Does sovereign risk matter? New evidence from eurozone corporate bond ratings and zero-volatility spreads

In this paper, we empirically examine if sovereign risk matters for corporate bonds in developed economies. Using a unique panel data sample of 897 corporate bonds from eleven countries within the Economic and Monetary Union (EMU), we investigate sovereign and corporate ratings as well as zero-volatility spreads (z-spreads). In the time period from March 2006 to June 2012, we find sovereign risk to be a significant driver of corporate risk. The effect is stronger for companies with domestic revenue structure, for companies that are (partly) owned by the government, and companies active in the utility and transportation sector. Interestingly, the impact of sovereign risk on corporate risk during the acute European sovereign debt crisis period decreases if ratings are examined, but increases if z-spreads are utilized. Rating agencies seem to take a more differentiated view on individual company risk during the sovereign debt crisis, while institutional investors might want to reduce their exposure to a country in financial distress as a whole, regardless of whether sovereign or corporate bonds are held.     

Does it cost to be sustainable?

We investigate whether firms’ corporate social performance (CSP) ratings impact their performance (cost of capital) and risk. Using a proprietary CSP ratings database, we find no difference in the risk-adjusted performance of UK firms with high and low CSP ratings. Additionally, the firms do not differ in their amount of idiosyncratic risk. We find some evidence of high-ranked firms being larger. The empirical evidence therefore indicates that investors and managers are able to implement a CSP investment or business strategy without incurring any significant financial cost (or benefit) in terms of risk or return.     

Sustainability and sovereign credit risk

The study investigates the impact of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) ratings on sovereign credit risk. The study measures sovereign credit risk using a market-based, structural and an analyst-based approach, while ESG scores are obtained from three different rating agencies. The contributions of this paper are multifold. First, we discover that higher sustainability performance at the corporate level significantly decreases market-based (CDS spreads) and structural (Distance-to-default) sovereign credit risk but has no consistent impact on analyst-based (Credit ratings) sovereign credit risk measure. Second, by expanding our research to include the concept of financial materiality based on the SASB materiality map, we break down and highlight the sustainability themes that require the most attention at the sovereign level and those that can affect the credit health of countries. Third, we demonstrate that the relationship between sustainability and sovereign credit risk varies across ESG rating providers, supporting the widespread belief that sustainability metrics lack standardization and are difficult to compare across providers.     

The wages of social responsibility — where are they? A critical review of ESG investing

This paper contributes both to investigating the link between the corporate social and financial performance based on environmental, social and corporate governance (ESG) ratings and to reviewing the existing empirical evidence pertaining to this relationship. The sample used includes ESG data of ASSET4, Bloomberg and KLD for the U.S. market from 1991 to 2012. The econometrical framework applies an ESG portfolio approach using the Carhart (1997) four-factor model as well as cross-sectional Fama and MacBeth (1973) regressions. Previous empirical research indicates a relationship between ESG ratings and returns. As against this, the ESG portfolios do not state a significant return difference between companies with high and low ESG ratings. Although the Fama and MacBeth (1973) regressions reveal a significant influence of several ESG variables, investors are hardly able to exploit this relationship. The magnitude and direction of the impact are substantially dependent on the rating provider, the company sample and the particular subperiod. The results suggest that investors should no longer expect abnormal returns by trading a difference portfolio of high and low rated firms with regard to ESG aspects.     

Why do countries matter so much in corporate social performance?

Why do levels of corporate social performance (CSP) differ so much across countries? We answer this question in an examination of CSP ratings of more than 2600 companies from 36 countries. We find that firm characteristics explain very little of the variations in CSP ratings. In contrast, variations in country factors such as stages of economic development, culture, and institutions account for a significant proportion of variations in CSP ratings across countries. In particular, we find that CSP ratings are high in countries with high income-per-capita, strong civil liberties and political rights, and cultures oriented toward harmony and autonomy. Furthermore, we find that home country factors explain a smaller portion of the overall variations in CSP for multinationals and cross-listed firms than for non-multinationals and pure domestic firms, respectively.     

Spillover of stock price crash risk: Do environmental,social and governance (ESG) matter?

This study measures the static and dynamic crash risk connections across ESG networks from 2015 to 2020, using the generalized vector autoregressive framework. In particular, it highlights the mixed results of the crash risk connections across ESG three pillars and the different spillover performance when firms with different ownership structures and qualification of margin-trading and short-selling. Our results reveal that stocks with higher ESG ratings display more negative net spillover effects, which is consistent with the ideas that stock groups with good ESG performance experience lower crash risk, and thus transmitting smaller crash risk to other ESG levels. Among the three ESG pillars, good social performance (S) significantly lowers the total crash risk connections. In contrast, firms with well environment performance (E) do not transmit lower crash risk. Moreover, SOEs and firms with qualification of margin-trading and short-selling have lower total crash risk connections among ESG ratings. Using propensity score matching to match companies with high ESG and low ESG quarterly, we find the results are still robust. When dividing the sample according to the outbreak of COVID-19, we find the crash risk connections across ESG networks are stronger during crisis.     

ESG in credit ratings and the impact on financial markets

This study examines environment, social, governance (ESG) consideration in rating reports published by credit rating agencies. 3,719 Moody's credit rating reports between 2004 and 2015 are examined and the ESG consideration is analyzed using a latent dirichlet allocation (LDA) approach. We further analyze the stock returns and credit default swap (CDS) spread changes to check whether ESG consideration has an effect on the capital market reactions. We find a small but present consideration of ESG in rating decisions. Within ESG, corporate governance plays the most important role. Moreover, the results reveal that ESG consideration is a significant determinant in the stock return and CDS spread around the rating announcement. We find that all ESG criteria are important for equity and debt investors.     

Do ESG ratings promote corporate green innovation? A quasi-natural experiment based on SynTao Green Finance's ESG ratings

Corporate efforts in green technology improvements are critical for enhancing sustainability; consequently, how to promote green innovation has attracted scholarly attention. This study explores whether and how environment, social, and governance (ESG) ratings influence corporate green innovation by using an independent third-party rating agency's (SynTao Green Finance) ESG ratings in China as a quasi-natural experiment. We find companies covered by the ESG rating agency significantly increase green innovation output by 3.9%, mainly as an increase in green invention patents. ESG ratings' positive effects on green innovation are more pronounced for firms whose investors are less short-sighted, non-state-owned enterprises and firms with higher degree of financial constraints. Additionally, we find ESG ratings' impact can also increase the green innovation quality and synergetic green innovation. Thus, ESG ratings from third-party institutions can effectively increase corporate green innovation, which has important implications for companies to achieve green transformation and for emerging markets to improve ESG rating systems.     

Environmental,social, and governance premium in Chinese stock markets

Financial markets have increasingly adopted the concept of ESG (environmental, social, and governance); this paper studies the evolving effect of corporate ESG performance on the stock returns in China's stock markets. Utilizing the Paris Agreement and China's President Xi's pledge to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060 as ESG shocks, we find that firms with lower ESG scores provide higher stock returns after the announcement of the Paris Agreement. Furthermore, the effect of ESG performance heightens after Xi's pledge. Using sorted portfolios and Fama–French factor models, we find that investors are rewarded for bearing ESG-related risks. Our estimated monthly ESG risk premium is between 0.52% and 0.61%, while state-owned firms with larger market capitalizations and better financial and operational performance tend to have better ESG performance.     

Corporate Sustainability Performance and Idiosyncratic Risk: A Global Perspective

Does investing in sustainability leaders affect portfolio performance? Analyzing two mutually exclusive leading and lagging global corporate sustainability portfolios (Dow Jones) finds that (1) leading sustainability firms do not underperform the market portfolio, and (2) their lagging counterparts outperform the market portfolio and the leading portfolio. Notably, we find leading (lagging) corporate social performance (CSP) firms exhibit significantly lower (higher) idiosyncratic risk and that idiosyncratic risk might be priced by the broader global equity market. We develop an idiosyncratic risk factor and find that its inclusion significantly reduces the apparent difference in performance between leading and lagging CSP portfolios.     

Corporate social performance and financial risk: Further empirical evidence using higher frequency data

Using a unique dataset of corporate social responsibility rating – available on a monthly basis – we shed new light on the relationship between corporate social performance (CSP) and firm risk. Where previous studies use annual (at best) measures of CSP, assuming that a change in CSP leads a change in risk, we formally test the direction of the relationship using Granger causality. Looking at large UK companies over 2002–2018 (for a total number of 19,832 firm-months), we reject any causality (either way) between CSP and financial risk (both systematic and idiosyncratic risk). This shows that the CSP-risk relationship is not an endogenous one, contrary to what previous evidence has found. Given the structure of our panel data (long T and short N), we apply GLS based estimator to correct for serial correlation in our panel regressions. We find strong evidence that CSP has a negative impact on idiosyncratic risk; however, the effect of CSP on systematic risk is not statistically significant. The existence of a contemporaneous, rather than lagged relationship doesn't fare well with established CSP theories. Overall, our original approach has opened a new door to further the study of the link between CSP, financial performance and financial risk.     

Who benefits from capital account liberalization? Evidence from firm-level credit ratings data

Using a novel panel data set on corporate foreign-currency credit ratings and capital account restrictions in advanced and emerging economies during 1995–2004, we find a strong positive effect of capital account liberalization on firms' credit risk, as measured by corporate credit ratings. As an identification strategy, we exploit within-country variation in firms' ability to obtain foreign currency and, thus, their ability to repay foreign currency debt. We find that liberalizing the capital account benefits significantly more those firms with more limited foreign currency access, namely, those producing nontradables. Our findings demonstrate a novel channel through which capital account restrictions affect economic outcomes, and they are robust to a broad range of alternative specifications.     

Tax credit rating and corporate innovation decisions

The tax credit rating mechanism was formally implemented in 2014. As an important tax collection and management innovation, it has attracted the attention of regulatory authorities and scholars. Different from the literature that directly examines corporate tax compliance, we focus on the impact of tax credit rating implementation on corporate research and development (R&D) investment decisions. Using listed companies’ data from 2014 to 2019, we find that companies with higher tax credit ratings invest more in innovation, because the system helps managers identify R&D opportunities, alleviates corporate financing constraints and reduces agency costs. We confirm that tax credit ratings have manifold impacts on corporate information environments and business decisions, with better ratings positively affecting firms’ business decisions. This discovery can inform tax policy reform, encourage corporate innovation and construct social credit systems.     

ESG government risk and international IPO underpricing

We study the association between environmental, social, and governance (ESG) government risk management and firm-level IPO underpricing between 2008 and 2018. Examining 7446 IPOs issued in 36 countries, we find that IPO underpricing tends to be lower in countries with higher ESG Government Ratings. When we uniquely examine the environmental, social, and governance pillars, we find that underpricing tends to be lower in countries with stronger risk management practices in each of these areas. Additional analysis indicates that the negative impact of ESG ratings on IPO underpricing is more pronounced in countries with more transparent financial disclosures, higher liability standards, and stronger shareholder protections.     

The effect of corporate sustainability performance on leverage adjustments

We examine the impact of corporate sustainability performance (CSP) on the speed at which firms adjust their leverage ratios to the target levels for a large sample of 31 countries from 2002 to 2018. Using two proxies of CSP, we find that firms with superior CSP tend to adjust faster toward their target leverage ratios. In exploring the potential underlying economic mechanisms through which CSP affects leverage adjustments, we find that better CSP helps firms to ease information asymmetry, enhance stakeholder engagement, push up stock prices in the stock market, and improve competitive advantage in the product market. In the cross section, the positive association between CSP and leverage adjustment speed is less pronounced in countries with high-quality institutions. The results remain unchanged in robustness tests. Overall, this paper highlights the important role of CSP in shaping corporate capital structure dynamics and suggests implications for corporate strategic planning on the privately optimal levels of CSP activities.     

CSR in the bond market: Pricing stakeholders and the moderating role of the institutional context

This study examines the impact of corporate social performance (CSP) on the spreads and credit ratings of corporate bonds on a global scale. The relationship is examined within the national legal and institutional environment and with regard to specific stakeholder practices. We construct and use a unique longitudinal, international dataset with a total of 5280 bond issues dating from 2003 to 2018 and spanning 40 countries worldwide.We provide evidence that more responsible firms benefit from lower bond spreads and improved bond ratings, while a higher degree of CSR-related controversies penalizes firms on both dimensions. Various, but not all, stakeholder relationships appear to generate a significant impact on spreads and bond ratings, with shareholders remaining crucial in both civil and common law countries, opposite to literature findings so far. Corporate governance is corroborated as a primary concern also in the debt market for common law economies, while societal stakeholders assume significance for civil law systems. Finally, findings highlight that stronger regulation and government involvement do not further promote the role of CSP in the debt market. On the other hand, free public criticism and media scrutiny generate a more pronounced effect of CSP on bond pricing providing support for the rewards associated with voluntary and proactive CSR.     

Split bond ratings and rating migration

This paper examines the relationships between split ratings and ratings migration. We find that bonds with split ratings are more likely to have future rating changes. A one-notch (more-than-one-notch) split rating increases the probability of rating change within one year of initial issuance by about 3% (6%). Furthermore, we find that about 30% of split rated bonds have their two ratings converge after four years of initial issuance. The rating convergence tapers off after three years, and the rating agency with a higher (lower) initial rating generally maintains a higher (lower) rating in subsequent years if the two ratings do not converge. We also show that rating transition estimation can be improved by taking into consideration split ratings. We find that one-year rating transition matrices are significantly different between non-letter-split rated bonds and letter-split rated bonds, and we show that the difference has an economically significant impact on the pricing of credit spread options and VaR-based risk management models. Overall, our results suggest that split ratings contain important information about subsequent rating changes.     

Board generational cohorts,gender diversity and corporate environmental and social disclosures: Evidence from China

We examine the association between board generational cohorts and corporate environmental and social disclosure. We find that older board members have a positive association with corporate environmental and social disclosures. In contrast, the moderately younger and youngest board members limit corporate environmental and social disclosures. Our results are robust to potential endogeneity with the use of alternative model specifications, with the youngest board members accounting for a lower level of corporate environmental and social disclosures. Furthermore, we find that the presence of gender diversity on the board moderates the relationship between board generational cohorts and corporate environmental and social disclosures and reporting incentives are important to oldest and youngest board members in their push for environmental and social disclosures. Finally, additional analysis indicates that firms with governmental shareholding are associated with a higher level of corporate environmental and social disclosures as compared to firms without governmental shareholding when board members are moderately young.     

Stock market reactions to adverse ESG disclosure via media channels

This study examines the value relevance of corporate reputation risks (CRR) from adverse media coverage of environmental, social and governance (ESG) issues on stock performance at the firm level. Empirical results advance signalling theory and resource-based view by providing evidence that corporate reputation is considered a valuable intangible asset by investors and adverse ESG disclosure via media channels have a significant and negative impact on firm valuation. The research is extended using various factors and indicates that heightened CRR have a substantially negative corollary effect on stock price of smaller and less liquid firms that are typically not S&P500 constituents. Further analysis using industry classifications reveals that stock performance of companies in the ‘sin’ triumvirate (i.e., alcohol, tobacco, and gaming) is not significantly affected by negative ESG media coverage. Instead, firms in candy & soda, steel works, banking, and insurance industries are the most susceptible to investors' repercussion from undesirable media spotlight. These findings provide new insights and indicate that beyond the type and delivery method of ESG disclosures, firm characteristics, corporate reputation status and industry explain differences in investors' reaction to ‘bad’ news.     

A comparative study of the probability of default for global financial firms

This article presents a modification of Merton’s (1976) ruin option pricing model to estimate the implied probability of default from stock and option market prices. To test the model, we analyze all global financial firms with traded options in the US and focus on the subprime mortgage crisis period. We compare the performance of the implied probability of default from our model to the expected default frequencies based on the Moody’s KMV model and agency credit ratings by constructing cumulative accuracy profiles (CAP) and the receiver operating characteristic (ROC). We find that the probability of default estimates from our model are equal or superior to other credit risk measures studied based on CAP and ROC. In particular, during the subprime crisis our model surpassed credit ratings and matched or exceeded KMV in anticipating the magnitude of the crisis. We have also found some initial evidence that adding off-balance-sheet derivatives exposure improves the performance of the KMV model.