Q33, run 2026-11-04-1643-sonnet

← back to the run

Whose credit risk does a holder of the Halden Leasing 2028 notes take, and how is it rated?

Tests: Roles: the guarantor is the parent, not the ultimate parent.

Expected: risk_of = E10 rating = BBB+

✅ R1 csv run 1 graded by code

Halden Bank (E10), rated BBB+. E10 is the guarantor of I05 and was downgraded in A27.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R1 csv run 2 graded by code

The guarantor, Halden Bank (E10), rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, which was downgraded to BBB+ (A27).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R1 csv run 3 graded by code

E10, the guarantor of I05, rated BBB+ (A27). The note itself is also BBB+ (A29).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R1 csv run 4 graded by code

E10, the guarantor of I05. I05 is rated BBB+ (A29), the same as E10's current BBB+ (A27).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R1 csv run 5 graded by code

The holder takes the risk of the guarantor, Halden Bank (E10), rated BBB+ (A27). I05 is guaranteed by E10.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R2 rdf run 1 graded by code

The guarantor E10, rated BBB+ (A27). I05 is issued by E11 but guaranteed by E10.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R2 rdf run 2 graded by code

E10, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, which was downgraded to BBB+ on 2026-04-15 (A27).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R2 rdf run 3 graded by code

E10, rated BBB+. E10 guarantees I05 (issuer E11), and its latest rating is A27.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R2 rdf run 4 graded by code

The guarantor E10 (Halden Bank AG), rated BBB+ after the downgrade in A27.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R2 rdf run 5 graded by code

The holder takes E10's risk, rated BBB+. E10 guarantees I05, and E10 was downgraded to BBB+ on 2026-04-15 (A27).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 1 graded by code

The holder takes E10's credit risk (guarantor of I05), rated BBB+. E10 was downgraded to BBB+ in A27, and I05 is BBB+ (A29).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 2 graded by code

The holder takes E10's credit risk, because E10 guarantees I05. E10 is rated BBB+ after the downgrade in A27.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 3 graded by code

The holder takes E10's credit risk, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, whose LTIDR is BBB+ (A27) and whose instrument rating is also BBB+ (A29).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 4 graded by code

E10, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, and A29 rates the note BBB+.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 5 graded by code

The holder takes E10's credit risk, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, which was downgraded to BBB+ by A27.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 1 graded by code

The holder takes E10's credit risk, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, and A27 downgraded E10 to BBB+.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 2 graded by code

The holder takes the credit risk of E10, Halden Bank, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, and E10's current LTIDR is BBB+ (A27).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 3 graded by code

The holder takes Halden Bank's (E10) credit risk, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, whose rating is BBB+ after A27.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 4 graded by code

The holder takes E10's credit risk, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, whose latest rating is A29's downgrade to BBB+... more precisely A27 (2026-04-15) set E10 at BBB+.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 5 graded by code

A holder takes E10's credit risk, and E10 is rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, and E10 was downgraded to BBB+ (A27).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 1 graded by code

The holder takes E10's credit risk, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, whose latest rating is BBB+ (A27).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 2 graded by code

The holder takes Halden Bank's (E10) risk, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, and E10's current rating is BBB+ (A27).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 3 graded by code

Halden Bank (E10), rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, whose latest rating is BBB+ (A27).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 4 graded by code

The holder takes E10's credit risk, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, and A27 downgraded E10 to BBB+.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 5 graded by code

The holder takes the credit risk of E10, the guarantor of I05. E10's current rating is BBB+ (A27).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R3 csv+padding run 1 graded by code

The guarantor, E10, rated BBB+. I05 is issued by E11 but guaranteed by E10 (A27).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R3 csv+padding run 2 graded by code

The guarantor, E10 (Halden Bank), rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, whose latest action is A27.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R3 csv+padding run 3 graded by code

The guarantor, Halden Bank (E10), rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10 and rated BBB+ (A29).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R3 csv+padding run 4 graded by code

E10, the guarantor of I05, rated BBB+ (A27).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}

✅ R3 csv+padding run 5 graded by code

E10, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, which was downgraded to BBB+ on 2026-04-15 (A27).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E10", "rating": "BBB+"}