穆迪评级符号及定义 2010年12月
Rating Symbols and Definitions DECEMBER 2010
MARCH 2008
Table of Contents
Preface 2 Moody’s Standing Committee on
Rating Systems & Practices 3 General Credit Rating Services 4 Long-Term Obligation Ratings (4)
Long-Term Issuer Ratings (5)
Medium-Term Note Program Ratings (5)
Short-Term Obligation Ratings (5)
Short-Term Issuer Ratings (6)
Sector Specific Credit Rating Services 7 US Municipal Short-Term Debt and Demand Obligation Ratings (7)
Structured Finance Long-Term Ratings (9)
Structured Finance Issuer Ratings (10)
Credit Default Swaps Ratings (10)
Counterparty Ratings: Structured Finance Entities (10)
Counterparty Instrument Ratings: Special Purpose Vehicles (10)
Corporate Family Ratings (11)
Probability of Default Ratings (11)
Bank Deposit Ratings (12)
US Bank Other Senior Obligation Ratings (12)
Insurance Financial Strength Ratings (13)
Long-Term Insurance Financial Strength Ratings (14)
Short-Term Insurance Financial Strength Ratings (15)
National Scale Ratings (16)
National Scale Long-Term Ratings (18)
National Scale Short-Term Ratings (19)
Other Permissible Services 20 Equity Fund Ratings (20)
Market Risk Ratings (21)
Investment Manager Quality Ratings (22)
Servicer Quality Ratings (23)
Hedge Fund Operational Quality Ratings (24)
Real Estate Portfolio Cash Flow Volatility Ratings (25)
Money Market and Bond Fund Ratings (26)
Credit Estimates (27)
Rating Assessment Services (27)
Indicative Ratings (28)
Contract Enforceability Indicators for Mexican States .28Other Rating Services 29 Internal Ratings (29)
Insured Ratings (29)
Enhanced Ratings (29)
Underlying Ratings (29)
Other Rating Symbols 30 Expected ratings - e (30)
Provisional Ratings - (P) (30)
Refundeds - # (30)
Withdrawn - WR (30)
Not Rated - NR (30)
Not Available - NAV (30)
Terminated Without Rating - TWR (30)
Inputs to Rating Services 31 Loss Given Default Assessments (31)
Covenant Quality Assessments (31)
Speculative Grade Liquidity Ratings (32)
Bank Financial Strength Ratings (33)
Country Ceiling for Bonds and Other Foreign Currency Obligations (35)
Country Ceiling for Foreign Currency Bank Deposits (35)
Country Ceiling for Bonds and Other Local Currency Obligations (35)
Local Currency Deposit Ceiling (35)
Hybrid Security Baskets (36)
Baseline Credit Assessments (36)
Rating Services Policies and Procedures 37 Rating Outlooks (37)
Watchlist (37)
Confirmation of a Rating (37)
Affirmation of a Rating (37)
Definitions of Default, Impairment and
Loss-Given-Default 38 Definition of Default (38)
Definition of Impairment (38)
Definition of Loss-Given-Default (39)
RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE 1
Preface
In the spirit of promoting transparency and clarity, Moody’s Standing Committee on Rating Systems &
Practices offers this updated reference guide which defines Moody’s various symbols and rating scales.
Since John Moody devised the first bond ratings almost a century ago, Moody’s rating systems have
evolved in response to the increasing depth and breadth of the global capital markets. Much of the inno-
vation in Moody’s rating system is a response to market needs for clarity around the components of credit
risk or to demands for finer distinctions in rating classifications.
The Standing Committee on Rating Systems & Practices, one of several at Moody’s that focuses on credit
policy issues, is comprised of structured finance, corporate finance, public finance, and financial institu-
tions credit analysts, as well as representatives from the Credit Policy group. The names, direct telephone
numbers and e-mail addresses of the members of the Standing Committee are listed below. I invite you
to contact us with your comments
2 MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS
RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE 3
Kenneth Emery - Chair
+1-212-553-4415
Senior Vice President, Credit Policy Group kenneth.emery@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/aa13827113.html,
Jack Dorer
+1-212-553-1332Managing Director, US Public Finance Group jack.dorer@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/aa13827113.html,
David Fanger
+1-212-553-4342Senior Vice President, Financial Institutions Group david.fanger@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/aa13827113.html,
Joseph Grohotolski
+1-212-553-4619Vice President, Senior Compliance Officer joseph.grohotolski@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/aa13827113.html,
Matthew Jones
+1-415-274-1735Senior Vice President, U.S. Public Finance Group matthew.jones@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/aa13827113.html,
Warren Kornfeld
+1-212-553-1932Managing Director, Structured Finance Group warren.kornfeld@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/aa13827113.html,
John Kriens
+1-212-553-1175Vice President, Information Technology John.Kriens@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/aa13827113.html,
Marie Menendez
+1-212-553-4126Senior Vice President, Corporate Finance Group marie.menendez@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/aa13827113.html,
Bart Oosterveld
+1-212-553-7914Managing Director, Credit Policy Group bart.oosterveld@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/aa13827113.html,
David Rosa
+4420-7772-5341Senior Vice President, Credit Policy Group david.rosa@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/aa13827113.html,
Russell Solomon
+1-212-553-4301Senior Vice President, Corporate Finance Group russell.solomon@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/aa13827113.html,
Celina Vansetti-Hutchins
+1-212-553-4845Senior Vice President, Financial Institutions Group celina.vansetti-hutchins@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/aa13827113.html,
Alastair Wilson
+44-207-772-1372Chief Credit Officer, Europe alastair.wilson@https://www.wendangku.net/doc/aa13827113.html, Moody’s Standing Committee on Rating Systems & Practices
General Credit Rating Services
Long-Term Obligation Ratings
Moody’s long-term ratings are opinions of the relative credit risk of financial obligations with an original
maturity of one year or more. They address the possibility that a financial obligation will not be honored
as promised. Such ratings use Moody’s Global Scale and reflect both the likelihood of default and any
financial loss suffered in the event of default.
4 MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS
Long-Term Issuer Ratings
Long-T erm Issuer Ratings are opinions of the ability of entities to honor long-term senior unsecured financial obligations and contracts. Moody’s expresses Long-Term Issuer Ratings on its long-term global scale.
Medium-Term Note Program Ratings
Moody’s assigns ratings to medium-term note (MTN) programs and to the individual debt securi-
ties issued from them (referred to as drawdowns or notes). These ratings may be expressed on Moody’s general long-term or short-term rating scale, depending upon the intended tenor of the notes to be issued under the program.
MTN program ratings are intended to reflect the ratings likely to be assigned to drawdowns issued from the program with the specified priority of claim (e.g. senior or subordinated). However, the rating assigned to a drawdown from a rated MTN program may differ from the program rating if the draw-down is exposed to additional credit risks besides the issuer’s default, such as links to the defaults of other issuers, or has other structural features that warrant a different rating. In some circumstances, no rating may be assigned to a drawdown.
Market participants must determine whether any particular note is rated, and if so, at what rating level. Moody’s encourages market participants to contact Moody’s Ratings Desks or visit https://www.wendangku.net/doc/aa13827113.html, directly if they have questions regarding ratings for specific notes issued under a medium-term note program. Unrated notes issued under an MTN program may be assigned an NR (not rated) symbol. Short-Term Obligation Ratings
Moody’s short-term ratings are opinions of the ability of issuers to honor short-term financial obliga-tions. Ratings may be assigned to issuers, short-term programs or to individual short-term debt instru-ments. Such obligations generally have an original maturity not exceeding thirteen months, unless explic-itly noted.
Moody’s employs the following designations to indicate the relative repayment ability of rated issuers: P-1 Issuers (or supporting institutions) rated Prime-1 have a superior ability to repay short-term debt obligations.
P-2 Issuers (or supporting institutions) rated Prime-2 have a strong ability to repay short-term debt obligations.
P-3 Issuers (or supporting institutions) rated Prime-3 have an acceptable ability to repay
shortterm obligations.
NP Issuers (or supporting institutions) rated Not Prime do not fall within any of the Prime rating categories.
Note: Canadian issuers rated P-1 or P-2 have their short-term ratings enhanced by the senior-most long-term rating of
the issuer, its guarantor or support-provider.
RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE 5
An issuer’s short-term rating is generally derived from its long-term rating as shown below:
SHORT-TERM VS. LONG-TERM RATINGS
LONG-TERM RATING SHORT-TERM CP
Short-Term Issuer Ratings
Short-Term Issuer Ratings are opinions of the ability of entities to honor short-term senior unsecured
financial obligations and contracts. Moody’s expresses Short-Term Issuer Ratings on its short-term obliga-
tions ratings scale.
6 MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS
Sector Specific Credit Rating Services
US Municipal Short-Term Debt and Demand Obligation Ratings
SHORT-TERM OBLIGATION RATINGS
There are three rating categories for short-term municipal obligations that are considered investment grade. These ratings are designated as Municipal Investment Grade (MIG) and are divided into three levels — MIG 1 through MIG 3. In addition, those short-term obligations that are of speculative quality ated SG, or speculative grade. MIG ratings expire at the maturity of the obligation.
are desig n
DEMAND OBLIGATION RATINGS
In the case of variable rate demand obligations (VRDOs), a two-component rating is assigned; a long
or short-term debt rating and a demand obligation rating. The first element represents Moody’s evalua-tion of the degree of risk associated with scheduled principal and interest payments. The second element represents Moody’s evaluation of the degree of risk associated with the ability to receive purchase price upon demand (“demand feature”), using a variation of the MIG rating scale, the Variable Municipal Investment Grade or VMIG rating.
When either the long- or short-term aspect of a VRDO is not rated, that piece is designated NR, e.g., Aaa/NR or NR/VMIG 1.
VMIG rating expirations are a function of each issue’s specific structural or credit features.
RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE 7
8 MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE
RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS
US MUNICIPAL SHORT- TERM VS. LONG-TERM RATINGS
SHORT-TERM DEMAND OBLIGATION
LONG-TERM
RATING
* For SBPA-backed VRDBs, The rating transitions are higher to allow for distance to downgrade to
below investment grade due to the presence of automatic termination events in the SBPAs.
Structured Finance Long-Term Ratings
Moody’s ratings on long-term structured finance obligations primarily address the expected credit loss an investor might incur on or before the legal final maturity of such obligations vis-à-vis a defined prom-ise. As such, these ratings incorporate Moody’s assessment of the default probability and loss severity of the obligations. Such obligations generally have an original maturity of one year or more, unless explic-itly noted. Moody’s credit ratings address only the credit risks associated with the obligations; other non-credit risks have not been addressed, but may have a significant effect on the yield to investors. Moody’s differentiates its ratings assigned to structured finance obligations by adding an (sf) indicator to all struc-tured finance ratings.
RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE 9
Structured Finance Issuer Ratings
Structured Finance Issuer Ratings are opinions of an entity’s general financial capacity to ultimately
honor its contracts and financial obligations. The opinions are founded upon an expected loss-based
assessment of the credit quality of the entity’s assets and also incorporate Moody’s opinion of the qual-
ity of its management and its investment process and strategy. Moody’s ratings symbols for Structured
Finance Issuer Ratings are identical to those used to indicate the credit quality of Moody’s long-term
structured finance obligations. As these ratings are not ratings of structured finance instruments, these
ratings will not receive the (sf) indicator. The credit quality of entities that leverage their structured
finance asset portfolios is more accurately expressed via a Counterparty Rating for various types of struc-
tured finance operating companies such as derivatives product companies and credit derivatives prod-
uct companies. Derivative product companies are not engaged in underwriting structure finance risk but
they instead focus on other types of risks such as interest rate and currency derivatives.
Credit Default Swaps Ratings
Moody’s Credit Default Swaps Ratings — expressed on the long-term structured finance scale —
measure the risk posed to a credit protection provider on an expected loss basis arising from the possibil-
ity that the credit protection provider will be required to make payments in respect of credit events under
the terms of the transaction. The ratings do not address potential losses resulting from an early termi-
nation of the transaction, nor any market risk associated with the transaction. Moody’s differentiates its
ratings assigned to structured finance obligations by adding an (sf) indicator to all structured finance
ratings.
Counterparty Ratings: Structured Finance Entities
Issuer ratings assigned to derivative product companies, credit derivative product companies and clearing-
houses are opinions of the financial capacity of an obligor to honor its senior obligations under financial
contracts, given appropriate documentation and authorizations. Moody’s employs the long term struc-
tured finance scale and the short-term obligation scale for Counterparty Ratings. As these ratings are not
ratings of structured finance instruments, these ratings will not receive the (sf) indicator.
Counterparty Instrument Ratings: Special Purpose Vehicles
Counterparty Instrument Ratings measure the risk posed to a counterparty arising from a special purpose
vehicle’s (SPV’s) inability to honor its obligations under the referenced financial contract. For struc-
tured finance issuers, Moody’s employs the long-term structured finance scale and the short-term obliga-
tions scale for Counterparty Instrument Ratings. Moody’s differentiates its ratings assigned to structured
finance obligations by adding an (sf) indicator to all structured finance ratings.
10 MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS
Corporate Family Ratings
Moody’s Corporate Family Ratings (CFR) are opinions of a corporate family’s ability to honor all of its financial obligations. A CFR is assigned to a corporate family as if it had:
?a single class of debt;
?a single consolidated legal entity structure.
Corporate Family Ratings are generally employed for speculative grade obligors, but may also be assigned to investment grade obligors. The Corporate Family Rating normally applies to all affiliates under the management control of the entity to which it is assigned. For financial institutions, CFRs may also be assigned to an association or group where the group may not exercise full management control, but where strong intra-group support and cohesion among individual group members may warrant a rating for the group or association.
A Corporate Family Rating does not reference an obligation or class of debt and thus does not reflect priority of claim. Moody’s employs the general long-term global scale for Corporate Family Ratings. Probability of Default Ratings
A probability of default rating (PDR) is a corporate family-level opinion of the relative likelihood that any entity within a corporate family will default on one or more of its debt obligations.
?For families not in default, PDRs are expressed using Moody’s long-term global scale.
?For families in default on all of their debt obligations (such as might be the case in bankruptcy), a PDR of D is assigned and/or maintained until the default is resolved.
?For families in default on a limited set of their debt obligations, PDRs reflect the risk of an additional default within the family and are expressed using Moody’s long-term rating scale appended by the symbol “/LD”, for example, Caa1/LD.
A D or LD probability of default rating is not assigned until a failure to pay interest or principal extends beyond any grace period specified by the terms of the debt obligation.
A D or LD probability of default rating is not assigned for distressed exchanges until they have been completed, as opposed to simply announced.
RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE 11
Bank Deposit Ratings
Moody’s Bank Deposit Ratings are opinions of a bank’s ability to repay punctually its foreign and/or
domestic currency deposit obligations. Foreign currency deposit ratings are subject to Moody’s coun-
try ceilings for foreign currency deposits. This may result in the assignment of a different (and typically
lower) rating for the foreign currency deposits relative to the bank’s rating for domestic currency deposits.
Moody’s Bank Deposit Ratings are intended to incorporate those aspects of credit risk that are relevant
to the prospective payment performance of the rated bank with respect to its foreign and/or domestic
currency deposit obligations. Included are factors such as intrinsic financial strength, sovereign transfer
risk (for foreign currency deposits), and both implicit and explicit external support elements.
Moody’s Bank Deposit Ratings do not take into account the benefit of deposit insurance schemes that
make payments to depositors, but they do recognize the potential support from schemes that may
provide direct assistance to banks.
In addition to its Bank Deposit Ratings, Moody’s also publishes Bank Financial Strength Ratings, which
exclude certain of these external risk and support elements (i.e., sovereign risk and external support).
Such ratings are intended to elaborate and explain Moody’s Bank Deposit Ratings, which incorporate
and reflect such elements of credit risk.
Moody’s employs the general long-term and short-term rating scales for bank deposits.
US Bank Other Senior Obligation Ratings
Deposit notes and bank notes are bank obligations that are structured to be sold and traded as securi-
ties similar to corporate bonds or medium-term notes. As bank obligations, such instruments are exempt
from SEC registration (if issued by a US bank or by the US branch of a foreign bank). Deposit notes
have the legal status of deposits and will rank pari passu in liquidation with certificates of deposit and
other domestic deposit obligations. Bank notes, although nominally senior, are not deposit obligations.
US law provides that foreign deposits and senior unsecured obligations, including bank notes, will rank
behind domestic deposit obligations of US banks in the event of liquidation.
Moody’s employs the general long-term and short-term scales for Other Senior Obligations (OSOs).
OSO ratings may be assigned to foreign deposits of US banks and International Banking Facility depos-
its, as well as to other senior non-depository obligations, including bank notes, letter-of-credit supported
obligations, federal funds and financial contracts. A rating distinction between domestic deposits and
OSOs will be reflected in those cases where there is a material susceptibility for impairment at a future
time. Bank subordinated notes will rank behind both domestic deposits and OSOs in a failed bank
liquidation.
12 MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS
Insurance Financial Strength Ratings
Moody’s Insurance Financial Strength Ratings are opinions of the ability of insurance companies to repay punctually senior policyholder claims and obligations. Specific obligations are considered unrated unless they are individually rated because the standing of a particular insurance obligation would depend on an assessment of its relative standing under those laws governing both the obligation and the insurance company.
Insurance Financial Strength Ratings, shown in connection with property/casualty groups, represent the ratings of individual companies within those groups, as displayed in Moody’s insurance industry ratings list. The rating of an individual property/casualty company may be based on the benefit of its participa-tion in an intercompany pooling agreement. Pooling agreements may or may not provide for continua-tion of in-force policyholder obligations by pool members in the event that the property/casualty insurer is sold to a third party or otherwise removed from the pooling agreement.
Moody’s assumes in these ratings that the pooling agreement will not be modified by the members of the pool to reduce the benefits of pool participation, and that the insurer will remain in the pool. Moody’s makes no representation or warranty that such pooling agreement will not be modified over time, nor does Moody’s opine on the probability that the rated entity may be sold or otherwise removed from the pooling agreement.
RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE 13
Long-Term Insurance Financial Strength Ratings
Moody’s rating symbols for Insurance Financial Strength Ratings are identical to those used to indicate
the credit quality of long-term obligations. These rating gradations provide investors with a system for
measuring an insurance company’s ability to meet its senior policyholder claims and obligations.
14 MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS
Short-Term Insurance Financial Strength Ratings
Short-Term Insurance Financial Strength Ratings are opinions of the ability of the insurance company to repay punctually its short-term senior policyholder claims and obligations. The ratings apply to senior policyholder obligations that mature or are payable within one year or less.
Specific obligations are considered unrated unless individually rated because the standing of a particular insurance obligation would depend on an assessment of its relative standing under those laws governing both the obligation and the insurance company.
When ratings are supported by the credit of another entity or entities, then the name or names of such supporting entity or entities are listed within parenthesis beneath the name of the insurer, or there is a footnote referring to the name or names of the supporting entity or entities.
In assigning ratings to such insurers, Moody’s evaluates the financial strength of the affiliated insurance companies, commercial banks, cor-porations, foreign governments, or other entities, but only as one factor in the total rating assessment. Moody’s makes no representation and gives no opinion on the legal validity or enforceability of any support arrangement.
RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE 15
National Scale Ratings
Moody’s assigns national scale ratings in certain local capital markets in which investors have found the
global rating scale provides inadequate differentiation among credits or is inconsistent with a rating scale
already in common use in the country.
Moody’s currently maintains national scale ratings for the following countries:
?Argentina (.ar)
?Bolivia (.bo)
?Brazil (.br)
?Czech Republic (.cz)
?Kazakhstan (.kz)
?Lebanon (.lb)
?Mexico (.mx)
?Russia (.ru)
?Slovakia (.sk)
?South Africa (.za)
?T unisia (.tn)
?T urkey (.tr)
?Ukraine (.ua)
?Uruguay (.uy)
16 MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS
RELATIVE RANKINGS
Moody’s National Scale Ratings are opinions of the relative creditworthiness of issuers and issues within a particular country. While loss expectation will be an important differentiating factor in the ultimate rating assignment, it should be noted that loss expectation associated with National Scale Ratings can be expected to be significantly higher than apparently similar rating levels on Moody’s global scale. Moody’s National Scale Ratings rank issuers and issues in order of relative creditworthiness: higher ratings are associated with lower expected credit loss.
NOT GLOBALLY COMPARABLE
National Scale Ratings can be understood as a relative ranking of creditworthiness (including relevant external support) within a particular country. National Scale Ratings are not designed to be compared among countries; rather, they address relative credit risk within a given country. Use of National Scale Ratings by investors is only appropriate within that portion of a portfolio that is exposed to a given coun-try’s local market, taking into consideration the various risks implied by that country’s foreign and local currency ratings.
RATING CRITERIA
National Scale Ratings take into account the intrinsic financial strength of the obligor, including such traditional credit factors as management quality, market position and diversity, financial flexibility, trans-parency, the regulatory environment, and the issuer’s ability to meet its financial obligations through the course of normal local business cycles. Issuer segments subject to an abrupt decline in creditworthiness will generally be rated lower than segments less exposed. Certain external support factors may be taken into consideration, including instrument-specific guarantees and indentures, and parent company or government support (if any).
TREATMENT OF SOVEREIGN RISK
National Scale Ratings take into account all credit risks that bear on timely and full payment of a debt obligation, including sovereign related risks such as relative vulnerability to political developments, national monetary and fiscal policies, and, in rare cases, foreign currency convertibility and transfer risk. Certain extreme events, such as a local currency payment system disruption, are largely extraneous to the analysis (at least as a differentiating factor) since all issuers would probably be equally affected by such
a failure. In other extreme cases, such as a government rescheduling or moratorium on local or foreign currency debt obligations, issuers or issues with higher ratings should be relatively more insulated from such an event; nonetheless, in such a situation, even the highest-rated entities may be at risk of temporary default.
For this reason, the traditional concept of “investment grade” that is applied in the international markets cannot necessarily be applied even to the highest national ratings. Although national governments are often in a position to receive the highest national credit ratings, it cannot, in Moody’s view, be taken for granted that a country’s national government is necessarily the best credit on a domestic scale, since it
is possible for a government to default on its local currency obligations while other issuers continue to perform.
RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE 17
National Scale Long-Term Ratings
The rating definitions are as follows, with an “n” modifier signifying the relevant country, for example,
Aaa.br for Brazil, or Aaa.tw for Taiwan. Each national scale rating category (e.g. Aaa.n, Aa1.n, etc.) may
represent a wide range of creditworthiness and may map to several different notches on Moody’s standard
global rating scale.
18 MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE RATING SYMBOLS AND DEFINITIONS
标准普尔、穆迪评级分类表
标准普尔、穆迪评级分类表 (2007-03-25 18:02:22) 转载 分类：学术研究 穆迪从A至B的分类评级都缀以数字(1.2和3)。如缀以l即表示该银行信用属于该级别的高档次级别，如缀以2即表示属于该级别的中档次级别，如缀以3即表示属于该级别的低档次级别。标准普尔使用加号(十)或减号(一)表示评级类别的相对档次。 评级符号后标有‘pi’表示该等评级是利用已公开的财务资料或其它公开信息作分析的依据，即标准普尔并未与该等机构的管理层进行深入的讨论或全面考虑其重要的非公开资料，所以这类评级所依据的资料不及全面的评级全面。
标普评级 标普的长期评级分为投资级和投机级两大类，投资级的评级具有信誉高和投资价值高的特点，投机级的评级则信用程度较低。投资级包括AAA、AA、A和BBB，投机级则分为BB、B、CCC、CC、C和D。AA A级为最高信用等级；D级最低，视为对条款的违约。 从AA至CC C级，每个级别都可通过添加“+”或“-”来显示信用高低程度。例如，在AA序列中，信用级别由高到低依次为AA+、AA、AA-。 标普的短期评级共设6个级别，依次为A-1、A-2、A-3、B、C和D。其中A-1表示发债方偿债能力较强，此评级可另加“+”号表示偿债能力极强。 标普目前对126个国家和地区进行了主权信用评级。美国失去AAA评级后，目前拥有AAA评级的国家和地区还有澳大利亚、奥地利、加拿大、丹麦、芬兰、法国、德国、中国香港、马恩岛、列支敦士登、荷兰、新西兰、挪威、新加坡、瑞典、瑞士和英国。 穆迪评级 穆迪长期评级（一年期以上债务）共分9个级别：Aaa、Aa、A、Baa、Ba、B、Caa、Ca 和C。其中Aaa级债务的信用质量最高；C级债务为最低等级，收回本金及利息的机会微乎其微。 在Aa到Caa的6个级别中，还可以添加数字1、2或3进一步显示各类债务在同类评级中的排位，1为最高，3则最低。通常认为，从Aaa级到Ba A3级属于投资级，从B A1级以下则为投机级。 穆迪的短期评级（一年期以下债务）依据发债方的短期债务偿付能力从高到低分为P-1、P-2、P-3和NP四个等级。 目前，穆迪的业务范围主要涉及国家主权信用、美国公共金融信用、银行业信用、公司金融信用、保险业信用、基金以及结构性金融工具信用评级等几方面。穆迪在全球26个国家和地区设有分支机构。 惠誉评级 惠誉的规模较小，是唯一的欧洲控股的评级机构。其长期评级用以衡量一个主体偿付外币或本币债务的能力。
企业信用评级标准
企业信用评级标准 （1）评级对象。凡向我公司申请担保授信的客户，如已有至少两个会计年度经营期财务报表，均应按规定进行信用等级评定。 （2）评级的企业类型。我司考虑到不同行业评价企业财务和经营状况的标准不同，主要参考上海和深圳证券交易所对上市公司的分类方法，将评级对象分为工业、商贸、公用事业、房地产开发、综合等五种类型，分别设置工业企业、商贸企业、房地产开发企业、公用事业企业、综合类企业等类型企业的信用评级指标体系与计分标准。 （3）评级指标体系。我司信用评级指标按偿债能力、获利能力、经营管理水平、履约情况及发展能力和潜力共五个方面设置。根据评级对象所属行业的差异及其资金运用和从事经营活动的特点，按上述五个方面有针对性地分别设置若干量化或非量化指标，由此构成一个完整的评级指标体系。评级采用百分制。见下表。
遍存在着在不良比率高、财务报表真实性差、经营波动性大、抗风险能力弱等问题，客户信用评级中还按不同评级企业类型设立信用等级限定指标，这些指标主要是资产负债率、利润增长率、履约指标、客户规模指标、同业竞争力及报表真实性等6项。见下表。 表6-10 我司对企业信用评级指标体系与计分标准表 （4）信用等级的设置和评级标准。 参照国际惯例，授信对象的信用等级划分为AAA、AA、A、BBB、BB、B、CCC、CC、C和D级共10个等级。评级对象所获评级总分与信用等级和信用度的关系见下表。 （5）客户信用评级管理。针对客户经营中可能出现的重大不利变动情况，我司必须对客户进行动态跟踪。如发生重大变动因素，须酌情调整有关评级对象的信用等级，这些不利因素可包括：客户主要评级指标明显恶化，导致评级分数降低10分或10分以上。客户主要管理人员涉嫌重大贪污、受贿、舞弊或违法经营案件。客户在业务往来中有重大违约行为。客户弄虚作假提供有关评级材料。客户发生或涉入重大诉讼或仲裁案件等。
中外信用评级体系差异
一文了解中外信用评级体系差异 同样的公司，同样的债券，中外评级公司的信用评级差异较大，中国公司给出的评级往往高于海外评级公司数个档次，主要原因在于国公司对于中国主权信用评级为AAA，大部分央企和国企也给予AAA评级，国际评级公司给予中国本币期主权信用评级分别为Aa3、AA-和A+，中国企业均不超过上述评级。 评级体系对比 国信用评级由于发展较晚，较多地借鉴了国际信用评级体系，同样分为主体评级和债项评级，长期评级和短期评级，评级符号体系与标普较为接近。 评级框架与方法对比 与国外评级机构的评级方法类似，中国评级机构在进行主体信用评级时，主要考察被评级主体的经营风险和财务风险。其中经营风险主要可以通过行业状况、竞争地位、公司治理来进行评价，财务风险通过公司的资本结构、资产质量、盈利能力、现金流等方面进行评价，也会考察被评级主体的外部条件，特别是股和政府的支持。 国外评级结果对比 中国公司国际评级行业分布。从我们统计的56家拥有国际评级的中国公司的行业分布来看，银行业的公司占比最高，超过30%，其次是非银行金融业和房地产业。 国际评级受制于主权评级上限。根据国际惯例，一国境单位发行外币债券的评级一般不超过该国长期主权信用评级。穆迪、标普、惠誉对中国本外币长期主权信用评级分别为Aa3、AA-和A+，其所出具的中国企业评级均不超过各自给出的主权评级。 国评级较国际评级高。国评级机构对中国的主权信用评级均为最高评级AAA，对国大部分央企和国有银行、股份制银行也给予了AAA的最高评
级。与国际评级相比，对同一家企业，国评级明显较高。对同一家企业，相对于国际评级，国评级平均高2.5个大档，6.5个小档。 能源业、非银金融差异较小，房地产业、银行业差异较大。石油等能源类行业以及保险等非银行金融行业的国外评级差距相对较小。房地产业的评级差距相对较大，国未有房地产企业获国际评级机构A以上评级。银行业的评级差异也相对较大，工农中建等国有银行较国评级较国低2个大档，兴业等股份行较国低4个大档。 评级分布对比 国评级中枢高于国际。国际评级机构评级中枢在BBB，三大机构给予的评级中，均为BBB等级最多。国评级公司评级中枢为AA，我们统计的国五家主要评级机构的评级分布情况显示，均为AA等级的企业最多，且获得最高AAA等级的企业较多。 评级迁移对比 国际评级迁移：下调较多，跨级下调普遍。惠誉评级下调的比例整体高于上调比例，高等级体现得更为明显。从穆迪的评级迁移矩阵可看出国际评级变动下调比例高于上调，且普遍存在跨评级下调的现象。 国评级迁移：上调高于下调，跨级下调较少。国评级整体较为稳定，具体表现为跟踪评级维持原有评级的比例较高。评级迁移时，上调的比例整体高于下调。与国外跨级下调较为普遍不同的是，国跨级调整的情况较少，这意味着评级调整的幅度较低。 正文： 1. 评级体系对比 1.1 国际评级体系
国家主权信用评级含义及等级标准讲述讲解
国家主权信用评级含义及等级标准国家主权信用评级(Sovereignrating)，是指评级机构依照一定的程序和方法对主权国家的政治、经济和信用等级进行评定，并用一定的符号来表示评级结果。信用评级机构进行的国家主权信用评级实质就是对中央政府作为债务人履行偿债责任的信用意愿与信用能力的一种判断。国际上流行国家主权评级，体现一国偿债意愿和能力，主权评级内容很广，除了要对一个国家国内生产总值增长趋势、对外贸易、国际收支情况、外汇储备、外债总量及结构、财政收支、政策实施等影响国家偿还能力的因素进行分析外，还要对金融体制改革、国企改革、社会保障体制改革所造成的财政负担进行分析，最后进行评级。根据国际惯例国家主权等级列为该国境内单位发行外币债券的评级上限，不得超过国家主权等级。信用评级业是金融体系中特殊的中介服务，是维护国家金融主权的重要力量，代表了一个国家在国际金融服务体系中的国家地位。信用评级是通过对企业和政府的债务偿还风险进行评价，引导金融资本投资和经济决策，它他直接关系到金融产品的定价权，并影响一国信贷市场利率及汇率形成，与国家金融主权和经济安全密切相关。它的定价功能使评级机构掌握着企业和金融市场的生杀大权。 目前国际上主要有三大信用评级公司：标准普尔(Standard&Poor's)，穆迪投顾(Moody's)和惠誉国际(FitchRatings)。 以下为三家公司的评级含义和等级标准。一、标准普尔评级含义及等级标准（一）长期信用评级（Long-TermIssueCreditRatings）AAA偿还债务能力极强，为标准普尔给予的最高评级。AA偿还债务能力很强，与最高评级差别很小。A偿还债务能力较强，但相对于较高评级的债务/发债人，其偿债能力较易受外在环境及经济状况变动的不利因素的影响。
企业信用评级行业标准(参考)
企业信用评级规范 （1）评级对象。凡向我公司申请担保授信的客户，如已有至少两个会计年度经营期财务报表，均应按规定进行信用等级评定。 （2）评级的企业类型。我司考虑到不同行业评价企业财务和经营状况的规范不同，主要参考上海和深圳证券交易所对上市公司的分类方法，将评级对象分为工业、商贸、公用事业、房地产开发、综合等五种类型，分别设置工业企业、商贸企业、房地产开发企业、公用事业企业、综合类企业等类型企业的信用评级指标体系与计分规范。 （3）评级指标体系。我司信用评级指标按偿债能力、获利能力、经营经管水平、履约情况及发展能力和潜力共五个方面设置。根据评级对象所属行业的差异及其资金运用和从事经营活动的特点，按上述五个方面有针对性地分别设置若干量化或非量化指标，由此构成一个完整的评级指标体系。评级采用百分制。见下表。
遍存在着在不良比率高、财务报表真实性差、经营波动性大、抗风险能力弱等问题，客户信用评级中还按不同评级企业类型设立信用等级限定指标，这些指标主要是资产负债率、利润增长率、履约指标、客户规模指标、同业竞争力及报表真实性等6项。见下表。 （4）信用等级的设置和评级规范。 参照国际惯例，授信对象的信用等级划分为AAA、AA、A、BBB、BB、B、CCC、CC、C和D 级共10个等级。评级对象所获评级总分与信用等级和信用度的关系见下表。 表6-11 信用等级和信用度的关系表 （5）客户信用评级经管。针对客户经营中可能出现的重大不利变动情况，我司必须对客户进行动态跟踪。如发生重大变动因素，须酌情调整有关评级对象的信用等级，这些不利因素可包括：客户主要评级指标明显恶化，导致评级分数降低10分或10分以上。客户主要经管人员涉嫌重大贪污、受贿、舞弊或违法经营案件。客户在业务往来中有重大违约行为。客户弄虚作假提供有关评级材料。客户发生或涉入重大诉讼或仲裁案件等。
信用评级标准对照
信用评级(Credit Rating) 什么是信用评级 信用评级又称资信评级是一种社会中介服务，将为社会提供资信信息，或为单位自身提供决策参考。最初产生于20世纪初期的美国。1902年，穆迪公司的创始人约翰·穆迪开始对当时发行的铁路债券进行评级。后来延伸到各种金融产品及各种评估对象。由于信用评级的对象和要求有所不同，因而信用评级的内容和方法也有较大区别。我们研究资信的分类，就是为了对不同的信用评级项目探讨不同的信用评级标准和方法。 ●资本市场上的信用评估机构，对国家、银行、证券公司、基金、债券及上市公司进行信用评级， 著名企业有：穆迪(Moody's)、标准普尔(Standard & Poor's)和惠誉国际(Fitch Rating) ●商业市场上的信用评估机构，他们对商业企业进行信用调查和评估，著名企业有邓白氏公司(Dun & Bradstreet) ●消费者信用评估机构，他们提供消费者个人信用调查情况 关于信用评级的概念，至目前为止没有统一说法，但内涵大致相同，安博尔·中诚信认为，主要包括三方面： 首先，信用评级的根本目的在于揭示受评对象违约风险的大小，而不是其他类型的投资风险，如利率风险、通货膨胀风险、再投资风险及外汇风险等等。 其次，信用评级所评价的目标是经济主体按合同约定如期履行债务或其他义务的能力和意愿，而不是企业本身的价值或业绩。 第三，信用评级是独立的第三方利用其自身的技术优势和专业经验，就各经济主体和金融工具的信用风险大小所发表的一种专家意见，它不能代替资本市场投资者本身做出投资选择。 需要指出的是：信用评级不同于股票推荐。前者是基于资本市场中债务人违约风险作出的，评价债务人能否及时偿付利息和本金，但不对股价本身作出评论；后者是根据每股盈利（EPS）及市盈率（PE）作出的，往往对股价本身的走向作出判断。前者针对债权人，后者针对股份持有人。 信用评级的分类 一、信用评级按照评估对象来分，可以分为企业信用评级、证券信用评级、项目信用评级和国家
三大评级公司评级符号体系
一、主体评级符号及其定义 标普、穆迪和惠誉三大国际评级机构的主体评级符号及其定义均采用各自的中长期信用等级符号体系。 在等级划分方面，标普采用四等十一级制，且对于‘AA’至‘CCC’级别，可通过增加‘+’或‘-’符号来表示评级在各主要评级分类中的相对强弱；穆迪采用三等九级制，对于‘Aa’至‘Caa’级别，通过增加修正数字1、2、3来表示同类评级中的相对排位，其中数字1表示级别在所属同类评级中排位较高，数字3则表示级别在所属同类评级中排位较低；惠誉也采用四等十一级制，但与标普和穆迪不同的是，修正符号‘+’和‘-’可用于‘AA’至‘B’级别（见附件一）。 二、债项评级符号及其定义 债项评级分为中长期债项评级和短期债项评级。 中长期债项评级 标普、穆迪和惠誉的中长期债项评级与主体评级一样，也均采用各自的中长期信用等级符号体系。但是，由于评级历史和评级理念不同，上述三家评级机构对各类级别的定义幵不完全相同。标普和惠誉认为长期信用评级主要衡量的应是被评对象的违约风险，因而其符号定义侧重于强调偿债能力；穆迪则认为不同的长期信用评级表示被评对象可能给投资者带来信用损失的相对大小，因而其符号定义更侧重于反映被评对象的预期损失（见附件二）。同时，为了更好的满足投
资者需求，三家机构在评级实践中对债券级别的划分和含义方面赋予了更多内容。 在债券级别划分方面，为使市场具有统一认知，同时满足投资者的不同偏好，三家机构均设定‘BBB-’或‘Baa3’及以上级别属于投资级别，这些级别以下则属于投机级别。从标普和惠誉的级别定义可以看出，区分投资和投机级别的关键因素是发行人偿债能力对经济周期以及不利环境变化的承受能力，此定义可通过美国近20年的违约率统计数据得以印证，即投机级债券违约率随经济的波动而剧烈变动，而投资级债券违约率则基本保持稳定。投资级别和投机级别的划分与定义可为投资者提供初步的投资建议，即具有长期持有、配置型偏 好的投资者可关注级别为‘BBB-’或‘Baa3’及以上的债券，而具有高风险、高收益偏好的投资者则可关注级别为‘BB+’或‘Ba1’及以下的债券。 此外，为了使评级结果更准确地反映被评对象的实际信用水平，各机构在评级实践中会视被评对象和投资者需求做出调整。如穆迪指出，由于高等级债券的投资者以觃避违约风险为主要目的之一，加之违约后损失率比违约率更难预测，因而其在对投资级债券评估时侧重于债券的违约率，而投机级债券则更侧重于预期损失率。同时标普也指出，虽然其评级主要关注违约风险，但由于投机级债券的违约风险本就比较高，其在评级时也会考虑违约后损失率。由此可见，国际评级公司的评级理念和方法实际上在逐渐趋同，即投资级债券评级应注重违约率评估，而投机级债券评级应注重预期损失率的评估。
国际信用评级机构的评级分类
国际信用评级机构的评级分类 标准-普尔公司 （1）长期债务评级 长期债券信用等级，共设10个等级分别为AAA、AA、A、BBB、BB、B、CCC、CC、C和D，其中长期信用等级的AA至CCC级可用“+”和“-”号进行微调 注：1.投资级债券信誉高，履约风险小，投机级债券信誉低。 2.AA级至CCC级可加上“+”和“-”号，表示评级在各主要评级分类中的相对强度。 3：评级符号后标有pi表示该等评级是使用已公开的财务资料或其它公开信息作为分析 的依据，即标准普尔并未与该机构的管理层进行深入的讨论或全面考虑其重要的非公开资 料，所以这类评级所依据的资料不及全面的评级全面。公开信息评级每年根据财务报告审核 一次，但当有重大事情发生而可能影响发债人的信用质素时，我们也会实时对评级加以审核。 公开信息评级没有评级展望，不附有+或-号。但如果评级受到主权评级的上限限制时，“+” 和“-”号有可能被使用。
（2）短期信用评级 短期债券信用等级，共设6个等级分别为A-1、A-2、A-3、B、C和D 穆迪信用评级 评级级别由最高的Aaa级到最低的C级，一共有二十一个级别。评级级别分为两个部分，包括投资等级和投机等级。 （1）穆迪长期债务评级 穆迪长期债务评级(到期日一年或以上)是有关固定收益债务相对信用风险的意见，而这些债务的原始到期日须为一年或以上。这些评级是关于某种金融债务无法按承诺履行的可能性，同时反映违约机率及违约时蒙受的任何财务损失。
（2）短期债务评级(到期日一年以内) 穆迪短期评级是有关发行人短期融资债务偿付能力的意见。此类评级适用于发行人、短期计划或个别短期债务工具。除非明确声明，否则此类债务的原始到期日一般不超过十三个月。
信用评级标准对照
信用评级 (Credit Rating) 什么是信用评级 信用评级又称资信评级是一种社会中介服务，将为社会提供资信信息，或为单位自身提供决策参 考。最初产生于20世纪初期的美国。1902年，穆迪公司的创始人约翰穆迪开始对当时发行的铁路债券进行评级。后来延伸到各种金融产品及各种评估对象。由于信用评级的对象和要求有所不同，因而信用评级的内容和方法也有较大区别。我们研究资信的分类，就是为了对不同的信用评级项目探讨不同的信用评级标准和方法。 资本市场上的信用评估机构，对国家、银行、证券公司、基金、债券及上市公司进行信用评级，著名企业有：穆迪(Moody's) 、标准普尔(Standard & Poor's) 和惠誉国际(Fitch Rating) 商业市场上的信用评估机构，他们对商业企业进行信用调查和评估，著名企业有邓白氏公司(Dun & Bradstreet) 消费者信用评估机构，他们提供消费者个人信用调查情况 关于信用评级的概念，至目前为止没有统一说法，但内涵大致相同，安博尔中诚信认为，主要包 括三方面： 首先，信用评级的根本目的在于揭示受评对象违约风险的大小，而不是其他类型的投资风险，如利率风险、通货膨胀风险、再投资风险及外汇风险等等。 其次，信用评级所评价的目标是经济主体按合同约定如期履行债务或其他义务的能力和意愿，而不是企业本身的价值或业绩。 第三，信用评级是独立的第三方利用其自身的技术优势和专业经验，就各经济主体和金融工具的信用风险大小所发表的一种专家意见，它不能代替资本市场投资者本身做出投资选择。 需要指出的是：信用评级不同于股票推荐。前者是基于资本市场中债务人违约风险作出的，评价债务人能否及时偿付利息和本金，但不对股价本身作出评论；后者是根据每股盈利( EPS )及市盈率(PE)作出的，往往对股价本身的走向作出判断。前者针对债权人，后者针对股份持有人。 信用评级的分类 一、信用评级按照评估对象来分，可以分为企业信用评级、证券信用评级、项目信用评级和国家 主权信用评级等四类
穆迪全球航空企业信用评级方法
CORPORATES MAY 24, 2012
Each of the factors (except the Financial Policy factor) also encompass a number of sub-factors that we explain in detail. Since an issuer’s scoring on a particular grid factor often will not match its overall rating, in the Appendix we include a discussion of “outliers” – companies whose grid-indicated rating for a specific sub-factor differs significantly from the actual rating. This rating methodology is not intended to be an exhaustive discussion of all factors that Moody’s analysts consider to be pertinent for ratings in the passenger airline sector. We note that our analysis for ratings in this sector covers factors that are common across all industries (such as ownership, management, liquidity, legal structure in the corporate organization, corporate governance) as well as factors that can be meaningful on a company-specific basis. Our ratings consider qualitative considerations and factors that do not lend themselves to a transparent presentation in a grid format. The grid represents a compromise between greater complexity that would result in grid-indicated ratings that map more closely to actual ratings, and simplicity that enhances a transparent presentation of the factors that are most important for ratings in this sector most of the time. Highlights of this report include: ?An overview of the rated universe ? A summary of the rating methodology ? A description of the key factors that drive rating quality ?Comments on the grid assumptions and limitations, including a discussion of rating considerations that are not included in the grid. The Appendices show the full grid (Appendix A), tables that illustrate the application of the methodology grid to the covered issuers with explanatory comments on some of the more significant differences between the grid-implied rating for each sub-factor and our actual rating (Appendix B)1. About the Rated Universe We presently rate fourteen passenger airlines using this methodology, covering approximately $30 billion of rated debt. These companies represent a diverse group of issuers with ratings (senior unsecured rating or Corporate Family Rating) ranging from Baa3 to Caa1. Seven of the rated airlines are based in the US; three are from Europe and the remainder come from either Australia, Brazil, Canada or New Zealand. Of the rated airlines, only three are investment grade being; Qantas, Air New Zealand and Southwest Airlines. The median rating for the industry is situated at B1.2 The relatively low ratings for the sector reflect the effect of high fuel prices on these companies ability to generate earnings and free cash flow at levels that would lead to more supportive financial leverage measures. Additionally, sustained pressure on non-fuel costs, particularly labor as the work force becomes more tenured and the need to replace older, less fuel-efficient aircraft should limit the extent of any improvement in credit profiles in upcoming years. 1In general, the actual rating utilized for comparison to the grid-implied rating is the Corporate Family Rating (CFR) for speculative-grade issuers and senior unsecured rating for investment-grade issuers. 2For the purposes of comparability in this methodology, Moody’s compares individual corporate family ratings (CFR) and senior unsecured ratings. As both Air New Zealand (ANZ) and Scandinavian Airlines System (SAS) are partially owned by their respective governments, their corporate family ratings reflect implied government support. However for the purpose of grid outliers, we will refer to the Baseline Credit Assessment (BCA) of these airlines, which represents an assessment of their credit standing excluding government support. ANZ’s BCA is 11, equivalent to Ba1, and SAS’ BCA is 18, equivalent to Caa2.
企业信用评级标准-企业信用评级打分标准
企业信用评级标准-企业信用评级打分标准
企业信用评级打分标准 项目分值内容及计算公式分数段及取 值一：领导者素质10 1.品质 2 企业法定代表人遵 纪守法、诚实守信情 况好，2分；一般，1分；差， 0分 2.经历 2 企业法定代表人或 主要经营者从事本 行业年限 >5年得2分，>2年得1分<2年得 0分 3.学历 2 正副厂长（经理）、 总工程师、总经济师 等企业主要领导中 大学本科以上学历 的比重 ≥80%得2分，≥60%得1.5分，≥50%得1分≥30%得0.5<30得0 分 4.能力 2 1．经营管理能力 2.企业领导层威信强，1分；一般，0.5分；差，0分
高，1分一般0.5分，差 0分 5.业绩 2 企业法定代表人近3 年的业绩情况 3年内获省部级以上优秀企业称号或业绩较为出色得2分，业绩一般得1分，其他得 0分 二：经济实力10 6.实有净资产 4 资产总额-负债总额- 待处理资产损失（单 位：万元）生产企业：≥5000得4分；≥4000得3.5分；≥3000得3分；≥2000得2.5分；≥1000得2分；≥500得1.5分；≥
100≥得1分；<100得 0分 7.有形长期资 产3 固定资产净值+在建 工程+长期投资（单 位：万元） ≥5000得3 分≥3000得 2分；≥1000 得1分≥500 得0.5分 <500得0分 8.人均实有净 资产3 实有净资产 ———— —（单位：万元/人） 在册职工数+离退休 职工数 ≥5得3分 ≥4得2分 ≥3得1 分;<3得0分 三：资金结构20 9.资产负债率10 负债总额 ———— —（单位：%） 资产总额 ≤50得10分≤55得9分≤60得8分≤65得7分≤70德6.≤75得5分≤80得4分
企业信用评级标准(参考)
企业信用评级标准(参 考) -CAL-FENGHAI.-(YICAI)-Company One1
企业信用评级标准 （1）评级对象。凡向我公司申请担保授信的客户，如已有至少两个会计年度经营期财务报表，均应按规定进行信用等级评定。 （2）评级的企业类型。我司考虑到不同行业评价企业财务和经营状况的标准不同，主要参考上海和深圳证券交易所对上市公司的分类方法，将评级对象分为工业、商贸、公用事业、房地产开发、综合等五种类型，分别设置工业企业、商贸企业、房地产开发企业、公用事业企业、综合类企业等类型企业的信用评级指标体系与计分标准。 （3）评级指标体系。我司信用评级指标按偿债能力、获利能力、经营管理水平、履约情况及发展能力和潜力共五个方面设置。根据评级对象所属行业的差异及其资金运用和从事经营活动的特点，按上述五个方面有针对性地分别设置若干量化或非量化指标，由此构成一个完整的评级指标体系。评级采用百分制。见下表。
的中小企业普遍存在着在不良比率高、财务报表真实性差、经营波动性大、抗风险能力弱等问题，客户信用评级中还按不同评级企业类型设立信用等级限定
指标，这些指标主要是资产负债率、利润增长率、履约指标、客户规模指标、同业竞争力及报表真实性等6项。见下表。 ? （4）信用等级的设置和评级标准。 参照国际惯例，授信对象的信用等级划分为AAA、AA、A、BBB、BB、B、CCC、CC、C和D级共10个等级。评级对象所获评级总分与信用等级和信用度的关系见下表。 （5）客户信用评级管理。针对客户经营中可能出现的重大不利变动情况，我司必须对客户进行动态跟踪。如发生重大变动因素，须酌情调整有关评级对象的信用等级，这些不利因素可包括：客户主要评级指标明显恶化，导致评级分数降低10分或10分以上。客户主要管理人员涉嫌重大贪污、受贿、舞弊或违法经营案件。客户在业务往来中有重大违约行为。客户弄虚作假提供有关评级材料。客户发生或涉入重大诉讼或仲裁案件等。
三大信用评级机构介绍
三大信用评级机构介绍 摘要：标准普尔公司、穆迪投资者服务公司和惠誉国际信用评级公司为三大信用评级机构，三者评级均有长期和短期之分，但有不同的级别序列。本文为大家简单的介绍一下三大信用评级机构简单常识性知识。 三大信用评级机构分别是标准普尔公司、穆迪投资者服务公司和惠誉国际信用评级公司。三者评级均有长期和短期之分，但有不同的级别序列。下面分别来介绍一下这三大信用评级机构。 标普评级——标准普尔公司 标普的长期评级主要分为投资级和投机级两大类，投资级的评级具有信誉高和投资价值高的特点，投机级的评级则信用程度较低，违约风险逐级加大。投资级包括AAA、AA、A和BBB，投机级则分为BB、B、CCC、CC、C和D。信用级别由高到低排列，AAA级具有最高信用等级；D级最低，视为对条款的违约。 从AA至CCC级，每个级别都可通过添加"+"或"-"来显示信用高低程度。例如，在AA序列中，信用级别由高到低依次为AA+、AA、AA-。 此外，标普还对信用评级给予展望，显示该机构对于未来(通常是6个月至两年)信用评级走势的评价。决定评级展望的主要因素包括经济基本面的变化。展望包括"正面"(评级可能被上调)、"负面"(评级可能被下调)、"稳定"(评级不变)、"观望"(评级可能被下调或上调)和"无意义"。 标普还会发布信用观察以显示其对评级短期走向的判断。信用观察分为"正面"(评级可能被上调)、"负面"(评级可能被下调)和"观察"(评级可能被上调或下调)。
标普目前对126个国家和地区进行了主权信用评级。美国失去AAA评级后，目前拥有AAA评级的国家和地区还有澳大利亚、奥地利、加拿大、丹麦、芬兰、法国、德国、中国香港特别行政区、马恩岛、列支敦士登、荷兰、新西兰、挪威、新加坡、瑞典、瑞士和英国。 穆迪评级——穆迪投资者服务公司 穆迪长期评级针对一年期以上的债务，评估发债方的偿债能力，预测其发生违约的可能性及财产损失概率。而短期评级一般针对一年期以下的债务。 穆迪长期评级共分九个级别：Aaa、Aa、A、Baa、Ba、B、Caa、Ca和C。其中Aaa 级债务的信用质量最高，信用风险最低;C级债务为最低债券等级，收回本金及利息的机会微乎其微。 在Aa到Caa的六个级别中，还可以添加数字1、2或3进一步显示各类债务在同类评级中的排位，1为最高，3则最低。通常认为，从Aaa级到Baa3级属于投资级，从Ba1级以下则为投机级。 此外，穆迪还对信用评级给予展望评价，以显示其对有关评级的中期走势看法。展望分为"正面"(评级可能被上调)、"负面"(评级可能被下调)、"稳定"(评级不变)以及"发展中"(评级随着事件的变化而变化)。 对于短期内评级可能发生变动的被评级对象，穆迪将其列入信用观察名单。被审查对象的评级确定后，将从名单中被去除。
工业企业信用评级内容及标准
工业企业信用评级内容及标准 企业概况 企业名称、建立时间、座落地址、经济性质、隶属关系、法人代表、工商登记证、注册资本、实收资本、所有者权益、总资产、占地面积、建筑面积、固定资产原价、固定资产净值、设备装备水平、生产能力、经营范围、销售收入总额、利润及税金、企业内部机构设置和现有职工人数以及职工队伍素质等情况。本项不计分值。 一、企业素质 主要考核三类，17 项指标，共10 分。 （一）人员素质 主要考核11 项指标标准分3.3 分 1、领导素质 主要考核六项指标，共2 分。 （1 ）年龄结构：标准分0.2 分 分别按人年龄档次评价领导班子年轻化要求。 评分标准：标准年龄档次40 岁以下（含40 岁），低于标准年龄档次评满分；40 岁（不含40 岁）-50 岁按80%（0.16 分）评分；50 岁以上按70%（0.14 分）评分。 注：评分计算公式，按年龄档次及人数比例评分。 （2 ）文化程度：标准分0.3 分 分别按人文化程度学历评价领导班子文化水平知识化要求。 评分标准：标准学历本科以上，达到本科以上学历评满分；大专学历按80% （0.24 分）评分；中专（高中）学历按70%（0.21 分）评分；其他按60%（0.18 分）评分。 注：计算公式，按文化程度学历及人数比例评分。 （3 ）技术职称：标准分0.3 分 分别按人专业技术职称专业水平评价领导班子专业化要求。 评分标准：标准专业技术职称高级，达到高级职称评满分；中级按80%（0.24 分）评分；初级按60%（0.18）分评分。 注：计算公式，按技术职称等级人数及比例评分。 （4 ）专业年限标准分0.3 分 分别按专业年限评价领导班子专业水平。 评分标准：标准专业年限20 年，达到专业年限标准评满分；10-20 年（不含20 年）按80%（0.24分）评分；5-10年（不含10年）按70%（0.21分）评分；5年以下，按60%（0.18 分）评分。 注：计算公式，按专业年限及人数比例评分。 （5 ）本职年限标准分0.2 分 分别按本职年限评价领导班子工作业绩。 评分标准：标准本职年限为10 年以上，达到标准年限评满分；5-10 年（不含10 年）按 80%（0.16分）评分；3-5年按70%（0.14分）评分；3年以下按60%（0.12 分）评分。 注：计算公式，按本职年限及人数比例评分。 （6）经营管理能力标准分0.7 分 A 、执行政策标准分0.3 分 认真贯彻执行党和国家的路线、方针、政策、遵守法令，执行主管机关的指令、决定和企业党委以及职代会的有关决定，在坚决维护国家、全民利益的前提下，正确处理国家、企业和职工个人三者利益的关系。
穆迪内部评级系统介绍
穆迪内部评级系统介绍 由世界上最大的资信评级公司之一穆迪公司所研发设计的信用风险评估系统，是在欧美多家跨国银行被广泛应用的电子化信用风险管理系统。该系统完全依据欧美银行的需求设计，因此在违约概率的测量、公司情况的评估、抵押物抵押价值的确定及信贷额度等级划分等方面并不一定适合于我国的实际情况。但这一系统吸收了欧美银行多年来的信用风险控制经验，同时贯彻了新巴塞尔协议的相关要求，其内在的风险控制理念对我国商业银行信用风险控制体系的设计与完善具有相当强的借鉴意义。故本文即对该系统作以下介绍。 穆迪系统的核心为如下公式： EL％=PD×LGD公式一 这个公式涵盖了信用风险控制的全部内容。EL％指预计损失率，PD指违约概率，LGD指违约损失率。 一、违约损失率(LGD) 违约损失率（LGD）用于衡量银行在每一单位的名义风险敞口下，当借款人违约时所实际暴露的风险敞口。它是一种与借款工具因素（即债项）相关的违约比率，其大小完全只与银行信贷额度所安排的借款工具相关，而与借款人的信用等级没有任何关系。即对于任何一个借款人而言，如果使用的借款工具是完全相同的，那么计算出的违约损失率也必然相同；对于同一借款人而言，当其使用不同的借款工具时，违约损失率也可能会不同。其计算公式是： 违约损失率=违约敞口/名义风险敞口公式二 其中，名义风险敞口指银行某一融资项目总的信贷额度风险敞口；违约敞口则是指扣除了抵押物的价值因素后的风险敞口，即当借款人出现违约时，银行实际风险暴露的数量。 违约损失率的计算步骤如下： （一）确定名义风险敞口的大小。穆迪系统将名义风险敞口划分为表内金额和表外金额两种作区别对待。前者即被视为实际借出的金额；后者则只是可能借出的金额，是一种或有风险。对于表内金额，穆迪系统将其全额计算为名义风险敞口；对于不同种类的表外金额，则按照不同的比例（100％、75％、50％、20％）确定其名义风险敞口。比如：银行保函和备用信用证等，将按照100％全额计算，
银行公司客户信用评级指标体系与评分标准说明
银行公司客户信用评级指标体系与评分标准说明
附件1-1 中国银行股份有限公司 客户信用评级指标体系与评分标准说明 一、一般统计模型评级指标体系与评分标准 一般统计模型评级指标与评分标准，在模型开发阶段确定。模型使用的定量指标主要是客户的财务指标，例如：现金比率、债务覆盖率、存货周转率、税前利润率、资产负债率、资本周转率等。定性指标全部是客观定性指标。模型指标与具体的评分标准有可能根据模型返回检验结果进行调整。 二、打分卡模型评级指标体系与评分标准 （一）打分卡模型的信用评分与信用等级对应关系： 90－100分，AAA级； 85－89分，AA级； 80－84分，A级； 70－79分，BBB级； 65－69分，BB级； 60－64分，B级； 50－59分，CCC级； 45－49分，CC级； 40－44分，C级；
40分以下，D级。 （二）医疗机构、教育机构、其它类事业法人以及新组建企业，四类打分卡评级指标体系与评分标准详见附件1-2。 （三）特殊指标说明 1. 医疗机构评级指标体系 （1）年就诊人数 计算标准：每年门诊、急诊治疗人数。 指标参考来源：决算报告文字说明。 （2）医疗人员水平 计算方法：医疗人员水平=中高级以上职称人数/全部医疗人员数×100% 指标参考来源：行政事业单位人员及机构情况表。 （3）实际开放病床床位 计算标准：医疗机构期末实际开放的病床床位数量。 指标参考来源：决算报告的文字说明。 （4）病床使用率 计算方法：病床使用率=实际占用病床日数/实际开放病床日数×100% 指标参考来源：决算报告文字说明。 （5）医疗研究水平和专用医疗设备水平 判断依据：医疗专科水平、承担国家医疗科研项目情况、先进医疗设备水平。
关于世界三大信用评级机构标普、惠誉、穆迪评判
海峡理工学院 财务管理 题目：关于世界三大信用评级机构标普、惠誉、穆迪评判 专业：市场营销 班级：10市场营销 学生姓名：黄新文张春林李良栋邱晨 章永垦钟辉汉刘斌河游泳完成时间：10小时
目录 一、引言 (3) （一）标普评级 (3) （二）穆迪评级 (3) （三）惠誉评级 (3) 二、中、美、西、希、意近几年的主权信用评级 (4) 三、世界三大信用评级机构标普、惠誉、穆迪评判 (4) （一）世界三大信用评级机构是否客观公正？ (5) （二）三家垄断弊端多多 (5) 四、综合论述 (5) （一）评价体系“硬伤”明显 (5) （二）中国是否合适建立评级机构？ (6) （三）根据国际评级机构的这些弊端，中国应做出如下改进 (7) （四）在谈及中国信用评级体系的发展时，成思危提出四点意见。 (7)
一、前言 （一）标普评级 标普的长期评级主要分为投资级和投机级两大类，投资级的评级具有信誉高和投资价值高的特点，投机级的评级则信用程度较低，违约风险逐级加大。投资级包括AAA、AA、A 和BBB，投机级则分为BB、B、CCC、CC、C和D。信用级别由高到低排列，AAA级具有最高信用等级；D级最低，视为对条款的违约。 从AA至CCC级，每个级别都可通过添加“＋”或“-”来显示信用高低程度。例如，在AA 序列中，信用级别由高到低依次为AA＋、AA、AA-。 （二）穆迪评级 穆迪长期评级针对一年期以上的债务，评估发债方的偿债能力，预测其发生违约的可能性及财产损失概率。而短期评级一般针对一年期以下的债务。 穆迪长期评级共分九个级别：Aaa、Aa、A、Baa、Ba、B、Caa、Ca和C。其中Aaa级债务的信用质量最高，信用风险最低；C级债务为最低债券等级，收回本金及利息的机会微乎其微。 在Aa到Caa的六个级别中，还可以添加数字1、2或3进一步显示各类债务在同类评级中的排位，1为最高，3则最低。通常认为，从Aaa级到Baa3级属于投资级，从Ba1级以下则为投机级。 （三）惠誉评级 惠誉的规模较其他两家稍小，是唯一一家欧洲控股的评级机构。 惠誉的长期评级用以衡量一个主体偿付外币或本币债务的能力。 惠誉的长期信用评级分为投资级和投机级，其中投资级包括AAA、AA、A和BBB，投机级则包括BB、B、CCC、CC、C、RD和D。以上信用级别由高到低排列，AAA等级最高，表示最低的信贷风险；D为最低级别，表明一个实体或国家主权已对所有金融债务违约。 惠誉的短期信用评级大多针对到期日在13个月以内的债务。短期评级更强调的是发债