(Editor's Note: This article is no longer current. The related methodology has been retired.)
Overview And Scope
S&P Global Ratings in this document provides additional guidance about how it applies its criteria in relation to Australian and New Zealand residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS).
We review our outlook assumptions periodically and update them in response to changes in the economy and housing markets. This article is intended to provide additional guidance about how we apply our Australian and New Zealand residential loan criteria in our ratings analyses. These criteria are set out in:
- Australian RMBS Rating Methodology And Assumptions, published Sept. 1, 2011; and
- New Zealand RMBS Rating Methodology And Assumptions, published Sept. 14, 2011.
This guidance document is intended to be read in conjunction with the relevant criteria and accompanying outlook commentaries for the jurisdictions.
Under our residential loans criteria, the 'B' projected loss level for an archetypal residential loan pool matches our expectations of losses and therefore varies according to changes in our outlooks for the respective mortgage markets.
A change in a country's mortgage market outlook could reflect a variety of rating factors because the outlook takes into account several variables, including:
- Changes in loan underwriting criteria;
- Structural changes in the mortgage market;
- Macroeconomic conditions and forecast unemployment rates;
- Inflation and interest rates;
- Prevailing mortgage loan performance, defaults, delinquencies, and their transition rates;
- Expected home price movements;
- Observed changes in discounts on forced sales; and
- Time to foreclosure.
Key Publication Information
- Original publication date: Jan. 15, 2019.
- This article is related to "Australian RMBS Rating Methodology And Assumptions," published Sept. 1, 2011; and "New Zealand RMBS Rating Methodology And Assumptions," published Sept. 14, 2011.
- We may revise this guidance from time to time when market dynamics warrant re-evaluating the variables we generally use in our recovery analysis.
Guidance
Table 1 shows the projected losses for the archetypal pool at a 'B' rating level and our view of the current market conditions.
Table 1
Projected Losses By Jurisdiction | |
---|---|
Jurisdiction | Projected losses for archetypal pool at 'B' rating level (%) |
Australia | 0.4 |
New Zealand | 0.4 |
Table 2 shows the loss estimates by rating for the archetypical pool for Australia and New Zealand.
Table 2
Key Credit-Enhancement Components For The Archetypical Pool By Rating – Australia And New Zealand | ||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Rating scenario | ||||||||||||||
AAA | AA | A | BBB | BB | B | |||||||||
Credit enhancement (%) | 5.0 | 3.6 | 2.2 | 1.3 | 0.8 | 0.4 | ||||||||
Foreclosure frequency (%) | 10.0 | 7.5 | 5.0 | 3.2 | 2.1 | 1.1 | ||||||||
Loss severity* (%) | 50 | 47 | 45 | 41 | 36 | 31 | ||||||||
*We have calculated loss severity for Illustration purposes by assuming 5% variable selling costs, A$5,000 fixed selling costs, a metropolitan property of A$100,000, and an interest rate through accrual of 12.75%. |
Revisions And Updates
This article was originally published on Jan. 15, 2019.
- On Jan. 8, 2020, we republished this article following a periodic review of our assumptions and outlook for Australian, Japanese, and New Zealand residential mortgage markets.
- On May 19, 2020, we republished this article following a review of our assumptions and outlook for the Australian and New Zealand markets. We increased our 'B' expected–case foreclosure frequency assumptions for the archetypal pool for Australia and New Zealand to 1.3% from 1.1% after reviewing the macroeconomic and market conditions for these jurisdictions. We added table 2 to show the revised loss estimates by rating for the archetypical pool for Australia and New Zealand. We also updated the interpolated intermediate foreclosure frequency assumptions for the 'B+' to 'AA+' rating levels for these jurisdictions accordingly (see table 2) and the articles listed in the "Related Research" section.
- On Jan. 7, 2022, we republished this article following a review of our assumptions and outlook for the Australian and New Zealand markets. We decreased our 'B' expected-case foreclosure frequency assumptions for the archetypal pool for Australia and New Zealand to 1.1% from 1.3% after reviewing the macroeconomic and market conditions for these jurisdictions. We updated table 2 to show the revised loss estimates by rating for the archetypical pool for Australia and New Zealand. We also updated the interpolated intermediate foreclosure frequency assumptions for the 'B+' to 'AA+' rating levels for these jurisdictions accordingly (see table 2) and the articles listed in the "Related Research" section.
- On Jan. 6, 2023, we republished this article under the current title (previously "Methodology And Assumptions For The Australian, Japanese, And New Zealand Residential Mortgage Markets") and removed references to Japan after our criteria "Methodology And Assumptions For Rating Japanese RMBS," published Dec. 19, 2014, was superseded by our update to "Global Methodology And Assumptions: Assessing Pools Of Residential Loans," published Jan. 25, 2019. We also removed a paragraph added in Jan. 7, 2022, that is no longer relevant. Finally, we updated the contact information, the Related Criteria, and the Related Research sections.
- On Aug. 16, 2023, we republished this article to update table 2 to reflect the rounding convention adopted in our "Australian RMBS Rating Methodology And Assumptions," published Sept. 1, 2011.
Related Criteria
- New Zealand RMBS Rating Methodology And Assumptions, Sept. 14, 2011
- Australian RMBS Rating Methodology And Assumptions, Sept. 1, 2011
Related Research
- 2023 Outlook Assumptions For The Australian RMBS Market, Jan. 6, 2023
- 2023 Outlook Assumptions For The New Zealand RMBS Market, Jan. 6, 2023
- Criteria And Guidance: Understanding The Difference, Dec. 15, 2017
This report does not constitute a rating action.
This article is a guidance document for Criteria (Guidance Document). Guidance Documents are not Criteria, as they do not establish a methodological framework for determining Credit Ratings. Guidance Documents provide guidance on various matters, including: articulating how we may apply specific aspects of Criteria; describing variables or considerations related to Criteria that may change over time; providing additional information on non-fundamental factors that our analysts may consider in the application of Criteria; and/or providing additional guidance on the exercise of analytical judgment under our Criteria.
Our analysts consider Guidance Documents as they apply Criteria and exercise analytical judgment in the analysis and determination of Credit Ratings. However, in applying Criteria and the exercise of analytic judgment to a specific issuer or issue, analysts may determine that it is suitable to follow an approach that differs from one described in the Guidance Document. Where appropriate, the rating rationale will highlight that a different approach was taken.
Primary Credit Analyst: | Narelle Coneybeare, Sydney + 61 2 9255 9838; narelle.coneybeare@spglobal.com |
Secondary Contact: | Kate J Thomson, Melbourne (61) 3-9631-2104; kate.thomson@spglobal.com |
No content (including ratings, credit-related analyses and data, valuations, model, software, or other application or output therefrom) or any part thereof (Content) may be modified, reverse engineered, reproduced, or distributed in any form by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC or its affiliates (collectively, S&P). The Content shall not be used for any unlawful or unauthorized purposes. S&P and any third-party providers, as well as their directors, officers, shareholders, employees, or agents (collectively S&P Parties) do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or availability of the Content. S&P Parties are not responsible for any errors or omissions (negligent or otherwise), regardless of the cause, for the results obtained from the use of the Content, or for the security or maintenance of any data input by the user. The Content is provided on an “as is” basis. S&P PARTIES DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE, FREEDOM FROM BUGS, SOFTWARE ERRORS OR DEFECTS, THAT THE CONTENT’S FUNCTIONING WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED, OR THAT THE CONTENT WILL OPERATE WITH ANY SOFTWARE OR HARDWARE CONFIGURATION. In no event shall S&P Parties be liable to any party for any direct, indirect, incidental, exemplary, compensatory, punitive, special or consequential damages, costs, expenses, legal fees, or losses (including, without limitation, lost income or lost profits and opportunity costs or losses caused by negligence) in connection with any use of the Content even if advised of the possibility of such damages.
Credit-related and other analyses, including ratings, and statements in the Content are statements of opinion as of the date they are expressed and not statements of fact. S&P’s opinions, analyses, and rating acknowledgment decisions (described below) are not recommendations to purchase, hold, or sell any securities or to make any investment decisions, and do not address the suitability of any security. S&P assumes no obligation to update the Content following publication in any form or format. The Content should not be relied on and is not a substitute for the skill, judgment, and experience of the user, its management, employees, advisors, and/or clients when making investment and other business decisions. S&P does not act as a fiduciary or an investment advisor except where registered as such. While S&P has obtained information from sources it believes to be reliable, S&P does not perform an audit and undertakes no duty of due diligence or independent verification of any information it receives. Rating-related publications may be published for a variety of reasons that are not necessarily dependent on action by rating committees, including, but not limited to, the publication of a periodic update on a credit rating and related analyses.
To the extent that regulatory authorities allow a rating agency to acknowledge in one jurisdiction a rating issued in another jurisdiction for certain regulatory purposes, S&P reserves the right to assign, withdraw, or suspend such acknowledgement at any time and in its sole discretion. S&P Parties disclaim any duty whatsoever arising out of the assignment, withdrawal, or suspension of an acknowledgment as well as any liability for any damage alleged to have been suffered on account thereof.
S&P keeps certain activities of its business units separate from each other in order to preserve the independence and objectivity of their respective activities. As a result, certain business units of S&P may have information that is not available to other S&P business units. S&P has established policies and procedures to maintain the confidentiality of certain nonpublic information received in connection with each analytical process.
S&P may receive compensation for its ratings and certain analyses, normally from issuers or underwriters of securities or from obligors. S&P reserves the right to disseminate its opinions and analyses. S&P's public ratings and analyses are made available on its Web sites, www.spglobal.com/ratings (free of charge), and www.ratingsdirect.com (subscription), and may be distributed through other means, including via S&P publications and third-party redistributors. Additional information about our ratings fees is available at www.spglobal.com/usratingsfees.