Does he not act for the benefit of shareholders (in the best possible future, at least)
Rate-limited edit: my (evasive?) answer was that Stoics were careful enough not to use the word "good", but the more subtle, one might accuse utilitarian, "agathos" in that scenario
Should I interest you in the needle's eye left for cybernetic* shareholders?
*Neither fully machine, nor fully human, nor even monolithic, but definitely no camel, bc camel, unlike horse, can survive anywhere and were once native to the USA (arguably)
This can be (plausibly) used to describe Sam Altman, for example