Credit Ratings and Liquidity Risk for the Optimization of Debt Maturity Structure
AbstractThe purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between credit rating scales and debt maturity choices. A liquidity hypothesis is used to formulate the testable proposition and conceptual framework. Generalized linear model (GLM) and pooled ordinary least square (OLS) are utilized by SAS programming to test the proposed hypothesis. Other different estimation techniques are also used for robust evidence. Results suggest that companies with high and low ratings have a shorter debt maturity. Companies with medium ratings have longer debt maturity structure. Liquidity shows a negative association with longer debt maturity structure. It is evident that at high rating scale with high liquidity, and at lower rating scales with lower liquidity firms have a shorter debt maturity. Mid rated firms with a low probability of refinancing risk show longer debt maturity structure. Considering refinancing risk by Asian companies make the nonlinear relationship between credit ratings and debt maturity choices. Results suggest the importance of credit ratings for the optimization of debt maturity structure of Asian firms, which was totally overlooked by the past studies. The findings of this study are consistent with the liquidity hypothesis. The findings also motivating financial managers and investors to consider credit ratings as a measure of financial constraints. View Full-Text
- Supplementary File 1:
RAR-Document (RAR, 4096 KB)
Share & Cite This Article
Sajjad, F.; Zakaria, M. Credit Ratings and Liquidity Risk for the Optimization of Debt Maturity Structure. J. Risk Financial Manag. 2018, 11, 24.
Sajjad F, Zakaria M. Credit Ratings and Liquidity Risk for the Optimization of Debt Maturity Structure. Journal of Risk and Financial Management. 2018; 11(2):24.Chicago/Turabian Style
Sajjad, Faiza; Zakaria, Muhammad. 2018. "Credit Ratings and Liquidity Risk for the Optimization of Debt Maturity Structure." J. Risk Financial Manag. 11, no. 2: 24.
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.