On comparing the accuracy of default predictions in the rating industry
We consider 1927 borrowers from 54 countries who had a credit rating by both Moody's and S&P at the end of 1998, and their subsequent default history up to the end of 2002. Viewing bond ratings as predicted probabilities of default, we consider partial orderings among competing probability forecasters and show that Moody's and S&P cannot be ordered according to any of these. Therefore, the relative performance of the agencies depends crucially on the way in which probability predictions are compared.
To our knowledge, this item is not available for
download. To find whether it is available, there are three
1. Check below under "Related research" 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.
|Date of creation:|
|Date of revision:||Oct 2006|
|Publication status:||Published in Empirical Economics, May 2008, pages 343-356|
|Contact details of provider:|| Postal: Vogelpothsweg 78, D-44221 Dortmund|
Phone: (0231) 755-3125
Fax: (0231) 755-5284
Web page: http://www.statistik.tu-dortmund.de/iwus.html
More information through EDIRC
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Carey, Mark & Hrycay, Mark, 2001. "Parameterizing credit risk models with rating data," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 197-270, January.
- Prof. Dr. Walter Krämer, "undated".
"On the ordering of probability forecasts,"
1, Business and Social Statistics Department, Technische Universität Dortmund, revised May 2003.
- Krämer, Walter, 2002. "On the ordering of probability forecasts," Technical Reports 2002,50, Technische Universität Dortmund, Sonderforschungsbereich 475: Komplexitätsreduktion in multivariaten Datenstrukturen.
- Robert L. Winkler, 1994. "Evaluating Probabilities: Asymmetric Scoring Rules," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(11), pages 1395-1405, November.
- Walter Krämer, 2006. "Evaluating probability forecasts in terms of refinement and strictly proper scoring rules," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 25(3), pages 223-226.
- Krämer, Walter, 2003. "Evaluating probability forecasts in terms of refinement and strictly proper scoring rules," Technical Reports 2003,24, Technische Universität Dortmund, Sonderforschungsbereich 475: Komplexitätsreduktion in multivariaten Datenstrukturen.
- Moon, Choon-Geol & Stotsky, Janet G, 1993. "Testing the Differences between the Determinants of Moody's and Standard & Poor's Ratings: An Application of Smooth Simulated Maximum Likelihood Estimation," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 8(1), pages 51-69, Jan.-Marc.
- Crouhy, Michel & Galai, Dan & Mark, Robert, 2001. "Prototype risk rating system," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 47-95, January.
- Diebold, Francis X & Mariano, Roberto S, 2002. "Comparing Predictive Accuracy," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 134-144, January.
- Diebold, Francis X & Mariano, Roberto S, 1995. "Comparing Predictive Accuracy," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 13(3), pages 253-263, July.
- Francis X. Diebold & Robert S. Mariano, 1994. "Comparing Predictive Accuracy," NBER Technical Working Papers 0169, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Tom Doan, "undated". "DMARIANO: RATS procedure to compute Diebold-Mariano Forecast Comparison Test," Statistical Software Components RTS00055, Boston College Department of Economics.