IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ucm/doicae/1423.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Risk-Return binomial after rating changes

Author

Abstract

Risk-averse investors take into consideration risk-return tradeoff for decide their new position after the release of relevant information. This paper analyzes the informational content of rating change announcements focusing on the joint reaction they cause on the risk-return binomial. Our purpose is to identify the main factors that signal which announcements are informative. To do that we estimate a binomial logit model for the probability of informative content of credit rating announcements. We analyze a sample of rating events affecting Spanish listed firms from 2000 to 2010. Empirical results show significant differences in the informative content between positive and negative rating events. For both kinds of announcements, we find higher informative content when agencies agree about the new level of solvency, whereas those affecting high covered firm that operate in highly regulated sectors are the less informative. Other factors as the presence of a previous rating refinements or trends in the credit quality reveals different information depending on the direction of the rating event. Finally, we find the announcements after de crisis disclose less information, suggesting a loss of reputation of CRAs.

Suggested Citation

  • Pilar Abad Romero & Maria Dolores Robles Fernández, 2014. "The Risk-Return binomial after rating changes," Documentos de Trabajo del ICAE 2014-23, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico.
  • Handle: RePEc:ucm:doicae:1423
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://eprints.ucm.es/26434/1/1423.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M.J. Barron & A.D. Clare & S.H. Thomas, 1997. "The Effect of Bond Rating Changes and New Ratings on UK Stock Returns," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(3), pages 497-509.
    2. Jorion, Philippe & Liu, Zhu & Shi, Charles, 2005. "Informational effects of regulation FD: evidence from rating agencies," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 309-330, May.
    3. Pilar Abad-Romero & M. Robles-Fernández, 2007. "Bond rating changes and stock returns: evidence from the Spanish stock market," Spanish Economic Review, Springer;Spanish Economic Association, vol. 9(2), pages 79-103, June.
    4. Miles Livingston & Jie (Diana) Wei & Lei Zhou, 2010. "Moody's and S&P Ratings: Are They Equivalent? Conservative Ratings and Split Rated Bond Yields," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 42(7), pages 1267-1293, October.
    5. Dion Bongaerts & K. J. Martijn Cremers & William N. Goetzmann, 2012. "Tiebreaker: Certification and Multiple Credit Ratings," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 67(1), pages 113-152, February.
    6. Arnoud W. A. Boot & Todd T. Milbourn & Anjolein Schmeits, 2006. "Credit Ratings as Coordination Mechanisms," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 19(1), pages 81-118.
    7. Becker, Bo & Milbourn, Todd, 2011. "How did increased competition affect credit ratings?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(3), pages 493-514, September.
    8. Impson, C Michael & Karafiath, Imre & Glascock, John L, 1992. "Testing Beta Stationarity across Bond Rating Changes," The Financial Review, Eastern Finance Association, vol. 27(4), pages 607-618, November.
    9. Gande, Amar & Parsley, David C., 2005. "News spillovers in the sovereign debt market," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(3), pages 691-734, March.
    10. Norden, Lars & Weber, Martin, 2004. "Informational efficiency of credit default swap and stock markets: The impact of credit rating announcements," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(11), pages 2813-2843, November.
    11. Lynnette D. Purda, 2007. "Stock Market Reaction To Anticipated Versus Surprise Rating Changes," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 30(2), pages 301-320, June.
    12. Hull, John & Predescu, Mirela & White, Alan, 2004. "The relationship between credit default swap spreads, bond yields, and credit rating announcements," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(11), pages 2789-2811, November.
    13. Pilar Abad-Romero & M. Dolores Robles-Fernandez, 2006. "Risk and Return Around Bond Rating Changes: New Evidence From the Spanish Stock Market," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(5-6), pages 885-908.
    14. Ederington, Louis H. & Goh, Jeremy C., 1998. "Bond Rating Agencies and Stock Analysts: Who Knows What When?," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(4), pages 569-585, December.
    15. Pilar Abad Romero & María Dolores Robles Fernández, 2012. "Credit rating agencies and unsystematic risk: Is there a linkage?," Documentos de Trabajo del ICAE 2012-17, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico.
    16. Guttler, Andre & Wahrenburg, Mark, 2007. "The adjustment of credit ratings in advance of defaults," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 751-767, March.
    17. Cantor, Richard & Packer, Frank, 1997. "Differences of opinion and selection bias in the credit rating industry," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 21(10), pages 1395-1417, October.
    18. May, Anthony D., 2010. "The impact of bond rating changes on corporate bond prices: New evidence from the over-the-counter market," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(11), pages 2822-2836, November.
    19. Xia, Han, 2014. "Can investor-paid credit rating agencies improve the information quality of issuer-paid rating agencies?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 450-468.
    20. Donald P. Morgan, 2002. "Rating Banks: Risk and Uncertainty in an Opaque Industry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(4), pages 874-888, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Abnormal return; Abnormal systematic risk; Abnormal volatility; Logit model.;

    JEL classification:

    • G12 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Asset Pricing; Trading Volume; Bond Interest Rates
    • 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
    • C22 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Single Equation Models; Single Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:ucm:doicae:1423. 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: (Águeda González Abad). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/feucmes.html .

    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 CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc 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 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.