• The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business
• /
• v.3 no.3
• /
• pp.5-15
• /
• 2016

This study examines whether Korean rating agencies such as Korea Investors Service (KIS), National Information & Credit Evaluation (NICE), and Korea Ratings Corporation (KR), incorporate corporate governance into their corporate bond ratings in Korea. We find that the Korean rating agencies assign higher ratings to the bonds issued by Chaebol (Korean business group) affiliated firms. Our results also indicate that those rating agencies give higher ratings to the bonds with greater foreign investor share ownership. Moreover, if the rating agencies value corporate governance, higher rated firms should issue bonds at lower yield to maturity. We discover that Chaebol affiliation is counted favorably by the rating agencies. We find that investors are willing to pay lower risk premium for bonds with higher institutional ownership, but higher risk premium to bonds with greater equity ownership in the form of depository receipts. Therefore, even if the rating agencies and investors in Korea consider corporate governance (Chaebol affiliation and ownership structure) an important determinant in bond ratings and the yields to maturity, they have opposite views on institutional ownership and share ownership in the form of depository receipts.

• Journal of the Korean Data and Information Science Society
• /
• v.14 no.4
• /
• pp.805-815
• /
• 2003

This study examines two hypothesis regarding return generating process of corporate bonds: the trading day hypothesis and calendar day hypothesis. To differentiate two hypothesis ANOVA(analysis of variance) and regression analysis were used. If the statistical result can not reject calendar day hypothesis, it implies that there is weekend effect. The statistical result didn't support any particular hypothesis for the period of September 7th, 1999 through December 31, 2002. However, corporate bonds were supporting calendar day hypothesis for the period of October 9, 2000 through December 31, 2002. The result indicates that the Korean corporate bond market got through the impact of IMF.

• The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business
• /
• v.5 no.4
• /
• pp.9-20
• /
• 2018

Global rating agencies, such as Moody's and S&P, have assigned credit ratings to corporate bonds issued by Japanese firms since 1980s. Local Japanese rating agencies, such as R&I and JCR, have more market share than the global raters. We examine the yield spreads of 1,050 yen-denominated corporate bonds issued by financial firms in Japan from 1998 to 2014 and find no evidence that bonds rated by at least one global agency are associated with a significant reduction in the cost of debt as compared to those rated by only local rating agencies. Unlike non-financial firms, the reputation effect of global rating agencies does not exist for Japanese financial firms. We also observe that firms with less information asymmetry are more likely to acquire ratings from Moody's or S&P. Additionally, the firm's financial profile does not affect its choice to seek out ratings from global raters. Our findings are contradictory to those by Han, Pagano, and Shin (2012), who employ bonds issued by non-financial firms in Japan. Our conjecture is that the asymmetric nature of financial firms makes investors less likely to depend on a credit risk assessment by rating agencies in determining the yields of new bonds.

• Journal of the Korea Convergence Society
• /
• v.10 no.4
• /
• pp.175-182
• /
• 2019

The purpose of this study is to test whether credit rating agencies highly evaluate the credit ratings of corporate bonds based upon management participation and ownership share by family governance in ownership structure forms. The samples of this study for empirical analysis were 1,449 non-financial companies listed on Korean Exchange from 2011 to 2016, over whose firm/year data this study conducted regression analysis. The results of empirical analysis in this study are as follows. First, family businesses had positive effects on the evaluation of corporate credit ratings. Second, if the ownership share of family businesses was higher, corporate credit ratings were higher. This result means that high ownership share in family businesses has very positive effects on the credit ratings of related businesses. It is meaningful that this study tested the effect that family businesses can alleviate agency problems and reduce information asymmetry. Furthermore, it is also academically meaningful that this study can contribute to future studies on the role of ownership structure.

• The Korean Journal of Financial Management
• /
• v.26 no.2
• /
• pp.63-91
• /
• 2009

This paper tests the validity of pecking order theory by Myers(1977) and Myers and Majluf(1984) on Korean manufacturing firms listed in the KRX for the years of 1994 to 2003. We also want to see if there is any difference in financing behavior between chaebol affiliated firms and non-chaebol affiliated firms. We develop testable hypotheses from the idea that established relationship between bank and firm mitigates the problem of information asymmetry (Kang and Lim, 2001), and thus makes it easier for firms to raise funds through banks. The test result of the first stage shows that firms prefer cash reserves to debt financing, and prefer debt to equity. Chaebol affiliated firms are found to behave as if they already exploit internal capital markets. The second stage of the test carried out by dividing debt capital into bank loans and corporate bonds also shows a consistent pattern of financing behavior. Firms are testified to prefer cash to bank loans, bank loans to corporate bonds, and corporate bonds to equity. In this case chaebol affiliation seems to make firms behave as if they already establish internal capital markets. Further analysis shows that some, though not in every case, difference of ordering around the occasion of Korean financial crisis exists. It may be from the change of attitude of Korean firms to risk, or from weakened influence of internal capital market along with strengthened market power in the post-crisis period.

• The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business
• /
• v.8 no.3
• /
• pp.1135-1142
• /
• 2021

This study aims to examine the factors that determine bond yields in infrastructure companies listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange. The research sample used 31 bonds issued by the company during the 2015-2019 period. The data analysis method to estimate the determinant of bond yield uses multiple regression models. The results prove that the increase in the coupon rate causes bond yields to increase, while the inflation rate has the opposite effect of decreasing bond yield. Interest rate, exchange rate, duration, and bond rating variables cannot affect the bond yield. The results of this study imply that investors will be interested in investing in bonds with better yields if the company has to set a higher coupon rate, especially in economic conditions that experience low inflation rates. Interest rates and exchange rates as macroeconomic variables have not been considered by investors in purchasing bonds. Bond characteristic factors, namely, the duration and rating of the bonds, are considered less important factors in bond investment decisions because they are more oriented towards getting higher yields. Therefore, further research needs to be explored further related to the behavior of Indonesian bond investors who may have different characters from investors in other countries.

• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• v.28 no.2
• /
• pp.239-262
• /
• 2006

The paper suggests that there has been a shift in the allocation of bank credit from large firms to small firms before and after the economic crisis. The paper also suggests that the improved lending practices of financial institutions, at least partially, contributed to this shift of corporate loans from large firms to small firms. Comparing the periods before and after the economic crisis also suggests that some important changes occurred to the corporate bond market. The effect of firm size on the corporate bond market differs before and after the economic crisis. Before the crisis, the larger the firms, the more they could borrow in the corporate bond market. However, after the crisis, it is not the case. The following interpretation could be put forward. Before the crisis, investors in the corporate bond market expected that the government would rescue large firms if they face the risk of bankruptcies. However, the collapse of Daewoo Group in 1999 shattered the TBTF (Too Big To Fail) myth of the public. The liquidity crisis of Hyundai Group in 2000-2001 reinforced the disintegration of the TBTF myth.

• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.205-219
• /
• 2023

Purpose - This study examines the effect of corporate debt characteristics on the relationship between anti-takeover provision and the cost of debt. Design/methodology/approach - The study analyzes a sample of non-financial firms listed on the stock market with December fiscal year-end from 2011 to 2018. Debt default risk (debt size, liquidity ratio, interest coverage ratio, loss occurrence) and the issuance of bonds are utilized as measures of corporate debt characteristics. Findings - First, it is observed that creditors of firms with anti-takeover provision demand higher returns as the debt default risk of these firms increases. Second, for firms issuing bonds, it is found that bondholders in companies with anti-takeover provision also seek higher returns. Research implications or Originality - This study contributes by demonstrating that the effect of anti-takeover provision on creditors can vary depending on corporate debt characteristics. Particularly, the study highlights the importance of a firm's debt default risk and creditor distinction (bondholders vs. regular creditors) as significant factors that may influence perceptions of anti-takeover provision.

• Journal of Service Research and Studies
• /
• v.7 no.4
• /
• pp.139-150
• /
• 2017

Open economy tightly works with foreign economy. This paper investigates the effect of the shock of foreign bond yield on the credit spreads of domestic corporate bonds in Korea. Foreign bond is referred to as US treasury bond. Credit spreads are defined with the difference between log yields of domestic corporate bonds and log yield of Korea treasury bond. With the data of monthly three-year AA- and BBB- corporate bond yields- ratings, monthly three-year Korean treasury bond yields, monthly US dollar foreign exchange rates, and monthly three-year US Treasury bond yields during the period from October 2000 to September 2014 including global financial crisis period, the paper documents the results as follow. First of all, the yield of Korean treasury and the credit spreads are very sensitive to the increase in the level and the volatility of the yield of the US treasury bond. Changes in the level and the volatility little affect the change of the exchange rate. Second, the change in the level and the volatility negatively affect the level of Korean treasury bond yields but lead to the increase in the level of Korean treasury bond yields at the same time. Third, there exist time lags of the increases of credit spreads by the increase in the level and the volatility. These imply that credit spreads and bond yields are very sensitive to the change in the yields of foreign bonds such as US treasury bond.

• The Korean Journal of Financial Studies
• /
• v.3 no.1
• /
• pp.267-299
• /
• 1996

The takeover boom of the 1980s was accompanied by a series of innovations in debt contracts, including the poison put that allows bonds to be redeemed in the event of a corporate control change. The poison put was included in a large majority of convertible debt offerings, shortly after the first issues with such provisions. We attempt to understand the factors that contributed to the widespread adoption of this innovation in convertible bonds and the consequences for shareholder wealth. Our, findings suggest that by reducing the potential for bondholder-shareholder conflicts and by conveying positive information about future takeover prospect'5, poison puts result in significant benefits to issuing firm shareholders, particularly if the firm is under takeover speculation. There are, however, no benefits when a firm has adopted anti-takeover measures prior to the offering. There is weaker evidence that existing bondholders do worse when poison puts are present.