S&P alters its core earning methodology
Standard & Poor’s has reacted to criticism of its corporate rating methodology by changing its system for evaluating corporate earnings in the future. The New York-based rating agency will focus on core earnings – roughly defined as after-tax earnings generated from a company’s principal business or businesses – as the basis for its corporate equity analysis. The agency said the methodology was introduced to create greater transparency in corporate ratings.
Excluded from this definition are impairment of goodwill, gains and losses from assets sales, pension gains, unrealised gains or losses from hedging activities, merger and acquisition related fees and litigation settlements
“A number of recent high-profile bankruptcies have renewed investors’ concerns about the reliability of corporate reporting,” said David Blitzer, Standard & Poor’s chief investment officer. “Once there are more generally accepted definitions, it will be much easier for analysts and investors to evaluate varying investment decisions.”
Leo O’Neill, S&P president, said the new analysis was widely supported in the analyst community. But one analyst questioned how popular the new methodology would prove with managers at US corporations. Sales/leasebacks, for example, have often been a way for airlines to boost earnings in depressed cycles and therefore manage the volatility of the industry. He was also concerned how analysts will view profitable hedging strategies that, if not implemented to boost revenues, may improve earnings all the same.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
EBA to address double-counting caused by new capital floor
Existing EU capital add-ons for model risk would duplicate new Basel floor on internal models
The Emir error reports that cost banks millions
Dealers lambast onerous EU requirement to notify clients of all errors and omissions
Basel stops short on wrong-way risk
New guidelines a step in right direction, but experts warn they won’t prevent another Archegos
Trump 2.0 bank supervision: simpler but no soft touch?
Republican FDIC vice-chair Travis Hill wants more focus on financial risk instead of process
Iosco mimics industry codes to tackle pre-hedging dilemma
Advocates breathe sigh of relief, but Iosco release carries suggested restrictions
Ice’s AFX swoop shines spotlight on Ameribor prospects
CEO John Shay steps down after exchange group buys firm for mortgage and index synergies
Barr’s Fed exit likely to delay, but not destroy, Basel III
Market risk, op risk and leverage ratio all in the sights of Barr’s potential successors
FCMs call for more oversight of self-clearing CCP members
Clearing firms worry that PTFs and market-makers joining CCPs en masse will increase systemic risk