Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
INTRODUCTION Credit rating agencies play an important role in assessing risk and its location and distribution in the financial system. By facilitating investment decisions they can help investors in achieving a balance in the risk return profile and at the same time assist firms in accessing capital at low cost. CRAs can thus potentially help to allocate capital efficiently across all sectors of the economy by pricing risk appropriately. However, in view of the fact that CRAs that rate capital market instruments are regulated by SEBI and that entities regulated by other regulators (IRDA, PFRDA and RBI) predominantly use the ratings, it was felt necessary to institute a comprehensive review of the registration, regulatory and supervisory regime for CRAs. The major motivation for the exercise was to look at inter regulatory coordination so that all interested stake holders have an institutional mechanism for providing inputs-feed back to ensure realisation of the objective behind the regulation of CRAs. Adding a further dimension to this enquiry, the subprime crisis has attracted considerable adverse attention worldwide on the role of CRAs enhancing the need for this review. CRAs attempt to make sense of the vast amount of information available regarding an issuer or borrower, its market and its economic circumstances in order to give investors and lenders a better understanding of the risks they face when lending to a particular borrower or when purchasing an issuers fixed-income securities. A credit rating, typically, is a CRAs opinion of how likely an issuer is to repay, in a timely fashion, a particular debt or financial obligation, or its debts generally.
Given that rating is only an opinion, albeit a very influential one, and regulation of gatekeeper business models is a border line ethical regulatory issue, the committee has examined wide ranging steps to improve the functioning and accountability of CRAs including the suggestion that in the medium run regulators may move away from the mandatory rating practice at least in the capital markets.
1.1 INTRODUCTION
The removal of strict regulatory framework in recent years has led to a spurt in the number of companies borrowing directly from the capital markets. There have been several instances in the recent past where the fly-by-night operators have cheated unwary investors. In such a situation, it has become increasingly difficult for an ordinary investor to distinguish between 'safe and good investment opportunities' and 'unsafe and bad investments'. Investors find that a borrower's size or name is no longer a sufficient guarantee of timely payment of interest and principal.
Investors perceive the need of an independent and credible agency, which judges impartially and in a professional manner, the credit quality of different companies and assist investors in making their investment decisions. Credit Rating Agencies, by providing a simple system of gradation of corporate debt instruments, assist lenders to form an opinion on -the relative capacities of the borrowers to meet their obligations. These Credit Rating Agencies, thus, assist and form an integral part of a broader programme of financial disintermediation and broadening and deepening of the Debt market. Credit rating is used' extensively for evaluating debt instruments. These include long-term instruments, like bonds and debentures as well as short-term obligations, like Commercial Paper. In addition, fixed deposits, certificates of deposits, inter-corporate deposits, structured obligations including non-convertible portion of partly Convertible Debentures (PCDs) and preferences shares are also rated.
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), the regulator of Indian Capital Market, has now decided to enforce mandatory rating of all debt instruments irrespective of their maturity.
DEFINITION
A credit rating represents the rating agency's opinion on the likelihood of a rated debt obligation being repaid in full and on time. A simple alphanumeric symbol is normally used to convey a credit rating.
1.3
SYSTEMATIC IMPORTANCE
OF RATING
AND RATING
AGENCIES
The history of systematic credit rating, however, is a century old beginning with rating of US railroad bonds by John Moody in 1909. During this one century of growth and adaptation, CRAs progressed from rating simple debt products to rating complex derivatives to national economies and altered their business models to cover a range of activities/products. There are three major credit rating agencies operating internationally- Fitch, Standard and Poors, Moodys Investor Services: between them they share the bulk of the $5 billion rating business globally relegating other 60 plus local/regional players into just competitive fringes. In India, credit ratings started with the setting up of The Credit Rating Information Services of India (now CRISIL Limited) in 1987. CRISIL was promoted by premier financial institutions like ICICI, HDFC, UTI, SBI, LIC and Asian Development Bank. Now CRISIL is an S&P company with a majority shareholding. Apart from CRISIL four more rating agencies have been registered by SEBI in India. These are ICRA, promoted by IFCI and now controlled by Moodys, CARE promoted by IDBI, Fitch India a 100% subsidiary of Fitch, and a new born Brickworks. In India, CRAs that rate capital market instruments are governed by Securities and Exchange Board of India (Credit Rating Agencies) Regulations, 1999. The regulation provides detailed requirements that a rating agency needs to fulfil to be registered with SEBI. Name of the CRA CRISIL ICRA CARE FITCH INDIA BRICKWORKS Year of commencement of Operations 1988 1991 1993 1996 2008
In India, revenues of the three big rating agencies, CRISIL, ICRA and CARE have shown an upward trend given the increase in the usage of ratings over time.
2) Issuers of Debt Instruments: A company whose instruments are highly rated has the opportunity to have a wider access to capital, at lower cost of borrowing. Rating also facilitates the best pricing and timing of issues and provides financing flexibility. Companies with rated instruments can use the rating as a marketing tool to create a better image in dealing with its customers, lenders and creditors. Ratings encourage the companies to come out with more disclosures about their accounting systems, financial reporting and management pattern. It also makes it possible for some category of investors who require mandated rating from reputed rating agencies to make investments.
3) Financial Intermediaries: Financial intermediaries like banks, merchant bankers, and investment advisers find rating as a very useful input in the decisions relating to lending and investments. For instance, kith high credit rating, the brokers can convince their clients to select a particular investment proposal Ignore easily thereby saving on time, cost and manpower ill convincing their clients.
4) Business Counter-parties: The credit rating helps business counter-parties in establishing business relationships particularly for opening letters of credit, awarding contracts, entering into collaboration agreements, etc.
5) Regulators: With the help of credit ratings, determine eligibility criteria and entry barriers for new securities, monitor financial soundness of organizations and promote efficiency in debt securities market. This increases transparency of the financial system leading to a healthy development of the market.
1.5 LIMITATIONS OF CREDIT RATINGS First, credit ratings are changed when the agencies feel that sufficient changes have occurred. The rating agencies are physically unable to constantly monitor all the firms in the market. The opinions of rating agencies may turn wrong in the context of subsequent events that may have an adverse impact on asset quality of the issuer.
Second, the use of credit ratings imposes discrete categories on default risk, while, in reality default risk is a continuous phenomenon. Moody's recognised this way back in 1982 by adding numbers to the letter system, thereby increasing its number of rating categories from 9 to 19. Nevertheless, this limitation still pertains. The letter grades assigned by rating agencies serve only as a general, somewhat coarse form of discrimination.
Third, owing to time and cost constraints, credit ratings are unable to capture all characteristics for an issuer and issue. A borrowing company can reduce the cost of borrowing, if it obtains a higher rating for its contemplated issue. The stakes and pressures, consequently, to get a good quality rating are high. If the company comes to know that its issue is going to get a low quality rating, it may approach another agency and then use the best rating among them since it is not under obligation to disclose all ratings.
According to the practice in the rating industry in India, a corporate entity has the option of not agreeing to the first rating given to its debt issue and can choose not to get rated by that agency at all. In such a situation, the rating agency cannot divulge its assessment to anybody, and the corporate entity is free to go to any other agency. But once the corporate entity agrees with the first rating, it has no option of getting out of the -rating discipline imposed by the rating agency. This may tempt rating agencies to woo clients with the help of an initial favourable rating, but the freedom may eventually be misused by the rating agency because corporate client doesn't have the option to differ with the agency, once it initially agrees to get rated by it. To ensure that corporate clients are not dependent on one rating agency, the system of compulsory dual ratings of all instruments could be considered.
Sometimes, the rating agency may reduce the rigor of their criteria on their own to enlarge the business and improve profits especially if they are a listed company.
Investors should, therefore, not follow blindly the ratings of different agencies in regard to the safety of fixed income instruments. The investors should explore other alternative evaluation sources so that they become aware of the true risks involved. The rating agencies have to be alert to ensure that their rating decisions are not driven by volume and profitability with a view to ensure favourable impact on the price of its share. It may be asserted that the rating agencies should be judged by overall performance and not by one or two defaults.
Once the corporate agrees with the first rating, the rating agency is obliged to assess the debt issue till its maturity and publish the rating as part of its surveillance system. It has been observed that rating agencies have miserably failed in predicting the brewing crisis and have continued to give investment grade rating to companies, which have eventually defaulted. It has been argued that CRB scam would not have taken place if we had a better credit rating agency that would have cautioned in time on the status of the company.
After the crisis, rating agencies became overcautious and resorted to drastic downgrades of ratings in respect of specific companies. For instance, CRISIL, ICRA, and CARE downgraded respectively 140, 35 and 50 companies in 1997. Of the rating changes effected by CRISIL, ICRA, and CARE-36%, 40% and 64% respectively were by three or more notches.
CRISIL By one notch By two notches By three notches By four notches By more than four notches Total downgrades 140 35.0 29.3 12.9 7.9 15.0
35
50
The high proportion of companies whose investment grade rating was overnight changed to non-investment grade is not conducive for enhancing the faith of investors in ratings.
In India, as in the developed countries, rating changes often lag the variations in stock prices. Of the 157 rating downgrades made by the three rating agencies in 1997, in 130 companies, the change in ratings lagged the decline in share prices. Despite evidence that stock price movements do eventually lead to a change in ratings, there is reason to believe that further changes are urgently needed when the ratings of companies and their stock prices are compared.
This need is more prominent in the case of the investment grade ratings granted to NBFCs by CRISIL and ICRA than to the companies which are trading below par, yet command investment grade rating.
CRISIL evaluation is carried out by professionally qualified persons and includes data collection, analysis and meeting with key personnel in the company to discuss strategies, plans and other issues that may effect ,evaluation of the company. The rating process ensures confidentiality. Once the company decides to use rating, CRISIL is obligated to monitor the rating over the life of the debt instrument.
ICRA: ICRA was promoted by IFCI in 1991. During the year 1996-97, ICRA rated 261 debt instruments of manufacturing companies, finance companies and financial institutions equivalent to Rs. 12,850 crores as compared to 293 instruments covering debt volume of Rs. 75,742 crores in 1995-96. This showed a decline of 83.0% over the year in the volume of rated debt instruments. Of the total amount rated cumulatively until March-end 1997, the share in terms of number of instruments was 28.5% for debentures (including long term instruments), 49.4% for Fixed Deposit programme (including medium- term instruments), and 22.1% for Commercial Paper Programme (including short term instruments). The corresponding figures of amount involved for these three broad rated categories were 23.8%.
CARE: CARE is a credit rating and information services company promoted by IDBI jointly with investment institutions, banks and finance companies. The company commenced its operations in October 1993. CARE is recognised by Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), Government of India (GOI), Reserve Bank of India (RBI), etc. CARE Ratings is well equipped to rate all types of debt instruments like Commercial Paper, Fixed Deposit, Bonds, Debentures, Hybrid Instruments, Structured Obligations,
Preference Shares, Loans, Asset Backed Securities (ABS), Residential Mortgage, etc. CARE Ratings services has been recognized by statutory authorities and other agencies in India which include Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI), Reserve Bank of India (RBI), Director General, Shipping and Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas (MOPNG), Government of India (GOI), National Housing Bank (NHB), National Bank for Agriculture and Rural development (NABARD), National Small Scale Industries Commission (NSIC). Duff and Phelps Credit Rating of India (Pvt.) Ltd.: The Duff and Phelps is a leading international credit rating agency. The J.M.Financial and Alliance Group in joint venture with Duffs and Phelps has now set up in India. Its main objective is to give credit rating to debt instruments. On special request it may undertake rating of companies and countries as well. The popular symbol employed by DCR is D1, D2, D3 etc. depending upon the credit status. For example, RBI has stipulated a minimum credit rating of D-2 DCR India for the purpose of issuing commercial papers by institutions.
(i) Sources of Additional Certification Credit rating agency provides additional information to issue the issuers of debts/ financial instruments. A highly rated firm can enter the market with great confidence. Indian experience shows that use of rating, benefit a great deal by getting larger amount of money from a wider audience at a lower cost. (ii) Increase the Investor Population A sound credit rating system gives an alternative method to name recognition as a determining factor in making the investment and help increase the population of those in debts obligation of the company. (iii) Forewarns Risk Credit rating acts as a guide to company which get a lower rating. It forewarns the management of the perception of the risk in the market and prompts to take steps on their operating and marketing risk and thereby changes the perception in the market. (iv) Encourages Financial Discipline Rating also encourages disciplines among the corporate borrower to improve their financial structure and performance to obtain better rating for their debt obligation. (v) Merchant banker Job made easy Merchant banker and brokers will be relieved of the responsibility of guiding investor as to the risk of particular investment. Merchant baker are brokers, in the absence of objective information, go on the basis of name, recognition in guiding their clients. With the advent of credit rating, what they required to do is to bring to the attention of their clients the rating of debts obligation. (vi) Foreign Collaboration made easy The Foreign Collaboration always ask for credit rating while negotiating with an Indian company. Credit rating enables to identity instantly the relative credit standing of the company. The importance of credit rating being increasingly recognised in the Euro- markets.
(vii) Benefits the industry as a whole Relatively small and unknown companies use ratings to install confidence in investors. Higher rate companies get larger amount of money at a lower cost. Thus the industry as a whole can benefits from rating by direct mobilisation of saving from individuals rather than from intermediary lending institute. (viii) Low cost of borrowing A company with highly rated instrument has the opportunity to reduce the cost of borrowing by quoting lesser interest rate on fixed deposits or debenture as investor with low risk preference would invest on safe securities through yielding low rate of return. (ix) Rating as a marketing tool Companies with rated instruments, use rating as a marketing tool to create better image in dealing with their customer, lenders and creditors.
1. The absence of widespread branch net work of the rating agency may limit its skill in rating. 2. Inexperienced unskilled or over loaded staff may not do justice to their job and resulting rating may not be perfect. 3. Since rating exercise involves a number of factors, a rigid mathematical formula cannot be applied to finalise the rating and some elements of subjectivity creeps in thereby giving scope for bias. 4. Time factor greatly affect rating and gives misleading conclusion. A company which experience adverse condition temporarily will be given a low rating judged on the basis of temporary phenomenon. 5. Since the rating agencies receives a sizable fee from the companies for awarding ratings, a tendency of inflate the rating may develop. 6. The rating is not permanent but subject to changes and moreover the agencies can not give any guarantee for the investors. 7. Investments which have the same rating may not have identical investment quality because the number of rating categories is limited and hence not reflect small but meaningful difference in the degree of risk. 8. Borrowing entities give misleading advertisement about the rating symbols of their instruments. For examples, X Co LTD which has got AAX for its debenture may mobilise. Fixed deposits instated of revealing the low rating for fixed deposits. Such kind of window dressing should be curtailed.
Established in 1987, CRISIL has been promoted by leading Indian financial institutions like The Industrial Credit and Investment Corporation of India Limited (ICICI), Unit Trust of India (UTI) and Housing Development Finance Corporation Limited. The major shareholders include Standard & Poor's, ICICI, UTI, Life Insurance Corporation, General Insurance Corporation and a host of nationalized and foreign banks. CRISIL became a public limited company in November 1993 and is presently a quoted company on the Bombay Stock Exchange and the National Stock Exchange. . CRISIL pioneered the concept of credit rating in India and developed the framework and methodology for rating debt in the context of the India financial, monetary and regulatory system. CRISIL today has attained a pre-eminent position in the rating industry. It is the largest rating agency in the South East Asia region and is amongst the four largest ratings agencies in the world. In February 1996, CRISIL entered into a strategic alliance with Standard and Poors .The relationship got strengthened with S&P with CRISILs working credibility, competence and management. The relationship got further strengthened with S&P taking up a majority stake in CRISIL.
CRISIL started with the rating of corporate dept and other the years extended its scope of activities. Its range of services one includes rating services, advisory services and investment research related services.
3.2 HISTORY
promoted by the erstwhile ICICI Ltd, along with UTI and other financial 1987 institutions.
Mr. N Vaghul and Mr. Pradip Shah are CRISIL's first Chairman and
incorporation. The business environment is far from promising for the one1988 year old - the lending rates are fixed, and India has no such thing as a corporate bond market as yet. And, what's more, credit rating is an idea that's far ahead of its times.
1990
Despite the odds, and the initial lack of market acceptance of credit
1991
ratings, CRISIL's operations are now well established. It begins to acquire brand identity, with a reputation for analytical rigour and independence.
1992
Agency Malaysia Berhad, and MAALOT, the Israeli securities rating company.
1993
Mr. R Ravimohan takes over as CRISIL's Managing Director. CRISIL diversifies business portfolio with a strategic entry into
1994
advisory services, and wins its first major mandate in the infrastructure policy advisory domain.
1995
(NSEIL), CRISIL develops and launches the CRISIL500 Equity Index, helping investors clue in on stock price movements.
1996
(S&P) Ratings Group. The tie-up is part of CRISIL's strategy to develop its skills and processes.
S&P acquires a 9.68 per cent stake in CRISIL. The alliance with the
world's leading rating agency adds a new dimension to CRISIL's 1997 methodologies. It provides CRISIL with exposure to the international rating markets and to S&P's rating processes.
CRISIL sets up India Index Services Ltd (IISL), a joint venture with
1998
NSEIL, to provide a variety of indices and index-related services and products to India's capital markets.
banking industry standard: given the heightened regulatory focus on the 1999 banks' risk management practices, RAM serves as a customised credit rating model for the banks.
Products and Research Services (India) Pvt Ltd. INFAC is a leading provider of research to India's financial sector. The acquisition strengthens CRISIL's research business, and makes it India's leading provider of integrated 2000 research.
(CRISIL~CPR) to provide performance evaluation standards and investment decision support to mutual fund houses, distributors, and investors.
2001
- to attract outstanding talent and provide a platform to India's future business leaders to showcase their views.
2002
offer integrated risk management solutions and advice to banks and corporate.
2003
EconoMatters Ltd (later the Gas Strategies Group), a London-based company providing natural gas related consulting, information and training, and conference-organising services.
the world's first regional rating agency, the Caribbean Information and Credit 2004 Rating Services Limited (CariCRIS), which CRISIL also helps set up.
equity research to its wide canvas of work. Irevna is a leading global equity research and analytics company. 2005
platform to recognize and reward the achievements of India's Small & Medium Enterprises.
independent, reliable, and consistent assessments of the fundamental 2006 strengths of new public issues.
CRISIL, following Mr. Ravimohan's appointment as Managing Director and Region Head of S&P, South Asia.
CRISIL assigns India's first Bank Loan Rating under the Reserve
2007
CRISIL with a prestigious mandate to assist in the selection of Fund Managers under the New Pension Scheme.
2008
CRISIL's SME Ratings group assigns its 5000th SME rating. CRISIL captures about half of India's bank loan rating market. Irevna is ranked globally by The Black Book of Outsourcing as the
2009
CRISIL moves into a new, corporate head office - the new CRISIL
CRISIL SME Ratings crosses its 15,000th SME rating. CRISIL launches Real Estate Star Ratings. CRISIL acquires Pipal Research, further strengthening its leadership
2010
(g) Bond funds (h) Real estate developers (i) Governance and value creation (j) Health-care institutions (k) Credit assessments (l) Collective investment schemes
Following is the brief of ratings for above said investments. (a) CRISIL Debenture Rating Symbols: (i) High Investment Grades:
AAA (Triple A): Highest Safety - on timely payment of interest and principal AA (double A): High Safety (This symbol shows the minor variation from triple A) (ii) Investment Grades:
A: Adequate safety. This rating shows the adverse impact arising out of changed circumstances. BBB: Moderate Safety This rating shows the variations caused by changing circumstances weakening the capacity. (iii) Speculative Grades:
BB: Inadequate Safety This rating shows the comparative uncertainties faced by the issuer. B: High Risk This shows adverse business or economic conditions affecting the issuer. C: Substantial Risk This rating shows unfavourable circumstances to develop as it can be default. D: Default This rating shows that such debenture is extremely speculative and returns from them can be realized only on reorganization or liquidation.
(b) CRISIL Fixed Deposit Ratings Symbols: FAAA (F triple A): Highest Safety FAA (F double A): High Safety FA: Adequate Safety This rating shows the changes in circumstances can affect the issues more than those in higher rated categories. FB: Inadequate Safety This shows the inadequacy capacity to make the timely interest and principal payments. FC: High Risk Such rating shows the adverse business or economic conditions would lead to lack of ability or willingness to pay interest or principal. FD: Default this shows that the issuer is either in default or is expected to be default upon maturity.
(c) CRISILs Rating for Short term Instrument: P - 1: Very Strong. This rating shows the degree of safety regarding timely payment on the instrument is very strong. P 2: Strong P 3: Adequate P 4: Minimal. This rating shows adversity affected by short term adversity or less favourable conditions. P 5: Default: This rating indicates that the instrument is expected to be in default on maturity or is in default.
(d) CRISILs Rating for Structured Obligations: Structured Obligations are using the same rating as debentures. However, structured obligations rating are defined differently. (1) High Investment Grades: AAA (SO): Highest Safety. This rating shows the highest degree of certainty regarding timely payment of financial obligations on the instrument. AA (SO): High Safety (2) Investment Grades:
A (SO): Adequate Safety. This rating shows changes in circumstances can adversely affect such instrument more than those in higher rated categories. BBB (SO: Moderate Safety (3) Speculative Grades: BB (SO): Inadequate Safety. This ratings shows the less susceptible to default than instruments. B (SO): High Risk. This rating shows high risk as well as greater susceptible to default. An adverse business or economic C (SO): Substantial Risk. This rating indicates the certainty of the payment of instrument. D (SO): Default (e) CRISILs Rating Symbols for Real Estate Developers Project: Highest Ability:
PA 1: This rating shows the highest ability of developer to specify and build to agreed quality levels and transfer clear title within stipulated time schedules. High Ability: PA 2 Adequate Ability: PA 3 Inadequate Ability: PA 4. This rating shows the inability of completion of project.
(f)
CRISIL ratings of Foreign Structured Obligations (FSO) are based on the entity based outside of the country. The rating shows the certainty regarding timely payment of financial obligation on the instrument. Financial Structured Obligations rating shows the same scale (AAA to D) as CRISIL rates for long term instrument. (g) CRISILs Rating for Bond Funds: CRISIL rates the bonds and shows the protection capacity in terms of profit or loss o credits. The following are the ratings: AAAf: Very Strong Aaf : Strong Af : Adequate BBBf : Moderate BBf : Inadequate Cf : Defaults CRISIL rates real estate projects on
the basis of their past achievement records. This records indicates the future expectation. The following are the ratings: DA1: Excellent: This shows the past record of the real estate project is excellent DA2: Very Good DA3: Good DA4: Unsatisfactory DA5: Poor
(i)
This rating was introduced because of few companies failure in USA due to governance failure. As a result for investor protection this ratings scale is introduced .This ratings analysis the credit worthiness of corporate governess. The following are the ratings for corporate governance: (j) Level 1: Highest Level 2: High Level 3: Strong Level 4: Moderate Level 5: Adequate Level 6: inadequate Level 7: Poor Level 8: Lowest CRISIL Rating for Health Care Institution:
CRISIL rates the health care institutions in the terms of delivering Patient care. In addition to this some more components are considered to rate i.e. facilities, equipments, manpower and also the service quality. The following are the ratings: Grade A: Very good Grade B: Good Grade C: An average Grade D: Poor
(k) CRISIL Ratings for Credit Assessments: CRISIL rates different type of Credit Assessment, whether the borrower can pay the principal and interest timely or not. The following are the ratings as follows: 1: Very Strong Capacity 2, 3, 4: Strong Capacity 5, 6, 7: Adequate Capacity 8, 9, 10: Inadequate Capacity 11, 12, 13: Poor Capacity 14: Default
(l)
CRISIL rates investment schemes to assure the investor that whether they are going to get there return of investment or not. The followings are the ratings as follows: Grade 1: High Certainty Grade2: Adequate Certainty Grade 3: Moderate Certainty Grade4: Inadequate Certainty Grade5: High Uncertainty
(Rs. Lacs) Particulars Total Income for the year was Profit before depreciation and taxes was Deducting there from depreciation of
17,512.33 Profit before tax was Deducting there from taxes of Profit after tax was The proposed appropriations are: Dividend Corporate Dividend Tax General Reserve Balance carried forward 5,057.50 859.52 1,373.78 17,663.64 3,774.52 13,737.81
9,147.36
2,080.28 7,067.08
PARTICULARS
SOURCES OF FUNDS TOTAL SHARE CAPITAL EQUITY SHARE CAPITAL RESERVES NETWORTH APPLICATION OF FUNDS NET BLOCK CAPITAL WORK IN PROGRESS INVESTMENTS SUNDRY DEBTORS CASH AND BANK BALANCE TOTAL CA, LOANS & ADVANCES TOTAL CL & PROVISIONS NET CURRENT ASSETS MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES TOTAL ASSETS 101.11 99.85 0.44 0.08 49.44 63.67 54.65 4.04 7.01 7.01 7.10 7.10 7.23 7.23 7.23 7.23
365.22 362.51
412.23 346.42
SUMMARY: As per the balance sheet shown above, we can see that in Dec12the share capital was only 7.01 cr. as compared to Dec09 which was 7.23 cr. The reserves were high in Dec10 405.00 cr. which falls down to 358.21 cr. in Dce12.It indicates less issue of shares. The net worth increased from 346.42 cr. in Dec09 to 365.22 cr. in Dec12. As far as investments are concerned, investments made in Dec12 were less as compared to Dec09. Cash and bank balance increased from 19.32 cr. in Dec09 to 63.60 cr. in Dce12. Total net current assets also increased to 155.27 cr. in Dec12. The overall performance was good in Dec12.
SUMMARY: As you can see Steel products creates higher revenue growth of over 18.1%. Airline services and Pharmaceuticals produces almost same growth rate which is of 16% and 16.1% respectively. Construction, Automobiles, Paper, Textiles shows growth between 11.3% to 11.6% which increases steadily. Shipping shows very less growth rate of only 4.5% in fy2012. Real estate indicates negative impact, as it is showing -5.1% growth.
4.4 SHARE PRICE ANALYSIS CRISILS SHARE PRICE AS ON 26TH MARCH 2012= 938.30 PRICE INFORMATION LIVE PRICE PREVIOUS CLOSE OPEN PRICE VOLUME DAYs HIGH DAYs LOW 52 WEEKs HIGH 52WEEKs LOW BSE 938.30 941.50 940.00 431 948.85 921.10 1,000.00 585.50 NSE 940.15 947.85 942.00 6,571 946.85 936.30 1,002.00 603.00
CRISIL STOCK RETURNS TIME SPAN TODAY WEEK MONTH THREE MONTHS SIX MONTHS ONE YEAR TWO YEARS THREE YEARS FIVE YEARS PRICE 938.30 936.40 908.00 897.40 799.03 585.00 502.89 221.12 262.28 CHANGE %CHANGE -3.20 5.10 33.50 44.10 142.47 356.50 438.61 720.38 679.22 -0.33 0.54 3.68 4.91 17.83 60.94 87.21 325.78 258.96
CRISIL Infrastructure Advisory Group provides workable policy and transaction level solution to Central and State governments, public sector and private sector entities, that help them make the difference. CRISIL Investment and Risk Management Group (part of CRISILs advisory services) and Global Data Services India Ltd (GDSIL), both CRISIL subsidiaries.
CRISIL Ltd provides business knowledge through research on industries, companies and the economy, GDSIL provides analytical data base to support CRISIL as well as external clients in their research and analysis. CRISILs news services (CRISIL Market wire CMW) are Indias leading provider of real time news and analysis on India debt markets.
CONCLUSION
On the basis of my study I conclude that, Rating is not a judgement or statement regarding any aspect of public policy OR a political statement in favour of or against a particular person or administration but it is the symbolic indication of the current opinion regarding the relative capability of a corporate entity to service its debt obligations in time with reference to the instrument being rated. In todays world the importance of credit rating is increasing day by day. We saw the changes in world economy when worlds no.1 agency STANDARD AND POORs reduced the ratings of U.S.A. in 2011.Also when the MOODYs reduced the ratings of EUROPEAN COUNTRIES LIKE SPAIN, PORTUGAL and ITALY; it creates a lot of fluctuations in world economy. Credit rating agencies judge the repayment capacity if someone has took the loan and gives them rating accordingly.
In INDIA, CRISIL does the same work for many institutions, banks, corporate etc. CRISIL is one of the most trusted CRA in INDIA as it gives accurate ratings according to the firms capability. CRISIL is financially sound company. As the study points out that, it has continuous growth in terms of Net worth, Reserves, Current assets, Earning per share, etc. CRISIL possesses transparency, accountability, fairness in its business; also they have good records of book keeping without any malpractices. So every individual prefer CRISILs ratings rather than going to others.
BIBLIOGRAPHY E. GORDON, K. NATARAJAN FINANACIAL MARKETS AND SERVICES HIMALAYA PUBLISHING HOUSE.