Contents 03 Paragraph Abbreviations I–XI Executive summary 1–14 Introduction 2–8 Regulatory reforms 9–13 The main characteristics of the CRA regulation 14 ESMA’s role 15–19 Audit approach 20–40 Part I — Registration and perimeter activities 20–21 Introduction 22–34 ESMA shortened the registration process, but the assessment of some criteria remains challenging 22–24 ESMA has well-established registration procedures for CRAs 25–29 ESMA shortened the registration process, but it remains cumbersome due to the regulatory requirements 30 The level of detail provided by the CRAs on the methodologies varied 31–34 ESMA did not have a structured approach to monitoring perimeter activities 35–40 The current approach of the Eurosystem does not guarantee that all ESMA-registered CRAs are on an equal footing 41–55 Part II — Planning and risk management 41–55 The risk-oriented planning process does not provide full assurance that ESMA gets the most out of its resources 42–50 Comprehensive risk identification, but difficult to trace 51–54 High-risk areas were not always sufficiently covered 55 ESMA resources make it difficult to satisfy all demanding regulatory requirements Contents 04 56–89 56–59 60–75 61–62 63–68 69–72 73–75 76–89 78–86 87–89 90–108 90–108 92–94 95–99 100–104 105–108 109–120 110–111 112 113–114 115 116 117–118 119 120 Part III — Supervision ESMA’s ongoing supervision and investigations Supervision process designed and implemented, but needs time to mature ESMA laid down good foundations for effective supervision of CRAs Internal guidelines and monitoring tools could be further developed to support ongoing supervisory work ESMA manages a huge volume of supervisory information, but does not have a dedicated IT tool for registering and processing this data Getting a description of the supervisory checks performed is difficult Real progress, but not yet adequate coverage in analysed thematic areas Methodologies supervised, but not all areas covered and requirements not always clear ESMA has not yet examined certain types of conflict of interest Part IV — Disclosures ESMA’s supervision of CRAs’ general disclosures ESMA regularly checked the individual CRAs’ general public disclosures, but a detailed assessment across CRAs of the general disclosure was carried out for the first time in late 2014 Market transparency impeded by restrictions and varying CRAs’ disclosure practices CEREP does not disclose sufficient information on CRAs’ ratings performance ESMA does not disclose sufficient information to ratings users on its website Conclusions and recommendations Registration Risk management and planning Ongoing supervision and investigations Methodologies Conflicts of Interest General disclosure CEREP disclosures ESMA website disclosure 
Innehåll 03 Punkt I–XI 1–14 2–8 9–13 14 15 –19 20 –40 20 –21 22 –34 22 –24 25 –29 30 31 –34 35 –40 41 –55 41 –55 42 –50 51 –54 55 Förkortningar Sammanfattning Inledning Lagstiftningsreformer De utmärkande dragen i förordningen om kreditvärderingsinstitut Esmas roll Revisionsmetod Del I – Registrering och utkantsaktiviteter Inledning Esma har förkortat registreringsprocessen men har fortfarande svårt att bedöma vissa kriterier Esma har goda registreringsförfaranden för kreditvärderingsinstitut Esma förkortade registreringsprocessen men den är fortfarande krånglig på grund av de lagstadgade kraven Hur detaljerat kreditvärderingsinstituten beskrev sina metoder varierade Esma hade ingen strukturerad metod för att bevaka utkantsaktiviteter Eurosystemets nuvarande strategi garanterar inte att alla Esma-registrerade kreditvärderingsinstitut har likvärdiga villkor Del II – Planering och riskhantering Den riskorienterade planeringsprocessen ger inte fulla garantier för att Esma utnyttjar sina resurser på bästa sätt Riskidentifieringen är heltäckande men svår att spåra Högriskområden täcks inte alltid tillräckligt Esma har inte tillräckliga resurser för att uppfylla alla stränga lagstadgade krav