Recognition versus disclosure of finance leases: Evidence from Japan

This study examines whether credit market participants—bond investors and credit rating agencies—treat recognized and disclosed finance leases differently when assessing firms’ credit risk in Japan. I use firms’ credit risk, measured by bond spreads and credit ratings, to investigate the relations between recognized versus disclosed finance lease obligations and firms’ credit risk following the adoption of Statement No. 13, Accounting Standard for Lease Transactions. For a sample of firms issuing new bonds, I find that, unlike recognized finance leases, disclosed finance leases are not associated with bond spreads. Moreover, the associations between recognized versus disclosed finance leases and bond spreads are substantially different. Conversely, recognized and disclosed finance leases are associated with credit ratings and are processed similarly when credit ratings are determined. Taken together, my results suggest that the sophistication of capital market participants influences their credit risk assessments of recognized versus disclosed finance leases.     

Market structure and rating strategies in credit rating markets – A dynamic model with matching of heterogeneous bond issuers and rating agencies

This paper investigates the impact of rating agencies in a market with asymmetric information. In particular, the role of credit rating agencies as an intermediary between investors and bond issuers is discussed. We model this setting in a dynamic framework in which both rating agencies and bond issuers are of heterogeneous quality. Rating agencies can apply costly research technology to reveal the fundamental nature of bond issuers and engage in rating smoothing. We show that rating smoothing can compensate for low research quality, even though it is accompanied by a quality deterioration in the rating market and market clustering. Moreover, low-quality bond issuers have a general tendency to match with low-quality rating agencies. If investors place a strong emphasis on the reputation of rating agencies, rating markets also tend to be strongly clustered.     

多重信用评级与债券融资成本——来自中国债券市场的经验证据

本文揭示了多重信用评级的信息生产机制和信用认证机制,排除了“信用评级购买”假说对于多重评级动机的解释,研究发现:多重信用评级有利于降低债券融资成本;相对于不一致的多重信用评级,一致的多重信用评级更有利于降低债券融资成本。在多重信用评级中,相对于评级机构均为“发行人付费”模式,兼有“投资者付费”模式的信用评级更有利于降低债券融资成本。此外,当多重信用评级的评级意见不一致时,平均评级的信息含量最高,即综合不同信用评级所包含的多种信息比任何单一信用评级更加具有信息含量。本研究为我国债券市场双评级制度提供了理论和经验证据的支持,有助于完善多元化信用评级制度和债券市场监管制度,并提示发债企业可以通过多重信用评级向市场传递更多和更具效度的评级信息,以弥补单一信用评级的信息不足和评级结果失准,减少投资者决策的不确定性,从而降低债券融资成本。     

Assessing Credit Rating Agencies by Bond Issuers and Institutional Investors

We examine how a sample of publicly traded corporate bond issuers and institutional investors assess the four major nationally recognized rating agencies and their role in capital markets. The results show that issuers and investors differ dramatically in their assessments about rating agencies. Specifically, the majority of institutional investors require only one rating when they buy rated corporate bonds, but most issuers obtain two or more ratings. Issuers and investors also differ in their assessments about whether ratings accurately reflect creditworthiness and timeliness. The results suggest that differences reflect the different roles that rating agencies provide in the market place.     

Corporate Credit Spreads and the Sovereign Ceiling in Latin America

We exploit a panel of 72 US dollar-denominated bonds issued by Latin American publicly listed firms between 1996 and 2004, a period of regional financial crises, to answer the following three questions: (1) Is sovereign risk a statistically and economically significant determinant of the corporate credit spread, controlling for firm- and bond-specific characteristics? (2) If yes, do market participants apply the sovereign ceiling rule adopted by rating agencies in the pricing of our bond market data? And (3) how do market views compare with the rating agencies ceiling policy for each corporate bond? We find strong evidence of an economically and statistically significant effect of sovereign risk on corporate spreads across different panel econometric specifications and bonds. Moreover, markets do not apply the ceiling rule in 77–90% of the bonds we sample and these findings are consistent with rating agencies’ policies toward the latter for about 50% of the firms. These results are robust to the inclusion of firm- and bond-specific variables derived from the structural approach to credit risk and to the business cycle in each country.     

Credit rating dynamics and competition

I analyze the market for credit ratings with competition between more than two rating agencies. How can honest rating behavior be achieved, and under which conditions can a new honest rating agency successfully invade a market with inflating incumbents? My model predicts cyclic dynamics if sophisticated investors have a high impact on agencies’ reputation. In contrast, if trusting investors have the main impact, then the dynamics exhibits a saddle point rather than cycles. In this case, regulatory support for honest rating agencies is only needed for a limited time, but the effect is sustainable in the long run.     

债券评级机构变更——基于评级选购与评级迎合视角

本文以2008年至2017年的公司债券为样本,研究了发行人变更评级机构的影响,以此来解释评级市场上发行人频繁变更评级机构的现象。本文发现发行人变更评级机构后,其信用等级得到显著提升。发行人变更评级机构的行为对信用等级的影响在以下两种情形中更显著:一是当发行人所处行业或评级机构所在的评级市场竞争激烈时;二是当发行人主体评级位于AA信用等级的临界点时。进一步研究发现,考虑到评级机构变更与信用等级之间的交互影响,变更评级机构的发行人整体上可实现发债成本的降低。但该类发行人未来的违约风险增加、经营业绩下降。最后,本文发现债券发行规模较大以及非国有发行人更倾向于变更评级机构来提高信用等级。本文通过分析发行人更换信用评级机构的动机和后果,为监管部门构建以评级质量为导向的良性竞争环境提供借鉴参考。     

Looking Beyond Credit Ratings: Factors Investors Consider In Pricing European Asset‐Backed Securities

In this paper, we empirically investigate what credit factors investors rely upon when pricing the spread at issue for European asset‐backed securities. More specifically, we investigate how credit factors affect new issuance spreads after taking into account credit rating. We do so by investigating primary market spreads for tranches of non‐mortgage‐related asset‐backed securities issued from 1999 to the year prior to the subprime mortgage crisis, 2007. We find that although credit ratings play a major role in determining spreads, investors appear to not rely exclusively on these ratings. Our findings strongly suggest that investors do not ignore other credit factors beyond the assigned credit rating.     

国家主权信用评级质量检验方法研究

国家主权信用评级对当今国际经济和金融运行有着极为重要的影响力。但是,与其地位不相符的是,评级机构的评级结果事后多次被证明准确性和前瞻性较差。事先缺乏预警而事后大幅降级,甚至对加剧危机起到了推波助澜的作用。本文从国家主权信用评级质量的检验方法入手,系统分析了违约率和迁移率等传统方法在检验评级结果起到的作用及其不足,给出了检验评级质量的一般方法,并验证了该评级检验方法的科学性和准确性。     

Do significant risk warnings in annual reports increase corporate bond credit spreads? Evidence from China

Based on listed companies issuing bonds on the Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchanges from 2007 to 2017, this study analyzes the relationship between significant risk warnings in Chinese companies’ annual reports and corporate bond credit spreads. The main findings are as follows. First, in the Chinese market, “substantial warnings of significant risks” can significantly improve corporate bond credit spreads, reflecting the risk-warning effect; second, state-owned property rights weaken this effect, which only pertains to listed companies with poor risk management and low information quality; third, significant risk warnings increase investors’ heterogeneous beliefs, also affecting credit spreads; and fourth, through textual analysis, it is found that the corporate bond credit spread is greater when the disclosed risk factors are more pessimistic and less similar to those of the previous year. The findings of this paper help to enrich the literature on credit spreads and risk disclosure.     

What explains corporate sukuk primary market spreads?

This study investigates the determining factors of international corporate sukuk pricing in the primary market for the period of 2004–2015. We present novel evidence for a unique data set covering all 63 international corporate sukuk issuances consisting of both a fixed margin rating as well a credit rating score. Our cross-sectional analysis indicates that both credit rating and maturity are significant factors which reduce issue spreads, whereas sukuk margin rating increases issue spreads. More prominently, Shari’ah scholar reputation and the type of sukuk are not statistically significant factors in the explanation of the issue spread. Our results are comparable with determinants of conventional bond pricing, and our findings further confirm existing sukuk market practices.     

Financial statement comparability and credit risk

Prior research shows that firms’ financial statement comparability improves the accuracy of market participants’ valuation judgments and thus may reduce firms’ costs of capital. Distinct from prior research focusing on the equity market, we develop measures of comparability relevant to debt market participants based on the within-industry variability of Moody’s adjustments to reported accounting numbers for the purposes of credit rating. We examine two sets of adjustments: (1) to the interest coverage ratio and (2) to non-recurring income items. We validate these comparability measures by providing evidence that greater comparability is associated with lower frequency and magnitude of split ratings by credit rating agencies. We predict and find that greater comparability is associated with (1) lower estimated bid-ask spreads for traded bonds, (2) lower credit spreads for both bonds and five-year credit default swaps, and (3) a steeper one- to five-year credit default swap term structure. Our results are consistent with financial statement comparability reducing debt market participants’ uncertainty about and pricing of firms’ credit risk.     

Does reputation matter? Evidence on spatial competition in China's bond market

This study investigates the effect of market competition on the reputational concerns of credit rating agencies (CRAs) in the Chinese bond market. We find credit ratings increase when the market share distance between an incumbent CRA and its closest peer competitor decreases. This spatial competition effect only exists at the provincial level. We also find the market competition deteriorates the ability of ratings to predict future bond defaults, while the correlation between credit ratings and market-implied credit spreads is unaffected. Our findings suggest that because of the market inefficiency in emerging economies, CRAs privilege current profits over reputational concerns.     

“投资人付费”vs.“发行人付费”:谁的信用评级质量更高？

本文选择2011-2015年被中债资信覆盖的发债A股上市公司作为主要研究对象,比较了“投资人付费”与“发行人付费”模式下的评级质量高低。研究发现:(1)与“发行人付费”评级相比,采用“投资人付费”模式的中债资信所作评级显著更低。(2)与“发行人付费”评级相比,当采用“投资人付费”模式的中债资信所作评级越低时,发行人未来盈利能力越差、预期违约风险越高,投资者要求的风险补偿也越高,这表明“投资人付费”模式下的信用评级质量更高。(3)“发行人付费”模式的评级结果可以在一定程度上反映公司的内部私有信息,但由于同时存在独立性缺失问题,“发行人付费”模式的信用评级质量仍然不如“投资人付费”模式的信用评级质量,这说明独立性对于评级机构尤其重要。     

Underwriter reputation and the quality of certification: Evidence from high-yield bonds

This paper provides primary evidence of whether certification via reputable underwriters is beneficial to investors in the corporate bond market. We focus on the high-yield bond market in which certification of issuer quality is most valuable to investors owing to low liquidity and issuing firms’ high opacity and default risk. We find bonds underwritten by the most reputable underwriters to be associated with significantly higher downgrade and default risk. Investors seem to be aware of this relation, as we further find the private information conveyed via the issuer-reputable underwriter match to have a significantly positive effect on at-issue yield spreads. Our results are consistent with the market-power hypothesis, and contradict the traditional certification hypothesis and underlying reputation mechanism.     

The impact of sovereign credit ratings on Eurobond yields: Evidence from Africa

The importance of sovereign credit ratings and Eurobonds issued by governments have come to the fore in Africa in the last decade. We examine whether changes in sovereign credit ratings impact Eurobond yields in 8 countries over the period of 2014–2019. Our approach reviews rating changes impact on Eurobond yields utilising the event study methodology. Our findings reflect that, on average, close to a third of rating actions directly impact bond yields in African countries. The statistically significant events include the downgrades of South Africa and Namibia to non-investment grade in 2017 reflecting critical transitions and bond investors’ reactions. Overall, the low percentage of a third, relative to previous international studies, suggests that largely rating changes are anticipated, do not have much new information and perhaps the perceived power of credit rating agencies may be overstated. In our view, the results reflect that pre-announcements of rating review dates since 2014 makes rating actions predictable and less impactful to bond yields. In addition, they reflect that bond investors adjust in real time as new information come in, resulting in less reliance on the opinions of CRAs and using their own assessments.     

Seniority Differentials in High Yield Bonds: Evolution,Valuation, and Ratings

Almost 20 years ago, one of the coauthors of this article published a study that reported finding systematically wider yield spreads on senior corporate bonds than on subordinated bonds with the same credit rating, but issued by different companies. The study also showed that this difference in spreads did not represent a market “anomaly” or failure to price risk correctly, but instead reflected differences in the actual, and hence the expected, loss rates of the securities. And such differences were in turn shown to stem from the practice of the rating agencies—which was abandoned about ten years ago—of rating a given issuer's subordinated debt two “notches” below that of its senior debt. Partly in response to this finding, all of the major agencies modified their use of this “two‐notch” convention by initiating in‐depth fundamental analysis of subordinated issuers on a case‐by‐case basis. In the meantime, the near disappearance of subordinated debt in the high yield market since the global financial crisis and its partial replacement by secured debt has furnished the authors of this article with a seemingly related “anomaly” to explore—namely, the tendency of secured bonds to have higher yields than samerated senior unsecured bonds. As in the earlier study of the senior‐subordinated puzzle, the authors' analysis confirms that the market has been properly pricing the relative risks of the different securities by showing that the actual loss rates of the secured issues have been systematically higher than those of like‐rated senior unsecured issues. The clear suggestion of these findings, as in the case of the earlier study, is that those investors who have chosen to incur the costs of analyzing expected loss rates instead of relying solely on the ratings have been rewarded for their efforts. And if the past is a guide to the future, this article may also succeed in spurring the rating agencies to make further refinements to their methods.     

私有信息、评级偏差和中国评级机构的市场声誉

考虑到评级机构拥有市场声誉的本质在于其可以通过扭曲评级从而对市场产生影响,本文分两步研究中国发行人付费评级机构的市场声誉:第一步,将信用评级对各种基本面因素进行回归,并以实际评级与回归预测值的差值作为评级偏差的量度。与既有文献相比,本文的重要改进是在基本面因素中引入了发债企业与各评级机构(分支机构)最短距离的均值和方差,这能较好地控制因发债企业私有信息可能造成的选择偏误。第二步,考察评级偏差和机构特征如何影响企业的发债成本。研究表明,中国评级机构作为一个整体具有显著的市场声誉,但各评级机构之间存在很大的差异性。最后,考虑到评级机构与发债企业在选址上可能会有集聚效应,我们基于高铁开通事件进行双重差分检验,研究表明本文结论是稳健的。     

INFORMATION OPACITY AND FITCH BOND RATINGS

We examine the marginal impact of Fitch ratings on the at‐issuance yields of industrial and utility bonds rated by Moody's and Standard & Poor's. We find that Fitch ratings reduce the yield premiums on information‐opaque bonds by about 30%, or 15 basis points. The finding is robust even when a Fitch rating exactly equals the two major ratings or their average. The findings suggest that Fitch ratings are not redundant but bring additional information to investors. Increased competition in the rating industry enhances the information efficiency of the bond market, and the existence of smaller rating agencies is economically justified.     

The impact of narrative disclosure readability on bond ratings and the cost of debt

Prior research on the determinants of credit ratings has focused on rating agencies’ use of quantitative accounting information, but the there is scant evidence on the impact of textual attributes. This study examines the impact of financial disclosure narrative on bond market outcomes. We find that less readable financial disclosures are associated with less favorable ratings, greater bond rating agency disagreement, and a higher cost of debt. We improve causal identification by exploiting the 1998 Plain English Mandate, which required a subset of firms to exogenously improve the readability of their filings. Using a difference-in-differences design, we find that the firms required to improve the readability of their filings experience more favorable ratings, lower bond rating disagreement, and lower cost of debt. Collectively, our evidence suggests that textual financial disclosure attributes appear to not only influence bond market intermediaries’ opinions but also firms’ cost of debt.