Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance
The Relationship between the Credit Ratings and Stock Market Performances
Financial Institutions and Markets
2
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
PAGE
SOVEREIGN CREDIT RATINGS
Sovereign credit ratings are widely used measures of the creditworthiness of a particular country's government.
Changes in credit ratings, whether real or potential, indicate not only that the credit risk of the government increases or decreases, but also that the macroeconomic environment changes, and thus it may have an impact on the performance of the companies which operate in that country.
An approach to examine the effect of the sovereign credit rating announcements is to investigate their impact on stock prices.
While credit ratings indicate future default probability, they are not absolute measures of credit risk. Instead, they provide an ordinal ranking, i.e. information on relative creditworthiness. All major rating agencies employ similar rating scales, which consist of 20 or more notches.
3
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
PAGE
SOVEREIGN CREDIT RATINGS
A change to a credit rating can signal to the market that the creditworthiness of the country has changed.
The importance assigned by the market to this signal of quality is such that a credit rating downgrade can provoke a strong reaction from the aggrieved country.
The informational value of credit rating agency is a controversial and inconclusive issue.
Do the credit rating announcements have any impact on the stock market?
4
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
PAGE
LITERATURE REVIEW
A number of researchers have explored the relationship between ratings and stock markets performance by different methods but the results are conflicting.
Some of the earlier studies have examined the credit rating announcements on the security returns and found no significant returns (Weinstein, 1977; Pinches and Singleton, 1978). Kaplan and Urwitz (1979) and Wakeman (1981) suggested that bond rating agencies only had access to public information and their ratings have no added value to the investors.
5
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
PAGE
LITERATURE REVIEW
However, other researchers argued that the rating agencies had information that was not available in the public domain and that the stock market reacted significantly to the relevant information.
Ederington and Yawitz (1991) indicated that the rating agencies are the low cost providers of such information. Danos, Holt, and Imhoff (1984) concluded that bond rating agencies possess expert judgment and are specialists at processing information related to country’s condition. Cornell, Landsman and Shapiro (1989) argued that revisions in bond ratings may have information content.
6
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
PAGE
HISTORICAL RATINGS & INDEXES DATA
The sample consists of rating changes for both developed and developing countries rated by Fitch for the period 1994-2012.
However, mostly developing countries are used because of higher rate of change in terms of ratings. The ratings and official rating dates were supplied directly by Fitch.
Also the stock market indexes for both developed and developing countries collected within the range of 1989-2012 on daily basis from Yahoo Finance and Google Finance.
The countries used within the study are Greece, India, Brazil, Italy, Spain, Mexico, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Japan.
7
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
PAGE
QUANTIFICATION OF RATINGS
In order to apply tests ratings needed to be converted into numerical value; therefore, starting with C- rating as 1 the ratings are changed with the numerical values; such as C=1, C+=2, CC-=3.
During the study, main stock market index of each country is used referring to their stock market performances. Also, in order to make their frequency equal both indexes’ and ratings’ frequency decreased to annual.
8
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
PAGE
DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
Stock Market Performances
Greece India Brazil Italy Spain Mexico Malaysia Indonesia Japan
Mean 3071.399 10100.62 36145.56 27766.41 8869.033 16268.06 1003.503 312.4638 14099.98
Median 2609.395 9424.240 31367.00 27774.00 8866.550 11262.95 915.1400 262.5600 13843.55
Maximum 5747.910 18327.76 79647.00 42197.00 14553.20 37422.68 1521.290 692.1600 20813.00
Minimum 766.7400 3250.380 8172.000 15828.00 3040.100 3647.100 569.5100 82.70000 7994.050
Std. Dev. 1660.275 5865.371 24181.63 9000.485 3020.093 12290.08 334.8662 214.1593 4338.584
Skewness 0.393518 0.248328 0.392726 0.178457 -0.220728 0.558238 0.367539 0.510497 0.085103
Kurtosis 1.865726 1.425818 1.691534 1.787726 2.667494 1.780994 1.701717 1.815953 1.565132
9
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
PAGE
DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
Ratings
Greece India Brazil Italy Spain Mexico Malaysia Indonesia Japan
Mean 15.80000 14.76923 13.06250 19.44444 22.72222 15.81250 18.00000 12.46154 21.26316
Median 18.00000 15.00000 12.00000 19.00000 24.00000 16.00000 18.00000 12.00000 20.00000
Maximum 19.00000 15.00000 16.00000 21.00000 24.00000 17.00000 19.00000 15.00000 24.00000
Minimum 2.000000 14.00000 11.00000 17.00000 18.00000 15.00000 16.00000 10.00000 19.00000
Std. Dev. 5.094660 0.438529 1.806239 1.333333 1.742397 0.543906 0.966092 1.330124 1.820931
Skewness -2.24771 -1.27801 0.465267 -0.20992 -1.27704 -0.17049 -0.45816 0.196281 0.676245
Kurtosis 6.693130 2.633333 1.696271 2.378906 3.980123 3.043245 2.122449 2.723850 1.775132
10
A panel has the form
Where i is the individual dimension and t is the time dimension.
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
PAGE
PANEL DATA
In statistics and econometrics, the term panel data refers to multi-dimensional data. Panel data contains observations on multiple phenomena observed over multiple time periods for the same sections.
Time series and cross-sectional data are special cases of panel data that are in one-dimension only.
11
A panel has the form
Where i is the individual dimension and t is the time dimension.
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
PAGE
PANEL DATA
In statistics and econometrics, the term panel data refers to multi-dimensional data. Panel data contains observations on multiple phenomena observed over multiple time periods for the same sections.
Time series and cross-sectional data are special cases of panel data that are in one-dimension only.
12
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
TESTING FOR INTEGRATION
Panel Unit Root Tests
ADF – Fisher Chi-Square
PP – Fisher Chi-Square
Im, Pesaran and Shin W-stat
PAGE
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
13
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
RELATION TESTING
Panel Granger Causality
PAGE
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
Panel Co-Integration
14
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
UNIT ROOT TESTSPAGE
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
Variable Method Decision
ADF – Fisher Chi-Square
INDEX 9.50471 [3]
4.75630**[1]
2.56002 [1]
∆INDEX 41.6316* [2]
37.3582*[1]
25.3620*[1] I(1)
RATING 2.165336[0]
0.820650[0]
-1.051970[0]
∆RATING -3.761079*[0]
-4.081819*[0]
-4.267101*[0] I(1)
PP – Fisher Chi-Square
INDEX 13.4386** [3]
8.41179 [1]
0.42995 [1]
∆INDEX 58.3863*[2]
78.1425*[1]
39.8658**[1] I(1)
RATING 2.165336[0]
0.820650[0]
-1.051970[0]
∆RATING -3.761079*[0]
-4.081819*[0]
-4.267101*[0] I(1)
15
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
UNIT ROOT TESTSPAGE
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
Variable Method Decision
Im, Pesaran and Shin W-stat
INDEX ----
1.56651[1]
2.56002 [1]
∆INDEX ----
-4.93111*[1]
25.3620*[1] I(1)
RATING 2.165336[0]
0.820650**[0]
-1.051970[0]
∆RATING -3.761079*[0]
-4.081819*[0]
-4.267101*[0] I(1)
Levin, Lin & Chu t
INDEX 0.00095 [3]
0.46183 [1]
0.42995 [1]
∆INDEX -5.96823* [2]
-5.28770*[1]
39.8658**[1] I(1)
RATING 2.165336**[0]
0.820650[0]
-1.051970[0]
∆RATING -3.761079*[0]
-4.081819*[0]
-4.267101*[0] I(1)
16
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
SAMPLE INDEX VALUESPAGE
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
1/1/1
998
2/1/1
999
3/1/2
000
4/1/2
001
5/1/2
002
6/1/2
003
7/1/2
004
8/1/2
005
9/1/2
006
10/1/2
007
11/1/2
008
12/1/2
009
1/1/2
0110
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
KLCI
1/1/1
997
4/1/1
998
7/1/1
999
10/1/2
000
1/1/2
002
4/1/2
003
7/1/2
004
10/1/2
005
1/1/2
007
4/1/2
008
7/1/2
009
10/1/2
010
1/1/2
0120
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
30000
35000
40000
IPC
17
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
GRANGER CAUSALITY TESTSPAGE
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
ReferencesN = 111K = 2 INDEXRATING RATINGINDEX
1.49615 2.63557 [0.2287] [0.0564]
𝐺𝐼𝑁𝐷𝐸𝑋=ln( 𝐼𝑁𝐷𝐸𝑋𝐼𝑁𝐷𝐸𝑋 (−1 ) ) ,𝐺𝑅𝐴𝑇𝐼𝑁𝐺=ln( 𝑅𝐴𝑇𝐼𝑁𝐺
𝑅𝐴𝑇𝐼𝑁𝐺 (−1 ) )
Before conducting Granger causality tests values of all variables are transformed into percentage amount, because of being I(1), according to the equation:
18
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
CO-INTEGRATION TESTSPAGE
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
𝐼𝑁𝐷𝐸𝑋=𝛼0+𝛽1𝑅𝐴𝑇𝐼𝑁𝐺+𝜖
In order to apply co-integration tests first of all, residuals are collected from the ordinary least squares (OLS) of the following regression equation:
Variable Method Decision
ADF – Fisher Chi-Square
Residual 16.8263** [3]
6.63873* [1]
14.1248**[1] I(0)
∆Residual 52.3061* [2]
44.3983* [1]
25.4193* [1]
PP – Fisher Chi-Square
Residual 13.2393* [3]
4.52342*[1]
5.79349** [1] I(0)
∆Residual 70.9801* [2]
89.1076* [1]
39.9183* [1]
19
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
CO-INTEGRATION TESTSPAGE
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
Variable Method Decision
Im, Pesaran and Shin W-stat
Residual ----
0.70977**[1]
14.1248**[1] I(0)
∆Residual ----
-5.25203* [1]
25.4193* [1]
Levin, Lin & Chu t
Residual -1.97372**[3]
-0.97246**[1]
5.79349** [1] I(0)
∆Residual -6.81616* [2]
-5.64822* [1]
39.9183* [1]
Because the variables INDEX and RATING have no unit root at 1st difference (I(1)), we can analyse two of them in terms of co-integration. After collection of the residuals, unit root test is conducted on the residuals. The estimation results suggest there exist long-run co-movement between value of stock market index and rating values.
20
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATIONPAGE
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References1/1
/2003
10/1/2
003
7/1/2
004
4/1/2
005
1/1/2
006
10/1/2
006
7/1/2
007
4/1/2
008
1/1/2
009
10/1/2
009
7/1/2
010
4/1/2
011
1/1/2
0120
1000200030004000500060007000
0
4
8
12
16
20
ATHEX
1/1/2
000
2/1/2
001
3/1/2
002
4/1/2
003
5/1/2
004
6/1/2
005
7/1/2
006
8/1/2
007
9/1/2
008
10/1/2
009
11/1/2
010
12/1/2
0110
4000
8000
12000
16000
20000
13.4
13.8
14.2
14.6
15
BSE
1/1/1
997
5/1/1
998
9/1/1
999
1/1/2
001
5/1/2
002
9/1/2
003
1/1/2
005
5/1/2
006
9/1/2
007
1/1/2
009
5/1/2
010
9/1/2
0110
20000
40000
60000
80000
0
4
8
12
16
BVSP
1/1/2
004
10/1/2
004
7/1/2
005
4/1/2
006
1/1/2
007
10/1/2
007
7/1/2
008
4/1/2
009
1/1/2
010
10/1/2
010
7/1/2
0110
10000
20000
30000
40000
0
5
10
15
20
25
FTSEMIB
21
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATIONPAGE
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References1/1
/1995
7/1/1
996
1/1/1
998
7/1/1
999
1/1/2
001
7/1/2
002
1/1/2
004
7/1/2
005
1/1/2
007
7/1/2
008
1/1/2
010
7/1/2
0110
4000
8000
12000
16000
051015202530
IBEX35
1/1/1
997
5/1/1
998
9/1/1
999
1/1/2
001
5/1/2
002
9/1/2
003
1/1/2
005
5/1/2
006
9/1/2
007
1/1/2
009
5/1/2
010
9/1/2
0110
500010000150002000025000300003500040000
1414.51515.51616.51717.5
IPC
1/1/1
998
4/1/1
999
7/1/2
000
10/1/2
001
1/1/2
003
4/1/2
004
7/1/2
005
10/1/2
006
1/1/2
008
4/1/2
009
7/1/2
010
10/1/2
0110
400
800
1200
1600
14.5
15.5
16.5
17.5
18.5
19.5
KLCI
1/1/2
000
1/1/2
001
1/1/2
002
1/1/2
003
1/1/2
004
1/1/2
005
1/1/2
006
1/1/2
007
1/1/2
008
1/1/2
009
1/1/2
010
1/1/2
011
1/1/2
0120
100200300400500600700800
0246810121416
LQ45
22
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATIONPAGE
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
1/1/1
994
11/1/1
994
9/1/1
995
7/1/1
996
5/1/1
997
3/1/1
998
1/1/1
999
11/1/1
999
9/1/2
000
7/1/2
001
5/1/2
002
3/1/2
003
1/1/2
004
11/1/2
004
9/1/2
005
7/1/2
006
5/1/2
007
3/1/2
008
1/1/2
009
11/1/2
009
9/1/2
010
7/1/2
0110
5000
10000
15000
20000
25000
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
NKY225
23
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
CONCLUSIONPAGE
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
ReferencesAfter the collection of dataset each data is tested in terms of whether they have unit root or not.
Then granger causality test applied between two variables and it is found that ratings granger cause stock market performance within short/mid – term. Because the integration level of both variables is I(1), co-integration test applied and the result indicates that there is also long-term effective relationship between rating and stock market performance.
The aim of this work is finding whether there is an effect of the relationship between credit ratings and stock market performance.
In order to get solid and robust results panel data is used during the study; and the dataset consists of the countries that have high volume stock market and not stable credit ratings.
24
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
CONCLUSIONPAGE
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
Eventually, according to econometrical analysis credit ratings affect stock market performance both within short-term and long-term. For future studies, the impact of credit ratings on stock market performance may be measured and its robustness may be tested.
25
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
REFERENCESPAGE
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
1) Brown, S. J., and J. B. Warner, 1985, Using daily returns: the case of event studies, Journal of Financial Economics 14, 3–31.2) Creighton, A., L. Gower, and A. Richards, 2004, The Impact of Rating Changes in Australian Financial Markets, research discussion paper (Reserve Bank of Australia, Sydney, NSW).3) Dichev, I. D. and Piotroski, J. D., 2001. “The Long-Run Stock Returns Following Bond Ratings Changes.” Journal of Finance 56: 173-203.4) Ederington, L. and J. Yawitz, 1991. “The Bond Rating Process.” In E. Altman (ed.), The Financial Handbook, 6th ed.5) Grier, P. and Katz S., 1976. “The Differential Effects of Bond Rating Change among Industrial and Public Utility Bonds by Maturity.” Journal of Business 49: 226-239.
26
Financial Institutions and MarketsFIN501 – Research PaperThe Relationship Between the Country Ratings and Stock Markets Performance 3 4
REFERENCESPAGE
Introduction
Data
Methdology
Emp. Results
Conclusion
References
6) Graham, J. R., and C. Harvey, 2001, The theory and practice of corporate finance: evidence from the field, Journal of Financial Economics 60, 187–243.7) Hand, J. R. M., Holthausen, R. W., and Leftwich, R. W., 1992. “The Effect of Bond Rating Agency Announcements on Bond and Stock Prices.” Journal of Finance 47: 733-752.8) Ingram, R. W., Brooks, L.D. and Copeland, R. M., 1983. “The Information Content of Municipal Bond Rating Change: A Note.” Journal of Finance 38: 997-1003.9) Katz Steven, 1974. “The Price and Adjustment Process of Bonds to Rating Reclassifications: A Test of Bond Market Efficiency.” Journal of Finance 29:551-559.10) Pinches, G. E., and J. C. Singleton, 1978, The adjustment of stock prices to bond rating changes, Journal of Finance 33, 29–44.
Top Related