Search results

This study aims to provide further insights into the connection between corporate social responsibility (CSR) and companies’ credit ratings, while also exploring the role of corporate governance as a moderating factor. The hypotheses for this relationship are rooted in both legitimacy and stakeholder theories.

Using a sample of French non-financial listed firms from 2007 to 2020, this paper uses the ordered probit model introduced by Greene (2000). The issue of endogeneity has also been addressed.

The study reveals that CSR practices positively impact companies’ credit ratings by enhancing solvency and financial performance. Specifically, firms that prioritize CSR, particularly in the social and environmental dimensions (such as community relations, diversity, employee relations, environmental performance and product characteristics), tend to have higher credit ratings and a reduced risk of default. This suggests that credit rating agencies likely incorporate CSR performance when assigning credit ratings. Furthermore, the quality of corporate governance acts as a moderator, strengthening the relationship between CSR and credit ratings. The findings remain robust even after accounting for key firm attributes and addressing potential endogeneity between CSR and credit ratings.

This research provides valuable guidance for policymakers, corporate managers, investors and other stakeholders, as it offers insights into the influence of CSR activities on risk premiums and financing costs. For financial institutions, expanding credit decisions to encompass non-financial factors such as CSR can result in more accurate predictions of firm credit quality compared to relying solely on financial indicators.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study stands out as the first to systematically examine the relationship between CSR and credit ratings within the French context. Moreover, it distinguishes itself by investigating the moderating influence of corporate governance on this relationship, setting it apart from prior research.

This chapter differentiates the effect of solicited credit ratings (SCRs) and unsolicited credit ratings (UCRs) on bank leverage decision before and after the credit rating change. We find that banks with UCRs issue less debt relative to equity when the credit rating changes are approaching. Such findings are also prominent when bank credit rating moves from investment grade to speculative grade. After credit rating upgrades (downgrades), banks with unsolicited (solicited) credit ratings are inclined to issue more (less) debt relative to equity than those with solicited (unsolicited) credit ratings. We conclude that SCR and UCR changes lead to significantly different effects on bank leverage decision.

The authors examine the role of CEO political ideology in the credit rating process.

This study adopts a quantitative method with panel data regressions using a sample of 5,211 observations from S&P 500 firms from 2001 to 2012.

The authors find that firms run by Republican-leaning CEOs, who tend to have conservative political ideologies, enjoy more favorable credit ratings than firms run by Democratic-leaning CEOs. In addition, the association between CEO political ideology and credit ratings is more pronounced for firms with high operating uncertainty, low capital intensity, high growth potential, weak corporate governance and low financial reporting quality. Finally, the authors find that CEO political ideology affects a firm's cost of debt incremental to credit ratings, consistent with debt investors incorporating CEO political ideology in their pricing decisions.

Leveraging CEO political ideology, the authors document that credit rating agencies incorporate managerial conservatism in their credit rating decisions. This finding suggests that CEO political ideology serves as a meaningful signal for managerial conservatism.

The study suggests that credit rating agencies incorporate CEO political ideology in their credit rating process. Other capital market participants such as auditors and retail investors can also use CEO political ideology as a proxy for managerial conservatism when evaluating firms.

The paper carries practical implications for practitioners, firm executives and regulators. The results on the association between CEO political ideology and credit ratings suggest that other financial institutions could also incorporate CEO political ideology in their evaluation in their evaluation of firms. For example, when evaluating audit risk and determining audit pricing, auditors may add CEO political ideology as a risk factor. For firms, especially those that have Democratic-leaning CEOs, the authors suggest that they could reduce the unfavorable effect of CEO political ideology on credit ratings by improving their corporate governance and financial reporting quality, as demonstrated in the cross-sectional analyses. Finally, this study shows that CEO political ideology, as measured by CEOs' political contributions, is closely related to a firm's credit ratings. This finding may inform regulators that greater transparency for CEOs' political contributions is needed as information on contributions could help capital market participants perform risk analyses for firms.

Credit rating agencies release their research methodologies for determining corporate credit ratings and identify managerial conservatism as an important factor that affects their risk assessments. The extant literature, however, has not empirically investigated the relation between credit ratings and managerial conservatism, which, according to behavioral consistency theory, can be proxied by CEO political ideology. This study provides novel empirical evidence that identifies CEO political ideology as an important input factor in the credit rating process.

This study aims to examine the determinants of Sukuk credit ratings of issuing firms in Malaysia, and the rating changes from lower to higher rating and vice versa.

A total of 328 Sukuk issuances and 1,110 Sukuk rating announcements from 2009 to 2014 were analysed using generalized ordered logit regressions approach. Firm financial characteristics, corporate governance attributes, macroeconomic factors and Sukuk structures (debt or equity based) were among the important determinants used to explain the different Sukuk credit ratings.

The results indicate a positive association of Sukuk credit rating with issuing firm’s financial information, governance attributes and the Sukuk structure whilst the macroeconomic factors did not explain the changes in the Sukuk credit rating. Specifically, firm size, profitability and leverage characteristics had significant positive effect on Sukuk credit rating for listed firms whilst only firm’s profitability had a positive effect on Sukuk credit rating by unlisted firms. With regard to governance, the board structure which includes board size, board independence and CEO/Chairman non-duality is associated with positive Sukuk credit rating for listed firms. Only financial report audited by big four auditors is associated with positive Sukuk credit rating for unlisted firms. Equity-based Sukuk are associated with positive Sukuk credit rating for listed firms while for unlisted firms only the Ijarah Sukuk had a positive Sukuk credit rating.

Data on credit rating is scarce and had to be hand-collected from published reports. Furthermore, issues on the lack of standardisation of Islamic contracts in different geographical areas could constrain on the comparability of findings on determinants of ratings in different jurisdictions.

The findings provide some guide to the rating agencies to objectively assess the issuer’s creditworthiness that could mitigate default risk. Mitigating the default risk will boost investors’ confidence and credibility of credit rating agencies.

This study examines the determinants of Sukuk credit rating of issuing firms in Malaysia, which include not only the listed firms but also the unlisted firms.

This study seeks to identify the main determinants of the optimal capital structure by reexamining the interpretation of the conventional set of explanatory variables used as proxies for the costs and benefits of debt in the context of the dynamic tradeoff theory.

The authors isolate the variation in leverage due to different targets from that caused by deviations by aggregating the data across a dimension identifying firms with similar targets – credit rating category.

Contrary to theoretical priors, large and profitable rated firms have lower targets. The authors show that size and profitability proxy for non-financial risk and that, for rated firms, non-financial risk is positively correlated to the optimal leverage. The benefits of a better rating outweigh the costs of foregone tax shields for firms with relatively low non-financial risk. The authors find support for that theory in institutional trading – institutional investors do not punish highly rated firms when credit downgrades occur.

This paper contributes to the capital structure literature by developing a new approach based on data aggregation. This study is the first, to the authors’ knowledge, to find a positive effect of the firm's non-financial risk on target leverage among rated firms. The authors argue that the benefit of a better credit rating is an increasing function of the rating itself. The authors also contribute to the literature on the impact of credit ratings on the capital structure choices of the firm.

This research aims to model the relationship between the credit risk signals in the credit default swap (CDS) market and agency credit ratings, and determines the factors that help explain the variation in such signals.

A comprehensive analysis of the differences in the relative credit risk assessments of CDS-based risk signals and agency ratings is provided. It is shown that the divergence between credit risk signals in the CDS market and agency ratings is explained by factors which the rating agencies may consider differently than credit market participants.

The results suggest that agency credit ratings of relative riskiness of a reference entity do not always correspond with assessments by CDS spreads, as the price of risk is a function of additional macro and micro factors that can be explained using statistical analysis.

This research is unique in modeling the relationship between the credit risk assessments of the CDS market and the agency ratings, which to the best of the authors' knowledge has not been analyzed before in terms of their agreement and the level of discrepancy between them. This model can be used by investors in debt instruments that are not explicitly CDSs or which have illiquid CDS contracts, to replicate market-based, point-in-time credit risk signals. Based on both market-based and firm-specific factors in this model, the results can be used to augment through-the-cycle credit risk assessments, analyze issues surrounding the pricing of CDSs and examine the policies of credit rating agencies.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the role and responsibility of credit rating agencies in promoting soundness and integrity, especially in the course of their business activities.

The paper describes, and uses, the framework for the activities of credit rating agencies introduced by the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO), in order to give effect to this investigation.

Credit rating agencies have implemented the provisions of the Code of Conduct Fundamentals for Credit Rating Agencies of the IOSCO on the quality and integrity of the rating process, to the extent of the resources available to them.

The main source of data is the information collected by the IOSCO from nine credit rating agencies, including the main three, on the quality and integrity of their rating processes. The absence of triangulation of research methods limits the robustness of the findings.

The paper addresses a specific aspect of the credit ratings story since the financial crisis on which there is currently little in the literature. It also focuses upon the actions of credit rating agencies, rather than on how these organisations are, or should be, regulated.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the difference of credit enhancement of variously secured bonds issued by local government financing platform bond (LGFPB).

The approaches to secure the bonds usually include mortgage, collateral, guarantee, etc.

Using a sample of LGFPBs issued during the 2007-2013 period, the authors find that all of the approaches to secure the bonds would increase the bond rating and that compounded approaches have a higher credit enhancement effect than single approaches. Among these approaches, the requirement of collateral has the strongest enhancement effect. Moreover, the authors find that the guarantee provided by a state-owned bank or enterprise increases the bond rating more than the guarantee provided by other local government financing platforms.

The findings in this study suggest that the credit enhancement would be deeply affected by the approach used to secure the bond.

These results can help the local government make better decisions when issuing bond.

This study empirically analyzes the different credit enhancement approaches for securing LGPFBs for the first time and contributes to the literature regarding credit ratings of local government bonds.

This study examines credit score migration rates of farm businesses, testing whether migration probabilities differ across business cycles. Results suggest that agricultural credit ratings are more likely to improve during expansions and deteriorate during recessions. The analysis also tests whether agricultural credit ratings depend on the previous period migration trends. The findings show that credit score ratings exhibit trend reversal where upgrades (downgrades) are more likely to be followed by downgrades (upgrades).

This study examines rating agency explanations that accompany changes in credit ratings for nonprofit hospitals. A national sample of Standard & Poor’s revision announcements is used to identify hospital characteristics that purportedly motivate credit rating changes. Significant differences in agency-cited performance dimensions, such as profitability, liquidity, service-mix, capital structure and market share, are observed across upward and downward revisions. The relative usefulness of these citations for explaining and classifying credit changes is also evaluated. The results suggest that agency explanations provide limited value relative to conventional, multivariate information sets.