Recent research shows that high return dispersion (RD) is associated with economic conditions characterized by high discount rates, which are not conducive to growth and investment. We propose that RD risk can explain the accrual and investment anomalies. We conduct asset-pricing tests that include RD as a potential risk factor and show that low-accrual and low-investment firms have significantly higher exposure to the risk captured by RD. RD significantly explains future returns and the excess returns to accrual and investment hedge portfolios shrink in magnitude and become insignificant during periods of low RD. We conclude that risk explains the accrual and investment anomalies.

We exploit the exogenous shock to the Brazilian banking system caused by the international turmoil of 2008 and find evidence that the run to systemically important banks is better explained by the perception of a too-big-to-fail policy than by bank fundamentals. We infer that the extra inflow of deposits received by systemically important banks during crises gives them an important competitive advantage. Our analysis also indicates that a bank’s share of funding from institutional investors affects the nonfinancial firms’ and institutional investors’ decision to run.

By the 1970s, quid pro quo policy, which requires multinational firms to transfer technology in return for market access, had become a common practice in many developing countries. While many countries have subsequently liberalized quid pro quo requirements, China continues to follow the policy. In this article, we incorporate quid pro quo policy into a multicountry dynamic general equilibrium model, using microevidence from Chinese patents to motivate key assumptions about the terms of the technology transfer deals and macroevidence on China's inward foreign direct investment (FDI) to estimate key model parameters. We then use the model to quantify the impact of China's quid pro quo policy and show that it has had a significant impact on global innovation and welfare.

We study the role of information in asset-pricing models with long-run cash flow risk. When investors can distinguish short- from long-run consumption risks (full information), the model generates a sizable equity risk premium only if the equity term structure slopes up, contrary to the data. In general, the short- and long-run components are unidentified. We propose a sparsity-based bounded rationality model of long-run risk that is both parsimonious and fully identified from historical data. In contrast to full information, the model generates a sizable market risk premium simultaneously with a downward-sloping equity term structure, as in the data.

Business sustainability has emerged as the theme of the 21st century. We examine whether and how different components of economic sustainability disclosure (ECON), as well as environmental, social, and governance (ESG) dimensions of sustainability performance affect cost of equity, individually and in aggregate. In addition, we investigate whether and how ECON and ESG sustainability interactively affect cost of equity capital. Costs of equity are calculated using industry adjusted earnings–price ratios and finite horizon expected return model. Using a sample of more than 3000 firms during 1990–2013, we find that ECON (ESG) is negatively associated with cost of equity, but only growth and research (environmental and governance) sustainability performance dimensions contribute to this relationship. Operation efficiency is positively, while social sustainability performance is only marginally, related to cost of equity. We also find that ECON and ESG sustainability performance interactively affect cost of equity. In general, the relationship between ECON (ESG) and cost of capital is strengthened when ESG (ECON) performance is strong.

The CLO shapes and enforces corporate governance, but is faced with a dual-role paradox that requires her to act as both monitor of corporate governance and executive of the firm. We study the role of the CLO under environments that are most likely to impact governance and pressure the firm to either emphasize or marginalize the CLO's role as monitor or facilitator. Using the financial shock of a securities class action lawsuit on large corporations, we measure changes in CLO value through the metrics of total and relative compensation of the CLO and other C-suite members. After controlling for relevant variables such as growth and total assets, we find that when firms have more insiders on their board of directors, the CLO's compensation declines when the preceding year's Tobin's Q is high. CLO compensation increases under conditions of high opacity, but that compensation partially erodes in high Tobin's Q environments. We also find that a lawsuit increases CFO and CEO turnover but not the CLO's. Our results have implications for corporate governance, the dual and potentially conflicting role of CLO as gatekeeper and monitor, executive compensation, and agency costs.