证券分析师惩戒信用评级机构吗?

IF 1.9 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE Review of Corporate Finance Studies Pub Date : 2022-05-19 DOI:10.1093/rcfs/cfac021
Kingsley Fong, Harrison Hong, Marcin Kacperczyk, Jeffrey D Kubik
{"title":"证券分析师惩戒信用评级机构吗?","authors":"Kingsley Fong, Harrison Hong, Marcin Kacperczyk, Jeffrey D Kubik","doi":"10.1093/rcfs/cfac021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Credit ratings of corporations are biased, but the forces driving this bias are unclear. We argue it would be difficult for rating agencies to issue high grades for a firm’s debt when there are a lot of objective equity analyst reports about the firm’s earnings that are informative about its default. We find that an exogenous drop in analyst coverage leads to greater optimism-bias in ratings, especially for firms with little bond analyst coverage and those that are close to default. This coverage-induced shock leads to less informative ratings about future defaults and downgrades and more subsequent bond security mispricings.","PeriodicalId":44656,"journal":{"name":"Review of Corporate Finance Studies","volume":"76 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do Security Analysts Discipline Credit Rating Agencies?\",\"authors\":\"Kingsley Fong, Harrison Hong, Marcin Kacperczyk, Jeffrey D Kubik\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/rcfs/cfac021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Credit ratings of corporations are biased, but the forces driving this bias are unclear. We argue it would be difficult for rating agencies to issue high grades for a firm’s debt when there are a lot of objective equity analyst reports about the firm’s earnings that are informative about its default. We find that an exogenous drop in analyst coverage leads to greater optimism-bias in ratings, especially for firms with little bond analyst coverage and those that are close to default. This coverage-induced shock leads to less informative ratings about future defaults and downgrades and more subsequent bond security mispricings.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44656,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Review of Corporate Finance Studies\",\"volume\":\"76 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Review of Corporate Finance Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/rcfs/cfac021\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Review of Corporate Finance Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/rcfs/cfac021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

企业的信用评级存在偏见,但造成这种偏见的原因尚不清楚。我们认为,当有大量客观的股票分析师关于公司收益的报告提供了有关公司违约的信息时,评级机构很难对公司的债务给予高评级。我们发现,分析师覆盖范围的外生下降会导致评级中更大的乐观偏见,特别是对于那些几乎没有债券分析师覆盖的公司和那些接近违约的公司。这种由覆盖范围引发的冲击,导致有关未来违约和评级下调的评级信息不足,以及随后更多的债券证券错误定价。
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
Do Security Analysts Discipline Credit Rating Agencies?
Credit ratings of corporations are biased, but the forces driving this bias are unclear. We argue it would be difficult for rating agencies to issue high grades for a firm’s debt when there are a lot of objective equity analyst reports about the firm’s earnings that are informative about its default. We find that an exogenous drop in analyst coverage leads to greater optimism-bias in ratings, especially for firms with little bond analyst coverage and those that are close to default. This coverage-induced shock leads to less informative ratings about future defaults and downgrades and more subsequent bond security mispricings.
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
CiteScore
17.80
自引率
1.80%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: The Review of Corporate Finance Studies (RCFS) is dedicated to publishing high-quality research in the expansive field of Corporate Finance. The journal seeks original contributions, reviewing papers based on their unique insights into Corporate Finance. This encompasses a wide spectrum, including a firm's interactions with stakeholders, capital markets, internal organization structure, compensation mechanisms, corporate governance, and capital management. RCFS also welcomes research in financial intermediation, financial institutions, microstructure, and the implications of asset pricing for Corporate Finance. The journal considers theoretical, empirical, and experimental papers for review.
期刊最新文献
Product Market Competition, Mergers and Acquisitions, and Covenant Redesign Higher Purpose, Employees, and the Firm Employer Dominance and Worker Earnings in Finance The Geography of Investor Attention Human Capital Reallocation across Firms: Evidence from Idiosyncratic Shocks
×
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