We study the determinants of firms’ LGBTQ+ policies and their relation to general CSR policies. Common factors explain LGBTQ+ policies related to firms’ primary stakeholders and those aimed at public LGBTQ+ efforts: younger firms, those with more financial resources, more educated workforces, catering to retail customers, and located in liberal areas have more LGBTQ+-friendly policies. LGBTQ+ initiatives encounter less societal agreement than CSR initiatives. Illustrating the distinctiveness of LGBTQ+ issues in the CSR space, we find that firms’ LGBTQ+ friendliness only weakly correlates with overall CSR performance. Lastly, we show that firms’ LGBTQ+ policies respond to pressure from shareholder proposals.

Credit ratings of corporations are biased, but the forces driving this bias are unclear. We argue it would be difficult for rating agencies to issue high grades for a firm’s debt when there are a lot of objective equity analyst reports about the firm’s earnings that are informative about its default. We find that an exogenous drop in analyst coverage leads to greater optimism-bias in ratings, especially for firms with little bond analyst coverage and those that are close to default. This coverage-induced shock leads to less informative ratings about future defaults and downgrades and more subsequent bond security mispricings.