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。     

Split bond ratings and rating migration

This paper examines the relationships between split ratings and ratings migration. We find that bonds with split ratings are more likely to have future rating changes. A one-notch (more-than-one-notch) split rating increases the probability of rating change within one year of initial issuance by about 3% (6%). Furthermore, we find that about 30% of split rated bonds have their two ratings converge after four years of initial issuance. The rating convergence tapers off after three years, and the rating agency with a higher (lower) initial rating generally maintains a higher (lower) rating in subsequent years if the two ratings do not converge. We also show that rating transition estimation can be improved by taking into consideration split ratings. We find that one-year rating transition matrices are significantly different between non-letter-split rated bonds and letter-split rated bonds, and we show that the difference has an economically significant impact on the pricing of credit spread options and VaR-based risk management models. Overall, our results suggest that split ratings contain important information about subsequent rating changes.     

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。     

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.     

On syndicate composition, corporate structure and the certification effect of credit ratings

We assess the relative importance of ratings versus stock exchange listings in reducing information asymmetry using a dataset of syndicated loans to public and private firms in the UK. We find that the certification effect of ratings is largest for private firms and that syndicates are smallest if firms are privately held or unrated. Moreover, we find that the marginal effect of being stock exchange listed is insignificant once these firms are rated. Exploiting the heterogeneity among lenders, we find that especially foreign bank and non-bank investors do not provide capital if firms are unrated. Our paper highlights the information produced by rating agencies as an important mechanism by which ratings improve access to capital. Our results also emphasize the importance of syndicate moral hazard on the supply of uninformed capital: bank-borrower relationships significantly increase the loan share syndicated to investors particularly if firms are not listed and unrated.     

The Costs of Issuing Preferred Stock

U.S. firms commonly use preferred stocks to raise external capital. Yet this hybrid security's issuance costs and offer yields have not been previously examined in a systematic manner. We analyze a sample of 3,042 U.S. preferred stocks issued between 1980 and 1999. We find that convertible issues, which are riskier than straight issues, entail higher gross spreads and other direct expenses. Scale, credit rating, and industry effects influence gross spreads and issuance costs. We also compare preferred stocks yields with various bellwether bond yields. Our results support the tax‐based argument that suggests that yields on preferred stocks should be lower than comparable risky bonds.     

Competition in the credit rating Industry: Benefits for investors and issuers

We empirically investigate the benefits of multiple ratings not only at issuance of debt instruments but also during the subsequent monitoring phase. Using a record of monthly credit rating migration data on all U.S. residential mortgage-backed securities rated by Standard & Poor's, Moody's, and Fitch between 1985 and 2012 (154,600 tranches), our results provide empirical evidence that rating agencies put more effort in rating and outlook revisions when tranches have assigned multiple ratings. Furthermore, we see that in the case of multiple ratings, agencies do a better job in discriminating tranches with respect to default risk. On the downside, we observe a shift in collateral towards senior tranches and incentives for issuers to engage in rating shopping activities, but find no evidence that rating agencies exploit such behavior to attract more rating business. Our results contribute to the literature on information production of credit ratings and extend the perspective to the monitoring period after issuance.     

The Impact of Cross‐Listing on the Home Market's Information Environment and Stock Price Efficiency

We empirically examine changes in information asymmetry and informational efficiency of cross‐listed stocks in their home market around a cross‐listing in the United States. We estimate intraday market microstructure measures of information asymmetry and price efficiency, and find that a U.S. cross‐listing significantly improves the quality of a firm's information environment and stock price efficiency in the home market. This improvement is stronger for cross‐listings that take place after the adoption of Sarbanes‐Oxley Act. Our results demonstrate that stricter disclosure from a U.S. cross‐listing is beneficial, in line with the legal and reputational bonding hypotheses.     

ADRs,Analysts, and Accuracy: Does Cross Listing in the United States Improve a Firm's Information Environment and Increase Market Value?

This paper investigates the relation between cross listing in the United States and the information environment of non‐U.S. firms. We find that firms that cross list on U.S. exchanges have greater analyst coverage and increased forecast accuracy than firms that are not cross listed. A time‐series analysis shows that a change in analyst coverage and forecast accuracy occurs around cross listing. We also document that firms that have more analyst coverage and higher forecast accuracy have higher valuations. Furthermore, the change in firm value around cross listing is correlated with changes in analyst following and forecast accuracy, suggesting that cross listing enhances firm value through its effect on the firm's information environment. Our findings support the hypothesis that cross‐listed firms have better information environments, which are associated with higher market valuations.     

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。     

Yankee Bonds and Cross-Border Private Placements

With credit spreads and U.S. Treasury yields near historical lows and the recent relaxation of U.S. regulatory reporting requirements, the U.S. bond markets are more and more frequently the markets of choice for international issuers. Total cross-border U.S. bond issuance is expected to top $200 billion in 1997, easily surpassing previous issuance levels.
Overseas issuers have three primary forms through which they can participate in the U.S. long-term debt markets: publicly traded, SEC registered bonds (commonly known as "Yankee" bonds); traditional private placements; and underwritten Rule 144A private placements. Each of these three financing methods has distinct benefits and limitations that should be thoroughly evaluated in light of the specific objectives of the issuer. Yankee bonds are typically the most cost-efficient vehicle for large, investment-grade issuers. The fastest growing segment is the rule 144A market, which accounted for 38% (by number, not dollar volume) of all U.S. cross-border debt transactions in 1996. The Rule 144A structure is often used for complex structures requiring heavy rating-agency involvement, such as future financial flow transactions and project financings. The 144A market has also become a particular favorite with international issuers because of its less formal disclosure requirements and streamlined execution process. The private placement market, which accounted for 24% of cross-border transactions in 1996, continues to be the dominant choice of smaller issuers, companies with complicated "stories," and firms that do not wish to submit to regular scrutiny by rating agencies. This article provides a detailed analysis of each type of bond issuance and the related issues facing a financial officer in trying to determine the most appropriate source of long-term debt.     

Unsolicited Versus Solicited: Credit Ratings and Bond Yields

This paper is the first attempt to analyze Standard & Poor’s unsolicited and solicited ratings by using bond-yield data in Japan. Our findings show that there are differences in firm characteristics between firms seeking solicited ratings and those that receive unsolicited ratings. Firms with solicited ratings have less information asymmetry and are more likely to be owned by foreign investors, generate more revenue from exports, be cross-listed in the US, and have higher firm quality. But, firms with unsolicited ratings pay higher costs for debt, and their bond prices react more strongly to credit-rating changes. Yield spreads for new bonds with unsolicited ratings are higher than those with solicited ratings, because unsolicited ratings have higher information asymmetry, and investors therefore demand higher yields. We find that bond-price reactions to the announcements of unsolicited rating downgrades (upgrades) are negative (positive) and significant, while bond prices do not react significantly to solicited rating downgrades or upgrades.     

YANKEE BONDS AND CROSS-BORDER PRIVATE PLACEMENTS: AN UPDATE

With U.S. Treasury yields near historical lows and the recent relaxation of U.S. regulatory reporting requirements, the U.S. bond markets are more and more frequently the markets of choice for international issuers. Total crossborder U.S. bond issuance is expected to top $350 billion in 2000, easily surpassing previous issuance levels.
Overseas issuers have three primary forms through which they can participate in the U.S. long-term debt markets: publicly traded, SEC-registered bonds (commonly known as "Yankee" bonds); traditional private placements; and underwritten Rule 144A private placements. Each of these three financing methods has distinct benefits and limitations that should be thoroughly evaluated in light of the specific objectives of the issuer. Yankee bonds are typically the most cost efficient vehicle for large, investment grade issuers, and they are expected to account for over 75% of the $350 billion market in 2000. Second in importance is the rule 144A market, which is typically used for complex structures requiring heavy rating-agency involvement, such as future financial flow transactions and project financings. The 144A market has also become a particular favorite with international issuers because of its less formal disclosure requirements and streamlined execution process. The private placement market continues to be the dominant choice of smaller issuers, companies with complicated "stories," and firms that do not wish to submit to regular scrutiny by rating agencies. This article provides a detailed analysis of each type of bond issuance and the issues facing a financial officer in trying to determine the most appropriate source of long-term debt.     

The relationship between R&D intensity,conservatism, and management earnings forecast issuance

R&D-intensive firms suffer from high information asymmetry and high proprietary costs and are prone to exhibit bottom-line losses given the unconditional conservative accounting treatment of R&D expenses. We examine how R&D intensity influences the issuance of management earnings forecasts (MEFs) across levels of accounting conservatism, controlling for proprietary costs and other earnings guidance determinants. We provide insights into how managers view the tradeoffs of using MEF disclosures to lower information asymmetry versus the costs of releasing proprietary information to competitors and the loss of reputational capital that could arise from providing inaccurate forecasts. We find that although R&D intensity and conditional conservatism are negatively related to the issuance of MEFs, as shown in prior research, at high levels of research intensity and the accompanying uncertainty about future payoffs, the negative association between conditional conservatism and MEF issuance is mitigated. These findings point to a role for conditional conservatism as a credibility enhancer for managers of R&D intense firms.     

TRADING COSTS OF NON‐U.S. STOCKS ON THE NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE: THE EFFECT OF INSTITUTIONAL OWNERSHIP,ANALYST FOLLOWING,AND MARKET REGULATION

We investigate the differences in market microstructure between U.S. and non‐U.S. stocks cross‐listed on the New York Stock Exchange using a sample of 316 pairs of matched stocks. We find that non‐U.S. stocks have wider spreads and larger adverse‐selection costs than U.S. stocks even after controlling for macro‐level institutional differences. Regression analysis shows that spreads and adverse‐selection costs are negatively correlated with institutional ownership and analyst followings. Thus, the higher spreads and adverse‐selection costs for non‐U.S. stocks can be partly explained by the lower institutional ownership and analyst following of non‐U.S. stocks. In addition, we find that although the spreads and adverse‐selection costs for non‐U.S. stocks are significantly higher before the implementation of Regulation Fair Disclosure (FD), the differences become even greater after Regulation FD, suggesting that Regulation FD has improved the information environment for U.S. stocks.     

Secondary Trading Costs in the Municipal Bond Market

Using new econometric methods, we separately estimate average transaction costs for over 167,000 bonds from a 1‐year sample of all U.S. municipal bond trades. Municipal bond transaction costs decrease with trade size and do not depend significantly on trade frequency. Also, municipal bond trades are substantially more expensive than similar‐sized equity trades. We attribute these results to the lack of bond market price transparency. Additional cross‐sectional analyses show that bond trading costs increase with credit risk, instrument complexity, time to maturity, and time since issuance. Investors, and perhaps ultimately issuers, might benefit if issuers issued simpler bonds.     

信用评级变动能反映企业真实财务信息吗?——基于财务重述的视角

本文以2007-2018年拥有主体信用评级的A股上市公司为研究对象,利用企业财务错报在未来被重述这一场景,检验主体信用评级变动能否反映企业真实财务信息。研究发现,评级机构在发债企业财务错报年显著下调了主体信用评级,而在重述公告发布年没有上述现象,这表明主体信用评级下调反映了企业的真实财务信息。在控制内生性影响后,结论仍然成立。进一步研究发现,发债企业当期财务错报涉及盈余时,主体信用评级被下调的幅度更大,说明评级机构更加关注与盈余相关的财务信息。机制分析表明,评级机构维护自身声誉是主体信用评级变动能够反映企业真实财务信息的主要机制。此外,主体信用评级被下调还导致了资本市场投资者的负面反应。本文的研究结果为主体信用评级变动反映企业真实财务信息提供了直接的证据支持,揭示了主体信用评级的信息含量,也对理解中国情境下评级机构调整主体信用评级的行为动机提供参考。     

Corporate financing and anticipated credit rating changes

Firm circumstances change but rating agencies may not make timely revisions to their ratings, thereby increasing information asymmetry between firms and the market. We examine whether firms time the securities market before a credit rating agency publicly reveals its decision to change a firm’s credit rating. Using quarterly data, we show that firms adjust their financing structures before credit rating downgrades are publicly revealed. Specifically, firms on average increase their debt financing by 1.29 % before the disclosure of a rating downgrade, and this increase is due to the issuance of debt rather than the repurchase of equity. In contrast, firms do not take significant financing actions before credit rating upgrades.     

Moody's and S&P Ratings: Are They Equivalent? Conservative Ratings and Split Rated Bond Yields

We examine the relative impact of Moody's and S&P ratings on bond yields and find that at issuance, yields on split rated bonds with superior Moody's ratings are about 8 basis points lower than yields on split rated bonds with superior S&P ratings. This suggests that investors differentiate between the two ratings and assign more weight to the ratings from Moody’s, the more conservative rating agency. Moody's becomes more conservative after 1998 and the impact of a superior Moody's rating becomes stronger. Furthermore, the differential impact of the two ratings is more pronounced for the more opaque Rule 144A issues.     

An Analysis of Concepts and Evidence on the Question of Whether IFRS Should be Conservative

Do international accounting standards require conservative accounting? The IASB's conceptual framework suggests that they should not, while the research literature is largely silent on the matter, typically presuming conservatism to be an outcome of private contracting rather than standardized, public, general purpose financial reporting. In this paper, we analyze the actual requirements of IFRS. We find multiple examples of recognition requirements that lead to unconditional conservatism, measurement requirements that lead to conditional conservatism, and also presentation/disclosure requirements that further support a conservative reporting environment. These findings complement, support and deepen existing evidence in the empirical literature that accounting is in practice conservative. We show, however, that the requirements for conservatism in IFRS conflict with, first, the IASB's stated position in its conceptual framework that accounting should not be conservative and, second, the private contracting explanation for conservatism that is generally accepted in the literature. What is missing, and lies behind both conflicts, is an acknowledgement and understanding of the role of an agency/contracting perspective in enhancing the decision‐usefulness of general purpose accounting standards, given the information/incentive asymmetry and uncertainty that characterizes the real‐world context in which those standards operate. From a policy perspective, such an understanding would reconcile the IASB's conceptual framework with the actual requirements of IFRS. From a research literature perspective, such an understanding would re‐position accounting standards as central to the practice of accounting conservatism, which would in turn require revision to the generally accepted theory of a private contracting explanation for the empirical evidence of conservative accounting practice.