Mohamed Ariff

Purpose: This manuscript reports evidence on how debt-taking decisions of top management in a multi-country setting do affect credit rating scores assigned by credit rating agencies (CRAs) as global monitors of creditworthiness of borrowers. This aspect has been long ignored by researchers in the literature. The purpose of this paper is twofold. A test model is specified first using theories to connect debt-taking behavior to credit rating scores. Once that model helps to identify a number of statistically significant factors, the next step helps to identify threshold values at which the variables driving debt-taking behavior would worsen the credit rating scores as turning points of the thresholds.Design/methodology/approach: The study identifies factors driving creditworthiness scores due to debt-taking behavior of countries and develops a correct research design to identify a model that explains (1) credit rating scores and the factors driving the scores and runs (2) panel-type regressions to test model fit. Having found factors driving debt-taking behavior by observed units, the next step identifies threshold values of factors at which point further debt-taking is likely to worsen credit rating risk of the observed units. This is a robustness test of the methodology used. The observed units are 20 countries with data series across 14 years.Findings: First, new findings suggest there are about six major factors associated with debt-taking behavior and credit rating changes. Second, the model developed in this study is able to account for substantial variability while the identified factors are statistically significant within the normal p-values for acceptance of hypotheses. Finally, the threshold values of factors identified are likely to be useful for managerial decisions to judge the levels at which further debt-taking would worsen the credit rating scores of the observed units.Research limitations/implications: The observed units are from 20 countries over 14 years of annual data available on credit rating scores (privately obtained from Standard and Poor [S&P]). The sample represents major economies but did not include emerging countries. In that regard, it will be worthwhile to explore the debt-taking behavior of emerging economies in a future study using the methodology verified in this study.Practical implications: The findings help add few useful guidelines for top management decisions. (1) There are actually factors that are associated with debt-taking behavior, so the authors now know these factors as guides for managerial actions. (2) The authors are free to state that the credit rating changes occur on objective changes in the factors found as significantly related to the debt-taking behavior. (3) The threshold values of key factors are known, so top management could use these threshold values of named factors to monitor if a debt-taking decision is going to push the credit rating to a worse score.Social implications: There are society-wide implications. Knowing that the world's debt level is high at US$2.2 for each gross domestic product (GDP) dollar across almost 200 countries, any knowledge on what factors help drive creditworthiness scores, thus credit riskiness, is revealed in this paper. Knowing those factors and also knowing the turning points of the factors – the threshold values – likely to worsen creditworthiness scores is a powerful tool for controlling excessive debt-taking by an observation unit included in this study (The dataset in this research can also be used to see inter-temporal movement on debt-taking in a future study).Originality/value: In the authors' view, there are many studies on debt-taking behavior. But none has connected debt-taking on how (1) named factors are observable to management that affect credit rating changes and (2) if a factor affects creditworthiness, at which point of the factor value, the creditworthiness will flip to worsen the score. These aspects are seldom found in the literature. Hence, the paper is original with practical value at the global level.

Purpose: The objective of this paper is to investigate the validity of stock valuation theories and their forecasting ability by conducting an empirical study. It employs four most commonly used theories which are then tested using 19-year banking-firm market data. The usefulness of these models demonstrates with promising results.Design/methodology/approach: This paper conducts a multi-country study using the multi-model testing approach to evaluate validity of theories and forecast accuracy of banking firms. It employs four methodology models used in finance literature; (1) P/E multiples model, (2) accounting-information-based clean surplus model, (3) theoretical model based on Gordon and Shapiro (1956) method and (4) the Damodaran-Kottler Free Cash Flow or FCF theory based on discounting model.Findings: The tests show that the four theories under tests have a significant fit with actual price formation. The explained variation ranges from 72 to 92%, so the explanatory power of the theories accounting for variations in bank prices over 19-year period is substantial. The models fit suggest that the P/E model has superior predictive power followed by the RIM, DDM and FCFE. These findings shed new lights on the relative performance of valuation models.Research limitations/implications: The study is limited in terms of the sample period size for 1999–2019. The availability of essential financial data prior to 2000 is very limited, so one can understand interpretation of statistical results under certain assumptions.Practical implications: The paper suggests that one-factor model is better than the two-factor model.Originality/value: The work done in this paper is unpublished and original contribution to banking and finance literature and also not under consideration for publication in any other journal.

The aim of this study is to identify the economic impacts on G7 banking industry when sovereign rating is revised. We used event study methodology (t-statistics) and found that sovereign rating changes significantly affect share market prices. It seems that there is information leakage prior to sovereign rating announcement dates as released by the S&P: there are some negative price effects as well on mixed-type rating change effects, such as ‘rating watch’ announcements. These are new findings that may help to extend the sovereign rating literature in terms of findings from multiple countries, and on sustainability of debt taking.

This paper provides evidence of a significant exchange rate effect on stock index returns using data from seven selected countries practicing free-floating exchange rate regimes. This research uses parity and asset pricing theories, thus placing it within the monetary-cum-economics framework for international asset pricing. In this study, we apply a system of seemingly unrelated regression to control for unobserved heterogeneity and cross-sectional dependence. The findings constitute evidence of a statistically significant exchange rate impact on stock index returns across selected countries. These findings can be considered as falling under the arbitrage pricing approach of the international capital asset pricing model of Solnik who also used the parity-theoretical framework on exchange rate determination.

We discuss currency volatility as a measure of currency instability using 15 currencies from developed and emerging economies. The IMF and others have recorded how countries manage their exchange rates to promote sustainable economic growth by designing exchange rate regimes as a pillar within economic policy. The findings herein show how to track currency instability using a given currency's volatility against the volatility of a benchmark currency of importance to the given currency. This is termed relative volatility. The study proceeds to test whether the parity factors and country risk factor are significantly correlated with exchange rate relative volatility.

Purpose: This paper aims to report practice-relevant anomalous investment yield behavior of two types of bonds – Type A, the mainstream bond, and Type B, which isSukuk– both having similar cash-flow-relevant characteristics.Design/methodology/approach: Bond valuation theory suggests that yields to investors of similarly rated bonds ought to be same. The authors collected time-series data on A and B bonds, all being coupon-paying bonds with similar rating and similar tenor as two matched samples traded in a bond exchange. To ensure the results are extended to different bond sectors, the data set was separated into treasury bonds as risk-free and corporate bonds as risky ones. The data set was further sub-divided into short-, medium- and long-tenor bonds. As the data straddle the Global Financial Crisis period, the authors use appropriate econometric method to control the possible effect from the crisis.Findings: The average and median yields on Type A bond are significantly different from those of Type B. The test results show significant and systematic differences: treasury bonds of Type A returns yield lower than treasury bonds of Type B; the yields of corporate mainstream bonds (A) are higher than the yields ofSukuk(B). The authors observe these findings constitute a puzzle, being anomalous to theory.Originality/value: This paper is original in that it is documenting significant differences in pricing of equivalent bonds. This has both theory and practice implications for fixed-income security market practices. The evidence is very strong to suggest that the identical types of bonds may have missing variable that contributes to the difference. Therefore, further research to identify the missing variable is necessary.

Bond yields of Treasury and corporate bonds are observed in a listed exchange. This article reports the findings on the market yield behaviour of two types of debt securities in the same exchange, the sharia-compliant sukuk bonds and the normal conventional bonds. There are 17 exchanges where sukuk bonds are traded, and the outstanding value is estimated at US$ 1,200 billion. The average yields of sukuk Treasury bonds are significantly higher (premium) than that of conventional Treasury bonds. On the other hand, investors in the sukuk corporate bonds receive slightly lower returns (discount) of about 25 basis points in the case of long-term sukuk bonds. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to verify these differences using appropriate advanced econometric methods. These results have far-reaching implications for the market practices as well as for teaching of bond pricing behaviour since this new form of debt markets is growing at about 17 per cent a year. JEL Classification: F23, F31, G12

This paper reports how non-parity fundamental factors together with parity factors are correlated with exchange rate movements. Seven Latin American countries were included in this study using a selection criterion that for a pair of countries to be included, the pair must have more than 50 per cent of trade with the group chosen. The econometric methods applied are appropriate to this topic and include pooled time series regression and seemingly unrelated regression. The findings show that there is support for short and long-run effects on exchange rates from inflation and interest rates. We entered non-parity factors suggested in recent research reports as likely determinants of the exchange rates, and found four non-parity factors that are significantly correlated with exchange rates and these served as control variables in our test model. Our main result shows that both inflation and interest rates are jointly significant factors in most of the tests. The results appear to suggest that exchange rate research should include both nonparity and parity factors. Only then would the parity factor effects be identifiable as relevant to exchange rate formation.