三大机构与大公国际主权信用评级比较与启示

Comparison and Enlightenment between Three Rating Agencies and Dagong Global Sovereign Credit Rating Agency

三大机构的评级很大程度是站在发达国家立场,所采用的评级方法也过于陈旧,其在主权信用评级市场的垄断地位理应破除。2010年,大公国际首次公布了对50个国家的信用评级,试图打破三大评级机构的垄断及其固有评级模式,建立一套新型的评级体系。大公国际进行主权信用评级的指导思想与三大评级机构不同,核心评价指标也存在很大差异,评价结果也有明显不同:对政治稳定、经济表现优秀及前景良好的新兴市场国家的评级高于三大机构,而对一些经济发展缓慢、债务负担日益沉重的发达国家的评级则明显低于三大机构。这反映了大公国际与三大机构评级理念的根本差异:不以意识形态和政治经济体制作为划分标准,更注重一国经济发展的前景。

The rating of three rating agencies is largely representing the developed countries, their rating methods are too stale and their monopoly position in credit rating market should be broken. In 2010, Dagong Global Rating Agency firstly announced its rating on 50 countries, trying to break the monopoly of the three rating agencies and their fixed rating model to establish a set of new rating system. The guiding ideas of Dagong Global Rating Agency to conduct sovereign credit rating are different from the three rating agencies, their core evaluation indicators are also largely different, as a result, their rating results are different. The rating on emerging countries with stable politics, excellent economy and good prospect by Dagong Global Rating Agency is higher than that of three rating agencies, however, Dagong＇ s rating on developed countries with slow economic development, heavier and heavier debt burden is obviously lower than that of the three, which reflect the basic difference of the ideas between Dagong Global Rating Agency and three rating agencies, Dagong does not regard ideology and political and economic system as evaluating standard but pays more attention to economic development prospect of a country.