱ Natural ȱ gas: ȱ 1MWh= ȱ 9,12 ȱ 10,72 ȱ Ȭ 14,95% ȱ ǧȱ Natural ȱ Gas, ȱ Henry ȱ Hub Ȭ I ȱ (prix ȱ en ȱ euro ȱ par ȱ MWh) ȱ Natural ȱ gas: ȱ 1 ȱ MMbtu= ȱ 3,03 ȱ 3,69 ȱ Ȭ 17,89% ȱ $ ȱ Natural ȱ Gas, ȱ Henry ȱ Hub Ȭ I ȱ (prix ȱ en ȱ $ ȱ par ȱ MMbtu) ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ ȱ Gold: ȱ 1 ȱ Kg= ȱ 117.811,32 ȱ 118.470,86 ȱ Ȭ 0,56% ȱ ǧȱ ȱ Gold: ȱ 1 ȱ oz= ȱ 4.155,73 ȱ 4.328,60 ȱ Ȭ 3,99% ȱ $ ȱ ȱ Silver: ȱ 1 ȱ Kg= ȱ 1.707,75 ȱ 1.951,16 ȱ Ȭ 12,48% ȱ ǧȱ ȱ Silver: ȱ 1 ȱ oz= ȱ 60,24 ȱ 71,29 ȱ Ȭ 15,50% ȱ $ ȱ ȱ Government ȱ Debt/GDP ȱ last ȱ ȱ previous ȱ ȱ trends ȱ last ȱ source ȱ Greece ȱ 137,0% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2026 ȱ 143,6% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ Ȭ 6,6% ȱ AOL ȱ (est.) ȱ Italy ȱ 138,9% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 137,1% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 1,8% ȱ Eurostat ȱ USA ȱ 125,0% ȱ Aug. ȱ 2026 ȱ 125,3% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ Ȭ 0,3% ȱ Council ȱ on ȱ Foreign ȱ Relations ȱ (CFR) ȱ (est.) ȱ France ȱ 119,0% ȱ Jun. ȱ 2026 ȱ 117,5% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 1,5% ȱ Insee/Ministry ȱ of ȱ Finance: ȱ 121.7% ȱ in ȱ 2027 ȱ (est.) ȱ Canada ȱ 110,7% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2026 ȱ 112,9% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ Ȭ 2,2% ȱ IMF ȱ (est.) ȱ Belgium ȱ 109,1% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 107,5% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 1,6% ȱ Eurostat ȱ UK ȱ 104,0% ȱ Apr. ȱ 2026 ȱ 101,3% ȱ Aug. ȱ 2025 ȱ 2,7% ȱ IMF ȱ ȱ Spain ȱ 99,2% ȱ Jul. ȱ 2026 ȱ 101,6% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ Ȭ 2,4% ȱ Radiofrance ȱ China ȱ 96,0% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2026 ȱ 94,0% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 2,0% ȱ IMF ȱ (est.) ȱ World ȱ 94,0% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 92,3% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2024 ȱ 1,7% ȱ IMF ȱ (est.) ȱ Portugal ȱ 92,9% ȱ Jun. ȱ 2026 ȱ 91,0% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 1,9% ȱ Banco ȱ de ȱ Portugal ȱ Finland ȱ 90,2% ȱ Jun. ȱ 2026 ȱ 89,8% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 0,4% ȱ Eurostat ȱ Eurozone ȱ 88,9% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 87,8% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 1,1% ȱ Eurostat ȱ Austria ȱ 83,5% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 81,5% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 2,0% ȱ Statistics ȱ Austria ȱ OECD ȱ 85,0% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2026 ȱ 83,0% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 2,0% ȱ OECD ȱ (est.) ȱ EU ȱ 82,9% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 82,1% ȱ Sep. ȱ 2025 ȱ 0,8% ȱ Eurostat ȱ Brazil ȱ 81,9% ȱ Jun. ȱ 2026 ȱ 80,4% ȱ Apr. ȱ 2026 ȱ 1,5% ȱ Zonebourse ȱ India ȱ 80,8% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2026 ȱ 81,1% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ Ȭ 0,3% ȱ IMF ȱ (est.) ȱ South ȱ Africa ȱ 78,9% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2026 ȱ 77,8% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 1,1% ȱ IMF ȱ (est.) ȱ Hungary ȱ ȱ 74,8% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 74,6% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 0,2% ȱ Eurostat ȱ Germany ȱ 64,4% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 63,5% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 0,9% ȱ Eurostat ȱ Africa ȱ 62,8% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 63,7% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2024 ȱ Ȭ 0,9% ȱ Institute ȱ of ȱ International ȱ Finance ȱ (IIF) ȱ Slovakia ȱ 62,8% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2025 ȱ 59,3% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2024 ȱ 3,5% ȱ Statista ȱ Poland ȱ 61,6% ȱ Mar.2026 ȱ 62,3% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ Ȭ 0,7% ȱ Eurostat ȱ Romania ȱ 60,4% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 59,3% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 1,1% ȱ Eurostat ȱ Korea ȱ 54,0% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2026 ȱ 51,7% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 2,3% ȱ IMF ȱ (est.) ȱ Australia ȱ 51,5% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2026 ȱ 51,4% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 0,1% ȱ IMF ȱ (est.) ȱ Netherlands ȱ 43,8% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 44,4% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ Ȭ 0,6% ȱ Eurostat ȱ Czechia ȱ 43,8% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 43,1% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 0,7% ȱ Czech ȱ Statistical ȱ Office ȱ Norway ȱ 42,9% ȱ Apr. ȱ 2026 ȱ 43,0% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ Ȭ 0,1% ȱ IMF ȱ (est.) ȱ Switzerland ȱ 40,7% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 39,9% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 0,8% ȱ Swiss ȱ Federal ȱ Finance ȱ Administration ȱ Ireland ȱ 37,0% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 32,9% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 4,1% ȱ National ȱ Treasury ȱ Management ȱ Agency ȱ Sweden ȱ 36,3% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 35,1% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 1,2% ȱ Trading ȱ Economics ȱ Luxembourg ȱ ȱ 29,2% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 27,9% ȱ Sep. ȱ 2025 ȱ 1,3% ȱ Eurostat ȱ Denmark ȱ 26,8% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 29,7% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2025 ȱ Ȭ 2,9% ȱ Eurostat ȱ Turkiye ȱ 23,8% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2025 ȱ 24,5% ȱ Sep. ȱ 2025 ȱ Ȭ 0,7% ȱ Ministry ȱ of ȱ Finance ȱ Azerbaijan ȱ 21,2% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2024 ȱ 21,9% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2023 ȱ Ȭ 0,8% ȱ Trading ȱ Economics ȱ ȱ Russia ȱ 15,6% ȱ Mar. ȱ 2026 ȱ 16,4% ȱ Dec. ȱ 2024 ȱ Ȭ 0,8% ȱ MSN: ȱ President ȱ Poutin ȱ to ȱ AFP ȱ Large ȱ differences ȱ may ȱ exist ȱ due ȱ to ȱ the ȱ definition ȱ of ȱ public ȱ debt ȱ (gross ȱ vs. ȱ net ȱ debt, ȱ government ȱ financial ȱ assets, ȱ etc.) ȱ ȱ This ȱ dashboard, ȱ exclusive ȱ to ȱ AGEFI ȱ Luxembourg, ȱ allows ȱ the ȱ reader: ȱȱ 1° ȱ to ȱ see ȱ the ȱ returns ȱ of ȱ the ȱ main ȱ assets ȱ and ȱ financial ȱ indices ȱ for ȱ the ȱ current ȱ year ȱ / ȱȱ 2° ȱ to ȱ see ȱ on ȱ one ȱ page ȱ the ȱ main ȱ stock ȱ market ȱ indices ȱ and ȱ interest ȱ rates ȱ / ȱȱ 3° ȱ to ȱ know ȱ the ȱ production ȱ cost ȱ of ȱ several ȱ energy ȱ products ȱ in ȱ euros, ȱ to ȱ compare ȱ with ȱ the ȱ retail ȱ price ȱ / ȱȱ 4° ȱ to ȱ know ȱ the ȱ price ȱ of ȱ gold ȱ and ȱ silver ȱ in ȱ kilos ȱ and ȱ in ȱ euros. ȱ / ȱȱ 5° ȱ to ȱ immediately ȱ see ȱ the ȱ public ȱ date/GDP ȱ for ȱ several ȱ significant ȱ countries ȱȱ (2022 ȱ trend) ȱ / ȱȱ 6° ȱ public ȱ debt ȱ updated ȱ figures ȱ in ȱ yellow ȱ ȱ