IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/gpprii/v40y2015i2p316-333.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

What Determines Lloyd’s Market Syndicates’ Unsolicited Ratings?

Author

Listed:
  • Yung-Ming Shiu

    (Department of Risk Management and Insurance, Risk and Insurance Research Center, College of Commerce, National Chengchi University, 64, Sec. 2, Zhinan Road, Wenshan District, Taipei 11605, Taiwan.)

Abstract

Based upon a sample of Lloyd’s syndicates covering the years 2006–2010, we examine the determinants of (i) the likelihood of being rated and (ii) the rating that is likely to be assigned by Standard and Poor’s, from which we document evidence of selectivity bias. Larger, more profitable and liquid syndicates are found to be more likely to receive a rating, and indeed, to have higher ratings. Syndicates with more reinsurance dependence are more likely to be rated, but less likely to obtain a higher rating. Our findings indicate that the “signalling” hypothesis dominates the “uncertainty reduction” theory.

Suggested Citation

  • Yung-Ming Shiu, 2015. "What Determines Lloyd’s Market Syndicates’ Unsolicited Ratings?," The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance - Issues and Practice, Palgrave Macmillan;The Geneva Association, vol. 40(2), pages 316-333, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:gpprii:v:40:y:2015:i:2:p:316-333
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/gpp/journal/v40/n2/pdf/gpp201436a.pdf
    File Function: Link to full text PDF
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/gpp/journal/v40/n2/full/gpp201436a.html
    File Function: Link to full text HTML
    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:pal:gpprii:v:40:y:2015:i:2:p:316-333. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/ .

    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.