Search results

In April and May of 2010 Moody's recalibrated its municipal bond ratings to a global scale, the system they use for other asset classes and the same scale used by Standard and Poor's (S&P). The authors investigate the impact of Moody's recalibration on true interest cost (TIC) of competitively-sold, uninsured, new bond issues with split bond ratings, by looking at a sample of bond issues before recalibration (1997–2010) and after recalibration (2010–2017).

Two different hypotheses are tested for each period to estimate whether TIC remains the same when the S&P rating is higher (H1) than Moody's rating or lower (H2) compared to bond issues for which the S&P and Moody's rating are the same. Further, two additional hypotheses are tested. H3 tests whether the impact of having a higher rating from S&P is the same as having a lower rating from S&P. H4 tests whether the impact of having a split rating is the same in the pre- and post-recalibration period.

Tests suggest that before recalibration a higher S&P rating leads to significantly lower interest costs, but a lower S&P rating does not lead to significantly higher costs. After recalibration, a higher S&P rating leads to significantly lower interest costs; however, a lower S&P rating leads to significantly higher interest costs for the bonds in the sample. The findings also suggest that the rating systems of Moody's and S&P became more similar to each other after recalibration and that the impact on interest cost of a higher S&P rating is reduced after the recalibration.

It appears that a given Moody's rating (which used higher credit standards in the period before recalibration) was more influential than the S&P rating prior to recalibration because investors “ignored” a lower S&P rating during this period. After recalibration, the lower S&P rating was no longer ignored by investors. Therefore, Moody's recalibration seems to have had the intended effect of moving the credit standards of the two rating agencies more into parity. This provides value to investors since they may now assume, unlike the situation in the pre-recalibration period, that similar ratings from the two companies provide similar information about the probability of default and loss that would occur following a default. From the standpoint of regulators, the municipal credit information is easier to understand and is more transparent for investors.

As the investing public flocks to no‐frills discount brokers and does its own investment homework, more and more of these soldiers of fortune can be found around the loose‐leaf financial services in the business departments of public and academic libraries. Because of their intensive, comprehensive coverage of the most widely traded stocks, two of the major stock reporting services, Moody's Investors Fact Sheets and Standard & Poor's Stock Reports, are becoming increasingly vital to libraries of all types. What follows is a comparison of the two services.

The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between going-concern (GC) opinions issued by the Big 4 audit firms and adverse credit ratings from the two largest credit rating agencies (CRAs) – Standard & Poor’s (S&P) and Moody’s. This question is relevant because there have been suggestions that auditors and CRAs should become more similar to each other, and because the two largest CRAs have different ownership structures that could affect their ratings.

Univariate and multivariate analyses are performed using a sample of firms that filed for bankruptcy between January 1, 2002 and December 31, 2013 that also had an audit opinion signed during the 12 months prior to bankruptcy, along with a credit rating issued by either or both S&P and Moody’s. Both influence each other. The likelihood of an auditor issuing a GC opinion is related to the credit rating issued by both S&P and Moody’s in the month prior to the audit report signing. The results also show differences between the CRAs. S&P reacted in the month after an auditor issued a GC opinion by downgrading its ratings 68% of the time. However, Moody’s did not react as strongly as S&P, downgrading its ratings only 24% of the time.

Both audit reports and credit ratings influence each other. The likelihood of an auditor issuing a GC opinion is related to the credit rating issued by both S&P and Moody’s in the month prior to the audit report signing. The results also show differences between the CRAs. S&P reacted in the month after an auditor issued a GC opinion by downgrading its ratings 68% of the time. However, Moody’s did not react as strongly as S&P, downgrading its ratings only 24% of the time.

Auditors are more likely to issue GC opinions when there is a downgrade to the credit rating, and CRAs are more likely to downgrade their ratings when there is a GC opinion. The study highlights that CRAs with different ownership structures provide different credit rating outcomes.

Librarians have a choice between two investment rating packages, Moody's Investors Services' “Special Library Service” and Standard & Poor's “Complete Library Reference Shelf.” In each there appears to be a staggeringly large amount of information of infinite detail and unknown value. Yet there are times when neither service fills information requirements.

This paper aims to shed new light on the inability of credit rating agencies (CRAs) to forecast the recent defaults and so-called quasi-defaults of rich countries. It also describes how Moody’s sovereign rating methodology has been modified – and could be further improved – to solve this problem.

After converting bond yields into yield-implied ratings, accuracy ratios are computed to compare the respective performances of CRAs and market participants. Then Iceland’s and Greece’s ratings at the beginning of the Great Recession are estimated while accounting for the parameters included in the new methodology implemented by Moody’s in 2013.

Market participants outperformed Moody’s and Standard & Poor’s in terms of anticipating the sovereign debt crisis that hit several European countries starting in 2008. However, the new methodology implemented by Moody’s should lead to more conservative and accurate sovereign ratings.

The chronic inability of CRAs to anticipate public debt crises in rich countries is dangerous because the countries affected – which are generally rated in the investment-grade category – are substantially downgraded, amplifying the sovereign debt crisis. This study is the first to demonstrate that Moody’s has learned from its recent failures. In addition, it recommends ways to detect serious threats to the creditworthiness of high-income countries.

To investigate the impact of the federal budget deficit (expressed as a per cent of the Gross Domestic Product, GDP) in the US on the ex ante real interest rate yield on Moody’s Baa-rated corporate bonds and to provide evidence that is both contemporary and covers an extended time period, namely, 1960 through 2015.

The analysis constructs a loanable funds model that involves a variety of financial and economic variables, with the ex ante real interest rate yield on Moody’s Baa-rated long-term corporate bonds as the dependent variable. The dependent variable is contemporaneous with the federal budget deficit and two other interest rate measures. Accordingly, instrumental variables are identified for each of these contemporaneous explanatory variables. The model also consists of four additional (lagged) explanatory variables. The model is then estimated using auto-regressive, i.e., AR(1), two-stage least squares.

The principal finding is that the ex ante real interest rate yield on Moody’s Baa rated corporate bonds is an increasing function of the federal budget deficit, expressed as a per cent of GDP. In particular, if the federal budget deficit were to rise by one per centage point, say from 3 to 4 per cent of GDP, the ex ante real interest rate would rise by 58 basis points.

There are other time-series techniques that could be applied to the topic, such as co-integration, although the AR(1) process is tailored for studying volatile series such as interest rates and stock prices.

The greater the US federal budget deficit, the greater the real cost of funds to firms. Hence, the high budget deficits of recent years have led to the crowding out of investment in new plant, new equipment, and new technology. These impacts lower economic growth and restrict prosperity in the US over time. Federal budget deficits must be substantially reduced so as to protect the US economy.

Higher budget deficits act to reduce investment in ew plant, new equipment and new technology. This in turn reduces job growth and real GDP growth and compromises the health of the economy.

This is the first study to focus on the impact of the federal budget deficit on the ex ante real long term cost of funds to firms in decades. Nearly all related studies fail to focus on this variable. Since, in theory, this variable (represented by the ex ante real yield on Moody’s Baa rated long term corporate bonds) is a key factor in corporate investment decisions, the empirical findings have potentially very significant implications for US firms and for the economy as a whole in view of the extraordinarily high budget deficits of recent years.

The purpose of this paper is to analyze which key financial factors are appropriate for measuring a credit rating score for family firms. In the recent literature, there exists a vast number of studies which evaluates performance differences between family and non-family firms (NFF). However an analysis with regards to a distinction between credit rating scores of family-orientated businesses compared to their counterparts in Austria has not been examined so far.

In order to bridge this research gap, an empirical model based on Moody’s credit rating methodology is used to address these issues. Therefore, the relevant data were taken from the 600 largest, both listed and non-listed, companies of Austria. The statistical measurements refer to a comparison of the means resulting from quantitative rating categories (profitability, leverage structure, liquidity development and firm size).

The results of this empirical research show that family firms achieve better values in profitability, leverage structure and liquidity development based on credit rating scores. Only firm size represents no significant differences between family and NFF.

This study will contribute to the existing literature in the academic area of family business research and offers a framework for future empirical analysis in this field. Furthermore, this paper provides important information that will help both family and NFF accomplish their financial strategies related to credit rating transitions.

Investors in commercial paper (CP) markets include money market mutual funds, corporate treasurers, state and local governments, and commercial banks and their trust departments. The obligors in the market are predominantly large and highly creditworthy corporations. The credit risks faced by CP investors have been minimal historically. However, the general decline in corporate credit quality that began in the first half of the 1980s set the stage for the spate of credit problems and defaults that took place in many CP markets beginning in 1987. While the incidence of default has decreased since 1991, the credit risks faced by commercial paper investors have not subsided to pre‐1987 levels. This analysis addresses concerns generated by this surge in credit risk.

The purpose of this study is to provide new empirical evidence on the impact of a variety of financial market forces on the ex post real cost of funds to corporations, namely, the ex post real interest rate yield on AAA-rated long-term corporate bonds in the USA. The study is couched within an open-economy loanable funds model, and it adopts annual data for the period 1973-2013, so that the results are current while being applicable only for the post-Bretton Woods era. The auto-regressive two-stage least squares (2SLS) and generalized method of moments (GMM) estimations reveal that the ex post real interest rate yield on AAA-rated long-term corporate bonds in the USA was an increasing function of the ex post real interest rate yields on six-month Treasury bills, seven-year Treasury notes, high-grade municipal bonds and the Moody’s BAA-rated corporate bonds, while being a decreasing function of the monetary base as a per cent of gross domestic product (GDP) and net financial capital inflows as a per cent of GDP. Finally, additional estimates reveal that the higher the budget deficit as a per cent of GDP, the higher the ex post real interest rate on AAA-rated long-term corporate bonds.

After developing an initial open-economy loanable funds model, the empirical dimension of the study involves auto-regressive, two-stage least squares and GMM estimates. The model is then expanded to include the federal budget deficit, and new AR/2SLS and GMM estimates are provided.

The AR/2SLS and GMM (generalized method of moments) estimations reveal that the ex post real interest rate yield on AAA-rated long-term corporate bonds in the USA was an increasing function of the ex post real interest rate yields on six-month Treasury bills, seven-year Treasury notes, high-grade municipal bonds and the Moody’s BAA-rated corporate bonds, while being a decreasing function of the monetary base as a per cent of GDP and net financial capital inflows as a per cent of GDP. Finally, additional estimates reveal that the higher the budget deficit as a per cent of GDP, the higher the ex post real interest rate on AAA-rated long -term corporate bonds.

The author is unaware of a study that adopts this particular set of real interest rates along with net capital inflows and the monetary base as a per cent of GDP and net capital inflows. Also, the data run through 2013. There have been only studies of deficits and real interest rates in the past few years.