Q33, run 2026-11-04-2024-sonnet-query

← 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+

✅ D1 sql run 1 graded by code · query session

You take the credit risk of E10, Halden Bank, the guarantor of I05. It is rated BBB+ (A29 for the note, A27 for E10).

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

✅ D1 sql run 2 graded by code · query session

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

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

✅ D1 sql run 3 graded by code · query session

A holder takes the risk of E10, the guarantor of I05, which is currently rated BBB+ (A27).

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

✅ D2 sql+markdown run 1 graded by code · query session

E10 (Halden Bank, the guarantor), rated BBB+. I05 was downgraded to BBB+ by A29.

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

✅ D2 sql+markdown run 2 graded by code · query session

The holder takes E10's credit risk (Halden Bank), because I05 is guaranteed by E10. I05 is rated BBB+ (A29), the same as E10 after A27.

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

✅ D2 sql+markdown run 3 graded by code · query session

A holder takes the credit risk of E10, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, and both E10 (A27) and I05 (A29) are BBB+.

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

✅ D4 sparql run 1 graded by code · query session

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

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

✅ D4 sparql run 2 graded by code · query session

Halden Bank (E10), rated BBB+. I05 is issued by E11 and guaranteed by E10, whose rating was cut on 2026-04-15 (A27).

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

✅ D4 sparql run 3 graded by code · query session

Halden Bank (E10), rated BBB+. E10 guarantees I05 and was downgraded to BBB+ in A27.

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

✅ D5 sparql+ontology run 1 graded by code · query session

The holder takes E10's credit risk, since E10 guarantees I05. I05 is rated BBB+ (A29).

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

✅ D5 sparql+ontology run 2 graded by code · query session

The holder takes the risk of E10 (Halden Bank), the guarantor of I05. E10's issuer rating is BBB+ (A27). The BBB Credit opinion on E11 is not a rating.

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

✅ D5 sparql+ontology run 3 graded by code · query session

The credit risk of Halden Bank (E10), at BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, and A29 puts I05 at BBB+.

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

✅ D3 sql+executed run 1 graded by code · query session

The holder takes the risk of E10, the guarantor of I05, and the note is rated BBB+ (A29).

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

✅ D3 sql+executed run 2 graded by code · query session

E10, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, and I05 is rated BBB+ (A29).

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

✅ D3 sql+executed run 3 graded by code · query session

E10 (Halden Bank) is the guarantor and the credit risk of I05. Its rating is BBB+ (A27).

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

✅ D6 sparql+axioms run 1 graded by code · query session

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

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

✅ D6 sparql+axioms run 2 graded by code · query session

E10 (Halden Bank, the guarantor), currently BBB+ (A27).

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

✅ D6 sparql+axioms run 3 graded by code · query session

E10, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, and both I05 (A29) and E10 (A27) are BBB+.

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