in the 3+1 evaluation criteria, "3" means that there are three standard elements in the enterprise's credit evaluation criteria, namely, the enterprise's creditor's rights management level, the enterprise's debt and contract management status and the enterprise's public record status, and "1" means the enterprise's financial status. The first three elements determine the enterprise's integrity evaluation standard, while the latter determines the enterprise's financing and solvency standard.
the enterprise credit evaluation uses the internationally aCCepted "three grades and nine grades" rating method, that is, the enterprise credit evaluation standard is divided into a, b, c and three grades, and AAA, AA, a, BBB, BB, b, CCC, cc and C. After evaluating the overall credit rating of the enterprise, it will also make a single evaluation on the management level of the enterprise's creditor's rights, the performance of debts and contracts, and the public records through the rating method of "three grades and nine grades".
the evaluation of enterprise financing and repayment ability is to assess the overall financing and repayment ability of an enterprise according to its financial status, which is represented by nine grades such as Arabic numerals 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9. "1" borrowing capacity is the best, and "9" borrowing capacity is the worst.
banks also have a set of monitoring and evaluation criteria for loans that have been issued, namely: five-level credit classification (current).
before p>1998, commercial banks in China always classified loans into normal loans, overdue loans, sluggish loans and bad loans according to the requirements of the 1988 financial system for financial and insurance enterprises of the Ministry of Finance, namely "one loan exceeds two loans". This statistical caliber is the four-level classification system of loans. In May 1998, commercial banks began to try out the guiding principle of loan risk classification formulated by the People's Bank of China, and it was fully implemented in January 22. The guiding principle divides loan risks into five categories, namely, normal, concerned, secondary, suspicious and loss, which is referred to as five-level classification for short.
Although the five-level classification of loans is carried out after the loan occurs, this evaluation result can affect the long-term credit of enterprises. From the five-level classification, we can see that only the normal ones are welcomed by banks. As long as the abnormal ones are concerned or classified as secondary or even suspicious and loss, it will form a bad record, which will be classified as bad enterprises by financial institutions, and it will be difficult to obtain credit support from financial institutions. Even if the enterprise is newly registered, the bad record of the legal representative may still be on file, which will be an unpleasant result. Therefore, it is also a basic condition for enterprises to understand the five-level classification of loans and make their loans in a normal state.
what needs to be understood is that the bank's management evaluation of loans will still change in the future. The new Basel Capital Accord, which will be formally implemented in 26, points out the direction for commercial banks in various countries to establish and improve their internal rating systems. The core content of the new agreement is the internal rating method (IRB method).
Different from the five-level classification of loans characterized by subjective judgment, IRB method, based on many years of historical data, calculates the absolute quantitative indicators representing the risks of lenders and debts through mathematical statistical analysis and other methods, and comprehensively carries out credit risk management on this basis.
a big difference between IRB method and five-level classification is that IRB method considers borrower risk and debt risk separately, so as to avoid the cross-action of risk factors that affect the classification results of borrowers and debts.
in contrast, the five-level classification takes into account the borrower's repayment ability and the mortgage and guarantee of the debt at the same time, so it is difficult to ensure that it can reflect two different types of risks more accurately.