Rating agencies, including Standard and Poor’s, Moody’s and Fitch, use different, proprietary models to rate debt and financial strength. While there may be no such thing as a perfect model, each company promotes its own model and methodology. Rating agencies serve a purpose in providing the marketplace with information on the financial health of the companies, governments and financial instruments they rate.
Taking into account differences in models (and agency inclinations), it is not surprising that rating agencies should differ in their ratings from time to time. Thus, Standard and Poor’s downgraded the United States credit rating from AAA to AA+ while Moody’s and Fitch have maintained their ratings while warning that future downgrades were possible if the United States did not enact debt reduction measures and if the economy weakened.
A more definitive statement would have been made if all three major rating agencies had dropped the rating of United States debt.
Standard and Poor’s rating change reflects their perception of the political stasis leading up to the recent move to raise the debt limit.
The Standard and Poor’s downgrade remained in place after a $2 trillion dollar error in their calculations was discovered by the Treasury department. Standard and Poor’s defended their decision, reinforcing the perception that the downgrade reflected to a large degree the inability of our government to get the job done.
Standard and Poor’s is under attack for their rating of mortgage backed securities involved in the financial debacle of 2008. These securities were rated AAA just prior to their default. The U.S. Justice Department is investigating Standard and Poor’s for their ratings of these instruments.
The ratings process is complex. Complex models are involved. When the ratings model indicates problem areas indicating a potential downgrade a number of paths may be taken. A rating agency may work with the organization to solve its problems (or to assure the model is adequately capturing an organization’s weaknesses and strengths). Either way, the focus is to assure capital adequacy.
This may give the organization an opportunity to avoid a downgrade while fixing the problem and risk a potential disastrous cascade into insolvency. There is a balance of risks -- a cascading failure could be a far worse alternative both for the organization , related entities and the economy. However, measures taken to solve the underlying problems should be appropriate, rather than window dressing which overvalues assets or undervalues liabilities.
If the agency does not downgrade an organization (or financial instrument), they risk a potential hit to their reputation if the entity does tank while holding the original, pristine rating.
In many instances companies pay a significant fee to be rated. This raises the issue that the agencies are serving the companies they rate rather than the overall public (or potential investors). This issue is to some degree offset by the reputation issue that rating agencies face when they fail to downgrade a company (or financial instrument ) that fails. Their services are judged by their ability to accurately rate entities.
The actual downgrade aside, Standard and Poor’s was correct in its appraisal of the ineffectiveness of our government in addressing the national debt issues. Standard and Poor’s mentioned the political brinksmanship, differences between political parties, and the failure to consider tax increases among other issues.
The sad thing is that our elected representatives performed so horribly that it gave Standard and Poor’s an opportunity to downgrade government debt from AAA for the first time in the history of the United States. There are many that depend on the United States to provide a stable financial milieu; the threat of a default; the inability of some representatives to compromise was an arrogant abrogation of their electoral duty to act in the best interest of the United States.
It seem that the rating agencies are, in a way, a force unto themselves that rest above governments and pass judgement upon them. Do we really want the institution of money to rule us in this way?
Wikipedia article on 2011 downgrade.
