Do Rating Agencies Cater? Evidence from Rating-Based Contracts
نویسنده
چکیده
I examine whether rating agencies are more likely to cater to borrowers with rating-based performance pricing agreements (PPrating firms). This study uses data from Moody’s Financial Metrics on agency adjustments to investigate this prediction and exploits an unexpected adverse shock to firms’ credit risk as identification. The evidence is mixed. In the crosssection and for firms experiencing adverse shocks, agency adjustments are more favorable for PPrating firms. However, agency adjustments are less favorable when the agency’s reputational costs are high. Agency adjustments for PPrating firms are not associated with incrementally higher bond yields. ∗I am very grateful to the members of my dissertation committee: Ray Ball (chair), Phil Berger, Christian Leuz, and Doug Skinner, as well as Ryan Ball, Mary Barth, Alexander Bleck, Marshall Blume, Fabrizio Ferri, Joseph Gerakos, Valeri Nikolaev, Maarten Petermann, Joshua Ronen, Stephen Ryan, Regina Wittenberg, Joanna Wu, Sarah Zechman and Jerry Zimmerman. I also thank participants at the NBER summer session on credit rating agencies and Standard & Poor’s Academic Council Meeting as well as participants at accounting workshops at Boston College (Carroll School of Management), Columbia Business School, London Business School, McGill University (Desautels Faculty of Management), New York University (Stern School of Business), Northwestern University (Kellogg Graduate School of Management), University of Chicago (Booth), University of Michigan (Ross School of Business), University of Pennsylvania (Wharton), University of Rochester (Simon Graduate School of Business Administration), University of Toronto, Stanford Graduate School of Business, and Washington University (Olin Business School) for constructive suggestions, questions and feedback. I thank Andrew Tan and Hui Lin Tan for excellent research assistance. I am grateful for the financial support provided by the University of New York Stern School of Business, the University of Chicago Booth School of Business and the Deloitte Foundation. This paper was previously circulated under the title: The Impact of the Contractual Use of Ratings on the Rating Process Evidence from Rating Agency Adjustments. To contact me, email [email protected].
منابع مشابه
The Economics of Rating Watchlists: Evidence from Rating Changes
Generally, information provision and certification have been identified as the major economic functions of rating agencies. This paper analyzes whether the “watchlist” (rating review) instrument has extended the agencies’ role towards a monitoring position, as proposed by Boot, Milbourn, and Schmeits (2006). Using a data set of Moody’s ratings between 1982 and 2004, we find that the overall inf...
متن کاملTesting Conflicts of Interest at Bond Ratings Agencies with Market Anticipation: Evidence that Reputation Incentives Dominate
This paper presents the first comprehensive test of whether well-known conflicts of interest at bond rating agencies importantly influence their actions. This hypothesis is tested against the alternative that rating agency actions are primarily influenced by a countervailing incentive to protect their reputations as delegated monitors. These two hypotheses generate a number of testable predicti...
متن کاملDo Credit Ratings Reflect Underlying Firm Characteristics? Evidence from the Utility Industry
The recent financial crisis has raised questions regarding the role credit rating agencies play in monitoring the quality of corporate debt. Utility industry deregulation serves as a natural testing ground for evaluating the prudence of rating agencies and their monitoring process. Following deregulation and the Enron scandal, the general opinion among industry professionals is that utilities a...
متن کاملCredit Ratings and Market Dynamics
Rating agencies provide opinions on the creditworthiness of companies and debt instruments, and so reduce lenders’ information gathering costs. Their ratings are especially useful in distinguishing the relative riskiness of different borrowers. Empirical evidence suggests that rating agencies rank the riskiness of borrowers well: realised default rates are consistently higher for lower rating g...
متن کاملAvoiding the Rating Bounce: Why Rating Agencies Are Slow to React to New Information
Rating agencies state that they take a rating action only when it is unlikely to be reversed shortly afterwards. Based on a formal representation of the rating process, I show that such a policy provides a good explanation for the empirical evidence: Rating changes occur relatively seldom, exhibit serial dependence, and lag changes in the issuers’ default risk. In terms of informational losses,...
متن کامل