Cybersecurity risk is a growing concern for public companies as economic activity increasingly relies on technology. Drawing on finance theory, which posits that lenders possess private information about borrowers, I hypothesize that lenders price cybersecurity risks into loan contracts. A priori, this relation is unclear, given the unpredictable nature of cybersecurity risk and the difficulty lenders face in assessing the likelihood and magnitude of associated losses. Using the private debt market, I find a positive association between cybersecurity risk and the cost of debt. This relation is weaker for borrowers with high-quality information technology and stronger in less competitive lending markets. I also find that, following successful cyberattacks, secondary market loan prices decline (increase) for borrowers with high (low) ex ante cybersecurity risk. Overall, these results suggest that, whereas the SEC’s newly adopted cybersecurity disclosures may provide decision-useful information to retail investors, they may be less relevant for certain stakeholders. Data Availability: Data are available from the public sources cited in the text.

We examine the relation between the gender composition of audit teams and two important audit outcomes—audit quality and audit fees. We identify gender composition across auditor ranks with novel audit-office level data for 20 large U.S. public accounting firms from 2010 to 2018. We find engagements of audit offices with more female auditors are associated with higher audit quality and lower audit fees. We find the association between gender composition and audit outcomes is strongest at the staff level, and among audit seniors in particular. The results also strengthen in offices with more supportive workplace environments. Overall, our large-scale evidence provides important insights on the role of gender composition of audit teams.

This paper examines investors’ perceptions of auditor involvement in non‐GAAP reporting as captured by non‐GAAP disclosures in 10‐K filings. We find that firm‐years with auditor involvement in non‐GAAP reporting have higher CARs, lower bid–ask spreads, lower stock volatility, and lower abnormal trading volume on 10‐K filing dates. To sharpen identification of auditor involvement, we hand‐collect non‐GAAP measures and reconciliations for S&P 500 firms and identify which exclusions reconcile directly to the audited financial statements. As the percentage of exclusions that reconcile directly to the audited financial statements increases, bid–ask spreads and stock volatility on 10‐K filing dates decrease. We find that the results are not driven by strategic reporting or managers’ responses to perceived litigation risk. This study provides new insights into non‐GAAP disclosures outside of earnings announcements, which have been largely ignored in prior literature. Collectively, our results suggest investors value auditor involvement in non‐GAAP reporting and inform policymakers and standard setters considering the usefulness of assurance over non‐GAAP measures.