如何改革信用评级程序以支持自有品牌证券化的可持续复兴

IF 0.9 Q3 BUSINESS, FINANCE
R. Herring, E. Kane
{"title":"如何改革信用评级程序以支持自有品牌证券化的可持续复兴","authors":"R. Herring, E. Kane","doi":"10.1142/S2010139212500024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"US product-liability laws unwisely treat credit-rating organizations (CROs) as if they produce opinions rather than empirically-based economic research. In principle, trained professionals gather time-varying information (\"financial news\") and analyze it statistically to reduce it to a single dimension, allegedly for the benefit of investors, which, in turn, enables issuers to finance themselves at lower cost. In practice, the issuer-pays business model currently used for funding the production and distribution of ratings information creates an incentive to favor high-volume issuers by over-rating private-label securitizations. While the Dodd–Frank Act intensifies SEC oversight of CRO activity, the SEC has a history of being captured by regulatory clients. We argue that the fundamental solution is to create accountability in the ratings process so that private label securitizations can play a constructive role in the provision of credit and we go on to offer some conjectures about how this could be done.","PeriodicalId":45339,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Finance","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2012-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How to Reform the Credit-Rating Process to Support a Sustainable Revival of Private-Label Securitization ¤\",\"authors\":\"R. Herring, E. Kane\",\"doi\":\"10.1142/S2010139212500024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"US product-liability laws unwisely treat credit-rating organizations (CROs) as if they produce opinions rather than empirically-based economic research. In principle, trained professionals gather time-varying information (\\\"financial news\\\") and analyze it statistically to reduce it to a single dimension, allegedly for the benefit of investors, which, in turn, enables issuers to finance themselves at lower cost. In practice, the issuer-pays business model currently used for funding the production and distribution of ratings information creates an incentive to favor high-volume issuers by over-rating private-label securitizations. While the Dodd–Frank Act intensifies SEC oversight of CRO activity, the SEC has a history of being captured by regulatory clients. We argue that the fundamental solution is to create accountability in the ratings process so that private label securitizations can play a constructive role in the provision of credit and we go on to offer some conjectures about how this could be done.\",\"PeriodicalId\":45339,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quarterly Journal of Finance\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-07-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quarterly Journal of Finance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1142/S2010139212500024\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Finance","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1142/S2010139212500024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

美国产品责任法不明智地将信用评级机构(cro)视为发表意见,而不是基于经验的经济研究。原则上,训练有素的专业人员收集时变信息(“金融新闻”),并对其进行统计分析,将其减少到单一维度,据称是为了投资者的利益,这反过来又使发行人能够以更低的成本为自己融资。在实践中,目前用于为评级信息的制作和分发提供资金的“发行者付费”商业模式,会通过对自有品牌证券的过高评级来鼓励大量发行者。虽然《多德-弗兰克法案》(Dodd-Frank Act)加强了SEC对CRO活动的监督,但SEC向来有被监管机构客户俘获的历史。我们认为,根本的解决方案是在评级过程中建立问责制,使自有品牌证券化在提供信贷方面发挥建设性作用,我们继续就如何做到这一点提出一些猜想。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
How to Reform the Credit-Rating Process to Support a Sustainable Revival of Private-Label Securitization ¤
US product-liability laws unwisely treat credit-rating organizations (CROs) as if they produce opinions rather than empirically-based economic research. In principle, trained professionals gather time-varying information ("financial news") and analyze it statistically to reduce it to a single dimension, allegedly for the benefit of investors, which, in turn, enables issuers to finance themselves at lower cost. In practice, the issuer-pays business model currently used for funding the production and distribution of ratings information creates an incentive to favor high-volume issuers by over-rating private-label securitizations. While the Dodd–Frank Act intensifies SEC oversight of CRO activity, the SEC has a history of being captured by regulatory clients. We argue that the fundamental solution is to create accountability in the ratings process so that private label securitizations can play a constructive role in the provision of credit and we go on to offer some conjectures about how this could be done.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Quarterly Journal of Finance
Quarterly Journal of Finance BUSINESS, FINANCE-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Quarterly Journal of Finance publishes high-quality papers in all areas of finance, including corporate finance, asset pricing, financial econometrics, international finance, macro-finance, behavioral finance, banking and financial intermediation, capital markets, risk management and insurance, derivatives, quantitative finance, corporate governance and compensation, investments and entrepreneurial finance.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信