Hennessy Energy Transition Fund portfolio manager Ben Cook says his top energy picks omit Chevron

A Yahoo Finance video interview has spotlighted how energy investors are selecting among oil and energy transition plays as the sector navigates volatile crude prices, policy uncertainty, and shifting demand for cleaner fuels. In the interview, Ben Cook, portfolio manager of the Hennessy Energy Transition Fund, lays out what he calls his top three stock picks in the energy space, and Chevron is not included in that short list.

The video, posted Aug. 6, frames the discussion around Cook’s investment process and the specific set of companies he favors within energy markets. The accompanying description identifies Cook as the portfolio manager behind the Hennessy Energy Transition Fund and states that his three top picks do not include Chevron. Beyond that, the publicly available metadata for the post does not specify what those three stocks are, nor does it provide the rationale in the excerpted information available here.

For Chevron, the omission matters less as a single-data-point valuation announcement and more as a window into how “energy transition” mandates can define opportunity differently from traditional integrated-oil exposure. Transition-oriented funds often look for supply chains, technologies, or assets they believe are positioned for policy and demand shifts. That can mean favoring companies perceived to be closer to lower-carbon growth themes, or with capital plans that investors think best align with future fuel consumption.

At the same time, the integrated-oil business model remains a central benchmark for many portfolios because of its cash-generation potential during commodity cycles. Cook’s decision not to include Chevron could reflect a preference for alternatives within energy, but the details of that preference are not captured in the information available from the interview listing alone.

In the absence of the full video transcript and any accompanying written note, it is not possible here to attribute specific decision factors to Cook, such as valuation levels, production mix, emissions intensity targets, shareholder return plans, or estimated transition cashflows. It also is unclear whether the “top 3” framing is tied to a particular time horizon, risk band, or portfolio construction constraint that would affect inclusion or exclusion of a large integrated company like Chevron.

Still, the interview is consistent with a broader pattern in energy investing: even managers who hold some commodity-linked exposure may differentiate between “energy” as a market theme and “transition” as an investable pathway. For readers watching Chevron, the more actionable takeaway is not the omission itself, but the approach implied by an energy transition fund manager selecting three names without a major integrated oil company.

What to watch next is whether the post, subsequent interviews, or any Hennessy fund materials spell out Cook’s three picks and the reasons behind each selection. If those selections include smaller-cap or technology-adjacent energy companies, the divergence from Chevron would suggest that transition mandates are still narrowing focus toward particular growth drivers. If, instead, the picks are other large-cap energy stocks, the debate may be more about relative positioning and capital allocation than about whether oil majors fit at all. For now, the interview indicates that Chevron is not on Cook’s short list, but the specific “why” requires more detail than the posting metadata provides.