Sustainable investing and stock performance during the pandemic : Evidence from Sweden
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is mixed evidence in the existing literature whether environmental, social and governance (ESG) activities are valuable during times of financial crisis. Proponents of ESG argue that such endeavors may act as a resilience factor for companies during market downturns. The COVID-19 pandemic represents an unexpected and exogenous shock to the economy, offering a unique opportunity to test the association between a firm's ESG ratings and stock performance. Furthermore, recent studies relate a company’s effectiveness of ESG activities to their respective country of operations overall trust levels. This study addresses the current research gap on this issue by analyzing data on 632 Swedish public companies, as Sweden is regarded as a high-trust country. The results suggests that stocks with higher ESG ratings does not exhibit higher returns and lower stock volatility during the initial collapse period of 2020. However, during the following recovery period, represented by the second quarter of 2020, ESG scores were in fact associated with higher stock return and lower stock volatility. This study furthers understanding of the relationship between ESG dimensions and financial performance in countries with high levels of trust.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".