Abstract 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 paper derives a stochastic discount factor for currency-hedged government bonds of developed markets by projecting returns onto the unconditional mean–variance efficient (UMVE) portfolio. Priced risks of international bonds differ fundamentally from those of currencies. The UMVE portfolio achieves a Sharpe ratio over twice the average of individual markets, with the market price of risk peaking during crises and periods with high inflation dispersion. While bond returns exhibit a strong factor structure, common sources of variation are only weakly connected to priced risks. Hedging unpriced risks in naive or factor-based strategies significantly improves Sharpe ratios, even under portfolio weight constraints.

This paper presents a framework to study how investors’ social concerns affect technology choices. Consequentialist preferences (disutility from aggregate harm) influence outcomes only if investors coordinate, unless internalized harm is independent of an investor’s mass. Non-consequentialist preferences (disutility from stockholdings) affect outcomes regardless of coordination. Both preferences have stronger impact when risk-sharing consequences of technology supply are small (e.g., highly correlated returns), and their effects cannot be inferred from cost-of-capital differences. When harm is stochastic, polluting firms may appear less risky to social investors. Depending on type and strength of social preferences, this can support or hinder the green transition.