Q33, run 2026-11-05-1819-sonnet-query-graphdb

← 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+

✅ D4 sparql run 1 graded by code · query session

E10, rated BBB+. I05 is issued by E11 and guaranteed by E10 (rated BBB+). The note itself is also BBB+ (A29).

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

✅ D4 sparql run 2 graded by code · query session

E10, the guarantor of I05 (A29), is rated BBB+.

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

✅ D4 sparql run 3 graded by code · query session

E10, rated BBB+. The Halden Leasing 2028 notes (I05) are guaranteed by E10, and I05 is also rated BBB+ (A29).

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

✅ D4 sparql run 4 graded by code · query session

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

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

✅ D4 sparql run 5 graded by code · query session

E10 (Halden Bank), rated BBB+. I05 is issued by E11 but guaranteed by E10, and the note is rated BBB+ (A29).

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

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

The holder takes E10's credit risk, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, which was downgraded to BBB+ in 2026.

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

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

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

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

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

The holder takes the credit risk of E10, Halden Bank, which is rated BBB+ since A27. I05 is guaranteed by E10.

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

✅ D5 sparql+ontology run 4 graded by code · query session

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

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

✅ D5 sparql+ontology run 5 graded by code · query session

A holder takes the credit risk of E10, rated BBB+. I05 is guaranteed by E10, which was downgraded to BBB+ on 2026-04-15 (A27).

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

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

The notes (I05) take the guarantor Halden Bank (E10)'s credit risk, rated BBB+ (A29).

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

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

E10 (?), rated BBB+ (A27). This is an inference from the group structure.

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 its rating was cut to BBB+ by A29.

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

✅ D6 sparql+axioms run 4 graded by code · query session

E10, rated BBB+ (guarantor of I05; A29).

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

✅ D6 sparql+axioms run 5 graded by code · query session

E10 (Halden Bank), the guarantor of I05. I05 is rated BBB+ (A29).

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