In practice, FINMA regards the following scenarios as greenwashing (deception) in the area of Swiss collective investment schemes or at least sees a potential greenwashing risk due to the lack of transparency vis-à-vis investors if the collective investment scheme makes reference to sustainability: • although no sustainable investment strategy/policy is actually pursued. • and information about the sustainability approach used is provided in the investment strategy/policy (e.g. best-in-class approach, approach integrating ESG considerations, stewardship), but the stated approach is not implemented. • but the investment policy allows for a significant proportion of nonsustainable investments, which are not in line with the sustainability approach pursued or are even inconsistent with it. • but the investment strategy/policy is only deemed to be sustainable because of exclusionary criteria that are already widespread, without there being a specific sustainability component going beyond this. • by using terms such as “impact” or “zero carbon” without the stated impact or savings being capable of being measured or verified. • but the fund documents do not provide or only provide very general information about the corresponding investment strategy/policy and/or the selection of permitted investments, along with how sustainability considerations are integrated into the investment decision process. Investors are not able to gain an impression of how sustainability is taken into account due to the lack of detail or transparency.