基准信用评级系统

K. Hornik, Manuel Lingo, Rainer Jankowitsch, Stefan Pichler, G. Winkler
{"title":"基准信用评级系统","authors":"K. Hornik, Manuel Lingo, Rainer Jankowitsch, Stefan Pichler, G. Winkler","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.930376","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The validation of credit rating systems has recently attracted particular interest both from banks and their supervisors as well as from academic research. Whereas the main interest has been focused on backtesting methods, alternative approaches such as benchmarking are of growing importance. Benchmarking methods make use of available multi-rater information, i.e. rating assignments about identical obligors stemming from different rating sources. Employing a unique data set provided by the Austrian central bank with rating information on European corporate obligors by nine major Austrian banks, we conduct a benchmarking analysis based on the framework suggested by Hornik et al. (2005) on both market specific and bank specific levels. It turns out that overall similarity among rating systems is remarkably lower for foreign markets compared to the domestic market. Transition economies and markets with a generally low involvement of Austrian banks show particularly dissimilar results. Differences in the overall similarity of rating systems are partly explained by different performance of some individual rating systems in the domestic and foreign markets.","PeriodicalId":163698,"journal":{"name":"Institutional & Transition Economics eJournal","volume":"33 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Benchmarking Credit Rating Systems\",\"authors\":\"K. Hornik, Manuel Lingo, Rainer Jankowitsch, Stefan Pichler, G. Winkler\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.930376\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The validation of credit rating systems has recently attracted particular interest both from banks and their supervisors as well as from academic research. Whereas the main interest has been focused on backtesting methods, alternative approaches such as benchmarking are of growing importance. Benchmarking methods make use of available multi-rater information, i.e. rating assignments about identical obligors stemming from different rating sources. Employing a unique data set provided by the Austrian central bank with rating information on European corporate obligors by nine major Austrian banks, we conduct a benchmarking analysis based on the framework suggested by Hornik et al. (2005) on both market specific and bank specific levels. It turns out that overall similarity among rating systems is remarkably lower for foreign markets compared to the domestic market. Transition economies and markets with a generally low involvement of Austrian banks show particularly dissimilar results. Differences in the overall similarity of rating systems are partly explained by different performance of some individual rating systems in the domestic and foreign markets.\",\"PeriodicalId\":163698,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Institutional & Transition Economics eJournal\",\"volume\":\"33 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2007-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Institutional & Transition Economics eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.930376\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Institutional & Transition Economics eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.930376","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

信用评级体系的验证最近引起了银行及其监管机构以及学术研究的特别兴趣。虽然人们的主要兴趣集中在回溯测试方法上,但基准测试等替代方法也越来越重要。基准测试方法利用可用的多评级者信息,即对来自不同评级来源的相同债务人的评级分配。采用奥地利中央银行提供的独特数据集,其中包含奥地利九家主要银行对欧洲公司债务人的评级信息,我们基于Hornik等人(2005)建议的框架,在特定市场和特定银行两个层面上进行基准分析。结果表明,与国内市场相比,国外市场的评级体系之间的总体相似性要低得多。奥地利银行参与程度普遍较低的转型经济体和市场表现出特别不同的结果。评级制度整体相似度的差异部分是由于个别评级制度在国内外市场上的不同表现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Benchmarking Credit Rating Systems
The validation of credit rating systems has recently attracted particular interest both from banks and their supervisors as well as from academic research. Whereas the main interest has been focused on backtesting methods, alternative approaches such as benchmarking are of growing importance. Benchmarking methods make use of available multi-rater information, i.e. rating assignments about identical obligors stemming from different rating sources. Employing a unique data set provided by the Austrian central bank with rating information on European corporate obligors by nine major Austrian banks, we conduct a benchmarking analysis based on the framework suggested by Hornik et al. (2005) on both market specific and bank specific levels. It turns out that overall similarity among rating systems is remarkably lower for foreign markets compared to the domestic market. Transition economies and markets with a generally low involvement of Austrian banks show particularly dissimilar results. Differences in the overall similarity of rating systems are partly explained by different performance of some individual rating systems in the domestic and foreign markets.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Why Foreign Aid Fails Informal Finance: A Theory of Moneylenders Do Institutions Not Matter in China? Evidence from Manufacturing Enterprises Two Russian Stock Exchanges: Analysis of Relationships Human Capital Externalities Evidence from the Transition Economy of Russia
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1