Table 3 - S&P, Moody’s and Fitch rating systems
|
Differences |
S&P- |
S&P- |
Moody's- |
|
6 |
0 |
1 |
0 |
|
5 |
0 |
1 |
3 |
|
4 |
1 |
0 |
7 |
|
3 |
3 |
1 |
12 |
|
2 |
61 |
13 |
60 |
|
1 |
202 |
128 |
114 |
|
0 |
518 |
487 |
370 |
|
-1 |
161 |
135 |
123 |
|
-2 |
67 |
21 |
46 |
|
-3 |
13 |
4 |
6 |
|
-4 |
9 |
0 |
0 |
|
-5 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
|
_______-6_______ |
0 |
0 |
0 |
|
Total |
1037 |
791 |
741 |
|
Within 1 * |
85.0% |
94.8% |
81.9% |
|
Within 2 ** |
97.3% |
99.1% |
96.2% |
Notes: * - % of differences in notches within +/- 1 notch.
** - % of differences in notches within +/- 2 notches.
35
More intriguing information
1. Large-N and Large-T Properties of Panel Data Estimators and the Hausman Test2. Sector Switching: An Unexplored Dimension of Firm Dynamics in Developing Countries
3. The Making of Cultural Policy: A European Perspective
4. The name is absent
5. The name is absent
6. How do investors' expectations drive asset prices?
7. Estimating the Economic Value of Specific Characteristics Associated with Angus Bulls Sold at Auction
8. AN IMPROVED 2D OPTICAL FLOW SENSOR FOR MOTION SEGMENTATION
9. Better policy analysis with better data. Constructing a Social Accounting Matrix from the European System of National Accounts.
10. Inhimillinen pääoma ja palkat Suomessa: Paluu perusmalliin