Effects of fiscal credibility on sovereign risk: evidence using comprehensive credit rating measures

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriel Caldas Montes ◽  
Julyara Costa
Keyword(s):  
Risk Perception ◽  
Financial Market ◽  
Public Debt ◽  
Credit Rating ◽  
Credit Rating Agencies ◽  
Sovereign Risk ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Rating Agencies ◽  
Sovereign Credit ◽  
Long Run

PurposeSince sovereign ratings provided by credit rating agencies (CRAs) are a key determinant of the interest rates a country faces in the international financial market and once sovereign ratings may have a constraining impact on the ratings assigned to domestic banks or companies, some studies have focused on identifying the determinants of sovereign credit risk assessments provided by CRAs. In particular, this study estimates the effect of fiscal credibility on sovereign risk using four different comprehensive credit rating (CCR) measures obtained from CRAs' announcements and two different fiscal credibility indicators.Design/methodology/approachWe build comprehensive credit rating (CCR) measures to capture sovereign risk. These measures are calculated using sovereign ratings, the rating outlooks and credit watches issued by the three main credit rating agencies (S&P, Moody's and Fitch) for long-term foreign-currency Brazilian bonds. Based on monthly data from 2003 to 2018, we use different econometric estimation techniques in order to provide robust results.FindingsThe results indicate that fiscal credibility exerts both short- and long-run effects on sovereign risk perception, and macroeconomic fundamentals are important long-run determinants.Practical implicationsSince fiscal credibility reflects the government's ability to maintain budgetary balance and sustainable public debt, the government should keep its commitment to responsible fiscal policies so as not to deteriorate expectations formed by financial market experts about the fiscal scenario and, thus, to achieve better credit assessments issued by CRAs with respect to sovereign debt bonds. Sovereign credit rating assessment is a voluntary practice. It is up to the country whether they want to apply for a rating assessment or not. Thus, without a sovereign rating, one must find an alternative to measure the sovereign risk of a country. In this sense, an important practical implication that this study provides is that fiscal credibility can be used as a leading indicator of sovereign risk perceptions obtained from CRAs or even as a proxy for sovereign risk.Originality/valueThis paper is the first to verify how important the expectations of financial market experts in relation to the fiscal effort required to keep public debt at a sustainable level (i.e. fiscal credibility) are to sovereign risk perception of credit rating agencies. In this sense, the study is the first to address this relation, and thus it contributes to the literature that seeks to understand the determinants of sovereign ratings in emerging countries.

A comparative study of economic growth as a key determinant of sovereign credit ratings in Africa

2020 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Misheck Mutize ◽  
McBride Peter Nkhalamba
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Credit Rating ◽  
Credit Ratings ◽  
Credit Rating Agencies ◽  
African Union ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Rating Agencies ◽  
Sovereign Credit ◽  
Sovereign Credit Ratings

PurposeThis study is a comparative analysis of the magnitude of economic growth as a key determinant of long-term foreign currency sovereign credit ratings in 30 countries in Africa, Europe, Asia and Latin America from 2010 to 2018.Design/methodology/approachThe analysis applies the fixed effects (FE) and random effects (RE) panel least squares (PLS) models.FindingsThe authors find that the magnitude economic coefficients are marginally small for African countries compared to other developing countries in Asia, Europe and Latin America. Results of the probit and logit binary estimation models show positive coefficients for economic growth sub-factors for non-African countries (developing and developed) compared to negative coefficients for African countries.Practical implicationsThese findings mean that, an increase in economic growth in Africa does not significantly increase the likelihood that sovereign credit ratings will be upgraded. This implies that there is lack of uniformity in the application of the economic growth determinant despite the claims of a consistent framework by rating agencies. Thus, macroeconomic factors are relatively less important in determining country's risk profile in Africa than in other developing and developed countries.Originality/valueFirst, studies that investigate the accuracy of sovereign credit rating indicators and risk factors in Africa are rare. This study is a key literature at the time when the majority of African countries are exploring the window of sovereign bonds as an alternative funding model to the traditional concessionary borrowings from multilateral institutions. On the other hand, the persistent poor rating is driving the cost of sovereign bonds to unreasonably high levels, invariably threatening their hopes of diversifying funding options. Second, there is criticism that the rating assessments of the credit rating agencies are biased in favour of developed countries and there is a gap in literature on studies that explore the whether the credit rating agencies are biased against African countries. This paper thus explores the rationale behind the African Union Decision Assembly/AU/Dec.631 (XXVIII) adopted by the 28th Ordinary Session of the African Union held in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia in January 2017 (African Union, 2017), directing its specialized governance agency, the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM), to provide support to its Member States in the field of international credit rating agencies. The Assembly of African Heads of State and Government highlight that African countries are facing the challenges of credit downgrades despite an average positive economic growth. Lastly, the paper makes contribution to the argument that the majority of African countries are unfairly rated by international credit rating agencies, raising a discussion of the possibility of establishing a Pan-African credit rating institution.

The Origins of Sovereign Risk Ratings

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 388-414
Author(s):  
Diogo L. Pinheiro
Keyword(s):  
Credit Rating ◽  
Social Issues ◽  
Credit Rating Agencies ◽  
Sovereign Risk ◽  
Rating Agencies

Abstract Sovereign Risk Ratings are controversial measures used to determine a country’s creditworthiness. They are supposed to measure not only a country’s ability, but willingness to repay its debts. Much has been said about what it is that is actually measured by these ratings. But relatively little attention has been paid to who gets rated. That is, there is substantially less research on the issue of the when and the why a nation gets rated by one of the leading Credit Rating Agencies. The objective of this article is to try to understand that, and to sort through different theories for the emergence and spread of sovereign risk ratings. We find that institutional and political aspects matter just as much as economic ones, and that therefore sovereign risk ratings may play a role in political and social issues.

Part II The Financial Crisis of 2007–2011, 6 Market and Regulatory Failure

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mccormick Roger ◽  
Stears Chris
Keyword(s):  
Risk Management ◽  
Financial Crisis ◽  
Credit Risk ◽  
Financial Market ◽  
Credit Rating ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Credit Rating Agencies ◽  
Rating Agencies ◽  
Market Participants ◽  
Regulatory Failure

This chapter first discusses the origins of the financial crisis, highlighting practice of ‘packaging and selling’ credit risk by financial market participants that led up to the crisis. It argues that although, in retrospect, many aspects of that practice look very bad indeed, the idea that banks might originate a credit exposure and then transfer the credit risk attached to it to a third party was, before the financial crisis, considered to be part and parcel of sound risk management. The discussion then turns to credit-rating agencies. Analysis of the financial crisis and ‘what went wrong’ has shown that rating agencies were too generous with their rating of many of the structured products that contributed to the collapse.

Chile spending commitments may hamper fiscal prudence

2018 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Government Spending ◽  
Credit Rating ◽  
Gdp Growth ◽  
Credit Rating Agencies ◽  
Government Budget ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Rating Agencies ◽  
The Government ◽  
Fiscal Prudence

Subject The draft 2019 budget. Significance The government budget for 2019, announced by President Sebastian Pinera on September 29, is the most austere in almost a decade. It aims to restore Chile’s long-standing reputation for exemplary fiscal conduct, which in recent years has been undermined by increases in government spending that outstrip GDP growth, and the resulting increase in borrowing. Impacts Credit rating agencies have indicated that the draft budget is in line with their concerns about Chile’s rising borrowing requirement. The ongoing decline in fiscal revenues from copper underlines Chile’s need to diversify its economy. The government will be hard-pressed to meet its fiscal goals if, as current forecasts suggest, GDP growth weakens through to 2020.

Regulating the Chinese credit rating agencies: progress and challenges

2015 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 66-80 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Bian
Keyword(s):  
Credit Rating ◽  
Legal Framework ◽  
Development Stage ◽  
Regulatory Regime ◽  
Credit Rating Agencies ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Rating Agencies ◽  
Depth Analysis ◽  
Effective Level ◽  
Full Dimension

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to examine the emerging Chinese credit rating agencies (CRAs), and their development, regulatory regime and challenges. The Chinese financial system has made many improvements; in particular, the regulatory regime has reached a more effective level. However, it should be admitted that some aspects still require further development. Compared with other developed markets, the Chinese credit rating industry is still young. Under these circumstances, questions are raised about the performance of the CRAs in China. Whether the legal framework is effective enough? A further point, in terms of the development, is what are the major obstacles lying ahead for the Chinese CRAs? Design/methodology/approach – This paper will concentrate on the study of Chinese CRAs. Starting with a brief introduction and analysis on the Chinese CRAs, it will further examine the rating methodologies of the Chinese CRAs. Following this, the regulatory regimes will be analyzed in detail, from the perspectives of the securities, banking and insurance market. Moreover, the paper will identify the key problems under the current regulatory regime. Last but not least, a conclusion and some future suggestions for the development of the regulatory regime will also be made based on the earlier observations and study. Findings – The current development stage and future reform requirement of the Chinese credit rating industry. Originality/value – Provide a full dimension and in depth analysis on the Chinese credit rating industry.

The geographical and income differences in the determinants of African sovereign credit ratings

2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 609-624
Author(s):  
Ilse Botha ◽  
Marinda Pretorius
Keyword(s):  
Credit Rating ◽  
Credit Ratings ◽  
African Countries ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Rating Agencies ◽  
Sovereign Credit ◽  
Additional Information ◽  
Income Groups ◽  
Sovereign Credit Ratings ◽  
Developmental Indicators

PurposeThe importance of obtaining a sovereign credit rating from an agency is still underrated in Africa. Literature on the determinants of sovereign credit ratings in Africa is scarce. The purpose of this research is to determine what the determinants are for sovereign credit ratings in Africa and whether these determinants differ between regions and income groups.Design/methodology/approachA sample of 19 African countries' determinants of sovereign credit ratings are compared between 2007 and 2014 using a panel-ordered probit approach.FindingsThe findings indicated that the determinants of sovereign credit ratings differ between African regions and income groups. The developmental indicators were the most significant determinants across all income groups and regions. The results affirm that the identified determinants in the literature are not as applicable to African sovereigns, and that developmental variables and different income groups and regions are important determinants to consider for sovereign credit ratings in Africa.Originality/valueThe results affirm that the identified determinants in the literature are not as applicable to African sovereigns, and that developmental variables and different income groups and regions are important determinants to consider for sovereign credit ratings in Africa. Rating agencies follow the same rating assignment process for developed and developing countries, which means investors will have to supplement the allocated credit rating with additional information. Africa can attract more investment if African countries obtain formal, accurate sovereign credit ratings, which take the characteristics of the continent into consideration.

A Bayesian inference model for the credit rating scale

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 390-404 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philipp Gmehling ◽  
Pierfrancesco La Mura
Keyword(s):  
Bayesian Inference ◽  
Credit Risk ◽  
Credit Rating ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Credit Rating Agencies ◽  
Model Framework ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Rating Agencies ◽  
Credit Rating Agency ◽  
Limited Accuracy

Purpose This paper aims to provide a theoretical explanation of why credit rating agencies typically disclose credit risk of issuers in classes rather than publishing the qualitative ranking those classes are based upon. Thus, its goal is to develop a better understanding of what determines the number and size of rating classes. Design/methodology/approach Investors expect ratings to be sufficiently accurate in estimating credit risk. In a theoretical model framework, it is therefore assumed that credit rating agencies, which observe credit risk with limited accuracy, are careful in not misclassifying an issuer with a lower credit quality to a higher rating class. This situation is analyzed as a Bayesian inference setting for the credit rating agencies. Findings A disclosure in intervals, typically used by credit rating agencies results from their objective of keeping misclassification errors sufficiently low in conjunction with the limited accuracy with which they observe credit risk. The number and size of the rating intervals depend in the model on how much accuracy the credit rating agencies can supply. Originality/value The paper uses Bayesian hypothesis testing to illustrate the link between limited accuracy of a credit rating agency and its disclosure of issuers’ credit risk in intervals. The findings that accuracy and the objective of avoiding misclassification determine the rating scale in this theoretical setting can lead to a better understanding of what influences the interval disclosure of major rating agencies observed in practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document