Blog
BankTrack news
BankTrack blog
Partner news
Partner blog
Bank
Mizuho Financial GroupJapan
Active
This profile is actively maintained
Last update: 2024-12-17 11:56:31
Mizuho's head office in Chiyoda, Tokyo. Photo: Lombroso via Wikimedia Commons (Public Domain)
Active
This profile is actively maintained
Last update: 2024-12-17 11:56:31
Bank info
BankTrack campaigns
All
About
| Website | https://www.mizuhogroup.com/ |
| Headquarters |
1–5–5, Otemachi, Chiyoda–ku 100–8176
Tokyo
Japan
|
| CEO/chair |
Masahiro Kihara President & Group CEO |
| Supervisor | |
| Ownership |
listed on NYSE, Osaka Securities Exchange & Tokyo Stock Exchange
Mizuho's shareholder structure can be accessed here. |
Mizuho Financial Group is one of three Japanese megabanks, along with Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group and Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group. Mizuho offers a broad range of service including banking, trust banking and securities, and other business related to financial services. Under the umbrella of the holding company Mizuho Financial Group, their major group companies include Mizuho Bank, Mizuho Trust & Banking and Mizuho Securities. Muziho Bank became a signatory of the Equator Principles in October 2003, and was the chair bank of the Equator Principles Association from May 2014 until April 2015.
Sustainability
Commitments
Policies
Voluntary standards
Mizuho's most important sustainability commitments can be found at the website sections listed below.
Mizuho Financial Group has committed itself to the following voluntary standards:
Dodgy Deals
Mizuho Financial Group is linked to a number of companies and projects that BankTrack considers controversial (so called Dodgy Deals), e.g. as a current or past financier or through an expression of interest. The profiles below provide more details on the nature of Mizuho Financial Group's link to these deals.
Projects / Companies
Finance type
Year
News
BankTrack
Partners
Blog
External
Resources
Documents
Videos
Links
The dark side of US LNG
The Dark Side of US LNG is the result of a field mission to the United States to uncover the strong and growing ties between Italy, and in particular Italy's largest banking group, Intesa Sanpaolo, and the American liquefied natural gas (LNG) sector. Interviews by ReCommon. Filming, editing and music: Carlo Dojmi di Delupis. www.recommon.org
Accountability
Grievances
Response
tracking
Mizuho is a member of the Japan Center for Engagement and Remedy on Business and Human Rights (JaCER), which operates a grievance mechanism based on the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, the “Engagement and Remedy Platform”. Individuals and communities affected by the bank’s finance can report human rights grievances here. Stakeholders may also raise complaints via the OECD National Contact Points (see OECD Watch guidance).
Mizuho is an Equator Principles signatory. While the Equator Principles have no official grievance mechanism, complaints relating to this bank's financing of Equator Principles projects can be filed through our own website www.equator-complaints.org.
This page evaluates Mizuho Financial Group's responses to instances of alleged human rights violations linked to its finance, raised by civil society organisations. It is not intended to be exhaustive, but covers selected impacts raised by BankTrack and other civil society partners since 2016. For the full scoring methodology, see here. For more information about BankTrack's evaluation of bank responses to human rights impacts, see the 2021 report "Actions speak louder: assessing bank responses to human rights violations".
Impacts reviewed
Responded?
Total score
Response
Action
Monitoring
Banks and Dirty Diesel: Vitol and Trafigura (May 2017)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank publicly responded stating that it "cannot refer to individual transactions". Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank engaged with its client or took appropriate action. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored progress. More info
Drummond and paramilitary violence in Colombia (May 2016)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank publicly responded stating that "As per our policies, we cannot refer to any specific transation". Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank provided no detail on whether it engaged with its client or took approriate action. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored progress. More info
East African Crude Oil Pipeline (March 2021)
1
0.5
0.5
0
Response
0.5
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank publicly responded stating that it would not finance the project "unless the on-going E&S isues will be resolved and amicable solutions will be prepared". It did not comment on or respond to the substance of the issues raised. Action
0.5
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank publicly stated that it would not finance the project unless "on-going E&S issues" were resolved, which consitutes appropriate action according to rights-holders involved in raising the issue with the bank. However, the bank remains exposed to TotalEnergies, the project developer, and it has not (yet) set out specific actions that it requires (or will require) the company to take to address the impacts raised. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored measures taken by its client to address the impacts associated with the project. IOI Corporation labour standards violations (February 2016)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank publicly responded stating that "As per our policies, we cannot refer to any specific transation". Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank engaged with its client or took appropriate action. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored progress. More info
Myanmar: Equity exposure to companies linked to the military regime (October 2021)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank responded citing client confidentiality and by saying it will refrain from commenting on whether the information in the report is accurate, therefore avoiding to speak to the substance of the issues raised and not acknowledging a link to the impacts. Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank does not engage with the allegations and do not mention appropriate measures of action. It only reiterates its engagment with UN Guiding Principles but do not respond to any of the allegations. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available about whether the bank monitored progress. More info
Rio Tinto's Jadar mine, Serbia (December 2021)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank's response neither acknowledges its link to the impact, nor addresses the issues raised. The bank states "we are unable to refer to individual transactions". Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank does not describe any engagement with its client or approptriate action Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information to indicate the bank is monitoring the actions of its clients, or actions it might itself have taken in response to the impacts raised. More info
Santos' Barossa gas project, Australia (July 2023)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank did not acknowledge a link to the company or the adverse human rights impacts raised. Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank did not state that it has engaged its client on the issues raised. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored progress. More info
UN human rights complaint regarding Saudi Aramco and its financiers (July 2023)
0
0
0
0
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank responded publicly but it did not acknowledge a link to the impacts raised or to the company in question. Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank did not provide information on whether it has engaged with its client or took appropriate action on the impacts raised. In its response, the bank outlined its approach to climate change and human rights more broadly. Monitoring
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank monitored progress. More info
ArcelorMittal steel impacts (June 2024)
0
0
0
n/a
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank publically responded and confirms information has been shared with relevant departments, but cites that they "cannot make responses on past, existing, and possible future
transactions with individual case due to the confidential obligation." Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information available on whether the bank engaged with its client or took appropriate action. Monitoring
n/a
Rationale for score
The impact was not raised over a year ago and therefore is not scored on monitoring progress. More info
JSW Utkal steel and coal, India (February 2025)
0
0
0
n/a
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank responed, stating: "unfortunately, we cannot make responses on past, existing, and possible future
transactions with individual case due to the confidential obligation." Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank stated it had shared the letter with the relevant departments, but no information is available on whether the bank engaged with its client or took appropriate action. Monitoring
n/a
Rationale for score
The impact was not raised over a year ago and therefore is not scored on monitoring progress. More info
Impacts of Indonesia’s state electricity company PLN (March 2025)
0
0
0
n/a
Response
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
The bank responded, stating: "we cannot make responses on past, existing, and possible future transactions with individual case due to the confidential obligation." Action
0
Out of 1
Rationale for score
No information is available on whether the bank engaged with its client or took appropriate action. Monitoring
n/a
Rationale for score
The impact was not raised over a year ago and therefore is not scored on monitoring progress. More info
See the letter BankTrack sent the bank here.
Average
100%
0.09
0.05
0.05
0
Banks and Climate
Banks and Climate
The 2025 Banking on Climate Chaos report showed that Mizuho Financial provided $150.9 bn in financing to the fossil fuel industry between 2021 and 2024. In 2024 only, Mizuho Financial provided $40.3 bn, including $22.0 bn for oil, gas and coal companies expanding fossil fuels. Mizuho Financial was the fourth-largest fossil fuel financier in 2024. Find further details on Mizuho Financial's fossil fuel portfolio and how it compares to other large banks globally on the Banking on Climate Chaos website below.
Partner organisation Reclaim Finance tracks the coal, oil and gas policies of financial institutions, including banks, in their Coal Policy Tool (CPT) and the Oil and Gas Policy Tracker (OGPT). BankTrack works closely with Reclaim Finance and endorses their policy assessments. Find further details on their assessment of Mizuho's fossil fuel policy below.
False Solutions Tracker expansion
BankLast update
Country
Wind Energy
Solar Energy
Geothermal Energy
Ocean Energy
Energy grids and storage
Hydropower
Hydrogen
Solid Biomass
Biofuels
CCUS
Nuclear Power
Details
Explanation
The purpose of the False Solutions Tracker is to give a clear overview of energy technologies that fall under banks' individual sustainable finance commitments. The tracker lists 11 energy technologies that are usually associated with the energy transition and the decarbonisation of the economy. These technologies are defined here and classified in three categories:
-
Real solutions: Technologies that deliver on a Just Transition towards Energy Democracy. BankTrack considers these technologies as real solutions only if and when they do deliver Energy Democracy.
-
Solutions under strict conditions: Energy technologies that could be real solutions if they deliver on a Just Transition towards Energy Democracy but that could also be false solutions. This is the case of hydrogen and hydropower. On one hand, fossil-free and green hydrogen could be a real solution under certain conditions. However, fossil-based hydrogen and nuclear hydrogen are always false solutions. On the other hand, hydropower lifespan extension could also be a real solution under strict conditions while hydropower expansion is a false solution.
-
False solutions: Energy technologies that are not aligned with a just transition towards Energy Democracy.
For each one of the 11 energy technologies, the tracker indicates if it is included in bank's individual sustainable finance commitments:
For Real solutions:
- : Yes, the bank includes its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
- : Yes, the bank includes its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting, but under certain conditions. In this case, those conditions are mentioned in the "relevant policy document" section for each bank.
- : No, the bank does not include its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
- : It is unclear whether the bank includes or not its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
For solutions under strict conditions and for false solutions:
- : Yes, the bank includes its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
- : Yes, the bank includes its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting, but under certain conditions. In this case, those conditions are mentioned in the "relevant policy document" section for each bank.
- : No, the bank does not include its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
- : It is unclear whether the bank includes or not its finance towards this energy technology in its sustainable finance reporting.
For more details see this page.
Banks and Human Rights
Banks and Human Rights
BankTrack assessed Mizuho Financial Group in its 2024 Global Human Rights Benchmark, where it achieved 11 points out of 15 and was ranked as a “leader”.
The bank scored 0.5 out of 3 points on the new “specific rights indicators”, which assess how banks address human rights defenders, Indigenous Peoples’ right to Free, Prior and Informed Consent and environmental rights in their policies and practices.
In addition, Mizuho Financial Group scored 0.11 out of 3 on how it responds to alleged human rights violations linked to its finance, which were raised by civil society organisations. More information is detailed in the “Accountability” section of this profile.
The table below shows BankTrack's assessment of how Mizuho Financial Group has implemented the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights. Please click on 'expand all details' and 'explanation' for further information on the methodology.
Our policy assessments are always a work in progress. We very much welcome any feedback, especially from banks included in the assessments. Please get in touch at humanrights@banktrack.org.
Global Human Rights Benchmark 2022
BankLast update
Country
Score
Ranking
Details
Mizuho Financial Group
JPN
9
Front runner
9
0
Explanation
Laggard
Follower
Front runner
Leader
0 - 3 points
3.5 - 6.5 points
7 - 10 points
10.5 - 14 points
For more details see this page.
Global Human Rights Benchmark 2024
BankLast update
Country
Score
Ranking
Details
Mizuho Financial Group
JPN
11
Leader
11
0
Explanation
Laggard
Follower
Moderate achiever
Leader
0 - 3 points
3.5 - 7 points
7.5 - 10.5 points
11 - 15 points
For more details see this page.
Banks and Nature
Banks and Nature
Mizuho’s policies for forest-risk sectors (beef, soy, palm oil, pulp and paper, rubber and timber) have been assessed by the Forests & Finance coalition, achieving an overall score of 6.9 out of 10 and ranking it as a front runner. Mizuho achieved a score of 4.3 out of 10 specifically for its policies related to the beef sector and 7.5 out of 10 for its policies related to the palm oil sector. In addition, BankTrack and the Environmental Paper Network have assessed Mizuho’s policies related to the pulp and paper sector.
Between 2016 and 2022, Mizuho provided USD 9,221 million in credit to companies operating in these forest-risk sectors and held investments amounting to USD 78 million as of 2022. For more information, see the links below.
Forest & Finance Policy Assessment 2022: Overall scores
BankLast update
Country
Score
Ranking
Details
Explanation
A bank can obtain a total of 10 points for the quality of its policies. The total score is based on their scores per sector, weighted against their financing and investment for each sector. For further details on this see here. Based on their overall score, banks are then classified as Laggards, Followers, Front runners or Leaders, as follows:
Laggard
Follower
Front runner
Leader
0 - 1 points
1 - 4 points
4 - 7 points
7 - 10 points
For more details see this page.
Forest & Finance Policy Assessment 2022: Beef
BankLast update
Country
Score
Ranking
Details
Explanation
A bank can obtain a total of 10 points for the quality of its beef policy. The total score is based on their scores per sector, weighted against their financing and investment for each sector. For further details on this see here. Based on their overall score, banks are then classified as Laggards, Followers, Front runners or Leaders, as follows:
Laggard
Follower
Front runner
Leader
0 - 1 points
1 - 4 points
4 - 7 points
7 - 10 points
For more details see this page.
Forest & Finance Policy Assessment 2022: Palm Oil
BankLast update
Country
Score
Ranking
Details
Explanation
A bank can obtain a total of 10 points for the quality of its palm oil policy. The total score is based on their scores per sector, weighted against their financing and investment for each sector. For further details on this see here. Based on their overall score, banks are then classified as Laggards, Followers, Front runners or Leaders, as follows:
Laggard
Follower
Front runner
Leader
0 - 1 points
1 - 4 points
4 - 7 points
7 - 10 points
For more details see this page.
Tracking the NZBA
Tracking the Net Zero Banking Alliance
Mizuho is a member of the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA) and has therefore committed to reduce its financed emissions to net zero by 2050; within 18 months of joining the alliance set interim targets for 2030 (or sooner) for high emission priority sectors, and within 36 months set further sector targets; set new intermediary targets every 5 years from 2030 onwards; annually publish data on emissions and progress against a transition strategy including climate-related sectoral policies; and take a robust approach to the role of offsets in transition plans. BankTrack track's implementation of these commitments in the NZBA compliance tracker.
Banks and Russia
Banks and Russian Aggression in Ukraine
BankTrack is keeping track of the public response of Mizuho Financial Group to Russia's illegal invasion of Ukraine. Mizuho Financial Group did not publicly condemn the war. Mizuho Financial Group is considered by Leave-Russia.org to be "continue operations" in Russia. We consider its exposure to Russia as limited, with over $2.87 billion of financial assets. Mizuho Financial Group supports the Russian fossil fuel industry through investments, loans and underwriting. For further details, see the table linked below.
Banks and Steel
Banks and Steel
As part of the Net Zero Banking Alliance (NZBA), Mizuho is required to set interim targets for 2030 for high emission priority sectors. For Mizuho, this includes its lending to the steel sector. You can see Mizuho’s iron and steel decarbonisation targets, and its progress towards meeting them in our NZBA steel targets compliance tracker:
Partner organisation Reclaim Finance’s 2023 report on metallurgical coal financing showed that Mizuho Financial provided US$ 13.7 billion in loans and underwriting to developers of new metallurgical coal between 2016 and 2022. Find further details on Mizuho Financial’s metallurgical coal financing and and how it compares to other large banks globally in the report.
Reclaim Finance tracks the metallurgical coal policies of financial institutions, including banks, in their Coal Policy Tool. BankTrack works closely with Reclaim Finance and endorses their policy assessments. Find further details on their assessment of Mizuho Financial’s metallurgical coal policy below.
According to a report by Reclaim Finance, between 2016 and June 2023, Mizuho Financial Group provided $9.8 billion in finance to the fossil-steel industry, making it the 8th largest financier worldwide. Find further details on Mizuho Financial's steel financing and how it compares to other large banks globally in the report.
.jpg){kind=link}
Send feedback
on this profile