Q7, run 2026-11-04-2028-haiku

← back to the run

Which issuers were downgraded in 2026?

Tests: Action types: outlook changes, Watch placements and withdrawals are not downgrades.

Expected: issuers = ['E08', 'E10']

❌ R1 csv run 1 graded by code

E08, E10, E16. These are the issuer-level downgrades (A21, A22, A27, A44). The I05 downgrade (A29) is on an instrument issued by E11, not an issuer rating action.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10", "E16"]}

Why: issuers: expected ['E08', 'E10'], got ['E08', 'E10', 'E16']

❌ R1 csv run 2 graded by code

E08 (DG to CCC on 2026-01-20, then DG to RD on 2026-07-08), E10 (DG to BBB+ on 2026-04-15), and E16 (DG to BB+ on 2026-06-01). The 2026 downgrade of I05 (A29) is on an instrument of E11, not E11's issuer rating, so E11 is excluded.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10", "E16"]}

Why: issuers: expected ['E08', 'E10'], got ['E08', 'E10', 'E16']

❌ R1 csv run 3 graded by code

E08, E10, E16. These had 2026 issuer downgrades (A21, A22, A27, A44). I05 was also downgraded (A29), but its issuer is E11, which has no issuer-level downgrade.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10", "E16"]}

Why: issuers: expected ['E08', 'E10'], got ['E08', 'E10', 'E16']

❌ R1 csv run 4 graded by code

E08, E10, E16. These issuers had downgrades in 2026 (A21, A22, A27, A44). I05 was also downgraded (A29), but it is an instrument, not an issuer.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10", "E16"]}

Why: issuers: expected ['E08', 'E10'], got ['E08', 'E10', 'E16']

❌ R1 csv run 5 graded by code

E08 (A21, A22), E10 (A27) and E16 (A44). I05 (A29) was also downgraded in 2026, but it's an instrument, not an issuer.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10", "E16"]}

Why: issuers: expected ['E08', 'E10'], got ['E08', 'E10', 'E16']

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 1 graded by code

E08, E10
A21 and A22 downgrade E08 (2026), and A27 downgrades E10 (2026-04-15). A29 is an instrument downgrade (I05), so it doesn't count as an issuer.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10"]}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 2 graded by code

E08 and E10. E08 was downgraded to CCC (A21) and then RD (A22), and E10 was downgraded to BBB+ (A27). I05 was also downgraded in 2026, but it is an instrument, not an issuer.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10"]}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 3 graded by code

E08 and E10. A21 and A22 downgrade E08 in 2026, and A27 downgrades E10 (Halden Bank).

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10"]}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 4 graded by code

E08 and E10. E08 was downgraded to CCC (A21) and then RD (A22), and E10 was downgraded to BBB+ (A27). The 2026 downgrade of I05 (A29) is an instrument, so it is excluded.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10"]}

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 5 graded by code

E08 and E10. E08 was downgraded to CCC (A21) and then RD (A22), and E10 (Halden Bank) was downgraded to BBB+ (A27). The instrument downgrade in A29 is not an issuer downgrade, and A44 is a QA record.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10"]}

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 1 graded by code

E08 (Saxby Shipping, A21 and A22) and E10 (Halden Bank AG, A27). E10 and E17 share an LEI, so they are one entity.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10"]}

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 2 graded by code

E08 and E10. E08 was downgraded to CCC and then RD (A21, A22), and E10 to BBB+ (A27). The 2026 I05 downgrade is an instrument action, so it is excluded.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10"]}

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 3 graded by code

E08 and E10. E08 was downgraded to CCC (A21) and then RD (A22). E10 was downgraded to BBB+ (A27). The 2026 downgrade of I05 (A29) is an instrument action, so it is excluded.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10"]}

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 4 graded by code

E08 (Saxby Shipping) and E10 (Halden Bank AG). A21 and A22 are downgrades for E08, and A27 is a downgrade for E10. QA record E16 is excluded.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10"]}

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 5 graded by code

E08 and E10. A21 and A22 downgrade Saxby Shipping (E08) in 2026, and A27 downgrades Halden Bank (E10, also recorded as E17) on 2026-04-15. A29 is an instrument downgrade, so it does not count.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10"]}

✅ R8 csv+axioms run 1 graded by code

E08 (A21, A22) and E10 (A27). E16 was also downgraded (A44), but it is a QA test record and not an issuer under the ontology.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10"]}

✅ R8 csv+axioms run 2 graded by code

E08 and E10. E08 was downgraded in 2026 (A21, A22) and E10 (A27). E16 was also downgraded (A44), but it is a QA test record, so I excluded it.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10"]}

✅ R8 csv+axioms run 3 graded by code

E08 and E10. E08 was downgraded in A21 and A22, and E10 in A27. E16's A44 is excluded because E16 is QA test data.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10"]}

✅ R8 csv+axioms run 4 graded by code

E08 and E10. E08 was downgraded to CCC (A21) and then RD (A22), and E10 to BBB+ (A27). E16 (Brindle) is excluded because it is a QA test record and its actions aren't rating actions.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10"]}

✅ R8 csv+axioms run 5 graded by code

E08 and E10. E08 was downgraded in A21 and A22, and E10 in A27 (2026-04-15). The instrument I05 (A29) and the QA record E16 (A44) are excluded.

JSON: {"issuers": ["E08", "E10"]}