Are All Credit Default Swap Databases Equal?

Sergio Mayordomo, Juan Ignacio Peña and Eduardo S. Schwartz

European Financial Management, 2014, vol. 20, issue 4, 677-713

Abstract: We compare the five major sources of corporate Credit Default Swap prices: GFI, Fenics, Reuters, CMA, and Markit, using the most liquid single name 5†year CDS in the iTraxx and CDX indexes from 2004 to 2010. Deviations from the common trend among prices in the different databases are not random but are explained by idiosyncratic factors, financing costs, global risk, and other trading factors. The CMA quotes lead the price discovery process. Moreover, we find that there is not a full agreement among databases in the results of the price discovery analysis between stock and CDS returns.

Date: 2014
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (37)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-036X.2013.12023.x

Related works:
Working Paper: Are all Credit Default Swap Databases equal? (2022)
Working Paper: Are all Credit Default Swap Databases Equal? (2010)
Working Paper: Are all Credit Default Swap databases equal? (2010)
Working Paper: Are all Credit Default Swap Databases Equal? (2010)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:eufman:v:20:y:2014:i:4:p:677-713

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.blackwell ... bs.asp?ref=1354-7798

Access Statistics for this article

European Financial Management is currently edited by John Doukas

More articles in European Financial Management from European Financial Management Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().