Unexpected defaults: the role of information opacity
Review of Accounting Studies, ISSN: 1573-7136, Vol: 30, Issue: 1, Page: 899-949
2025
- 40Usage
- 8Captures
Metric Options: Counts1 Year3 YearSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Usage40
- Downloads32
- Abstract Views8
- Captures8
- Readers8
Article Description
Bond defaults are undesirable yet natural outcomes of risky investments. What is also crucial but hitherto underexplored is the unexpectedness of defaults. We develop a parsimonious measure of default unexpectedness and highlight its economic importance by demonstrating that unexpected defaults are associated with unfavorable recovery outcomes and adverse price changes in peer firm bonds. We then examine how default unexpectedness relates to information opacity. We find that firms with opaque financial reporting and weak voluntary disclosure experience more unexpected defaults. Defaults also occur more unexpectedly when the external information environment is opaque—when rating agencies disagree on a firm’s credit risk and when the media coverage is low. We further report evidence on a specific case in which transparent firms suffer unexpected defaults—when creditors’ run incentives are particularly high. Overall, our paper introduces default unexpectedness as an economically relevant construct, offers a tractable measure, and highlights the role of transparency in mediating this phenomenon.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=85202151804&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11142-024-09842-8; https://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11142-024-09842-8; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soa_research/2050; https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3077&context=soa_research; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11142-024-09842-8; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11142-024-09842-8
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know