Q5, run 2026-11-04-1526-sonnet

← back to the run

Whose credit risk does a holder of the Northwind Finance 2030 notes take, and how is it rated?

Tests: Roles: issuer versus guarantor; a finance subsidiary's guaranteed debt carries the guarantor's risk.

Expected: risk_of = E02 rating = A

✅ R1 csv run 1 graded by code

The holder takes the credit risk of Northwind Holdings (E02), the guarantor of I03, which is rated A. The guarantee is recorded in I03 (guarantor E02), and A09 affirmed E02 at A. The notes themselves are also rated A (A11).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R1 csv run 2 graded by code

The risk is E02's (Northwind Holdings), rated A. I03 is issued by E04 but guaranteed by E02 (guarantor_id). E02's A rating comes from A08 and A09, and I03 itself is rated A (A10, A11).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R1 csv run 3 graded by code

The holder takes the credit risk of E02, Northwind Holdings, rated A. I03 is issued by the finance subsidiary E04 but guaranteed by E02 (guarantor_id), and I03 is rated A (A10, affirmed in A11).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R1 csv run 4 graded by code

The holder takes the credit risk of Northwind Holdings plc (E02), the guarantor of I03, which is rated A. The issuer, E04, has no rating of its own. I03's rating (A10, affirmed in A11) is A, in line with E02's A.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R1 csv run 5 graded by code

Northwind Holdings (E02), rated A. I03 is issued by E04 but guaranteed by E02, and both I03 (A11) and E02 (A09, via the duplicate E03) were affirmed at A.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R2 rdf run 1 graded by code

The guarantor, Northwind Holdings (E02), rated A. I03 is issued by E04, a finance subsidiary with no rating of its own, and guaranteed by E02. The note is rated A (A10, A11), which matches E02's rating in A08/A09.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R2 rdf run 2 graded by code

The guarantor, Northwind Holdings (E02), rated A. The notes (I03) are issued by E04, which has no rating of its own, but E02 guarantees them. I03 is rated A (A10, affirmed in A11), and E02's own IDR is also A (A08, A09).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R2 rdf run 3 graded by code

The guarantor, E02 (Northwind Holdings), rated A. I03 is issued by E04, which has no rating of its own in the data, but it is guaranteed by E02. I03's A rating (A10, A11) matches E02's A rating (A08, A09).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R2 rdf run 4 graded by code

A holder takes the credit risk of E02 (Northwind Holdings), the guarantor of the notes (I03), which are rated A. The issuer is E04, a finance subsidiary with no rating of its own. I03's latest rating is A (A11), and E02/E03 are also rated A.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R2 rdf run 5 graded by code

The guarantor, Northwind Holdings (E02), rated A. I03 is issued by E04, which has no rating of its own, but E02 guarantees it. I03's A rating (A10, A11) matches E02's A.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 1 graded by code

The holder takes the credit risk of Northwind Holdings (E02, the same entity as E03), rated A. I03 is issued by E04 but guaranteed by E02, so it carries the guarantor's risk. I03's own rating is A (A11), in line with E02/E03's A (A09).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 2 graded by code

Northwind Holdings (E02, same entity as E03), rated A. I03 is issued by E04 but guaranteed by E02 (lad:guarantor), and its latest rating is A09/A11 (A, affirmed 2025-09-15).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 3 graded by code

Northwind Holdings (E02, same entity as E03), rated A. The notes (I03) are guaranteed by E02, so they carry its credit risk; the guarantor's LTIDR FC is A (A09, affirmed 2025-09-15), and the instrument itself is rated A (A11).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 4 graded by code

The holder takes **E02**'s credit risk, rated **A**. I03 is issued by E04 but guaranteed by E02, so it is rated on the guarantor (I03's rating is A, A11), in line with E02/E03's LTIDR of A (A09).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 5 graded by code

Northwind Holdings, rated A. I03 is issued by E04 but guaranteed by E02, so the holder takes the guarantor's risk. E02 is the same entity as E03, whose latest rating is A (A09), and I03's own rating is A (A11).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 1 graded by code

The holder takes Northwind Holdings' credit risk (E02), rated A. I03 is issued by the finance subsidiary E04 but guaranteed by E02. E02's latest LTIDR is A (A09, recorded under E03).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 2 graded by code

Northwind Holdings (E02), rated A. I03 is issued by the finance subsidiary E04 but guaranteed by E02. E02/E03's current LTIDR is A (A09), and I03 was affirmed at A (A11).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 3 graded by code

The holder takes Northwind Holdings' credit risk (E02), rated A. I03 is guaranteed by E02 (issuer E04 is a finance subsidiary). E02's current LTIDR is A (A08, affirmed by A09), and I03 is also rated A (A11).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 4 graded by code

The holder takes Northwind Holdings' credit risk (E02), rated A. I03 is issued by the finance subsidiary E04 but guaranteed by E02, whose latest LTIDR is A (A09, same entity as E03); the instrument itself was affirmed at A (A11).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 5 graded by code

The holder takes Northwind Holdings' credit risk (E02), rated A. I03 is guaranteed by E02 (the issuer E04 is a finance subsidiary). E02's LTIDR is A (A08, affirmed in A09 under E03), and I03 is also A (A11).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E02", "rating": "A"}