Are credit ratings more rigorous for widely covered firms?

Samuel B. Bonsall, Jeremiah R. Green, Karl A. Muller

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

43 Scopus citations


We study how business press coverage can discipline credit rating agency actions. Because of their greater prominence and visibility to market participants, more widely covered firms can pose greater reputational costs for rating agencies. Consistent with rating agencies limiting such risk, we find that ratings for more widely covered firms are more timely and accurate, downgraded earlier and systematically lower in the year prior to default, and better predictors of default and non-default. We also find that the recent tightening of credit rating standards is largely explained by growing business press coverage of public debt issuers. Additionally, we find that credit rating agencies take explicit actions to improve their ratings by assigning better educated and more experienced analysts to widely covered firms. Moreover, we document that missed defaults of more visible firms create greater negative economic consequences for rating agencies, and that rating improvements following the financial crisis were greater for more visible firms.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)61-94
Number of pages34
JournalAccounting Review
Issue number6
StatePublished - Nov 2018

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Accounting
  • Finance
  • Economics and Econometrics


Dive into the research topics of 'Are credit ratings more rigorous for widely covered firms?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this