Reliability and Agreement of Credit Ratings in the Mexican Fixed Income Market

V. Charlin, Arturo Cifuentes
{"title":"Reliability and Agreement of Credit Ratings in the Mexican Fixed Income Market","authors":"V. Charlin, Arturo Cifuentes","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2696621","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Credit ratings play an important role in the fixed income market as the entire regulatory framework of this market segment is based on them and a significant part of what investors can and cannot do is dictated by ratings. Also, a number of ratings-based metrics are employed globally to estimate capital reserves, liquidity buffers, and solvency standards for many institutional investors such as insurance companies and pension funds. A critical assumption at the root of this regulatory architecture is that the credit-rating scales of the three leading agencies (Moody’s, Fitch, and Standard & Poor’s) are completely equivalent.In this study we focus on the Mexican fixed income market. We find that the ratings of all three rating agencies exhibit a very high degree of inter-rater reliability. This means that in terms of ranking a group of bonds based on creditworthiness the three rating agencies would produce very similar results.On the other hand, using a non-parametric statistic, the Wilcoxon matched-pairs test, we conclude that there are significant discrepancies among the ratings of the three agencies. This is consistent with a low level of inter-rater agreement detected. These findings challenge the suitability of credit ratings as a useful metric for regulatory purposes as they create the possibility of arbitrage.","PeriodicalId":105752,"journal":{"name":"IRPN: Innovation & Regulatory Law & Policy (Topic)","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-11-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IRPN: Innovation & Regulatory Law & Policy (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2696621","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Credit ratings play an important role in the fixed income market as the entire regulatory framework of this market segment is based on them and a significant part of what investors can and cannot do is dictated by ratings. Also, a number of ratings-based metrics are employed globally to estimate capital reserves, liquidity buffers, and solvency standards for many institutional investors such as insurance companies and pension funds. A critical assumption at the root of this regulatory architecture is that the credit-rating scales of the three leading agencies (Moody’s, Fitch, and Standard & Poor’s) are completely equivalent.In this study we focus on the Mexican fixed income market. We find that the ratings of all three rating agencies exhibit a very high degree of inter-rater reliability. This means that in terms of ranking a group of bonds based on creditworthiness the three rating agencies would produce very similar results.On the other hand, using a non-parametric statistic, the Wilcoxon matched-pairs test, we conclude that there are significant discrepancies among the ratings of the three agencies. This is consistent with a low level of inter-rater agreement detected. These findings challenge the suitability of credit ratings as a useful metric for regulatory purposes as they create the possibility of arbitrage.
墨西哥固定收益市场信用评级的可靠性和一致性
信用评级在固定收益市场中扮演着重要的角色,因为这个细分市场的整个监管框架都是基于它们的,投资者能做什么和不能做什么在很大程度上是由评级决定的。此外,许多基于评级的指标在全球范围内被用于估计许多机构投资者(如保险公司和养老基金)的资本储备、流动性缓冲和偿付能力标准。这种监管架构的一个关键假设是,三大主要评级机构(穆迪、惠誉和标准普尔)的信用评级规模完全相同。在本研究中,我们主要关注墨西哥固定收益市场。我们发现所有三个评级机构的评级都表现出非常高的评级机构之间的可靠性。这意味着,在对一组债券进行信用评级方面,这三家评级机构将得出非常相似的结果。另一方面,使用非参数统计,即Wilcoxon配对对检验,我们得出结论,三个机构的评级之间存在显着差异。这与检测到的低水平的评级机构间协议是一致的。这些发现挑战了信用评级作为监管目的有用指标的适用性,因为它们创造了套利的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信