IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kuk/journl/v43y2010i3p349-374.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stabilität versus Aktualität – Wann sind stabile Agency-Ratings marktbasierten Bewertungen vorzuziehen?

Author

Listed:
  • Christina E. Bannier

    (Frankfurt School of Finance and Management, Commerzbank Professur für Mittelstandsfinanzierung, Sonnemannstraße 9-11, D-60314 Frankfurt/M)

Abstract

This article analyses in theoretical terms on the basis of strategic portfolio decisions the pros and cons of an information basis that is stable in the long term versus one that is topical, but more volatile. The effects of an evaluation method depend on the characteristics of the assets evaluated, notably their specificity and lifetime. Stable agency ratings mitigate the volatility of unspecific asset prices. On the other hand, the trade in short-term assets is more efficient when marked-based ratings are applied. For long-term assets, the degree of specificity, the upside/ downside risk and the rating level are decisive. For specific assets, in particular, agency ratings are dominant where rating levels are sufficiently high and where transaction costs are low. Downgrading of ratings may result in trading inefficiencies increasing by leaps and bounds.

Suggested Citation

  • Christina E. Bannier, 2010. "Stabilität versus Aktualität – Wann sind stabile Agency-Ratings marktbasierten Bewertungen vorzuziehen?," Credit and Capital Markets, Credit and Capital Markets, vol. 43(3), pages 349-374.
  • Handle: RePEc:kuk:journl:v:43:y:2010:i:3:p:349-374
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design
    • G14 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Information and Market Efficiency; Event Studies; Insider Trading
    • G24 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Investment Banking; Venture Capital; Brokerage

    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:kuk:journl:v:43:y:2010:i:3:p:349-374. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Credit and Capital Markets). General contact details of provider: http://www.credit-and-capital-markets.de/ .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.