This article discusses profitability-liquidity relationships on accounting and market levels for 872 shares of publicly-traded Brazilian companies, observed between 1994 and 2013. On the market level, the assumption is that share liquidity is able to reduce some of the risks incurred by investors, making them more willing to pay a higher price for liquid shares, which would lower expected market returns. On the accounting level, the basic hypothesis argues that a firm's holding more liquid assets is related to a conservative investment policy, possibly reducing accounting returns for shareholders. Under the assumption of financial constraint, however, more accounting liquidity would allow positive net present value investments to be carried out, increasing future accounting returns, which would positively affect market liquidity and share prices in an efficient market, resulting in a lower market risk/expected return premium. Under the assumption of no financial constraint, however, more accounting liquidity would only represent a carry cost, compromising future accounting returns, which would adversely affect market liquidity and share prices and result in a higher market risk/expected return premium. Among the hypotheses, the presence of a negative market liquidity premium was verified in Brazil, with shares that traded more exhibiting a higher expected market return. On the margins of the major theories on the subject, only two negative relationships between excess accounting liquidity and market liquidity and accounting return, supporting the carry cost assumption for financially unconstrained firms, were verified. In terms of this paper's contributions, there is the analysis, unprecedented in Brazil as far as is known, of the relationship between liquidity and return on market and accounting levels, considering the financial constraint hypothesis to which the firms are subject.

We used a multilevel approach on comparing for‐profit and not‐for‐profit microfinance institutions (MFIs). The database was composed of 202 MFIs (in 52 countries) from the most widely used microfinance dataset (the Microfnance Information eXchange, Inc. Market), with 669 observations from 2010 to 2014. Four financial sustainability outcomes were considered: yield on gross portfolio; return on assets; portfolio at risk, 30 days; and operational self‐sufficiency (OSS). Although for‐profit MFIs had a higher Yield, there was no significant effect of profit orientation on ROA, PAR30, and OSS. Further analysis shows that although profit orientation has a significant effect on the yield of small MFIs, it does not have any effect on larger MFIs, which is consistent with the theory that larger MFIs can distribute its fixed costs better, requiring lower interest rates and allowing smaller yield on the gross portfolio. In addition, we show that the intrinsic characteristics of the MFIs account for the majority of the variance from the four outcomes.