Supporting Innovative SMEs in Korea - Vinnova
Supporting Innovative SMEs in Korea - Vinnova
Supporting Innovative SMEs in Korea - Vinnova
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
- Approach<strong>in</strong>g by KOTEC<br />
- Focus<strong>in</strong>g on KTRS(Kibo Technology Rat<strong>in</strong>g System)<br />
Leo (Hee Chang) Park<br />
Senior Manger<br />
Technology Valuation Model<strong>in</strong>g Team<br />
<strong>Korea</strong> Technology F<strong>in</strong>ance Corporation(KOTEC)
1 KOTEC(KIBO) at a Glance<br />
2 General Outlook of KTRS<br />
3 Closer Look of KTRS<br />
4 How to m<strong>in</strong>imize Assessor Subjectivity<br />
5 Other Issues
1 KOTEC(KIBO) at a Glance<br />
3
Historical Background of KOTEC’s Foundation<br />
1. Establishment<br />
Major Bus<strong>in</strong>esses:<br />
- Operat<strong>in</strong>g loan guarantees to technology-based <strong>SMEs</strong><br />
- Provid<strong>in</strong>g technology appraisal service to Government , Bank, and Investors<br />
- Others: Direct Investment, Consult<strong>in</strong>g, and Corporate Restructur<strong>in</strong>g., etc<br />
Founded <strong>in</strong> April 1989 under Special Act (<strong>Korea</strong> Technology Credit Guarantee Fund Act)<br />
2. Historical Background of Foundation <strong>in</strong> the late 1980’s<br />
• High Economic Growth Rate<br />
• GNI : US$ 154 <strong>in</strong> 1953 -> US$20,000 <strong>in</strong> 1989<br />
Economic Miracle<br />
• Nut-Cracked btw. Japan and Ch<strong>in</strong>a<br />
• Technology Gap btw. Large and <strong>SMEs</strong><br />
Los<strong>in</strong>g Momentum<br />
…led national consensus to boost technological <strong>in</strong>novation of <strong>SMEs</strong><br />
4
Capital<br />
Why does the market need KOTEC ?<br />
KOTEC’s role is vital <strong>in</strong> correct<strong>in</strong>g the market failure and promot<strong>in</strong>g the<br />
commercialization of technologies<br />
Government <strong>in</strong>vestment<br />
(policy fund<strong>in</strong>g)<br />
Market failure<br />
Private <strong>in</strong>vestment<br />
(private fund<strong>in</strong>g)<br />
Possibility to<br />
waste Grants<br />
Death Valley<br />
R&D<br />
Market entry (Growth Stage)<br />
Start-up<br />
Growth<br />
Maturity<br />
KOTEC represents a useful alternative with a low <strong>in</strong>vestment culture<br />
for start-ups and technologically <strong>in</strong>novative <strong>SMEs</strong><br />
The Technology Rat<strong>in</strong>g of KOTEC (KTRS) also works as effective<br />
Screen<strong>in</strong>g Measure to f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g promis<strong>in</strong>g technology of Start-ups
KOTEC’s Role<br />
KOTEC’s role is vital <strong>in</strong> support<strong>in</strong>g the whole life-cycle of technology<br />
commercialization of <strong>SMEs</strong> (Total Bus<strong>in</strong>ess Solution for <strong>SMEs</strong>)<br />
life-cycle of<br />
technology<br />
commercialization<br />
R&D<br />
Start-up<br />
Commerci<br />
alization<br />
Growth<br />
Technology<br />
transfer/M&A<br />
Maturity<br />
Tech.<br />
Appraisal<br />
&<br />
Bus<strong>in</strong>ess<br />
Support<br />
TRM<br />
R&D Plann<strong>in</strong>g<br />
Tech Valuation<br />
Mentor<strong>in</strong>g<br />
Feasibility study<br />
Certification<br />
Consult<strong>in</strong>g<br />
Tech Valuation<br />
Loan<br />
Guarantee<br />
Based on<br />
Tech.<br />
R&D evaluation KTRS Start-up KTRS and KTRS-based <strong>in</strong>dustry specific TRSs<br />
- One person biz<br />
- <strong>Innovative</strong>-knowledge based service evaluation<br />
- Cultural Contents Evaluation
Organization & Human Resources<br />
<br />
<br />
Organization<br />
Headquarters<br />
Nation-wide<br />
- 11 Departments<br />
Technology Appraisal Centers<br />
- 1 T/A Institutes<br />
- 10 Regional T/A Headquarters<br />
- 42 T/A Centers<br />
<br />
<br />
Human Resources<br />
Headquarters<br />
- 6 Executives<br />
- 210 Staffs<br />
1,069 Staff <strong>in</strong> total<br />
- <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g 553 T/A specialized<br />
Staffs (129 PhDs)<br />
Hybrid<br />
Human Resources<br />
Credit Guarantee Volume<br />
T/A Performance<br />
[unit*: bn€]<br />
[unit: cases]<br />
2011 Sep. 2012<br />
2011 Sep. 2012<br />
Guarantee balance 10.8 11.4<br />
New Guarantee<br />
Provision<br />
2.6 2.6<br />
* 1€ = 1,600 KRW<br />
Number of<br />
technology<br />
appraisals<br />
40,702 35,382<br />
7
8<br />
2 General Outlook of KTRS
KTRS is...<br />
Decision Process Tool that screens promis<strong>in</strong>g<br />
Technology<br />
Not Just look at Technology Level itself but<br />
focus<strong>in</strong>g on Bus<strong>in</strong>ess Feasibility of technology<br />
…. If a technology has no practical value, there is no<br />
po<strong>in</strong>t <strong>in</strong> provid<strong>in</strong>g Government Support<br />
Comb<strong>in</strong>ation of the technology-oriented appraisal<br />
factors and the real <strong>in</strong>solvency(default) risks of a<br />
firm<br />
9
What makes KTRS Unique...<br />
Focuses on technology based bus<strong>in</strong>ess prospects ,<br />
without analyz<strong>in</strong>g f<strong>in</strong>ancial status of company<br />
Heavily dependant on a statistical & mathematical<br />
approach<br />
Sav<strong>in</strong>g Cost and Time<br />
- Speedy assessment with a limited number of Assessors<br />
M<strong>in</strong>imiz<strong>in</strong>g Assessor Subjectivity<br />
10
Customized Indicators<br />
Structure of KTRS<br />
Classification 1<br />
(INDEX)<br />
Classification 2 Classification 3<br />
(Indicator)<br />
Owner’s<br />
Technology<br />
Capability<br />
Module<br />
Technology Experience<br />
Management Capability<br />
Management & Team Work<br />
Technology Development &<br />
Implementation Capability<br />
4 <strong>in</strong>dicators<br />
2 <strong>in</strong>dicators<br />
3 <strong>in</strong>dicators<br />
2 <strong>in</strong>dicators<br />
General<br />
Bio<br />
Technology<br />
Module<br />
Market<br />
Module<br />
Investment <strong>in</strong> Technology & R&D<br />
Technological Innovation<br />
Technological Completeness &<br />
Expandability<br />
Competitive Status<br />
Product Competitiveness<br />
3 <strong>in</strong>dicators<br />
3 <strong>in</strong>dicators<br />
3 <strong>in</strong>dicators<br />
4 <strong>in</strong>dicators<br />
3 <strong>in</strong>dicators<br />
Applied<br />
To<br />
7 Sectors<br />
Environmental<br />
S/W<br />
Medical<br />
Commercializa<br />
-tion &<br />
Profitability<br />
Module<br />
Productibility of Technology and<br />
Production Capability<br />
Operational Capability<br />
Profit Forecast<br />
2 <strong>in</strong>dicators<br />
2 <strong>in</strong>dicators<br />
3 <strong>in</strong>dicators<br />
Design<br />
Scores or rat<strong>in</strong>g<br />
Risk level<br />
Tech. biz<br />
level<br />
Tech. biz appraisal<br />
rat<strong>in</strong>g<br />
( R7 ) ( V8 ) ( BBB )<br />
Fusion<br />
11
The Usage of KTRS ...<br />
Provid<strong>in</strong>g Credit Guarantee<br />
KOTEC<br />
Consult<strong>in</strong>g<br />
-provid<strong>in</strong>g feedback to <strong>SMEs</strong><br />
Credit loan<br />
Banks<br />
Support on<br />
Policy fund<br />
Government<br />
KTRS<br />
M&A<br />
Companies<br />
&<br />
VCs<br />
Investment<br />
Venture Capital<br />
Technology transfer<br />
Research Centers
13<br />
3 Closer Look of KTRS
Structure of KTRS (1)<br />
In Technology Level, the weights of technology <strong>in</strong>novation and bus<strong>in</strong>ess<br />
possibility are measured through AHP Analysis<br />
In Risk Level, Risk of Technology is computed from the correlation<br />
between the factors and historical default data through Logistic<br />
Regression<br />
The f<strong>in</strong>al KTRS rat<strong>in</strong>g is the comb<strong>in</strong>ation of Technology Level and Risk<br />
Level through Matrix Structure<br />
KTRS<br />
Management Capacity<br />
Technological &<br />
Commercial Viability<br />
Success Probability<br />
(V1 - V10)<br />
Technology<br />
Marketability<br />
Commercialization<br />
Technology Level<br />
Technology<br />
Rat<strong>in</strong>g<br />
Grade<br />
Economic<br />
conditions/<br />
Corporate<br />
environment<br />
factors<br />
Risks <strong>in</strong> Technology<br />
Feasibility<br />
Environmental Risk<br />
Risk Level<br />
Matrix<br />
Grade : AAA – D<br />
Default Risk<br />
(R1 - R10)
Structure of Technology Level<br />
In Technology Level, the weights of technology <strong>in</strong>novation and<br />
bus<strong>in</strong>ess possibility are measured through AHP Analysis<br />
In Risk Level, Risk of Technology is computed from the correlation<br />
between the factors and historical default data through Logistic<br />
Regression<br />
The f<strong>in</strong>al KTRS rat<strong>in</strong>g is the comb<strong>in</strong>ation of Technology Level and Risk<br />
Level through Matrix Structure<br />
KTRS<br />
Management Capacity<br />
Technological &<br />
Commercial Viability<br />
Success Probability<br />
(V1 - V10)<br />
Technology<br />
Marketability<br />
Commercialization<br />
Economic<br />
conditions/<br />
Corporate<br />
environment<br />
factors<br />
Risks <strong>in</strong> Technology<br />
Feasibility<br />
Environmental Risk<br />
Technology Level<br />
Risk Level<br />
Matrix<br />
Technology<br />
Rat<strong>in</strong>g<br />
Grade<br />
Grade : AAA – D<br />
Default Risk<br />
(R1 - R10)
Structure of Risk Level<br />
In Technology Level, the weights of technology <strong>in</strong>novation and bus<strong>in</strong>ess<br />
possibility are measured through AHP Analysis<br />
In Risk Level, Risk of Technology is computed from the correlation<br />
between the factors and historical default data through Logistic<br />
Regression<br />
The f<strong>in</strong>al KTRS rat<strong>in</strong>g is the comb<strong>in</strong>ation of Technology Level and Risk<br />
Level through Matrix Structure<br />
KTRS<br />
Management Capacity<br />
Technological &<br />
Commercial Viability<br />
Success Probability<br />
(V1 - V10)<br />
Technology<br />
Marketability<br />
Commercialization<br />
Technology Level<br />
Technology<br />
Rat<strong>in</strong>g<br />
Grade<br />
Economic<br />
conditions/<br />
Corporate<br />
environment<br />
factors<br />
Risks <strong>in</strong> Technology<br />
Feasibility<br />
Environmental Risk<br />
Risk Level<br />
Matrix<br />
Grade : AAA – D<br />
Default Risk Probality<br />
(R1 - R10)
Process of KTRS Rat<strong>in</strong>g -Matrix<br />
The f<strong>in</strong>al KTRS rat<strong>in</strong>g is the comb<strong>in</strong>ation of Technology Level and<br />
Risk Level through Matrix Structure<br />
Tech.Level<br />
Risk Level<br />
V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7 V8 V9 V10<br />
R1<br />
R2<br />
R3<br />
R4<br />
R5<br />
R6<br />
R7<br />
R8<br />
AAA<br />
AA<br />
A<br />
BBB<br />
BB<br />
B<br />
CCC<br />
R9 CC C<br />
R10<br />
CC<br />
D<br />
Matrix Comb<strong>in</strong>ation of Tech. Level and Risk Level<br />
17<br />
17
How to Measure Technology Level?<br />
Indices came from...<br />
• Academic papers<br />
• Assessors’ experience<br />
• Experts‘ op<strong>in</strong>ion<br />
F<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g Key<br />
Success/Risk<br />
Factors<br />
Select<strong>in</strong>g & Structur<strong>in</strong>g<br />
Input Variables<br />
34 factors Data<br />
f(y) = ß 1·(X 1<br />
)+ß 12·(X 12<br />
)+ ß 13·(X 1<br />
)+….+ ß 34·(X 34<br />
)<br />
Scor<strong>in</strong>g<br />
Model<br />
Technology<br />
Level<br />
(V1 - V10)<br />
Scor<strong>in</strong>g Model from AHP * analysis<br />
• Us<strong>in</strong>g expert-advised questionnaires, give weighted value to questions<br />
• Give different weighted scores by <strong>in</strong>dustries<br />
• Rate bus<strong>in</strong>ess success prospects of the technology <strong>in</strong> terms of its<br />
technological ability and bus<strong>in</strong>ess prospects<br />
*AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process)
How to Measure Risk Level?<br />
f(y) = ß 1·(X 1<br />
)+ß 12·(X 12<br />
)+ ß 13·(X 1<br />
)+….+ ß 34·(X 34<br />
) + ß e1·(X e1 )+….<br />
Input Variables<br />
34 rat<strong>in</strong>g factors data<br />
Logit Model<br />
Economic environment variables<br />
Corporate environment variables<br />
Economic environmental<br />
factors ( 7)<br />
• SME Production Index<br />
• Bus<strong>in</strong>ess Survey Index(BSI)<br />
price <strong>in</strong>dex<br />
• Foreign exchange rate<br />
• Interest Rate, etc.<br />
Corporate<br />
environment factors<br />
(5)<br />
Risk Level<br />
(R1 -R10)<br />
• Certified Venture firms<br />
• ROI<br />
• Certified InnoBiz firms<br />
• Firms subject to<br />
external audit<br />
Risk Level from Logistic Regression analysis<br />
(used Factor Analysis & Pr<strong>in</strong>cipal Component Analysis, Logit Regression)<br />
• Analyzed 22,445 data (Tech. Appraisal Guarantee data) collected from ’99<br />
us<strong>in</strong>g statistical techniques<br />
• Unlike general credit rat<strong>in</strong>g models based on f<strong>in</strong>ancial variables,<br />
this Logit model is designed to measure technology-related risks
20<br />
4 How to m<strong>in</strong>imize Assessor Subjectivity
M<strong>in</strong>imiz<strong>in</strong>g Assessor Subjectivity(1)<br />
Detailed Guidel<strong>in</strong>es of Indicators<br />
(Quantitative, Check-list Methods)<br />
- 19 <strong>in</strong>dicators <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g quantitatives and check-lists out of 34 <strong>in</strong>dicators<br />
Quantitative Indicators (SAMPLE)<br />
Classification 1 (INDEX)<br />
Classification 2<br />
: Technology Module<br />
: Technology Development & Implementation Capability<br />
Classification 3 (Indicator) : Technology (Design) Personnel<br />
Evaluation Target: Company<br />
After exam<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g the technology development personnel (apply<strong>in</strong>g technology qualification and educational<br />
quotient) as of the appraisal date, 5 po<strong>in</strong>ts for special technicians, 4 po<strong>in</strong>ts for advanced technicians, 3 po<strong>in</strong>ts<br />
for <strong>in</strong>termediate technicians, 2 po<strong>in</strong>ts for beg<strong>in</strong>ners and 1 po<strong>in</strong>t for other technicians are given for the<br />
appraisal.<br />
※ Po<strong>in</strong>t calculation formula : 5 po<strong>in</strong>ts x (“acquired po<strong>in</strong>ts”/ “highest standard po<strong>in</strong>ts by <strong>in</strong>dustry”)<br />
In the event that the acquired po<strong>in</strong>ts exceed the highest standard po<strong>in</strong>ts, the highest standard po<strong>in</strong>ts are<br />
applied.<br />
General/Bio<br />
/Envi. Etc.<br />
S/W<br />
Grade A Grade B Grade C Grade D Grade E<br />
20 po<strong>in</strong>ts or<br />
more<br />
25 po<strong>in</strong>ts or<br />
more<br />
15 po<strong>in</strong>ts or<br />
more<br />
19 po<strong>in</strong>ts or<br />
more<br />
10 po<strong>in</strong>ts or<br />
more<br />
13 po<strong>in</strong>ts or<br />
more<br />
5 po<strong>in</strong>ts or<br />
more<br />
6 po<strong>in</strong>ts or<br />
more<br />
Below 5 po<strong>in</strong>ts<br />
Below 6 po<strong>in</strong>ts
M<strong>in</strong>imiz<strong>in</strong>g Assessor Subjectivity(2)<br />
Feed-back System<br />
- the system provide the relative position of evaluator<br />
by provid<strong>in</strong>g the Mode(average) and standard deviation of others<br />
- Monitor<strong>in</strong>g the “Tendency” and “Consistency” of an evaluator<br />
Consistency<br />
Tendency(Rigorous)<br />
4 3 4<br />
2σ<br />
2σ<br />
2σ<br />
2<br />
1<br />
2σ<br />
4 3<br />
4<br />
Tendency (Generous)<br />
1<br />
2<br />
3<br />
4<br />
•Too Generous<br />
•Too Rigorous<br />
•Lack of Consistency<br />
•Too Extreme tendency & Lack of<br />
Consistency
M<strong>in</strong>imiz<strong>in</strong>g<br />
3. M<strong>in</strong>imiz<strong>in</strong>g<br />
Assessor<br />
Assessor<br />
Subjectivity(3)<br />
Subjectivity<br />
Overview<br />
▣Technology is rapidly chang<strong>in</strong>g and needs specific knowledge<br />
★ Hard to get <strong>in</strong>formation on Technology and Market<br />
▣ Research and compile <strong>in</strong>formation from <strong>in</strong>-house PhDs and<br />
thesis, and academic journals<br />
▣ Serve the <strong>in</strong>formation through the <strong>in</strong>tranet<br />
Academic Journal<br />
TIA(technology Information Architecture)<br />
Thesis<br />
718 Information on Tech<br />
Tech Rat<strong>in</strong>g Reports<br />
Evaluator’s Research<br />
1,161 Information on Market<br />
Classified <strong>in</strong>to 9 Different Sectors<br />
Mach<strong>in</strong>ery, Mechanical Eng<strong>in</strong>eer<strong>in</strong>g, Green Tech.<br />
Electronics, ICT, Bio, New Material, Chemicals
Shows High Correlation between KTRS grade<br />
And Default <strong>in</strong> a real case<br />
Validity of KTRS<br />
Loan Default vs. Rat<strong>in</strong>g<br />
25,00%<br />
20,00%<br />
21,70%<br />
15,00%<br />
10,00%<br />
5,00%<br />
0,00%<br />
6,40%<br />
9,40%<br />
12,20%<br />
4,00%<br />
0,00% 1,60%<br />
AAA AA A BBB BB B CCC<br />
Rat<strong>in</strong>g<br />
4.7 % on Avg.<br />
Well managed Under KOTEC’s Target (5-6%)
25<br />
5 Other Issue
Transferability<br />
Practical Challenges<br />
Possible Solutions<br />
Lack of statistical data<br />
Lack of staff (assessors)<br />
Cultural differences<br />
Weights of <strong>in</strong>dicators<br />
Patent<br />
Survey<strong>in</strong>g real default<br />
cases<br />
Us<strong>in</strong>g the external Pool<br />
Most <strong>in</strong>dicators are not<br />
different from TechRate ®<br />
You can change via AHP<br />
KOTEC will be open to<br />
collaboration
leopark91@gmail.com<br />
Thank you!<br />
Merci!<br />
Dan wel!<br />
Danke Schön!<br />
Tack så mycket!<br />
Dziekuje!<br />
Hvala!<br />
Kiitos!
Academic Background Beh<strong>in</strong>d of KTRS Appendix 1<br />
AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process) Analysis<br />
• A frame work used for Multi-criteria decision mak<strong>in</strong>g<br />
• Methods of weight calculation us<strong>in</strong>g matrix equation<br />
• Derives ratio scales from paired comparisons of criteria.<br />
• Used for deriv<strong>in</strong>g weights of technology appraisal <strong>in</strong>dicators<br />
Logistic Regression Model<br />
• A technique of regression analysis used to determ<strong>in</strong>e which variable is significant by<br />
us<strong>in</strong>g formula that classifies a group after express<strong>in</strong>g correlation between the<br />
<strong>in</strong>dependent success factors(key <strong>in</strong>dicators) and the subord<strong>in</strong>ate variables(default)<br />
• ex) Does a student good at math go to Ivy League?<br />
• Is the level of the number of patents related with the default ratio?<br />
• KOTEC tracked down the correlation every 34 factors and defaults<br />
from the historical data (22,445 cases for five years)<br />
28
PATENTS of KTRS<br />
Appendix 2<br />
Overview<br />
KTRS and Feedback System are Patented<br />
29
KTRS vs. Credit Rat<strong>in</strong>g System Appendix 3<br />
KTRS<br />
• Output of Matrix of Technology<br />
Level and Risk Level(Insolvency)<br />
• Focus on Company’s<br />
future potential<br />
• Non-F<strong>in</strong>ancial Measure is<br />
dom<strong>in</strong>ant<br />
ex) Technology Excellence<br />
Bus<strong>in</strong>ess Feasibility<br />
Credit Rat<strong>in</strong>g System<br />
• Forecast Corporation’s<br />
Insolvency<br />
• Focus on Company’s<br />
past history<br />
ex) F<strong>in</strong>ancial Records<br />
Owner’s Credit Level<br />
• F<strong>in</strong>ancial Model is dom<strong>in</strong>ant<br />
30
KTRS Vs. TechRate r<br />
They have a lot <strong>in</strong> common…<br />
Appendix 4<br />
Modules<br />
Importance<br />
KTRS<br />
Four Modules (34 key factors)<br />
- Management Capacity<br />
- Technology<br />
- Marketability<br />
- Bus<strong>in</strong>ess Feasibility<br />
Capacity of Entrepreneurs<br />
TechRate r<br />
Four Modules (24 key factors)<br />
- Market<strong>in</strong>g<br />
- Technologie<br />
- Management<br />
- F<strong>in</strong>ance<br />
Capacity of Entrepreneurs<br />
Method<br />
AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process)<br />
Logistic Regression<br />
AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process)<br />
31
KTRS Vs. TechRate r Appendix 5<br />
But There are Still a few differences<br />
Focus<br />
KTRS<br />
Bus<strong>in</strong>ess Risk<br />
- Relationship of Factors and Risk<br />
Key Success Factors of Technology<br />
De-emphasis on F<strong>in</strong>ancial Data<br />
- One F<strong>in</strong>ancial Ratio(R&D Invest. Ratio)<br />
TechRate r<br />
Key Success Factors of Technology<br />
Us<strong>in</strong>g F<strong>in</strong>ancial Data<br />
- F<strong>in</strong>ancial History<br />
- Fund<strong>in</strong>g Capacity<br />
Objectivity<br />
Uses<br />
Focuses on Consistency of Evaluation<br />
Screen<strong>in</strong>g the beneficiaries of F<strong>in</strong>ancial<br />
Support (<strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g Credit Guarantee)<br />
Certificate, Competition<br />
Valu<strong>in</strong>g R&D Projects<br />
Grants Autonomy of Investigators<br />
Start-up Competition<br />
Limited Use for F<strong>in</strong>ancial Support<br />
32
Development of KTRS<br />
National Authorization of Technology<br />
Appraisal Rat<strong>in</strong>gs with KTRS<br />
Appendix 5<br />
Phase I Phase II Phase III<br />
Up to 2006<br />
Groundwork for T.A.<br />
Rat<strong>in</strong>g and Certification<br />
2007∼ 2009<br />
Disclosure of KTRS<br />
Results<br />
After 2010<br />
Authorization of KTRS-<br />
Based Rat<strong>in</strong>gs<br />
Rat<strong>in</strong>g Certificate enables<br />
Bank Loans with no<br />
Guarantee<br />
Default rate by T.A.<br />
Rat<strong>in</strong>gs are disclosed<br />
T.A Rat<strong>in</strong>gs Replaces<br />
Conventional Credit<br />
Rat<strong>in</strong>gs<br />
- 430 Certificates<br />
222 loans amount<strong>in</strong>g<br />
13.2 million USD<br />
- Opened to Public s<strong>in</strong>ce<br />
March, 2007<br />
- F<strong>in</strong>e Tun<strong>in</strong>g of KTRS<br />
- Methodology to up to date<br />
33
Change language