IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this article

Financial Rating Agencies: Are They Credible? – Insights Into The Reporting Incentives Of Rating Agencies In Times Of Enhanced Systemic Risk

Listed author(s):
  • Christoph Kuhner
Registered author(s):

    The paper asks if credit rating agencies have incentives to misrepresent their clients’ credit quality during an ongoing systemic crisis. Two important elements are essential for a systemic crisis: (1) Investors are not able to distinguish fundamentally healthy debtors from fundamentally unhealthy ones. (2) Investors tend to cumulatively withdraw their funds. Therefore, neither fundamentally healthy nor unhealthy debtors can be expected to survive a creditor’s exit. We model a signalling game that reflects these two assumptions and several others. The game focuses on the creditor’s financial pay-offs and the agency’s reputational pay-offs. We show that there are no separating equilibria in which agencies report observed credit quality truthfully and creditors make their withdrawal decision contingent on this report. Depending on the relevant parameters, four different equilibria emerge. In three of these equilibria, rating assignments are always ignored by the creditors. Only in one equilibrium, there is limited transmission of decision-useful information as both players will adopt mixed strategies. Pure strategy equilibria in which rating assignments reflect decision-useful information can develop for a certain scope of parameters if some of the above mentioned assumptions are relaxed, i.e. (1) if fundamentally healthy firms can survive cumulative creditor’s withdrawal with positive probability, or (2) if two rating agencies successively evaluate the debtor. The paper’s findings add to the understanding of self-fulfilling prophecy phenomena in financial markets.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Article provided by LMU Munich School of Management in its journal Schmalenbach Business Review.

    Volume (Year): 53 (2001)
    Issue (Month): 1 (January)
    Pages: 2-26

    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:sbr:abstra:v:53:y:2001:i:1:p:2-26
    Contact details of provider: Postal:
    Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1, 80539 Muenchen

    Phone: 0049 89 2180 2166
    Fax: 0049 89 2180 6327
    Web page:

    More information through EDIRC

    No references listed on IDEAS
    You can help add them by filling out this form.

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sbr:abstra:v:53:y:2001:i:1:p:2-26. 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: (sbr)

    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.

    If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with 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 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.

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.