The impact of sovereign rating actions on bank ratings in emerging markets

This paper analyses the effects of sovereign rating actions on the credit ratings of banks in emerging markets, using a sample from three global rating agencies across 54 countries for 1999–2009. Despite widespread attention to sovereign ratings and bank ratings, no previous study has investigated the link in this manner. We find that sovereign rating upgrades (downgrades) have strong effects on bank rating upgrades (downgrades). The impact of sovereign watch status on bank rating actions is much weaker and often insignificant. The sensitivity of banks’ ratings to sovereign rating actions is affected by the countries’ economic and financial freedom and by macroeconomic conditions. Ratings of banks with different ownership structures are all influenced strongly by the sovereign rating, with some variation depending on the countries’ characteristics. Emerging market bank ratings are less likely to follow sovereign rating downgrades during the recent financial crisis period.     

Special Issue on Market Development and Investment Strategies in Asia

Sovereign credit rating actions have attracted considerable attention recently. This study employs a rich and unique data set of ratings from six international agencies to investigate the causes of split sovereign ratings in emerging countries. Three reasons are identified in explaining the relatively high frequency of disagreement across agencies on emerging sovereign ratings. First, rating agencies use different economic factors and different weights on those factors. Second, rating agencies disagree to a greater extent about more opaque issuers. Third, for smaller rating agencies, issuers in their "home region" tend to be more favored. The findings should be of interest to a wide range of participants in global credit markets.     

The sovereign-bank rating channel and rating agencies' downgrades during the European debt crisis

We investigate the rating channel for the transmission of changes in sovereign risk to the banking sector, analysing data from Moody's, S&P and Fitch before and during the European debt crisis. Sovereign rating downgrades and negative watch signals have strong effects on bank rating downgrades in the crisis period. The impact is stronger for multiple-notch sovereign rating downgrades, and more pronounced in PIIGS countries. Secondly, we investigate rating agencies' competition in the banking sector during the same periods, finding significant differences in rating policies across the agencies. S&P credit actions tend to be the more independent ones, while Moody's appears to be more cautious, although it is by far the most likely to assign multiple-notch downgrades. In the pre-crisis period, we find no evidence that bank rating actions are linked to sovereign rating signals (nor vice versa) nor to prior bank rating changes by a competing agency.     

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。     

Leads and lags in sovereign credit ratings

This paper analyses lead–lag relationships in sovereign ratings across five agencies, and finds evidence of interdependence in rating actions. Upgrade (downgrade) probabilities are much higher, and downgrade (upgrade) probabilities are much lower for a sovereign issuer with a recent upgrade (downgrade) by another agency. S&P tends to demonstrate the least dependence on other agencies, and Moody’s tends to be the first mover in upgrades. Rating actions by Japanese agencies tend to lag those of the larger agencies, although there is some evidence that they lead Moody’s downgrades.     

债务上限与信评机构的政治悖论性选择

金融危机后,以危机推手著称的美国信评机构因群体性道德风险和贩卖劣质公信力而备受国际谴责.为此,三大机构不同程度地修订了主权信用评级规则,并自2010年下半年以来,联袂发布了美国主权信用评级的负面意见,尤其是2011年轮番下调美国主权信用评级前景展望至负面,希望借此塑造其公正、客观的商业形象.但是,三大机构的政治附属物属性决定了三大机构发布的美国主权信用评级负面意见,本质上是一场政治逻辑与资本逻辑的较量,更多展现为一种政治博弈的需要,并使自己陷入了债务上限与主权信用评级的政治悖论困境.     

Sovereign credit ratings: Discovering unorthodox factors and variables

The presence of different rating agencies and nuanced viewpoints on the determinants of sovereign credit ratings has led to convoluted and contested narratives; hence a need to arrive at common ground on both the significant and prioritised factors important in sovereign rating assessments. Furthermore, much research has focused on a regression analysis of variables which were determined as important to sovereign ratings on an a priori theoretical basis, while excluding a factor analysis which integrates variables within a multifaceted framework. This paper argues that the variables used in existing research are subject to a priori theoretical selection rather than being selected empirically. There has also been an insufficient utilisation of rating agencies' methodology papers in assisting with the selection of variables, and a lack of analysis of the rating agencies' application of factors. Hence, this paper unearths both new factors and variables relevant to assessing sovereign ratings. The findings suggest that there needs to be a broadened understanding of indicators used to analyse and assign sovereign ratings, and a prioritisation of analysed aspects following the inclusion of unorthodox factors and variables.     

“一带一路”下防范主权信用评级风险的法律对策研究

“一带一路”战略的实施,凸显主权信用评级的重要价值。然而,主权评级屡次发生风险并演化为系统性风险和危机,造成重大损失。此风险一方面是由主权评级自身在金融稳定时期潜在的风险要素引起的,另一方面也是美欧当下缺乏有效的风险防范措施所导致的。因此,为推进“一带一路”建设,以尽早防范主权评级风险,我国应采取设定“本土+全球”的双评级规范、强化控制和监管国际评级机构以及减弱对主权评级的依赖等法律对策。     

An analysis of the determinants of sovereign ratings

In recent years, the demand for sovereign ratings has increased mainly due to the inevitable globalisation of markets. This study analyses the quantitative determinants of sovereign ratings provided by the two main agencies, namely, Standard and Poors and Moody. The analysis also provides a forecast of the ratings to be assigned to the countries based on the model used as well as providing ratings to be assigned to a set of weaker economies which are not actually rated by the rating agencies. The main finding of the paper is that current economic and financial indicators alone do not determine ratings. In addition, the relevance of economic variables is not the same across the different rating categories. Economic variables do not carry the same importance for the sample of high rated countries with a long financial stability history as compared to the low rated sample of countries that are still undergoing structural changes.     

Sovereign credit ratings and bank funding cost: Evidence from Africa

This paper aims to examine the relationship between sovereign credit ratings and funding costs of banks and also the relationship between sovereign credit ratings. Using over 300 banks operating in Africa from 2006 to 2012, the study investigates sovereign ratings’ impact on funding cost. The long term domestic sovereign ratings announced by Fitch and Standard & Poor’s during the period under study were used. The panel made use of Generalized Method of Moments estimation strategy for funding cost. The findings of the study indicate that sovereign ratings upgrades have an inverse and statistically significant relationship with funding costs. The findings suggest that sovereign rating upgrades makes it easier for banks to access funds from the capital and global market at a cheaper cost compared to rating downgrades. The study recommends and encourages emerging economies to use the services provided by credit rating agencies since these agencies may help improve accessibility of funds in the international markets by banks. It is recommended that sovereign rating should be considered as a supplement and not a substitute to our own perceived judgement and research.     

Market-implied ratings and their divergence from credit ratings

In this article, we investigate the divergence between credit ratings (CRs) and Moody's market-implied ratings (MIRs). Our evidence shows that rating gaps provide incremental information to the market regarding issuers' default risk over CRs alone in the short horizon and outperform CRs over extended horizons. The predictive ability of rating gaps is greater for more opaque and volatile issuers. Such predictability was more pronounced during the 2008 financial crisis but weakened in the post–Dodd–Frank Act period. This finding is consistent with credit rating agencies’ efforts to improve their performance when facing regulatory pressure. Moreover, our analysis identifies rating-gap signals that do (do not) lead to subsequent Moody's actions to place issuers on negative outlook and watchlists. We find that negative signals from MIR gaps have a real economic impact on issuers’ fundamentals such as profitability, leverage, investment, and default risk, thus supporting the recovery-efforts hypothesis.     

Do credit rating agencies add to the dynamics of emerging market crises?

This study investigates the role of credit rating agencies in international financial markets. With an index of speculative market pressure it is analyzed whether sovereign ratings changes have an impact on the financial stability in emerging market economies. The event study analysis indicates that sovereign rating changes have substantial influence on the size and volatility of emerging markets lending. The empirical results are significantly stronger in the case of government's downgrades and negative imminent rating actions than in the case of agencies’ positive rating adjustments. Sovereign rating changes anticipated by market participants have a smaller impact on financial markets in emerging economies.     

Rating Agency Reputation,the Global Financial Crisis,and the Cost of Debt

Why do foreign firms obtain credit ratings by global rating agencies rather than from their home country's rating agencies even though global raters typically assign lower credit ratings when these foreign firms issue bonds in their home currencies? We find that bonds rated by a global agency decreased yields 11‐14 basis points (bps) when compared to those rated by Japanese rating agencies but, during the 2007‐2009 financial crisis, the yields on these Japanese bonds increased 12‐17 bps, thus fully negating the advantage of obtaining a bond rating from a global rater. This suggests that the reputation of global rating agencies declined during the 2007‐2009 crisis period.     

Sovereign ceilings “lite”? The impact of sovereign ratings on corporate ratings

Although credit rating agencies have gradually moved away from a policy of never rating a corporation above the sovereign (the ‘sovereign ceiling’), it appears that sovereign credit ratings remain a significant determinant of corporate credit ratings. We examine this link using data for advanced and emerging economies over the period of 1995–2009. Our main result is that a sovereign ceiling continues to affect the rating of corporations. The results also suggest that the influence of a sovereign ceiling on corporate ratings remains particularly significant in countries where capital account restrictions are still in place and with high political risk.     

Sovereign credit rating determinants: A comparison before and after the European debt crisis

This paper compares the importance of different sovereign credit rating determinants over time, using a sample of 90 countries for the years 2002–2015. Applying the composite marginal likelihood approach, we estimate a multi-year ordered probit model for each of the three major credit rating agencies. After the start of the European debt crisis in 2009, the importance of the financial balance, the economic development and the external debt increased substantially and the effect of eurozone membership switched from positive to negative. In addition, GDP growth gained a lot of importance for highly indebted sovereigns and government debt became much more important for countries with a low GDP growth rate. These findings provide empirical evidence that the credit rating agencies changed their sovereign credit rating assessment after the start of the European debt crisis.     

A public good approach to credit ratings – From concept to reality

From the onset of the 2008–2009 financial crisis to the subsequent European sovereign debt crisis, credit rating agencies have been assigned considerable blame. Reforming the credit rating industry has hence become an important policy issue. In addition to the regulatory efforts in the context of accepting the for-profit business model of ratings, there is a growing realization that credit ratings bear the characteristics of a public good. Financial market participants need reliable, transparent and independent assessment of credit risks. Credit ratings are therefore better viewed as an infrastructure matter. However, the proposed regulations seem to have missed this point. This paper introduces a new approach to credit ratings undertaken by the Risk Management Institute at the National University of Singapore that is predicated on the provision of credit ratings as a public good. With a public good alternative in place, the currently predominant for-profit business model may be counterbalanced.     

The Real Effects of Credit Ratings: The Sovereign Ceiling Channel

We show that sovereign debt impairments can have a significant effect on financial markets and real economies through a credit ratings channel. Specifically, we find that firms reduce their investment and reliance on credit markets due to a rising cost of debt capital following a sovereign rating downgrade. We identify these effects by exploiting exogenous variation in corporate ratings due to rating agencies' sovereign ceiling policies, which require that firms' ratings remain at or below the sovereign rating of their country of domicile.     

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.     

The German Capital Markets Model Case Act (KapMuG): a European role model for increasing the efficiency of capital markets? Analysis and suggestions for reform

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to examine the determinants of the sovereign credit ratings provided by the three major rating agencies: Fitch Ratings, Moody’s and Standard and Poor. A principal component analysis is employed in order to identify the common factors affecting these ratings. The impact of the variables correlated with these factors on ratings is then assessed through an ordered logistic model. Results show that sovereign ratings are mostly influenced by per capita income, government income, real exchange rate changes, inflation rate and default history. The study also highlights the importance of corruption, as measured by Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index, which appears as a proxy for both economic development and the quality of the governance of a country.     

中国的主权信用评级是否被低估?

本文以1986至2009年期间120个国家的宏观经济数据和三大评级机构的主权信用评级结果为研究对象;运用面板数据的多元回归模型和有序Probit概率模型研究中国的主权信用评级是否被低估的问题。通过对三大评级机构的定量分析模型进行模拟与验证发现,中国的主权信用评级在20世纪90年代和2001年至2002年前后的确被低估,但2003年以后,随着穆迪、标准普尔等评级机构相继调高我国的主权信用等级,目前我国的模拟评级与实际评级已经基本持平。