scholarly journals The Credit Rating Agencies and Their Role in the Financial System

Author(s):  
Lawrence J. White

Despite extensive criticism, the major credit rating agencies (CRAs)—Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s, and Fitch—remain central entities in the financial markets of the United States and Europe, especially with respect to bonds and similar financial instruments. This chapter provides a discussion of the role that the CRAs continue to play in the financial system and how and why they play that role. After a brief overview of the CRAs as providers of information that lessens the problems of asymmetric information in lending/borrowing markets, the chapter discusses the expanded use of the CRAs’ ratings in the prudential regulation of financial institutions and the problems that contributed to the financial crisis of 2008. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the likely direction of the CRAs and their regulation.

2018 ◽  
Vol 15 (2) ◽  
pp. 339-402
Author(s):  
Chiara Picciau

Credit rating agencies have assessed the creditworthiness of issuers and debt instruments for over a century. Nevertheless, in the United States and in the European Union a first regulation of rating services was passed only at the beginning of the twenty-first century, respectively in 2006 and 2009. Statutory liability rules were later adopted in the United States with the Dodd-Frank Act of 2010 and in the European Union with Regulation (EU) no 462/2013. Despite some similarities between the American and European existing discipline, significant differences still exist and pave the way for regulatory arbitrage opportunities in the ratings market. The reasons for divergence are clearly historically based and derive, in part, from the different traditions of the two legal systems. Accordingly, this article compares the evolution of the US regulatory framework and case law on the liability of rating organizations towards investors with the uniform rules adopted by the European Union since 2009, absent a comparable case law at the European level. It is argued that, in both systems, while it is easier to establish liability in case of intent, burden of proof rules generally place a significant, if not insurmountable, obstacle to damage compensation for investors.


Author(s):  
A. Seetharaman ◽  
Nitin Patwa ◽  
Shriram Nagarajan

The current research identifies the rating of credit raters by evaluating how credit rating agencies are involved in rating the corporate. It determines the credibility and reliability of their scores based on various variables presenting the credit history and credit worthiness of corporate operating in global perspectives including the United States, UK and India. The paper indicates that there should be some agencies or financial bodies that oversee the processes and procedures of credit raters rating the corporate worldwide. The research explores and norms and practices of the rating of credit raters and determines how the selected variables would be helpful in determining the credibility and authenticity of the credit raters in financial markets. It highlights the implications of the opinions of these credit raters on the performance and future growth of the corporate and predicts what measures should be adopted in rating the credit worthiness of corporate operating in developing countries. This research indicates how these variables could affect the processes of credit raters and gives a direction to the policymakers and financial experts on the performance and creditworthiness of the financial opinions and ratings of the credit raters.


2008 ◽  
Vol 193 ◽  
pp. 65-83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott Kennedy

AbstractAlthough China has had difficulty improving the performance of its banks and stock markets, it has struggled even more to develop a credit rating industry. Credit rating agencies (CRA), which provide bond ratings, are vital to financial markets in advanced capitalist countries, but China's credit rating companies are weak and have had little influence over the behaviour of those who issue or invest in bonds. Some argue that CRAs gain authority through their strong reputation in the eyes of market participants, but the experience of rating agencies in China supports evidence from elsewhere that their private authority is largely dependent on government mandate, a benefit China's CRAs have only recently begun to enjoy. Many private actors, from trade associations to charity groups, are struggling to gain public influence in China, but credit rating agencies may be the best barometer to measure the Chinese government's general stance towards private authority.


Author(s):  
Josh Wolfson ◽  
Corinne Crawford

<p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: justify; line-height: normal; margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; mso-pagination: none;"><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;; color: black; font-size: 10pt; mso-themecolor: text1;">Credit rating agencies are considered the gatekeepers to the financial markets; however, these agencies have come under increasing attack in the past few years by investors, regulators and the business community.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The United States Senate has accused the credit rating agencies of flawed methodology, weak oversight by regulators, conflicts of interest and a total lack of transparency.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>The Senate review concluded that the problems with the credit rating agencies were responsible for contributing to the housing bubble by awarding AAA ratings to complex, unsafe asset backed securities and other derivatives, thereby magnifying the financial shock when the housing bubble finally burst. In this article, we will explore how the credit rating agencies obtained, and, as many feel, misused their power.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">&nbsp; </span>In addition, we will outline currently proposed legislative and regulatory solutions.</span></p>


Author(s):  
Miles Livingston ◽  
Lei Zhou

Credit rating agencies have developed as an information intermediary in the credit market because there are very large numbers of bonds outstanding with many different features. The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association reports over $20 trillion of corporate bonds, mortgaged-backed securities, and asset-backed securities in the United States. The vast size of the bond markets, the number of different bond issues, and the complexity of these securities result in a massive amount of information for potential investors to evaluate. The magnitude of the information creates the need for independent companies to provide objective evaluations of the ability of bond issuers to pay their contractually binding obligations. The result is credit rating agencies (CRAs), private companies that monitor debt securities/issuers and provide information to investors about the potential default risk of individual bond issues and issuing firms. Rating agencies provide ratings for many types of debt instruments including corporate bonds, debt instruments backed by assets such as mortgages (mortgage-backed securities), short-term debt of corporations, municipal government debt, and debt issued by central governments (sovereign bonds). The three largest rating agencies are Moody’s, Standard & Poor’s, and Fitch. These agencies provide ratings that are indicators of the relative probability of default. Bonds with the highest rating of AAA have very low probabilities of default and consequently the yields on these bonds are relatively low. As the ratings decline, the probability of default increases and the bond yields increase. Ratings are important to institutional investors such as insurance companies, pension funds, and mutual funds. These large investors are often restricted to purchasing exclusively or primarily bonds in the highest rating categories. Consequently, the highest ratings are usually called investment grade. The lower ratings are usually designated as high-yield or “junk bonds.” There is a controversy about the possibility of inflated ratings. Since issuers pay rating agencies for providing ratings, there may be an incentive for the rating agencies to provide inflated ratings in exchange for fees. In the U.S. corporate bond market, at least two and often three agencies provide ratings. Multiple ratings make it difficult for one rating agency to provide inflated ratings. Rating agencies are regulated by the Securities and Exchange Commission to ensure that agencies follow reasonable procedures.


Author(s):  
Eborall Charlotte

This chapter concentrates on credit rating agencies (CRAs), which play a key role in financial markets. It explains how CRAs help reduce information asymmetry between investors and issuers by providing an independent assessment of the relative creditworthiness of countries or companies. It also describes how CRA's role has expanded significantly in recent decades with financial globalization, such as the introduction of references to credit ratings in regulations and the embedding by market participants of ratings in their operating procedures, investment decisions, and contracts. This chapter identifies the heavy reliance on CRAs as one of the main contributors to the global financial crisis in 2008. It also talks about the efficacy of CRAs' credit ratings after 2008, in which regulators in the United States (US) and Europe introduced new regulations intended to address the reliability of CRAs' predictions of probability of default.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document