Asset-backed commercial paper (ABCP) outstanding in the U.S. remains in the range of $240 billion-$250 billion, as the economy continues to heal despite the COVID-19 pandemic persisting. The low interest rate environment, along with robust levels of bank deposits relative to loans, is likely to limit ABCP growth. At the same time, new seller activity, additional issuances from existing programs, and newly launched programs slightly outpaced the wind-down of previously funded transactions. S&P Global Ratings expects issuance to remain stable this year.
In Europe, the Middle East, and Africa (EMEA), strong issuance, which picked up in the second half of 2020 following a tepid first half, continued into 2021 with a nearly 10% increase in total ABCP outstanding as of June 2021 over December 2020. Growth in committed funding amounts continued with some improvement in utilization rate, indicating that long-term interest remains positive. Driving growth has been ABCP issuance by conduits financing investment contracts, which has seen a sharp 40% uptick in the first half of 2021. Overall, we expect that moderate growth will continue under our base-case forecast, and any further increase will be dependent on overall economic conditions, the pace of recovery, and availability of liquidity.
In Japan, performance trends remained largely stable and unchanged from previous year.
Globally, the top 10 sponsors accounted for about 71.2% of all S&P Global Ratings-rated ABCP outstanding in the U.S. and EMEA as of June 2021.
COVID-19: Economic Recovery Reduces Potential Impact From Bank Rating Changes
The ratings on fully supported ABCP programs are weak-linked to the ratings on the liquidity facility provider, and rating actions on the ABCP generally stem from rating changes on the liquidity facility provider (see the Appendix for more information). A change in the rating outlook on a liquidity provider would not affect the ratings on the ABCP. However, a downgrade of the liquidity provider or a CreditWatch placement, which could affect the short-term rating on the liquidity provider, could affect the rating on the ABCP.
Government support, including provisioning and funding, to households and corporations during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as liquidity buffers post the global financial crisis, are helping the global banking sector to inch back to normalcy. With economies getting back on track, COVID-19 vaccines, and state support to banks, S&P Global Ratings expects normalization over the next 12 months, as banks are rebounding more quickly than previously anticipated. Our net negative outlook for the global banking sector improved to 1% in June 2021 from 31% in October 2020. About 75% of rating outlooks on banks are now stable (up from about 65% in October 2020), with about 12% now positive (compared with 2% in October 2020), although some revision of outlooks to stable were accompanied by rating downgrades (see the Related Research section for more information).
We assess the sensitivity of the rating on a fully supported conduit to a change in the credit rating on the support provider. Based on this (see tables 1 and 5, and the Appendix), we currently expect no impact on our ratings on fully supported ABCP conduits over the next six months.
For partially supported ABCP, we also consider asset performance in our analysis. For prime auto loans, auto lease, auto dealer floorplan, private student loan, and commercial equipment we consider both the collateral performance outlook and rating trends to be stable. For all other asset types, the outlook remains somewhat weaker but rating trends are stable, except for unsecured consumer loans for which rating trends are stable to negative. Our base-case loss assumptions for all the partially supported transactions are higher than the current loss performance and reflect our view of expected performance during multiple economic scenarios.
In the first half of 2021, we lowered our ratings on one program each in the U.S. and EMEA. We continue to monitor any deterioration in support provider ratings and collateral performance over time.
U.S.: Strong Deposit Levels And Liquidity For Banks Limit Issuance Growth
Dev C Vithani, New York, (1) 212-438-1714; dev.vithani@spglobal.com
Cathy C de la Torre, New York, (1) 212-438 0502; cathy.de.la.torre@spglobal.com
U.S. ABCP outstanding stood at approximately $249 billion as of April 2021, as issuance came under pressure heading into second-quarter 2021 due to ongoing market uncertainties, a modest projected rebound in U.S. real GDP, elevated unemployment levels, a low-interest rate environment, and robust levels of bank deposits relative to loans. Currently, levels remain in the $240 billion-$250 billion range as the economy continues to heal, even though the COVID-19 pandemic persists. In particular, GDP grew 6.7% in second-quarter 2021, the labor market continues to rebound, and our economists expect the inflation spikes stemming from a speedy recovery to be largely transitory. However, the raising of interest rates by the Federal Reserve is not imminent and will likely continue holding back ABCP growth.
Financial institutions, such as banks, still benefit from solid asset quality, sound capital, abundant liquidity, and decent profitability. However, banks have continued reporting low net interest margins due to tepid loan growth and strong deposit growth relative to loans amid an ultralow interest rate environment. Therefore, their need for non-deposit funding, including ABCP, has been limited. That said, we have seen a few newly launched programs in the U.S., additional issuances from existing programs, and new seller activity slightly outpacing the wind-down of previously funded transactions. All of this supports our view that overall ABCP outstanding issuance will reach our projected levels of approximately of $255 billion-$260 billion by year-end.
Chart 1
Despite stable issuances, conduit level activity was strong
In the last six months, our ratings on ABCP outstanding remained stable. Since our last publication in April 2021, we have rated issuances from several programs (see the Rating Actions section):
- Pure Grove Funding (administered by Royal Bank of Canada as financial services agent) is a new, partially supported conduit that will issue U.S. dollar- and CAD-denominated standard, callable, puttable, puttable/callable, and investor-option extendible ABCP notes to fund consumer and commercial assets supported by liquidity agreements.
- Regatta Funding Co. LLC (sponsored by Nearwater Capital) is a new, fully supported conduit that will issue U.S. dollar-denominated standard, callable, puttable, and puttable/callable ABCP notes to fund financial securities or financial assets supported by liquidity agreements in the form of asset purchase agreements, loan agreements, master or global repurchase agreements, and total return swaps.
- Endeavour Funding Co. LLC (sponsored by Nearwater Capital) is a new, fully supported conduit that uses proceeds derived from a global master securities lending agreement, as well as total return swaps to purchase U.S. Treasuries and loans to banks, to hold as high-quality liquid assets.
- Alinghi Funding Co. LLC (sponsored by Nearwater Capital) is an existing fully supported conduit that added callable ABCP notes to supplement the outstanding standard ABCP notes.
- Ionic Capital III Trust (administered by Capitolis Advisors LLC as investment advisor) is a new conduit that uses proceeds from issuance of class A notes and class B certificates to purchase a portfolio of eligible underlying equities in the open market and enter into total return swap agreements with rated counterparties.
- Lexington Parker Capital Co. LLC (managed by Guggenheim Treasury Services LLC) is an existing, fully supported conduit that added a Series B and Series C standard, callable, puttable, and puttable/callable ABCP notes to supplement the outstanding Series A notes.
In June 2021, we lowered our rating from 'A-1+ (sf)' to 'A-1(sf)' on ABCP issued by Autobahn Funding Co. LLC (administered by DZ BANK AG Deutsche Zentral-Genossenschaftsbank) following the downgrade on DZ Bank AG.
Ratings sensitivity in U.S. ABCP programs
We have assessed the impact on the ratings on outstanding ABCP programs separately for fully supported and partially supported conduits. Our ratings on fully supported ABCP conduits are weak-linked to the ratings on liquidity facility providers. Currently, we consider that none of the fully supported conduits could be affected based on the ratings on the liquidity support provider (see table 1 and Appendix), which is lower than the 12.2% we anticipated in April 2021.
Table 1
| U.S. ABCP Ratings Sensitivity For Fully Supported Conduits | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of June 30, 2021 | ||||||||
| Current ABCP rating | Number of conduits | No impact | Potential impact | |||||
| A-1+ | 3 | 3 | 0 | |||||
| A-1 | 41 | 41 | 0 | |||||
| ABCP--Asset-backed commercial paper. | ||||||||
Partially supported assets' sensitivity in U.S. ABCP programs
Ratings on partially supported ABCP programs remain sensitive to asset performance. For prime auto loans, auto lease, auto dealer floorplan, private student loan, and commercial equipment, we consider both the collateral performance outlook and the rating trends to be stable. For all other asset types, the outlook remains somewhat weaker, but rating trends are stable except for unsecured consumer loans for which rating trends are stable to negative (see table 2).
Table 2
| North America Asset-backed Securities Trends (12-Month Outlook) | ||
|---|---|---|
| As of fourth-quarter 2021 | ||
| Asset-backed securities | Collateral performance outlook | Rating trends |
| ABS - prime auto loans | Stable | Stable |
| ABS - subprime auto loans | Somewhat weaker | Stable |
| ABS - auto lease | Stable | Stable |
| ABS - auto dealer floorplan | Stable | Stable |
| ABS - credit cards | Somewhat weaker | Stable |
| ABS - unsecured consumer loans | Somewhat weaker | Stable to negative |
| ABS - FFELP student loan | Somewhat weaker | Stable |
| ABS - private student loan | Stable | Stable |
| ABS - commercial equipment | Stable | Stable |
| Asset-backed commercial paper | Somewhat weaker | Stable |
Our view considers the low exposure (see table 3), ample weighted-average loss coverage multiples from credit enhancement (see table 4) for various partially supported assets, and the availability of 8%-10% fungible program-wide credit enhancement for these programs. Because of these factors, we believe the overall impact on the ratings on programs with investments in these assets will be limited.
Table 3
| ABCP Exposure | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of June 30, 2021 | ||||||||||
| Partially supported assets | Total commitment (mil. US$) | % | Net investment (mil. US$) | % | ||||||
| Autos | 32,391 | 10.0 | 17,762 | 8.1 | ||||||
| Prime auto loans | 16,992 | 5.2 | 11,803 | 5.4 | ||||||
| Nonprime auto loans | 3 | 0.0 | 3 | 0.0 | ||||||
| Subprime auto loans | 3,596 | 1.1 | 1,700 | 0.8 | ||||||
| Auto leases | 9,174 | 2.8 | 4,194 | 1.9 | ||||||
| Prime/nonprime/subprime auto loans(i) | 2,625 | 0.8 | 61 | 0.0 | ||||||
| Student loans | 5,955 | 1.8 | 3,455 | 1.6 | ||||||
| Private student loans | 4,437 | 1.4 | 2,419 | 1.1 | ||||||
| FFELP student loans | 1,518 | 0.5 | 1,036 | 0.5 | ||||||
| Credit cards | 7,675 | 2.4 | 2,239 | 1.0 | ||||||
| Bank cards | 5,775 | 1.8 | 1,477 | 0.7 | ||||||
| Retail cards | 1,900 | 0.6 | 762 | 0.3 | ||||||
| Equipment and commercial - other(ii) | 3,053 | 0.9 | 1,932 | 0.9 | ||||||
| Dealer floorplan | 2,519 | 0.8 | 1,465 | 0.7 | ||||||
| Trade receivables | 3,160 | 1.0 | 1,808 | 0.8 | ||||||
| Consumer - other | 3,242 | 1.0 | 1,956 | 0.9 | ||||||
| Mobile handset loans | 1,466 | 0.5 | 1,291 | 0.6 | ||||||
| Unsecured consumer loans | 1,776 | 0.5 | 666 | 0.3 | ||||||
| Fully Supported(iii) | 265,695 | 82.1 | 188,100 | 86.0 | ||||||
| Fully supported in partially supported conduits | 39,744 | 12.3 | 21,314 | 9.7 | ||||||
| Fully supported conduits | 225,951 | 69.8 | 166,787 | 76.3 | ||||||
| Total | 323,689 | 100.0 | 218,717 | 100.0 | ||||||
| (i)Prime/nonprime/subprime category is used for sellers where borrowing base allows for all three asset classes. (ii)Commercial other category includes commercial fleet leases, future flow, insurance premium, and manufactured housing. (iii)Fully supported transactions (where exposure is only directly related to bank counterparty) is the largest class of the entire portfolio. ABCP-- Asset-backed commercial paper. | ||||||||||
Table 4
| Weighted Average Loss Coverage Multiple Provided By Credit Enhancement | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| As of June 30, 2021 | ||||
| Asset | Actual CE to loss horizon losses(i) | |||
| Autos | 1,304 | |||
| Student loans | 233 | |||
| Equipment | 6,041 | |||
| Commercial - other(ii) | 1,171 | |||
| Dealer floorplan (%)(iii) | 30 | |||
| Credit cards | 127 | |||
| Consumer - other | 310 | |||
| Trade receivables | 80 | |||
| All multiples are weighted average based on net investments of each transaction. (i)Losses assumed as $0 when net investment is $0; loss horizon consistent with funding under respective liquidity agreements. (ii)Commercial-other includes fleet leases, future flows, insurance premiums, and finance assets. (iii)Dealer floorplan has net losses of $0; percentage included is the weighted average total credit enhancement available. CE--Credit enhancement. | ||||
We will continue to monitor any impact on our conduit ABCP ratings as a result of the economic implications from the COVID-19 pandemic. We will also continue to monitor monthly performance on all of the partially supported transactions against our base-case loss assumptions, including any weakness in the collateral over time.
Key trends in program composition
U.S. dollar-denominated issuances in 2021 accounted for the majority of the ABCP outstanding in the U.S., at almost 98%, while the rest of the issuances were denominated in euros and British pound sterling (see chart 2).
As of June 30, 2021, three sponsors (Citibank, JPMorgan, and Royal Bank of Canada) represent the nine partially supported programs, totaling $52.1 billion of ABCP outstanding, which make up 23% of the total U.S. ABCP we rate (see Appendix). The remaining 44 programs (45 programs as of Oct. 31, 2021) in the U.S. are fully supported and total about $171.1 billion, or 77% of the total U.S. ABCP we rate (see Appendix).
As of June 30, 2021, traditional assets -- such as auto loans and leases, credit cards, student loans, consumer loans, and equipment loans and leases –- make up about 35.1% of the collateral in all conduits (see chart 3) and 77.8% of the collateral in partially supported programs (see Appendix).
Chart 2
Chart 3
EMEA: Strong Issuance Momentum Continues Into H1 2021
Florent Stiel, Paris, (33) 1-4420-6690; florent.stiel@spglobal.com
Matthew S Mitchell, CFA, Paris, +33 (0)6 17 23 72 88; matthew.mitchell@spglobal.com
The total S&P Global Ratings-rated ABCP outstanding from conduits domiciled in EMEA increased 9.7% to $116.4 billion as of June 2021 from December 2020. This is the fastest growth since 2017, continuing the momentum from the second half of 2020.
We observed strong growth in conduits funding investment contracts with highly rated financial institutions. The ABCP outstanding for these conduits increased 40.7% to $38.6 billion from $27.4 billion last year. We understand this is driven by strong investor demand for short-term paper, as large amounts of government stimulus limited banks' funding requirements. Further, we have observed an overall strong growth in term securitizations. This could indirectly boost ABCP issuance volumes over the year if ABCP fund assets by subscribing to notes issued under term securitizations. Based on this, we expect that moderate growth will continue under our base-case forecast this year, with any further uptick depending on the overall economic conditions, pace of economic recovery, and availability of liquidity.
While we did not rate any new conduits in the first half of the year, we withdrew our ratings on Curzon Funding Ltd. in February. Committed funding amounts also increased about 5%, indicating resilience in longer-term commitments within programs, as well as improving market interest as economies start to rebound (see chart 4). Utilization rates improved slightly since 2020.
Chart 4
Ratings sensitivity in EMEA ABCP programs
All issuances from conduits domiciled in EMEA are currently fully supported by liquidity. This means our ABCP ratings are weak-linked to the credit ratings on the liquidity providers or, in the case of conduits funding investment contracts, the lowest applicable credit rating on the series counterparties.
In July 2021, we lowered our ratings on Opusalpha Funding Ltd. to 'A-2 (sf)' from 'A-1(sf)', since the short-term rating on Landesbank Hessen-Thüringen Girozentrale, the support provider, was lowered. Other than this, the ratings on all other ABCP programs remained stable during the first six months. Although we anticipate that ABCP conduit ratings in EMEA will remain largely stable over the next six months, we have assessed their sensitivity to rating changes on the support provider (see table 5 and Appendix). Based on our analysis, currently, none of the conduits remain vulnerable to a change in the credit rating on the support provider. This is compared to 13.8% of the conduits we had flagged in December 2020 as likely to be impacted by a support provider ratings downgrade.
Table 5
| EMEA ABCP Ratings Sensitivity | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| As of June 30, 2021 | |||
| Current ABCP rating | Number of conduits | No impact | Potential impact |
| A-1+ | 1 | 1 | 0 |
| A-1 | 24 | 24 | 0 |
| A-2 | 3 | 3 | 0 |
Key trends in program composition
More than 99% of the ABCP outstanding issued by European conduits are denominated in U.S. dollars, euros, and British pound sterling. The uptick in volumes resulted from U.S.-denominated issuances, while the share of British pound sterling- and euro-denominated ABCP issuances dropped (see chart 5). The increase in issuances stemmed largely from conduits funding investment contracts.
Chart 5
The share of single-seller programs increased to about 11% from 9.5% in 2020, due to higher issuances particularly from conduits backed by investment contracts. Similarly, issuances from 'A-1+' and 'A-2' rated programs increased, while the share of 'A-1' rated programs fell slightly (see Appendix).
Funding of investment contracts increased 40% in H1 2021
Total asset investments in EMEA rose 4.8% as of June 30, 2021, compared with 2020, with increases in commercial assets, which was offset to some extent by a decline in autos (see chart 6). Although traditional assets, such as trade receivables and autos, continue to account for more than half the total asset investments, their share has steadily declined from about 67% in 2017. At the same time, the share of investment contracts such as repurchase agreements, total return swaps, and securities lending agreements, has risen to about 32% of all asset investments, from about 25% last year. As of June 30, 2021, total assets funded by conduits funding investment contracts has increased about 40% to $38.6 billion from $27.5 billion in December 2020. This has increased total investments in commercial assets. Of all assets, over 84% remain domiciled across various countries in EMEA.
Chart 6
Japan: Overall Market Activity Remains Stable
Toshiaki Shimizu, Tokyo, (81) 3-4550-8302; toshiaki.shimizu@spglobal.com
ABCP is a traditional form of securitization in Japan. Currently there is one ABCP program outstanding, which was established by Apex Funding Corp. The conduit is a multi-seller program, fully supported by MUFG Bank Ltd. Therefore, the ratings on the program remain linked to our short-term credit ratings on MUFG Bank Ltd. Currently, there are no scheduled legal or regulatory changes that would affect ABCP issuances in the Japanese market.
In 2009, there were four ABCP programs in Japan. We withdrew our ratings on two programs in 2012 and one program in 2020 following their closures and upon the related transaction parties' requests.
Utilization rates in Japan have been low, compared with global trends, likely because of the current lending environment and availability of credit. To date, all issuances by Japanese conduits have been denominated only in Japanese yen.
Global Top 10 Sponsors
As of June 30, 2021, the top 10 sponsors globally are concentrated in the U.S. and EMEA. They formed about 71.2% of S&P Global Ratings-rated ABCP issuances outstanding in these two regions, down from 72.3% since December 2020. The top three sponsors hold about 34.3% of the total issuance volumes in the U.S. and EMEA, slightly lower than 36.2% in December 2020.
In the U.S, the top 10 sponsors, administrators, and managers accounted for 82.7% of the total ABCP outstanding as of June 30, 2021 (see Appendix). Three of the top 10 sponsors and administrators accounted for about 23.3% of the total ABCP outstanding in nine partially supported conduits as of June 2021 (see Appendix). The top 10 liquidity providers provided a combined commitment of approximately $196.4 billion, or 87.3%, of the $224.9 billion of support available for the U.S. ABCP that we rate.
In EMEA, the top 10 sponsors of the outstanding ABCP issuances accounted for 89.1% of the total ABCP outstanding as of June 30, 2021, versus 88.8% as of Dec. 31, 2020 (see Appendix). The top 10 liquidity providers represented a combined commitment of approximately $128.9 billion, or 81.3% of the $158.6 billion support available for the ABCP we rate in EMEA.
Rating Actions
- New Issue: Lexington Parker Capital Co. LLC, Sept. 10, 2021
- New Issue: Endeavour Funding Co. LLC, Aug. 30, 2021
- Opusalpha Funding Ltd. ABCP Program Rating Lowered Following Counterparty Downgrade, July 20, 2021
- Rating Lowered On Autobahn Funding Co. LLC ABCP Notes, June 30, 2021
- New Issue: Regatta Funding Co. LLC, June 21, 2021
- Alinghi Funding Co. LLC U.S. Callable ABCP Notes Rated, June 14, 2021
- New Issue: Pure Grove Funding, May 26, 2021
- New Issue: Ionic Capital III Trust, May 6, 2021
- New Issue: Lexington Parker Capital Co. LLC, April 30, 2021
Related Research
- Economic Research: U.S. Biweekly Economic Roundup: Retail Sales Stay Resilient Amid Elevated Inflation And Low Consumer Sentiment, Oct. 22, 2021
- EMEA Structured Finance Chart Book: October 2021, Oct. 22, 2021
- U.S. Auto Loan ABS Tracker: August 2021 Performance, Oct. 20, 2021
- North American Financial Institutions Monitor 4Q 2021: Riding The Economy's Tailwind And Aiming For A Smooth Landing, Oct. 20, 2021
- The Jury Is Out: Will European Banks Fly Or Flounder As Competition Increases?, Oct. 14, 2021
- SF Credit Brief: U.S. Structured Finance Issuance Totaled $78B In September; $549B For Year Up Over 62% From 2020, Oct. 4, 2021
- U.S. And Canada Structured Finance Chart Book, Sept. 29, 2021
- Global Credit Conditions Q4 2021: Supply Chain Strain, Inflation Pain, Sept. 29, 2021
- Top 100 Banks: Capital Ratios Show Resilience To The Pandemic, Sept. 28, 2021
- U.S. Credit Card Quality Index: Monthly Performance – August 2021, Sept. 27, 2021
- Credit FAQ: How Could Cyber Risks Affect Structured Finance Transactions?, Sept. 8, 2021
- Global Banking Country Outlook Midyear 2021: Tantalizing Signs of Stability, July 22, 2021
- Global Structured Finance Midyear Outlook 2021: Issuance Forecast Raised To $1.4 Trillion, July 20, 2021
- Global Structured Finance: Charting The Recovery From COVID-19, June 14, 2021
- Default, Transition, And Recovery: 2020 Annual Global Structured Finance Default And Rating Transition Study, May 13, 2021
- Inside Global ABCP: Economic Recovery To Underpin Modest Issuance And Stable Ratings, April 28, 2021
- ESG Industry Report Cards For Structured Finance Published, March 31, 2021
- The ESG Pulse: Texas Storm Highlights Need For Preparedness, March 24, 2021
- EMEA Structured Finance: Surveillance Chart Book, March 10, 2021
- The ESG Pulse: 2020 Lookback, Feb. 15, 2021
- European Structured Finance Outlook 2021: In Short Supply, Jan. 20, 2021
- Global Structured Finance 2021 Outlook: Market Resilience Could Bring Over $1 Trillion In New Issuance, Jan. 8, 2021
- S&P Global Ratings Definitions, Aug. 7, 2020
- Inside Global ABCP: Expanding Portfolios Underpin Steady Issuance, Though Market Uncertainties Persist, Oct. 23, 2019
- ESG Credit Factors In Structured Finance, Sept. 19, 2019
- Methodology For Linking Long-Term And Short-Term Ratings, April 7, 2017
Appendix
The appendix tables are available here:
https://disclosure.spglobal.com/ratings/en/regulatory/article/-/view/sourceId/100662321
Note: Resolution Counterparty Ratings Versus ICRs On Support Providers in ABCP
Typically, the applicable counterparty rating is either the issuer credit rating (ICR) or the resolution counterparty rating (RCR), if relevant, depending on the obligation of the support provider. The RCR reflects our opinion of the relative default risk of a bank's certain senior liabilities that may be protected from default should the bank be subject to a bail-in resolution (see "Methodology For Assigning Financial Institution Resolution Counterparty Ratings," published April 19, 2018).
We assign RCRs to banks in a number of countries across the EU and in Switzerland, the U.K., and the U.S., and differences in bail-in legislation across the major jurisdictions mean that the universe of RCR liabilities differs markedly between them. Secured liabilities, such as repurchase agreements and collateralized derivatives, would typically qualify for an RCR in most jurisdictions, if the counterparty's obligations are fully collateralized.
In considering whether a support provider would qualify for an RCR, we will review any collateralization provisions under the contract and the frequency of the mark to market. To the extent any unsecured exposure to the counterparty remains, the ICR would generally be the applicable rating type. Other forms of support in ABCP programs, such as liquidity facilities, are typically structured as unsecured funding commitments, which would not be explicitly excluded from bail-in. Therefore, we typically weak-link the ratings on the ABCP to the ICR on the liquidity provider.
This report does not constitute a rating action.
| Primary Credit Analysts: | Dev C Vithani, New York + 1 (212) 438 1714; dev.vithani@spglobal.com |
| Florent Stiel, Paris + 33 14 420 6690; florent.stiel@spglobal.com | |
| Toshiaki Shimizu, Tokyo + 81 3 4550 8302; toshiaki.shimizu@spglobal.com | |
| Secondary Contacts: | Cathy C de la Torre, New York + 1 (212) 438 0502; cathy.de.la.torre@spglobal.com |
| Matthew S Mitchell, CFA, Paris +33 (0)6 17 23 72 88; matthew.mitchell@spglobal.com | |
| Research Contributors: | Vidhya Venkatachalam, CFA, CRISIL Global Analytical Center, an S&P Global Ratings affiliate, Mumbai |
| Mugdha Mane, CRISIL Global Analytical Center, an S&P Global Ratings affiliate, Mumbai | |
| Diksha Panjri, CRISIL Global Analytical Center, an S&P affiliate, Mumbai |
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 acknowledgment 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 non-public 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.standardandpoors.com (free of charge), and www.ratingsdirect.com and www.globalcreditportal.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.standardandpoors.com/usratingsfees.
Any Passwords/user IDs issued by S&P to users are single user-dedicated and may ONLY be used by the individual to whom they have been assigned. No sharing of passwords/user IDs and no simultaneous access via the same password/user ID is permitted. To reprint, translate, or use the data or information other than as provided herein, contact S&P Global Ratings, Client Services, 55 Water Street, New York, NY 10041; (1) 212-438-7280 or by e-mail to: research_request@spglobal.com.