scholarly journals Analysis of Determinants of Split Ratings and Rating Conservativeness between Japanese and US Credit Rating Agencies

Author(s):  
Yoshiki Shimizu ◽  
Junghee Lee ◽  
Hideki Takei

In the previous paper, we confirmed the existence of the split ratings between Japanese and US credit rating agencies (CRAs). Our study did not support early studies suggesting that the split ratings were merely random occurrences. Rather, our findings suggested that the split ratings occurring between Japanese and US CRAs were not random and frequently occurring. The Japanese CRA assigned less conservative ratings than the US CRAs. In this paper, we performed the multivariate regression analysis to find variables which would differentiate the degree of rating conservativeness. Our samples were 192 Japanese companies which were assigned their ratings by Japanese and US credit rating agencies. We used 10-year bond ratings of these companies from 2000 and 2009. Our data sources were Nikkei NEEDS-Financial Quest for Japanese ratings and financial information and Thomson Reuters Datastream for US ratings. All financial data of the 192 firms were collected from Nikkei NEEDS-Financial Quest. According to our findings, Japanese agency seems to put higher weight on ROA than US agencies while all agencies seem to use variables such as asset, liquidity, and leverage to assign ratings. We assume that this is the main variable that has differentiated the degree of rating conservativeness.

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.


Risks ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (12) ◽  
pp. 226
Author(s):  
Patrycja Chodnicka-Jaworska

The aim of this study was to examine the impact of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) measures on credit ratings given to non-financial institutions by the largest credit rating agencies according to economic sector divisions. The hypotheses were as follows: a strong negative impact on non-financial institutions’ credit rating changes will result from ESG risk changes, and the reaction of credit rating changes will vary in different sectors. Panel event models were used to verify these hypotheses. The study used data from the Thomson Reuters Database for the period 2010–2020. The analysis was based on the literature on credit rating determinants and on papers and reports on COVID-19, ESG factors, and their impact on credit rating changes. Linear decomposition was used for the analysis. To verify these hypotheses, long-term issuer credit ratings presented by Moody’s and Fitch for European companies listed on these stock exchanges have been used. In the analyses, financial and non-financial factors were also considered. The results suggested that, within the last year, the methodology presented by credit rating agencies has changed, and ESG factors are one of the basic measures that are used to verify credit rating changes, especially those related to the pandemic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document