With the advent of greening the global economy and the introduction of green financial assets, this study examines the connectedness and spillover effect of green assets using a QVAR approach focusing on the average connectedness and connectedness under extreme market conditions. The time of the study captures the crucial global incidents of COVID-19 and Russia–Ukraine war to investigate the effect of major incidents on the connectedness of green assets. The results of the QVAR analysis reveal that green assets are moderately connected under normal market conditions; however, their connection is strengthened under extreme market conditions. IOTA and SP Green Bonds are the net receivers of shocks from other assets, and SP Green Bonds are connected to green energy indices and green cryptocurrencies during turbulent markets. Since green cryptocurrencies are closely connected, a lower portion of them should be added to portfolios, whereas SP Green Bonds qualify as a good diversifying agent in a portfolio. The study has significant implications for market participants, investors, and policymakers.

This study is conducted to examine the relationship between overall ESG performance and financial performance through the moderating role of board compensation. By adopting a large panel dataset, this study follows the fixed effect models to examine how ROA and ROE influence on the ESG score as well as each dimension of the ESG, including social, environmental and governance. The study includes two interaction effects to examine whether board compensation strengthens or weakens the connection between corporate financial performance and operational efficiency (ROA) and shareholder returns (ROE). The results indicate that statistically insignificant relationships are found in all dimensions between ROA, ROE, and ESG performance. The direct relationship between board compensation and ESG outcomes is positive and statistically significant, although the moderating effect is not significant. The results add to Agency Theory, Stakeholder Theory, and Slack Resources Theory, revealing that the statistical moderating effect of board compensation on the positive direct relationship between ESG and board returns is unsupported. References Abass, H. T., Zhuyun, X., & Wiredu, I. (2026). Sustainability in the digital era: How ESG performance and technological transformation shape corporate value in emerging business environments. Business Strategy & Development, 9(3), Article e70395. https://doi.org/10.1002/bsd2.70395 Abu Afifa, M., Nguyen, N. M., & Bui, D. V. (2025). Environmental, social and governance (ESG) disclosure quality in developing countries: Evidence from the ASEAN region. Corporate Governance, 25(7), 1728–1754. https://doi.org/10.1108/CG-02-2024-0102 Ajay, R., Jory, S. R., & Syamraj, K. P. (2024). Advancing understanding of ESG score and executive compensation relationships in the Indian context. Global Finance Journal, 62, Article 100993. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gfj.2024.100993 Aldogan Eklund, M., & Pinheiro, P. (2024). The determinants of corporate social responsibility (CSR) committee: Executive compensation, CSR-based incentives and ESG performance. Social Responsibility Journal, 20(7), 1240–1255. https://doi.org/10.1108/SRJ-07-2022-0303 Awa, H. O., Etim, W., & Ogbonda, E. (2024). Stakeholders, stakeholder theory and corporate social responsibility (CSR). International Journal of Corporate Social Responsibility, 9(1), Article 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40991-024-00094-y Aydoğmuş, M., Gülay, G., & Ergun, K. (2022). Impact of ESG performance on firm value and profitability. Borsa Istanbul Review, 22, S119–S127. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bir.2022.11.006 Chen, W., Sun, C., Tsang, A., & Zeng, X. (2026). ESG reporting, ESG contracting, and executive compensation: International evidence. Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, 53(1), 380–410. https://doi.org/10.1111/jbfa.70024 DasGupta, R., & Roy, A. (2023). Firm environmental, social, governance and financial performance relationship contradictions: Insights from institutional environment mediation. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 189, Article 122341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2023.122341 Deb, S., Sajit, S., & Digar, B. (2023). Does ESG improve firm performance? Evidence from Indian companies. International Journal of Scientific Research in Engineering and Management, 7(8), 1–7. Dell’Erba, M., & Gomtsyan, S. (2024). Regulatory and investor demands to use ESG performance metrics in executive compensation: Right instrument, wrong method. Journal of Corporate Law Studies, 24(1), 1–40. https://doi.org/10.1080/14735970.2024.2350139 Ding, T., Zhou, Y., & Chen, L. (2025). Non-financial factors and financial returns: The impact of linking ESG metrics to executive compensation on corporate financial performance. Sustainability, 17(22), Article 10220. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/22/10220 Dmytriyev, S. D., Freeman, R. E., & Hörisch, J. (2021). The relationship between stakeholder theory and corporate social responsibility: Differences, similarities, and implications for social issues in management. Journal of Management Studies, 58(6), 1441–1470. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12684 Figueiredo, E., Margaça, C., García, J. C. S., & Ribeiro, C. (2025). The contribution of reward systems in the work context: A systematic review of the literature and directions for future research. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 16(5), 16525–16559. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-024-02492-w Gazi, M. A. I., Islam, H., Islam, M. A., Karim, R., Momo, S. M., & Senathirajah, A. R. B. S. (2024). Unlocking sustainable development in East Asia Pacific and South Asia: An econometric exploration of ESG initiatives. Sustainable Environment, 10(1), Article 2366558. https://doi.org/10.1080/27658511.2024.2366558 Islam, S. M. T., Ghosh, R., & Khatun, A. (2021). Slack resources, free cash flow and corporate social responsibility expenditure: Evidence from an emerging economy. Journal of Accounting in Emerging Economies, 11(4), 533–551. https://doi.org/10.1108/JAEE-09-2020-0248 Jeyhunov, A., Kim, J. D., & Bae, S. M. (2025). The effects of board diversity on Korean companies’ ESG performance. Sustainability, 17(2), Article 787. https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/2/787 Koundouri, P., Pittis, N., & Plataniotis, A. (2022). The impact of ESG performance on the financial performance of European area companies: An empirical examination. Environmental Sciences Proceedings, 15(1), Article 13. https://www.mdpi.com/2673-4931/15/1/13 Lee, N. G., Han, S. H., & Kim, H. J. (2024). Internal monitoring mechanisms and corporate environmental and social performance: Evidence from Korea. Research in International Business and Finance, 71, Article 102414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ribaf.2024.102414 Liao, Q., Erzurumlu, Y. O., & Gozgor, G. (2025). Impact of market regulations on firm-specific ESG performance: Evidence from Asian economies. Research in International Business and...