IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rfinst/v26y2013i9p2270-2310.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rating Shopping or Catering? An Examination of the Response to Competitive Pressure for CDO Credit Ratings

Author

Listed:
  • John M. Griffin
  • Jordan Nickerson
  • Dragon Yongjun Tang

Abstract

We examine whether "rating shopping" or "rating catering" is a more accurate characterization of rating agency interactions regarding collateralized debt obligations (CDOs). Although investors paid a premium for dual ratings, AAA CDO tranches rated by both Moody's and S&P defaulted more frequently than tranches rated by only one of them, which is inconsistent with pure rating shopping. Rating agencies made upward adjustments beyond their model when their competitor had more lenient assumptions. Finally, consistent with rating catering, S&P's and Moody's adjustments and disagreements at security issuance were reflected in subsequent rating downgrades, suggesting that adjustments were harmful. The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Society for Financial Studies. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com., Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • John M. Griffin & Jordan Nickerson & Dragon Yongjun Tang, 2013. "Rating Shopping or Catering? An Examination of the Response to Competitive Pressure for CDO Credit Ratings," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 26(9), pages 2270-2310.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rfinst:v:26:y:2013:i:9:p:2270-2310
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/rfs/hht036
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:rfinst:v:26:y:2013:i:9:p:2270-2310. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sfsssea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.