Robert Heinkel, Josef Zechner, The Role of Debt and Preferred Stock as a Solution to Adverse Investment Incentives, The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 25, No. 1 (Mar., 1990), pp. 1-24

This paper explores the effect of exclusionary ethical investing on corporate behavior in a risk-averse, equilibrium setting. While arguments exist that ethical investing can influence a firm's cost of capital, and so affect investment, no equilibrium model has been presented to do so. We show that exclusionary ethical investing leads to polluting firms being held by fewer investors since green investors eschew polluting firms' stock. This lack of risk sharing among non-green investors leads to lower stock prices for polluting firms, thus raising their cost of capital. If the higher cost of capital more than overcomes a cost of reforming (i.e., a polluting firm cleaning up its activities), then polluting firms will become socially responsible because of exclusionary ethical investing. A key determinant of the incentive for polluting firms to reform is the fraction of funds controlled by green investors. In our model, empirically reasonable parameter estimates indicate that more than 20% green investors are required to induce any polluting firms to reform. Existing empirical evidence indicates that at most 10% of funds are invested by green investors.

In a dynamic framework, the advantage of leverage depends upon the firm's recapitalization policy. We show that if bonds are callable at par, then equityholders have an incentive to recapitalize too early. Call premia and issue discounts, however, mitigate the agency problem of early recapitalization. The model provides the optimal call premium and issue discount as a function of firm-specific characteristics. An analysis of a bond sample supports the model's prediction that the optimal call premium is positively related to firm risk.

Long-term growth expectations are central to investment analysis and corporate valuation. Despite a dominant effect on firm value, the academic literature and practitioner conventions provide little guidance on determining this long-term growth rate. This article takes a step in addressing this gap: we estimate the relationship between long-term growth and an extensive selection of firm, industry, and market characteristics. Market prices do not seem to fully capture long-term growth information. Cross sectional tests yield substantial positive abnormal returns for firms with high expected long-term growth.

This article shows that, for major equity markets, the proportion of index values attributable to the first 5 years of dividends dropped substantially in the first quarter of 2020 and that this drop was not reversed by the end of the year. In the cross section, this breakdown of dividend smoothing due to COVID-19 was less severe for firms with higher operating cash flows and more positively coskewed stock returns, and it was more pronounced for those with higher leverage and in the financial sector. Heavy dividend cutters also experienced a substantial increase in exposure to systematic risk.

We study whether firms spread out debt-maturity dates, which we call granularity of corporate debt. In our model, firms that are unable to roll over expiring debt need to liquidate assets. If multiple small asset sales are less inefficient than a single large one, it can be optimal to diversify debt rollovers across time. Using a large sample of corporate bond issuers during the 1991–2012 period, we establish novel stylized facts and evidence consistent with our model’s predictions. There is substantial heterogeneity (i.e., firms have both concentrated and dispersed debt structures). Debt maturities are more dispersed for larger and more mature firms and for firms with better investment opportunities, higher leverage, and lower profitability. During the recent financial crisis, firms with valuable investment opportunities implemented more dispersed maturity structures. Finally, firms manage granularity actively and adjust toward target levels.