Q5, run 2026-11-05-2135-haiku

← 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

E02, rated A
I03 (Northwind Finance 2030 notes) is guaranteed by E02, and E04 has no issuer rating, so the rated risk is E02's (A11, 2025-09-15).

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

✅ R1 csv run 2 graded by code

Northwind Holdings (E02), rated A. I03 (Northwind Finance 2030 notes) is guaranteed by E02, and the instrument is rated A (A10, A11).

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

✅ R1 csv run 3 graded by code

E02 (Northwind Holdings), rated A. I03 is guaranteed by E02, and E04 has no ratings of its own. The notes are rated A (A11, 2025-09-15).

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

✅ R1 csv run 4 graded by code

The guarantor, E02 (Northwind Holdings), rated A. I03 is guaranteed by E02 (guarantor_id) and rated A (A11), matching E02's A (A08).

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

✅ R1 csv run 5 graded by code

E02 (Northwind Holdings), rated A. I03 is issued by E04, which has no rating of its own, but it is guaranteed by E02 and carries E02's A rating (A10, A11).

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

🟡 R2 rdf run 1 graded by code

E04 (Northwind Finance BV), rated A. The I03 notes are issued by E04 and guaranteed by E02, and the latest rating is A11 (A, 2025-09-15).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E04", "rating": "A"}

Why: risk_of: expected E02, got E04

🟡 R2 rdf run 2 graded by code

The holder takes the credit risk of Northwind Finance BV (E04), rated A. I03 (A10, A11) is issued by E04 and guaranteed by E02, so the guarantee may also bear on the rating; the data does not say how.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E04", "rating": "A"}

Why: risk_of: expected E02, got E04

✅ R2 rdf run 3 graded by code

The holder takes the credit risk of E02 (Northwind Holdings), which guarantees the note; the note is rated A. The Northwind Finance 2030 note (I03) is issued by E04 and guaranteed by E02, with an A affirmation on 15 Sep 2025 (A11). The data does not say whether the holder's primary exposure is E04 or the guarantor, so this answer assumes the guarantor.

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

✅ R2 rdf run 4 graded by code

The guarantor, Northwind Holdings (E02), rated A. I03 is guaranteed by E02 and issued by E04; the instrument rating is A (A10, A11).

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

🟡 R2 rdf run 5 graded by code

Holders bear the risk of E04 (Northwind Finance BV, issuer of I03), which E02 guarantees; rating A. I03 is rated A (A10, A11).

JSON: {"risk_of": "E04", "rating": "A"}

Why: risk_of: expected E02, got E04

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 1 graded by code

Northwind Holdings (E02), rated A.
I03 is guaranteed by E02, so the holder takes E02's credit risk, and the instrument rating is A per A11 (Affirmed, 2025-09-15).

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

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 2 graded by code

E02 (Northwind Holdings), rated A. I03 is guaranteed by E02, and its rating is A (A11, affirmed 2025-09-15).

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

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 3 graded by code

Northwind Holdings (E02), rated A. I03 (Northwind Finance 3.75% 2030) is guaranteed by E02, so the holder takes E02's credit risk. I03's instrument ratings A10 and A11 are both A.

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

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 4 graded by code

The holder takes the risk of guarantor E02 (Northwind Holdings), rated A. I03's latest action is A11 (AF A, 2025-09-15), and I03 is guaranteed by E02.

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

✅ R6 rdf+ontology run 5 graded by code

E02, A
I03 is guaranteed by E02, so it is rated on E02's issuer rating; I03 is also rated A (A10, A11), consistent with E02's A (A08, A09).

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

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 1 graded by code

Risk of E02 (Northwind Holdings), rated A. I03 is guaranteed by E02, so it carries E02's risk; its instrument rating is A (A11, AF, 2025-09-15).

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

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 2 graded by code

E02 (Northwind Holdings), rated A. I03 is guaranteed by E02, so the holder carries E02's risk, and I03 is rated A (A10, A11).

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

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 3 graded by code

(no answer found)

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

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 4 graded by code

Northwind Holdings (E02), rated A. I03 is guaranteed by E02, so the holder takes E02's risk; I03's latest rating is A (A11).

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

✅ R5 csv+ontology run 5 graded by code

Northwind Holdings (E02), at A. I03 is guaranteed by E02, so it is rated on E02's issuer rating (A10, A11), not on E04's.

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

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 1 graded by code

Northwind Holdings (E02), rated A. I03's guarantor is E02, so the holder takes E02's risk (A10, A11).

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

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 2 graded by code

E02 (Northwind Holdings) takes the risk, and I03 is rated A. I03 is guaranteed by E02, so it is rated in line with E02's A (A11).

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

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 3 graded by code

Northwind Holdings (E02), rated A. The 2030 notes (I03) are issued by Northwind Finance (E04) and guaranteed by E02, so the holder takes E02's risk, and I03 is rated A (A10, A11).

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

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 4 graded by code

E02, A. I03 (Northwind Finance 3.75% 2030) is guaranteed by E02, so the holder takes E02's risk; its instrument rating is A (A11).

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

✅ R4 csv+markdown run 5 graded by code

Northwind Holdings (E02). The Northwind Finance 2030 notes (I03) are guaranteed by E02, so they carry its risk and are rated A (A10, A11).

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

✅ R3 csv+padding run 1 graded by code

Holders of I03 take risk on E02, the guarantor, with issuer E04 also exposed; the instrument is rated A (A10, A11).

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

✅ R3 csv+padding run 2 graded by code

E02 (guarantor), rated A. I03 is guaranteed by E02 and carries A (A11). The issuer E04 is also exposed but has no rating of its own.

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

🟡 R3 csv+padding run 3 graded by code

Northwind Finance BV (E04), rated A. The notes (I03) are issued by E04 and guaranteed by E02 (A10, A11), so E02 also bears the guarantee.

JSON: {"risk_of": "E04", "rating": "A"}

Why: risk_of: expected E02, got E04

✅ R3 csv+padding run 4 graded by code

E02 (rating A). I03 is issued by E04 and guaranteed by E02, so the holder's main exposure is to the guarantor; I03 is rated A (A11), matching E02's A (A08).

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

✅ R3 csv+padding run 5 graded by code

E02 (Northwind Holdings), which guarantees the notes. The issuer is E04, and the notes (I03) are rated A (A11).

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

✅ R10 executed run 1 graded by code

E02 (Northwind Holdings), rated A. The 2030 notes are I03, whose credit_risk_of is E02 (guarantor), and I03 is A (AF, current).

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

✅ R10 executed run 2 graded by code

E02 (Northwind Holdings), rated A. I03 is guaranteed by E02, and E02 is the credit_risk_of entity; I03 is A (A11, open).

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

✅ R10 executed run 3 graded by code

E02 (Northwind Holdings), rated A. I03's credit_risk_of is E02, and I03 is rated A (A11).

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

✅ R10 executed run 4 graded by code

Northwind Holdings (E02). I03 has credit_risk_of E02, and it is rated A (A11).

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

✅ R10 executed run 5 graded by code

The holder takes credit risk of E02 (Northwind Holdings), rated A. I03 has credit_risk_of = E02 and E02's current rating is A (A09).

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

✅ R7 csv+neutral run 1 graded by code

The holder takes the guarantor's risk, E02 (Northwind Holdings), which is rated A. I03 is rated A (A11, AF), in line with E02.

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

✅ R7 csv+neutral run 2 graded by code

The holder takes Northwind Holdings' (E02) credit risk, since E02 guarantees the notes. The notes are rated A (I03, A11), in line with the guarantor.

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

✅ R7 csv+neutral run 3 graded by code

Northwind Holdings (E02), rated A. I03 is guaranteed by E02, so the holder carries E02's risk, and I03's latest rating (A11) is A.

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

✅ R7 csv+neutral run 4 graded by code

The holder takes Northwind Holdings' (E02) risk, rated A. I03 is guaranteed by E02 (guarantor), so it is rated in line with E02, and A10/A11 give A.

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

✅ R7 csv+neutral run 5 graded by code

Northwind Holdings (E02). I03 is guaranteed by E02, so it is rated in line with E02's issuer rating, which is A (A08, A09).

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

✅ R8 csv+axioms run 1 graded by code

E02, rated A. I03 has guarantor E02, so E02 carries the credit risk, and A11 rates the notes A.

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

✅ R8 csv+axioms run 2 graded by code

E02, rated A. The Northwind Finance 2030 notes (I03) are guaranteed by E02, so the guarantor's credit risk applies; I03 is rated A (A11, 2025-09-15).

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

✅ R8 csv+axioms run 3 graded by code

The holder bears the risk of E02, the guarantor, and E02 is rated A. I03 is guaranteed by E02, and E02's current rating is A (A08/A09).

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

✅ R8 csv+axioms run 4 graded by code

Holders take Northwind Holdings' risk (E02), rated A. I03 has guarantor E02, so `creditRiskOf` is E02; A08 and A09 both give A.

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

✅ R8 csv+axioms run 5 graded by code

E02 (Northwind Holdings), rated A. The 2030 notes (I03) have guarantor E02, so credit risk sits with the guarantor, and both E02 and I03 are rated A.

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

✅ R9 csv+axioms+markdown run 1 graded by code

Guarantor E02 (Northwind Holdings). The I03 notes are guaranteed by E02, so the holder takes E02's credit risk, and the notes are rated A (A10, reaffirmed A11).

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

✅ R9 csv+axioms+markdown run 2 graded by code

E02; A.
I03 is guaranteed by E02, so the holder takes E02's credit risk, and its latest instrument rating is A (A11).

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

✅ R9 csv+axioms+markdown run 3 graded by code

E02 (Northwind Holdings). I03's guarantor is E02, so the holder takes E02's credit risk, and the note is rated A (A11, 2025-09-15).

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

✅ R9 csv+axioms+markdown run 4 graded by code

E02, rated A. I03 (Northwind Finance 2030 notes) is guaranteed by E02, so the holder takes E02's credit risk; the instrument rating is A (A11, 2025-09-15).

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

✅ R9 csv+axioms+markdown run 5 graded by code

E02 (Northwind Holdings), rated A. I03 is issued by E04 but guaranteed by E02, so the holder takes E02's credit risk, and I03's latest action (A11) is A.

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