The dominant view in the psychological sciences is that bad is stronger than good, as demonstrated by phenomena such as loss aversion. However, this view has its detractors, and recent meta-analyses report contradictory findings regarding whether losses indeed loom larger than gains. One way to address whether bad or good loom larger is by examining the prevalence of valenced antonyms across languages. In this work, we test whether negatively valenced concepts are more prevalent than their positively valenced antonyms across 308 languages. Findings reveal that, consistent with the dominant view, negatively valenced concepts are more prevalent than their positive antonyms, but only when concepts refer to existential threats (e.g., danger vs. safety). In all other instances, positively valenced concepts are more prevalent than their negative antonyms (e.g., happiness vs. sadness). We conclude that the proponents of the dominant view and its detractors are both correct, but under different boundary conditions. We discuss downstream implications of these findings for the larger literature on whether and why bad is stronger than good.