Investor-State Dispute Settlement (ISDS) has proliferated, yet average claims contain less information than before. This study examines 812 disputes from 1987 to present.

Historical Context: Fewer ISDS cases succeeded in the past compared to recent years.

Current Trends: More claims now involve indirect expropriation or fair and equitable treatment allegations, but have lower success rates due to reduced information content.

Methodology & Findings: Analyzing firms' risk perceptions across two datasets reveals mixed effects on FDI. Direct expropriation cases still impact investment slightly, but less than historically.

Implications for Reputation Theory: The findings suggest reputational harm from ISDS claims has diminished over time, challenging conventional wisdom about these disputes.