IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Smoothing versus timeliness - wann sind stabile Ratings optimal und welche Anforderungen sind an optimale Berichtsregeln zu stellen?

  • Bannier, Christina E.

Im Mittelpunkt dieser Arbeit steht die Analyse der Vor- und Nachteile einer geglätteten versus aktuellen Informationsbasis in einem theoretischen Modell. Am Beispiel stabiler Agency-Ratings und volatiler marktbasierter Ratings zeigt sich, dass die Effekte der Berichtsmethode von den Charakteristika der bewerteten Assets, insbesondere ihrer Spezifizität und Laufzeit, abhängen. Für unspezfische Assets reduziert das Agency-Rating die Preisvolatilität am Markt. Hinsichtlich der Handelseffizienz hängt die Vorteilhaftigkeit eines Rating-Regimes von der Verteilung der Asset-Cashflows ab, für spezifische Assets dagegen von der Höhe des Agency-Ratings. Eine Herabstufung des Agency-Ratings führt in beiden Asset-Klassen zu sprunghaft ansteigender Handelsineeffizienz. Dies erklärt das beobachtete asymmetrische Beharrungsvermögen von Agency-Ratings.

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

Paper provided by Frankfurt School of Finance and Management in its series Frankfurt School - Working Paper Series with number 84.

in new window

Date of creation: 2007
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:zbw:fsfmwp:84
Contact details of provider: Postal: Sonnemannstraße 9-11, 60314 Frankfurt am Main
Phone: 069 154008-0
Web page:

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.:

as in new window
  1. Altman, Edward I. & Rijken, Herbert A., 2004. "How rating agencies achieve rating stability," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(11), pages 2679-2714, November.
  2. Morris, S & Song Shin, H, 1996. "Unique Equilibrium in a Model of Self-Fulfilling Currency Attacks," Economics Papers 126, Economics Group, Nuffield College, University of Oxford.
  3. Guillaume Plantin & Haresh Sapra & Hyun Song Shin, 2008. "Marking-to-Market: Panacea or Pandora's Box?," Journal of Accounting Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 46(2), pages 435-460, 05.
  4. Gunther Gebhardt & Rolf Reichardt & Carsten Wittenbrink, 2004. "Accounting for financial instruments in the banking industry: conclusions from a simulation model," European Accounting Review, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 13(2), pages 341-371.
  5. Dimitrios P Tsomocos & Xavier Freixas, 2004. "Books vs. Fair Value Accounting in Banking, and Intertemporal Smoothing," Economics Series Working Papers 2004-FE-13, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  6. Cantor, Richard, 2004. "An introduction to recent research on credit ratings," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(11), pages 2565-2573, November.
  7. Andrea Enria & Lorenzo Cappiello & Frank Dierick & Sergio Grittini & Andrew Haralambous & Angela Maddaloni & Philippe Molitor & Fatima Pires & Paolo Poloni, 2004. "Fair value accounting and financial stability," Occasional Paper Series 13, European Central Bank.
  8. Philippe Robert-Demontrond & R. Ringoot, 2004. "Introduction," Post-Print halshs-00081823, HAL.
  9. Posch, Peter N., 2011. "Time to change. Rating changes and policy implications," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 641-656.
  10. Loffler, Gunter, 2004. "Ratings versus market-based measures of default risk in portfolio governance," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(11), pages 2715-2746, November.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

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:zbw:fsfmwp:84. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics)

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.