No Need To Idolize Moody’s Ratings

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 12 March 2016
by Wang Yanxing (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Yuzhi Yang. Edited by Helaine Schweitzer.
Moody’s, a renowned international credit rating agency, announced it was leaving the Russian market on March 9. Just five days earlier, Moody’s placed Russia's Ba1 rating on review for downgrade. Moody’s departure will only further isolate Russia.

Moody’s has been very vocal for a while in the international financial market. Recently, Moody’s ranked Chinese government bonds at Aa3, while changing its outlook from stable to negative, creating great controversy. The other two global rating agencies, Fitch and Standard & Poor's, kept their ratings the same. This author believes that Moody’s attacks on China and Russia have only exposed the unspoken rules of international credit markets.

One: A high degree of monopoly. The three agencies, including Moody’s, have monopolized 96 percent of global financial ratings so other rating agencies cannot effectively counterbalance their influence. The three big agencies use their ratings to praise or denigrate other countries and economic bodies, creating a man-made capital funding difference and causing some organizations to privately benefit.

Two: Unpredictability. In 1998, during the Asian financial crisis, to everyone’s surprise Moody’s lowered South Korea’s rating by more than 10 levels, further exacerbating South Korea’s crisis.

Three: A double standard. When America was in a bubble economy with the “Internet of Things,”* although Moody’s and the other agencies knew, they did not alert people to Enron and other fraudulent American companies. The different standards that Moody’s and other rating agencies have used in recent years have earned them the criticism of holding double standards and being unfair.

Four: Forced buying and selling. Moody’s once bullied a German insurance giant, Hannover Re, by offering free rating services and seeking future paid services. When Hannover Re refused, Moody’s rated the company anyway and kept the rating very low for two years in a row. And Hannover Re continued refusing to pay. In 2003, Moody’s suddenly downgraded Hannover Re to the lowest rating, causing a massive stock dump and forcing the company to sign a contract with Moody’s and accept its rating services.

Moody’s has made its ratings system into an ideology lacking in fairness, and has imposed its undesirable influence on some countries. Fortunately, people have realized the agency’s true character. Plato once said, “And all knowledge, when separated from justice and virtue, is seen to be cunning and not wisdom.” After all, the world does not belong to a few people, it belongs to everyone.

The author is a senior researcher at the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies at Renmin University of China.

*Editor’s note: The “Internet of Things” refers to a network of physical objects embedded with electronics, software, sensors and network connectivity that enables these objects to collect and exchange data.


作为一家国际知名信用评级公司,穆迪3月9日宣布撤出俄罗斯市场。就在5天前的3月4日,穆迪将俄罗斯的Ba1主权债务评级置于“可能降级观察”行列。穆迪选择此时撤出,其会导致孤立俄罗斯的后果。

  一个时期以来,穆迪在国际金融市场频繁发声。比如不久前,穆迪在确认对中国政府债券保持为Aa3评级的同时,将评级展望从稳定调整为负面,引来巨大争议。全球另两大评级机构惠誉和标普则对中国的主权信用评级尚未改变。笔者认为,穆迪对中国和俄罗斯评级接连“出手”,昭示了国际信用咨询市场的一些潜规则。

  第一,高度垄断。穆迪等三大评级机构垄断了全球金融信用评级业务的96%,把持着信用咨询市场的垄断地位,其他评级公司则难以对其形成有效的制衡。穆迪等三大评级机利用信用评级对个别国家与新兴经济体的一褒一贬,人为制造“融资剪刀差”,导致一些机构从中套利。

  第二,制造不确定性。例如1998年亚洲金融危机时,穆迪等曾在一周内将韩国的信用等级调低十多个级别,出乎所有人意料,使得韩国危机陷入到极高的程度,深受其害,苦不堪言。


  第三,双重标准。在美国的物联网泡沫中,穆迪等三大评级机构尽管心知肚明,但是,它们不去提醒关注安然公司和其他美国公司造假行为。近些年,穆迪等评级机构屡遭“双重标准”、“不公正”等谴责。

  第四,强买强卖。有一个穆迪对德国再 保险巨头——汉诺威再保险公司强行评级的事例:穆迪给汉诺威发出商业信函,称愿意为其提供免费评级服务,并希望未来能为其提供收费服务,遭到汉诺威拒绝。 然而,穆迪还是对汉诺威进行了主动评级,并连续两年给出了很低级别,并予以公布,汉诺威却坚持不付费。2003年,穆迪突然把汉诺威的债券级别降至垃圾 级,引起了市场的抛售潮,最终迫使汉诺威签订“城下之盟”,接受穆迪的收费评级服务。

  穆迪把评级意识形态化,有失公允,必然会对一些国家造成不良影响,好在人们已经认 清其真实面目。柏拉图说:“一切背离了公正的知识都应叫做狡诈,而不应称为智慧。”毕竟,世界非少数人之世界,乃天下人之世界。(作者是中国人民大学重阳 金融研究院高级研究员、第二届中国银行业声誉风险管理联席会常务副主席、博导)
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Austria: Trump Is Only Part of the Problem

Indonesia: Trump’s Chaos Strategy Is Hurting His Allies, Not Just His Rivals

China: 3 Insights from ‘Trade War Truce’ between US and China

Ireland: The Irish Times View on Trump and Ukraine: a Step in the Right Direction

United Kingdom: We’re Becoming Inured to Trump’s Outbursts – But When He Goes Quiet, We Need To Be Worried

Topics

Indonesia: Trump Needs a Copy Editor

Indonesia: Trump’s Chaos Strategy Is Hurting His Allies, Not Just His Rivals

Sri Lanka: Epstein Files, Mossad and Kompromat Diplomacy

Sri Lanka: Is America Moving toward the Far Right?

Turkey: Musk versus the Machine: Disrupting the 2-Party System

Canada: How To Avoid ICE? Follow the Rules

Canada: Trump Doesn’t Hold All the Cards on International Trade

Ireland: The Irish Times View on Trump and Ukraine: a Step in the Right Direction

Related Articles

Ireland: The Irish Times View on Trump and Ukraine: a Step in the Right Direction

Australia: As Trump Turns His Back on Renewables, China Is Building the Future

Germany: Trump’s Disappointment Will Have No Adverse Consequences for Putin*

Indonesia: US-China: Tariff, Tension, and Truce

Ukraine: Why Washington Failed To End the Russian Ukrainian War