The Recognition Process and Eligibility Criteria
CA-4.6.1
CBB will assess all External Credit Assessment Institutions (ECAI) according to the six criteria below. Any failings, in whole or in part, to satisfy these to the fullest extent will result in the respective ECAI's methodology and associated resultant rating not being accepted by the CBB:
(a) Objectivity: The methodology for assigning credit assessments must be rigorous, systematic, and subject to some form of validation based on historical experience. Moreover, assessments must be subject to ongoing review and responsive to changes in financial condition. Before being recognized by the CBB, an assessment methodology for each market segment, including rigorous back testing, must have been established for an absolute minimum of one year and with a preference of three years;(b) Independence: An ECAI must show independence and should not be subject to political or economic pressures that may influence the rating. The assessment process should be as free as possible from any constraints that could arise in situations where the composition of the board of directors, political pressure, the shareholder structure of the assessment institution or any other aspect could be seen as creating a conflict of interest;(c) International access/Transparency: The individual assessments, the key elements underlining the assessments and whether the issuer participated in the assessment process should be publicly available on a non-selective basis, unless they are private assessments. In addition, the general procedures, methodologies and assumptions for arriving at assessments used by the ECAI should be publicly available;(d) Disclosure: An ECAI should disclose the following information: its code of conduct; the general nature of its compensation arrangements with assessed entities; its assessment methodologies, including the definition of default, the time horizon, and the meaning of each rating; the actual default rates experienced in each assessment category; and the transitions of the assessments, e.g. the likelihood of AA ratings becoming A over time;(e) Resources: An ECAI must have sufficient resources to carry out high quality credit assessments. These resources should allow for substantial ongoing contact with senior and operational levels within the entities assessed in order to add value to the credit assessments. Such assessments will be based on methodologies combining qualitative and quantitative approaches; and(f) Credibility: Credibility, to a certain extent, can derive from the criteria above. In addition, the reliance on an ECAI's external credit assessments by independent parties (investors, insurers, trading partners) may be evidence of the credibility of the assessments of an ECAI. The credibility of an ECAI will also be based on the existence of internal procedures to prevent the misuse of confidential information. In order to be eligible for recognition, an ECAI does not have to assess firms in more than one country.January 2015CA-4.6.2
The CBB recognises Standard and Poor's, Moody's, Fitch IBCA, Capital Intelligence and the Islamic International Rating Agency as eligible ECAIs. With respect to the possible recognition of other rating agencies as eligible ECAIs, CBB will update this paragraph subject to the rating agencies satisfying the eligibility requirements. (See Appendix CA-7 for mapping of eligible ECAIs).
January 2015CA-4.6.3
Islamic bank licensees must use the chosen ECAIs and their ratings consistently for each type of claim, for both risk weighting and risk management purposes.Islamic bank licensees will not be allowed to "cherry-pick" the assessments provided by different eligible ECAIs and to arbitrarily change the use of ECAIs.January 2015CA-4.6.4
Islamic bank licensees must disclose in their annual reports the ECAIs that they use for the risk weighting of their assets by type of claims, the risk weights associated with the particular rating grades as determined by the CBB through the mapping process as well as the aggregated risk-weighted assets for each risk weight based on the assessments of each eligible ECAI.January 2015