The aim of the article is to compare several rating systems used by banks and their affiliates, especially in German-speaking countries. The research is focused on the rating of business entities, more precisely the corporate ones, (especially limited liability companies or joint-stock companies). In particular, two aspects of the rating of the corporations are highlighted in the rating system comparison, namely: (i) which quantitative indicators are used for the calculation of the hard-facts and (ii) how the soft-facts are included in the rating system. The result of the research shows, that concerning the quantitative indicators (i), the highest emphasis is put on the capital structure of an enterprise (whether in the form of Equity to Liabilities or Equity to Total assets) in all compared rating systems. Concerning the other indicators used for the calculation, the monitored rating systems are different, and the total number of indicators also differs (from 6 to 9). For soft-facts (ii) all rating systems agree on some of the queries (e.g. the sensitivity of the rated entity to market fluctuations), but otherwise the number and the topics of the queries overlap only partially.

Some significant changes to the Basel III regulatory framework (called Basel IV) will come into effect during the 2022 to 2027 period. In its first part, this article shows the opinion of the European Federation of Leasing Company Associations Leaseurope on Basel IV. In its second part, this paper evaluates the situation of the largest leasing companies on the Czech market using methods of financial analysis.The results of several studies published by Leaseurope clearly show that the risk associated with the provision of liabilities through leasing is significantly lower than the risk calculated by the capital adequacy calculation for Basel rules. For this reason, the Leaseurope federation prepared concrete proposals for changes in the rules so that the regulation better corresponds to the actual risks taken.The second part of the article analyzes the situation of leasing companies in the Czech Republic in terms of capital, capital adequacy and compliance with Basel rules. It shows the state of the capital adequacy of the largest leasing companies operating on the Czech market using simplified indicators of the ratio of Equity / Balance sheet total and Equity / Receivables. As a complementary indicator, the ratio of Share capital / Balance sheet total is also used. Furthermore, a simplified stress test based on 5% and 10% decline in net receivables and coverage of this decline from equity, respectively, was performed.The results show that leasing companies operating on the Czech market would probably have no problem meeting the considered tightening of capital requirements. Several exceptions are mentioned in the text.

The article compares internal rating systems of three banks from the German-speaking region, continuing with last year's research. In this paper a detailed analysis of qualitative indicators (soft - facts) is made. These qualitative indicators, as one of the two main components of banking rating systems have the wage of between 30% and 50% of the overall rating score. This makes this part of rating certainly important enough to be further researched.  The research is focused on the rating of business entities, more precisely the corporate, (especially limited liability companies or joint-stock companies). It does not deal with the rating of natural persons or non-profit organizations, municipalities etc. The procedure of collecting empirical data as well as data from relevant literature, their assessment according to the criteria of verifiability and relevance and the application of the induction method was used and a generalization of conclusions was subsequently made. The goal of this research was to find out if the structure of used qualitative factors (soft- facts) is similar or even the same across the rating systems included in the comparison and what weights of individual factors are used. The result of the research shows that two categories of qualitative indicators (soft - facts) are present in all considered rating systems: (i) quality of company’s management and / or strategy and (ii) market on which the bank client operates. (iii) Accounting or related indicators like information system or audit quality also play a significant role in rating systems. On the other hand, the use of the factor (iv) relationship with the bank (or similar) is quite different across the rating systems included in the research. The number and structure of guidance questions that help risk-management analysts determine indicator values also differ. In one case, there is an extensive catalog of questions with a standardized set of responses. In other cases, the number of questions is lower and each one has its specific variation of the predefined answers the analyst selects from.

This article contains the result of a research, monitoring the rating system of one (nonbank) financial institution in years 2007-2009. The essence of the research is a probability of default based on the rating system compared with real figures of defaults. The result of the research illustrates, that the main problem of the rating system is its delay, especially at clients with doubleentry bookkeeping. The rating of the most clients is based on two or more years old financial reports (statements). The elimination of this problem would be difficult, where one of the possible solutions is making ratings based on preliminary statements.