Click to login and read the full article.
Don’t have access? Click here to request a demo
Alternatively, Call a member of the team to discuss membership options
US and Overseas: +1 646-931-9045
UK: 0207 139 1600
Abstract
This panel focuses on alternate ratings and their impact on traditional ratings. The panel addresses where rating agency performance fell short and where did it not; how investors view ratings and rating agencies and what are they looking for now from rating agencies; how Rule 17g-5 has changed the competitive landscape in the ratings business; other key issues arising from the U.S. SEC’s rule-making process on ratings; a proposed rotational system for assigning ratings; whether regulators should assign ratings; how effective the NAIC/PIMCO model has been; how the rating agencies are and should be addressing conflicts of interest; whether there are other viable rating models; and market-based ratings.
TOPICS: Information providers/credit ratings, legal and regulatory issues for structured finance
- © 2012 Pageant Media Ltd
Don’t have access? Click here to request a demo
Alternatively, Call a member of the team to discuss membership options
US and Overseas: +1 646-931-9045
UK: 0207 139 1600
Log in using your username and password
In this issue
Jump to section
- Article
- Abstract
- RATING AGENCY PERFORMANCE VARIED BY SECTOR OF THE STRUCTURED FINANCE UNIVERSE
- HOW DO INVESTORS LOOK AT RATINGS NOW?
- HAS RULE 17G-5 CHANGED THE COMPETITIVE LANDSCAPE FOR THE RATINGS BUSINESS?
- VIEWS ON THE OTHER RECENTLY PROPOSED SEC RULES FOR THE RATING AGENCIES
- WHAT IS YOUR VIEW ON THE PROPOSAL TO ROTATE RATING ASSIGNMENTS ACROSS THE AGENCIES?
- SHOULD REGULATORS ASSIGN RATINGS? HOW EFFECTIVE HAS THE NAIC/PIMCO MODEL BEEN?
- CONFLICTS OF INTEREST AND HOW TO ADDRESS THEM
- OTHER RATING MODELS (E.G., MARKET-BASED RATINGS)
- CONCLUSIONS
- REFERENCES
- Info & Metrics
- PDF (Subscribers Only)
- PDF (Subscribers Only)
Similar Articles
Cited By...
- No citing articles found.