Bad triple-A was mislabelled risk
TEXT OF STORY
Scott Jagow: We’re starting to getting a better explanation of why banks invested in those atrocious mortgage backed securities. The Financial Times is reporting that Moody’s gave triple-A ratings to many of them wen they should’ve been rated much lower. And this was caused by a computer bug more than a year ago. The bug was fixed but those securities stayed Triple-A until January — about the time things fell apart. Stephen Beard has more from London.
Stephen Beard: The error apparently occurred in the mathematical code that Moody’s was using to assess the riskiness of complex financial products. It was little more than a minor typing mistake, but, says the Financial Times, it had big repercussions.
The paper claims that When Moody’s discovered the problem last year, they realized that some $2 billion worth debt-backed securities had been given the same rating as U.S. government bonds, butT they were in fact much riskier.
This incorrect labelling may well have misled a lot of investors, says Sam Jones of the Financial Times:
Sam Jones: Typically, people who go buying triple-A products might be pension funds. They might be institutional investors. Many of them may not have bought the securities in the first place had they not been triple-A.
In a statement, Moody’s says it is investigating the matter.
In London, this is Stephen Beard for Marketplace.
Stories You Might Like
There’s a lot happening in the world. Through it all, Marketplace is here for you.
You rely on Marketplace to break down the world’s events and tell you how it affects you in a fact-based, approachable way. We rely on your financial support to keep making that possible.
Your donation today powers the independent journalism that you rely on. For just $5/month, you can help sustain Marketplace so we can keep reporting on the things that matter to you.
