[Feedback from stock prices to cash flows occurs because information revealed by firms' stock prices influences the actions of competitors. We explore the implications of feedback within a noisy rational expectations setting with incumbent publicly traded firms and privately held new entrants. In this setting the equilibrium relation among stock prices and both future dividends and aggregate output depends on the strategic environment in which these firms operate. In general, under reasonable conditions, the relations between prices, dividends, and economic output in our framework are consistent with empirical evidence in the macroliterature. We also generate new, potentially testable, implications.]

This address explores the link between financial market shocks, investment choices, and various externalities that can arise from these choices. My analysis, which emphasizes differences between shocks to debt and equity markets, provides insights about some stylized facts from the macro finance literature. These insights are illustrated with a discussion of the technology boom and bust in the late 1990s and early 2000s, and the housing boom and bust in the mid‐2000s.

Feedback from stock prices to cash flows occurs because information revealed by firms' stock prices influences the actions of competitors. We explore the implications of feedback within a noisy rational expectations setting with incumbent publicly traded firms and privately held new entrants. In this setting the equilibrium relation among stock prices and both future dividends and aggregate output depends on the strategic environment in which these firms operate. In general, under reasonable conditions, the relations between prices, dividends, and economic output in our framework are consistent with empirical evidence in the macroliterature. We also generate new, potentially testable, implications.

A number of studies of U.S. stock returns document what is referred to as the investment or asset growth effect. Specifically, firms that increase investment or total assets subsequently earn lower risk-adjusted returns. This study finds substantial cross-country differences in the asset growth effect. In particular, the asset growth effect is stronger in countries with more developed financial markets, but it does not seem to be associated with corporate governance or the costs of trading. Overall, the evidence is consistent with a q-theory where financial market development captures either managers’ willingness or ability to align investment expenditures to the cost of capital, but it is inconsistent with the hypothesis that the asset growth effect is due to bad governance and overinvestment.