¦¦ SMERA ¦¦ SME Rating Agency of India
¦¦ SMERA ¦¦ SME Rating Agency of India
Today - 18 May, 2012
epayment
¦¦ SMERA ¦¦ SME Rating Agency of India ¦¦ SMERA ¦¦ SME Rating Agency of India
Products
SME
NSIC D&B SMERA
Greenfield & Brownfield
Microfinance Institutions
» Green Rating
» Maritime Institutes
» Bond Ratings
» IPO Grading
 
Home Others Compliance


IOSCO Guidelines Compliance
 
Introduction

A credit rating agency is expected to observe highest standards of integrity and fairness in all its dealings.  SMERA  is committed  to  continuously  reviewing  and  monitoring  its policies and procedures in light of the contemporary developments. In addition, in order to also align its code of conduct with  Code of Conduct Fundamentals for credit rating agencies  (the IOSCO Code ) published  in  December  2004 by  the International  Organization  of Securities Commissions (IOSCO),  SMERA  has come  out with  this code.  This code  will  be available  to  public on SMERA s website  at  www.smera.in.  However,  by  making  this code  available  to  the  public SMERA does not assume any responsibility or liability to any third party arising out of or relating to this code. 

This code shall not form a part of any contract with any third party and no third party shall have any  right (contractual  or  otherwise) to  enforce  any  of  this code s provisions,  either  directly  or indirectly. SMERA in its sole discretion may revise this code to reflect changes in market, legal and regulatory circumstances and changes to SMERA s control, policies and procedures. 

SMERA expects all employees to comply with this code and the related policies and procedures. Any exceptions to this code or the related policies and procedures should be approved in writing by the Compliance Officer of SMERA who shall be responsible for interpretation of this code and the related policies and procedures. Failure to comply with this code and the related policies and procedures could be sufficient reason for disciplinary action. 

Quality and Integrity of the Rating Process 

A. Quality of the Rating Process 

1.1 & 1.2 SMERA  shall  use  rating  methodologies/criteria  that are  rigorous,  systematic,  and, where possible, result in ratings that can be subjected to some form of objective validation based on historical experience. 

1.3 In assessing an issuer s creditworthiness, analysts involved in the preparation or review of any rating  action shall  use methodologies/criteria  established by  SMERA.  Analysts shall apply methodology/criteria existing at the time of rating/review in a consistent manner, as determined by SMERA.

1.4 Credit ratings shall  be assigned by  the  Rating  Committee comprising  competent and experienced professionals and not by any individual analyst employed by SMERA. Ratings shall reflect all information known, and believed to be relevant by the Rating Committee,  consistent with SMERA s published  methodology/criteria and SMERA shall use people  who, individually or collectively have appropriate knowledge and experience in developing a rating opinion for the type of credit being applied. 

1.5 SMERA shall maintain internal records to support its credit opinions for a reasonable period of time or in accordance with applicable law.

1.6 SMERA and its analysts shall take steps to avoid issuing any credit analyses or reports that contain  misrepresentations or  are  otherwise  misleading  as to  the  general  creditworthiness of an issuer or obligation.

1.7 SMERA  shall  ensure  that it has and devotes  sufficient resources  to carry  out high-quality credit assessments  of all obligations and  issuers it  rates.  When  deciding whether  to rate  or continue  rating  an  obligation  or  issuer,  it shall  assess whether  it is able  to  devote  sufficient personnel with requisite skill sets to make a proper rating assessment, and whether its personnel likely will have access to sufficient information needed in order to make such an assessment.

1.8 SMERA  shall  structure  its rating  teams to  promote  continuity  and  avoid  bias in  the rating process.

B. Monitoring and Updating 

1.9 In  accordance  with  SMERA s established rating  policies and  procedures,  once a  rating  is accepted, SMERA shall monitor it on an ongoing basis (except for ratings that are carried out as one time exercise and or Private Rating), and update the rating by:  a. regularly reviewing the issuer s creditworthiness; b. initiating a review  of the status of the rating upon becoming aware  of any information that might reasonably  be     expected  to  result in  a  rating  action  (including  withdrawal  of a rating),consistent with the applicable rating    methodology/criteria; and,  c. updating on a timely basis the rating, as appropriate, based on the results of such review.  

1.10 SMERA typically withdraws rating  only  when the rated  instrument is fully redeemed  or if there  is no  instrument outstanding.  Where  SMERA  makes its ratings available to  the  public,  it shall publicly announce if it withdraws rating of an issuer or obligation. Where SMERA s ratings are  provided  only to  its subscribers,  SMERA  shall  announce  to  its subscribers if it withdraws rating of an issuer or obligation. In both cases, publications by SMERA of the withdrawn rating shall indicate that the rating was withdrawn.

C. Integrity of the Rating Process 

1.11 SMERA and its employees shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations governing its activities in each jurisdiction in which it operates.

1.12 SMERA  and  its employees shall  deal  fairly  and  honestly  with  issuers,  investors,  other market participants, and the public.

1.13 SMERA s analysts shall  be held  to  high  standards of integrity,  and  SMERA  shall  not employ individuals with demonstrably compromised integrity.

1.14 SMERA  and  its employees shall  not,  either  implicitly  or  explicitly,  give  any  assurance  or guarantee of a particular rating prior to a rating assessment. This does not preclude SMERA from developing prospective assessments used in structured finance and similar transactions. 

1.15 The  Company  Secretary  of  SMERA  would  be responsible  for  SMERA  and  SMERA s employees  compliance with the provisions of its code of conduct and with applicable laws and regulations. 

1.16 Upon becoming aware that another employee of SMERA is or has engaged in conduct that is illegal, unethical or contrary to SMERA s code of conduct, an employee of SMERA shall report such information immediately to the individual in charge of compliance or an officer of SMERA, as appropriate, so proper action may be taken. SMERA s employees are not necessarily expected to  be  experts in  the  law.  Nonetheless,  its employees are  expected  to  report the  activities that a reasonable  person would  question.  Any SMERA  officer  who  receives such a  report from  a SMERA  employee is obligated  to  take  appropriate  action,  as determined  by  the  laws and regulations of the  jurisdiction  and  the  rules and  guidelines set forth  by  SMERA.  SMERA s management prohibits retaliation  by  other  SMERA  staff or  by  SMERA  itself against any employee who, in good faith, make such reports. In case any staff is found guilty on this count, SMERA shall take disciplinary action upto and including termination of employment. 

Independence and Avoidance of Conflicts Of Interest 

A. General 

2.1 SMERA shall not forbear or refrain from taking a rating action, if appropriate, based on the potential effect (economic, political, or otherwise) of the rating action on SMERA, an issuer, an investor, or other market participant.

2.2 SMERA and its analysts shall use SMERA and professional  judgment to  maintain both the substance and appearance of independence and objectivity.

2.3 The determination of a credit rating shall be influenced only by factors known to the Rating Committee that are believed by it to be relevant for credit assessment. 2.4 The credit rating SMERA assigns to an issuer or issue shall not be affected by the existence of or  potential  for  a  business relationship between  SMERA(or  its affiliates) and  the  issuer  (or  its affiliates) or any other party, or the non-existence of such a relationship.

2.5 SMERA or any of its associated arms does not have advisory business.

B. SMERA s Procedures and Policies 

2.6 SMERA  shall  adopt written  internal  procedures and  mechanisms to  (1) identify,  and  (2) eliminate, or manage and disclose, as appropriate, any actual or potential conflicts of interest that may  influence the opinions  and  analyses SMERA  makes or  the judgment and analyses of the analysts. SMERA shall disclose such conflict avoidance and management measures.

2.7 SMERA s disclosures of actual and potential conflicts of interest should be complete, timely, clear, concise, specific and prominent.

2.8 SMERA  shall  disclose the general  nature  of its compensation arrangements with  rated entities. Where SMERA receives from a rated entity compensation unrelated to its ratings service, As such SMERA  does not have any other  subsidiary business activity such  as consulting  and advisory  and  therefore  the  issue  of receiving  compensation  from a  rated  entity  on  businesses unrelated to its ratings service does not arise. .

 2.9 SMERA  and  its employees shall  not engage in  any  securities or  derivatives trading presenting conflicts of interest with SMERA s rating activities.

2.10 In instances where rated  entities (e.g., governments) have, or are simultaneously pursuing, oversight functions related  to  SMERA,  SMERA  shall use different employees to  conduct its rating actions than those employees involved in its oversight issues.

C. Analyst and Employee Independence 

2.11 Reporting  lines for  Analyst and  their  compensation  arrangements shall  be structured  to eliminate or effectively manage actual and potential conflicts of interest. An analyst will not be compensated  or  evaluated  on  the basis of the amount of revenue  that SMERA  derives from issuers that the analyst rates or with which the analyst regularly interacts.

2.12 SMERA  analysts shall  not be  involved in deciding the commercial  terms of  the rating assignment. This is decided by the business development group /Senior Management.

2.13 No  SMERA  Employee/Rating  Committee Member  shall participate in or  otherwise influence the  determination  of rating of any particular entity  or obligation  if the  Analyst/Rating Committee Member or member of his family (family includes self, dependent spouse, dependent parents, dependent children, dependent parents in laws): a.  Owns securities or  derivatives of  the  rated  entity,  other  than  holdings in  diversified collective investment schemes; 

       b.  Owns securities or  derivatives of any  entity  related  to  a  rated  entity,  the  ownership of which  may cause  or  may  be perceived as causing  a  conflict of interest,  other  than holdings in diversified collective investment schemes; 

       c. had been  employed  or had  other significant business relationship with the rated  entity  in the immediately preceding one year that may cause or may be perceived as causing a conflict of interest;

       d. Has an immediate relation (i.e., a spouse, partner, parent, child, or sibling) who currently works for the rated entity; or

       e. Has, or had in the immediately preceding  one  year, any  other relationship with the rated entity or any related  entity thereof that may cause or may be perceived as causing a conflict of interest.

2.14 SMERA s analysts and  anyone involved  in  the  rating  process  (or  their  dependent spouse, partner or minor children/family member) shall not buy or sell or engage in any transaction in any security or derivative based on a security issued, guaranteed, or otherwise supported by any entity within such analyst s area of primary analytical responsibility, other than holdings in diversified collective  investment schemes  except  as permitted  under  SMERA s internal  securities trading policy.

2.15 SMERA employees are prohibited from soliciting money, gifts or favors from anyone with whom SMERA does business and are prohibited from accepting gifts offered in the form of cash or any gifts exceeding a minimal monetary value. 

2.16 Any  SMERA  analyst who  becomes involved  in  any  personal  relationship that creates the potential  for  any  real  or  apparent conflict of interest (including,  for  example,  any  personal relationship with an  employee of a rated  entity or agent of such  entity  within his or her area of analytic responsibility), shall be required to disclose such relationship to the appropriate manager or officer of SMERA.

2.17 SMERA shall establish policies and procedures for reviewing the past work of analysts that leave the employ of the CRA and join an issuer the SMERA analyst has been involved in rating, or a financial firm with which the SMERA analyst has had significant dealings as part of his or her duties at the SMERA.

SMERA s Responsibilities to the Investing Public and Issuers 

A. Transparency and Timeliness of Ratings Disclosure 

3.1 SMERA  shall  distribute  in  a  timely manner  its ratings decisions regarding  the  issuers and securities it rates if any. 

3.2 SMERA shall publicly disclose its policies for distributing ratings, reports and updates. 

3.3 SMERA shall indicate with each of its ratings when the rating was updated.

3.4 Except for  private ratings  provided only to the issuer, SMERA shall disclose to the public, on  a  non-selective basis and  free of charge,  any  rating  regarding  publicly  issued  securities,  or public issuers themselves, as well as any subsequent decisions to discontinue such a rating. Press releases providing brief rationale of the rating are provided on SMERA s website. 

3.5 SMERA  shall  publish  sufficient information  about its procedures,  methodologies and assumptions (including  financial  statement adjustments that deviate  materially  from those contained  in  the  issuer s published  financial  statements) so  that outside  parties can  understand how a rating was arrived at by SMERA. This information will include (but not be limited to) the meaning of each rating category and the definition of default.

3.6 When issuing or revising a rating, SMERA shall explain in its press releases and reports the key elements underlying the rating opinion.

3.7 Where feasible and appropriate, prior to issuing or revising a rating, SMERA shall inform the issuer of the critical information and principal considerations upon which a rating will be based and afford the issuer an opportunity to clarify any likely factual misperceptions or other matters that SMERA would wish to be made aware of in  order to produce an accurate rating. SMERA will  duly  evaluate  the  response.  Where  in  particular  circumstances SMERA  have  not informed the issuer prior to issuing or revising a rating, SMERA shall inform the issuer as soon as practical thereafter and, generally, shall explain the reason for the delay.

3.8 SMERA  would  publish  periodic default and  transition  studies on  its ratings.  These  studies will explain the methodologies, assumptions and limitations. 

3.9 SMERA  undertakes only  ratings solicited  by  issuers It would  hence  not be  necessary  to separately disclose whether each rating has been initiated at the request of the issuer. 

3.10 Because  users of credit ratings rely  on  an  existing  awareness of SMERA  methodologies, practices,  procedures and  processes,  SMERA  shall  fully  and  publicly  disclose  any  material modification  to  its methodologies and  significant practices,  procedures,  and  processes.  Where

feasible and  appropriate,  disclosure  of  such  material  modifications shall  be  made prior  to  their going into effect.  SMERA  shall  carefully  consider  the  various uses of  credit  ratings  before modifying its methodologies, practices, procedures and processes. 

B. The Treatment of Confidential Information 

3.11 SMERA  shall  adopt procedures and  mechanisms  to  protect the confidential  nature  of information shared with it by issuers under the terms of a confidentiality agreement or otherwise under  a  mutual  understanding  that the  information  is shared  confidentially.  Unless otherwise permitted  by  the  confidentiality  agreement and  consistent with  applicable  laws or  regulations, SMERA and its employees shall not disclose confidential information in press releases, through research conferences, to future employers, or in conversations with investors, other issuers, other persons, or otherwise.

3.12 SMERA shall use confidential information only for purposes related to its rating activities or otherwise in accordance with any confidentiality agreements with the issuer. 

3.13 SMERA  employees shall  take all  reasonable measures to  protect all property  and records belonging to or in possession of SMERA from fraud, theft or misuse.

3.14 SMERA employees shall be prohibited from engaging in transactions in securities when they possess confidential information concerning the issuer of such security. 3.15 In preservation of confidential information, SMERA employees shall familiarize themselves with the internal  securities trading  policies maintained  by  it,  and  periodically  certify their compliance as required by such policies.

3.16 SMERA  employees shall  not selectively  disclose  any  non-public  information  about rating opinions or possible future rating actions of SMERA, except to the issuer or its designated agents.

3.17 SMERA  employees shall  not share  confidential  information entrusted  to  SMERA  with employees of any affiliated entities. SMERA employees shall not share confidential information within SMERA except on an  as needed  basis. 

3.18 SMERA employees shall not use or share confidential information for the purpose of trading securities, or for any other purpose except for the conduct of SMERA s rating s business.

Disclosure of the Code of Conduct and Communication with Market Participants 

A. General 

4.1 SMERA shall disclose to the public its code of conduct and describe how the provisions of its code of conduct fully implement the provisions of the IOSCO Principles Regarding the Activities of Credit Rating  Agencies and  the  IOSCO Code  of Conduct Fundamentals for  Credit Rating Agencies.  If SMERA s code  of conduct deviates from  the  IOSCO provisions,  SMERA  shall explain  where  and  why  these  deviations exist,  and  how  any  deviations nonetheless achieve  the objectives contained  in  the  IOSCO provisions.  SMERA  shall  also  describe  generally  how  it intends to enforce its code of conduct and shall disclose on a timely basis any changes to its code of conduct or how it is implemented and enforced.

4.2 SMERA s Chief Executive  Officer  shall  be  responsible  for  communicating  with  market participants and  the  public about any  questions,  concerns or  complaints that SMERA  may receive.  Chief Executive  Officer  will  help ensure  that SMERA s officers and  management are informed of those issues so that it could be taken note of when setting the organization s policies. 

Limitations of SMERA Ratings

Ratings are  arrived  at based  on  information  obtained  in  the  rating  process.  In  addition  to management meetings and  information  provided  by rated  entities,  the  rated  entity's audited accounts, regulatory filings, and information provided by management form an important source of information.  Although  reasonable care  has been taken  to  ensure  that the information  in  the Rating Report is true, such information is provided as is without any warranty of any kind and SMERA,  in particular,  makes no  representation  or  warranty,  express or  implied,  as to  the accuracy, timeliness or completeness of any such information. The limitations of SMERA rating are given below

1. The  rating  is a  one-time exercise  and  does not envisage automatic surveillance.  The rating  is valid  for  a  period  of one  year  ; subject to  however,  no  significant changes / events occur during that period which could materially affect the business and financials parameters of the organization / project

2. SMERA  is not responsible for  any  errors in  transmission  and  specifically  states that SMERA shall have no financial liability whatsoever to the users of the Rating Report.

3. The rating does not constitute an audit and SMERA s work is significantly different from that of an  audit and  accordingly,  cannot be  relied  upon  to  provide  the  same  level  of assurance as an audit. 

4. SMERA Rating Report is not a recommendation to purchase, sell or hold any securities and  investors should  take  their  own  decision.  In  providing  this SMERA  does not underwrite the risks of any third party or that of the subject. SMERA Rating is not liable to the Company or any third party in respect of any matter specified in the Rating Report.

5. SMERA Rating is not an opinion on associate, affiliate or group companies of the rated entity, or on promoters, directors or officers of the rated entity.

6. SMERA  Rating  is not an  indication  of compliance  or  otherwise  with  legal  or  statutory requirements 


Default Definition
 

SMERA proposes to define Default for issue Ratings as default of one rupee by one day which is in line with the normally adopted definition by rating agencies.

Default Experience of SMERA

SMERA’s current mandate does not necessitate monitoring ratings on an on going basis. Only if the entity approaches SMERA for a review rating, default can be tracked in the absence of ongoing surveillance.

Rated clients appearing in CIBIL suit filed cases/ RBI Default list

SMERA tracks default on its rated portfolio on an annual basis by checking suit filed accounts of willful defaulters appearing in the CIBIL data base. From the entire universe of SMERA rated only 2 cases are appearing as suit filed accounts. 1 case rated 6 and another 1 case rated 5 are appearing in the suit filed willful defaulters list of CIBIL.

CIBIL willful suit filed Cases

Year of Rating
Rating Assigned
2006-07
SMERA 5
2009-10
SMERA 5

In view of this situation of very low default amongst SMERA rated entities, SMERA has conducted a study to validate its differentiating capabilities of good rated and poorly rated client. The study, relevance, methodology and outcome are enumerated below in detail:

Study of good and bad rated MSMEs

Credit ratings produced by the credit rating agencies (CRAs) aim to measure the creditworthiness, or more specifically, the relative creditworthiness of companies, i.e. their ability to meet their debt servicing obligations. In principle, the rating process focuses on the fundamental long-term credit strength of a company.

The point at which probabilities of default have been found empirically to rise sharply constitutes one of the most important divides in rating scales, and one of the main thresholds is average rating, as it separates good ratings from poor ratings. Entities rated in the poor rating category carry materially higher risk compared to those rated in the better rating category. A poor rating on an entity does not mean that it is certainly going to default. All it indicates is that the entity has risks associated with it that make it significantly more vulnerable to default than others.

SMERA’s rating is a onetime exercise and is not subjected to automatic surveillance. In the absence of continuous monitoring, SMERA is not in a position to know the precision or the stability of the rating unless the MSME unit approaches for a renewal. In view of this SMERA conducted a pilot study to ascertain the key differentiating features for better rating grade and poor grade ratings. 

Research Methodology

SMERA rating scale consists of two parts, a composite appraisal/condition indicator and a size indicator. It has a rating scale of 1 to 8 representing highest to lowest ranking. For the purpose of study, out of this universe, a sample of 20 MSMEs (10 for each grade) was selected from the ratings done in FY 2005, 2006 & 2007 to put light on the behavior of these two converse grades. 

Analysis & Discussion

The two sample sets were analyzed based on various financial parameters, namely, Sales growth (SG), Net profit growth (NPG), Return on net worth (RONW), Return on capital employed (ROCE), Current liabilities to net worth (CL to NW), Total liabilities to net worth (TL to NW), and Interest coverage ratio (ICR). Also, non financial parameters, like management qualification, experience, number of employees, customer base etc were also taken into consideration to study conduct of good rated and poor rated entities.

To put simply, parameters of good ratings and poor ratings entities take opposite road in a given period of time. Good Rated group has given soaring sales growth during boom period of 2005-08, reaching 50 percent in the year 2007. But, poor rated group has given significantly lower and volatile growth during the same period. Similar analysis could be done with net profit growth numbers as well. In addition, in the year 2009, a year of global turmoil, high rated MSMEs could still manage to give a sales growth of 33 percent, but, low rated entities had to rest with a meager 6.6 percent growth. The picture is even shoddier in case of net profit growth for the poor ratings group; the number remained negative through 2006-09.

Picture remains same for profitability ratios as well. RONW has been in the range of 16 to 22 percent in case of better rated MSMEs; however, for low rated MSMEs, the number has been extremely low, moving in the range of 3 to 17 percent. ROCE is higher than RONW in poor ratings grade in most of the years of the study, it depicts that earnings of these entities are lower than the rate they are paying for borrowings.

Ratio of Total liabilities to net worth has gone down in case of better rated entities, it was 232 in the year 2005 and came down to 203 percent in 2009. Conversely, this number in case of poor ratings grade has gone up from 115 in 2005 to exorbitant 377 percent in 2009. Interest coverage ratio (ICR) has remained close to 200 percent throughout the period of study for poor grade MSMEs. In case of better grade group, ICR is way higher between 300 and 500 percent for the period 2005-09.

 MSME News
¦¦ SMERA ¦¦ SME Rating Agency of India
 TESTIMONIALS
E. M Mani Construction

Kadal Constructions

S K Constructions

Sri Ranga Industrials

Sri Madheswara Agencies

Malar Silks

Green Technology Corporations

Malar Readymades

R Karunanidhe Constructions

Nandhini Construction

Shrishyam Agro (P) Limited

Laxmi Cottage Industry

HIMT rates SMERA the BEST

Bharat Automotive Pressings(India) Pvt. Ltd.

Blue Star Air Travel Services (India) Pvt. Ltd.

Kishore Vadilal Pvt. Ltd.

Multani Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

Pinnacle Equipments Pvt. Ltd.

Shah Brothers Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd.

Spark Technologies Ltd.

Supack Industries Pvt. Ltd.

APT Automotions

V R Persulfates Pvt. Ltd.

Zedex Clothing Pvt. Ltd.

Sangeeta Tools Pvt. Ltd.

Virama Laminates Pvt. Ltd.

Raneko Tech

South India Enterprises Pvt. Ltd.

NTB International Pvt. Ltd.

Thriarr Polymers Pvt. Ltd.


Know More.. 
Media Kit   |   MSME Forum   |  Other Links   |   Compliance   |   Regulatory Disclosures   |   Website Disclaimer
Best viewed in 1024x768 resolution
     
    chic logo