We study how shifting global macroeconomic conditions affect sovereign bond prices. Bondholders earn premia for two sources of systematic risk: exposure to low-frequency changes in the state of the economy, as captured by expected macroeconomic growth and volatility, and exposure to higher-frequency macroeconomic shocks. Our model predicts that the first source, labeled long-run macro risk, is the primary driver of the level and the cross-sectional variation in sovereign bond premia. We find support for this prediction using sovereign bond return data for 43 countries over the 1994–2018 period. A long-short portfolio based on long-run macro risk earns 8.11% per year in our sample.

We classify asset pricing anomalies into those exacerbating mispricing (build-up anomalies) and those resolving it (resolution anomalies). We estimate the dynamics of price wedges for well-known anomaly portfolios and map them to firm-level mispricings. We find that several prominent anomalies like momentum and profitability further dislocate prices. Multi-factor models designed to eliminate one-month alphas still produce large price wedges. Our estimates yield a novel decomposition of Tobin’s q, revealing that q’s mispricing component has substantial explanatory power for firm investment. Overall, our results suggest that financial intermediaries chasing build-up anomalies negatively affect price efficiency and associated real capital allocation.

Implicit guarantees provided by financial intermediaries are a key component of China's shadow banking sector. We show theoretically that project screening by intermediaries, accompanied by their implicit guarantees to investors, can be the second-best arrangement and mitigate capital misallocation that favors state-owned enterprises (SOEs). Using a dataset of trusts’ investment products, we find, consistent with our model, that ex ante expected yields reflect borrower risks and implicit guarantee strength, and risk sensitivity is reduced by strong guarantees. Regulations in 2018 restricting implicit guarantees lead to a weaker relationship between yield spread and guarantee strength, and more credit rationing of non-SOEs.

In 2017, “The Big Three” institutional investors launched campaigns to increase gender diversity on corporate boards. We estimate that their campaigns led American corporations to add at least 2.5 times as many female directors in 2019 as they had in 2016. Firms increased diversity by identifying candidates beyond managers’ existing networks and by placing less emphasis on candidates’ executive experience. Firms also promoted more female directors to key board positions, indicating firms’ responses went beyond tokenism. Our results highlight index investors’ ability to effectuate broad-based governance changes and the impact of investor buy-in in increasing corporate-leadership diversity.