articles Ratings /ratings/en/research/articles/230714-u-s-cmbs-update-q2-2023-the-market-continues-to-adjust-while-offices-drive-credit-concerns-12793115 content esgSubNav
In This List
COMMENTS

U.S. CMBS Update Q2 2023: The Market Continues to Adjust While Offices Drive Credit Concerns

COMMENTS

U.S. BSL CLO Obligors: Corporate Rating Actions Tracker 2025 (As Of April 25)

COMMENTS

European CMBS Monitor Q1 2025

COMMENTS

SF Credit Brief: CLO Insights 2025 U.S. BSL Index: Loan Price Volatility Highlights Tariff-Affected Sectors; CLO Metrics Stable Except For Loan Prices

COMMENTS

Tender Option Bond Update Q1 2025: What Tariffs Mean For Muni Securitization


U.S. CMBS Update Q2 2023: The Market Continues to Adjust While Offices Drive Credit Concerns

Overall Delinquency And Special Servicing Rates Rising Led By Office

As of the end of June 2023, the overall delinquency (DQ) rate for U.S. commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transactions was 3.4%, steadily rising throughout the quarter, led mainly by increasing office delinquencies. The retail and lodging sectors still maintain the highest 30-plus-day delinquency rates, at 6.2% and 5.0%, respectively, although they are well off their pandemic-era peaks above 20.0% and 15.0%, respectively. The office sector rate is now 4.4% and has risen in six consecutive months. Multifamily and industrial round out the major property types with 1.3% and 0.4% DQ rates, respectively.

The special servicing rate has also increased, up by approximately 80 basis points (bps) during the last quarter, to 5.6% in June. The rate for office, now at 6.9%, rose nearly two and a half percentage points over the past quarter alone. For more detail, see "Overall U.S. CMBS Delinquency Rate Rose 24 Bps To 3.4% In June 2023; The Highest Level Since December 2021," published June 30, 2023.

Refinancing Risk, Surveillance, and Rating Actions In Focus

The uncertainty about future office demand and the impact on fundamentals, valuations, and credit remains a focus of the commercial real estate and CMBS markets. Continued uncertainty with regard to interest rates and the relative dearth of transactions are making the future that much murkier. During the second quarter, we published a lengthy commentary on refinancing risk covering banks, non-bank financial institutions, life insurance companies, rated REITs, and CMBS (see "Stressful Conditions For U.S. Commercial Real Estate Are Raising Refinancing Risks," published June 5, 2023) as well as a scenario analysis laying out financing conditions for single borrower CMBS, titled "U.S. SASB CMBS Office Loan Refinancing Risk: Mind The Funding Gap," published June 7.

Not surprisingly, with the still elevated delinquency rates in retail and lodging and deterioration in office loan performance, rating actions largely turned negative over the 12 months ended June 30. Indeed, 218 CMBS ratings were downgraded, versus only six ratings upgraded (largely because of defeasance). The downgrades were primarily in single borrower/large loan and legacy conduit deals. While underperforming retail malls were the culprit behind most negative rating actions, underperforming office properties, particularly ones nearing loan maturity, have also started to drive downgrade activity.

Chart 1

image

For the rating actions in single asset single borrower (SASB) office deals, we have seen some variance deal to deal with regard to how far up the stack actions are taken. In general, a rating committee's view of temporary versus longer-term impairment, which depends on a number of factors (including the magnitude of changes in occupancy and the prospects for retenanting [recent market vacancy/subleasing trends], land value/location, lease rollover/maturity profile, and so on) may determine how far up the stack ratings actions will go. There have been three 'AAA' ratings from office-backed SASBs downgraded to the 'AA' category over the past nine months.

It is worth mentioning that we rate to timely interest and ultimate principal, and that the servicer advancing mechanism provides some support to timely interest in the speculative-grade and low investment-grade rating categories. Also (and we get this question frequently), a loan modification does not automatically trigger a downgrade (though loan modifications don't typically occur for positive reasons). Therefore, they may trigger a review, which can result in downgrades if we deem the risk profile to have changed since the last review or initial rating.

New Issuance Grew In The Second Quarter, But Remains Subdued; 2023 Forecast Lowered

There was about $11 billion in second-quarter 2023 private-label CMBS issuance, excluding commercial real estate collateralized loan obligations. This was nearly double the $6 billion in the first quarter, but still left the year-to-date figure of $17 billion down by about two-thirds compared to first half 2022. Aside from segments within the office sector, property cashflows overall have either rebounded to pre-pandemic levels or surpassed them, reinforcing the argument that the cost of capital is the primary headwind to issuance. The fact that long-term interest rates have risen recently suggests issuance may remain subdued for the time being. Our initial forecast of $60 billion for private label issuance now appears unlikely; something in the $30 billion to $40 billion range seems more appropriate.

A Larger Sample Size For Conduits

Challenges in collateral aggregation have been hampering conduit issuance, but there were eight second-quarter 2023 transactions, versus four in the first quarter. Here are a few observations (see table for details):

  • Overall loan-to-value (LTV) ratios have been lower than recent history, down 310 bps to 80.9% in the latest quarter. Debt service coverage (DSC) ratio constraints are probably leading drivers for the lower leverage levels observed in the last few quarters.
  • DSC ratios have been lower alongside the higher interest rates but were mainly stable quarter-over-quarter (q/q) at 1.56x in quarter two. Interest-only concentration percentages have remained high, and the full-term share reached a new post-financial crisis high of 82.4%. Even with the new high, the overall DSC ratio has fallen despite being less burdened with amortization.
  • Deals have again become smaller and more concentrated. Average deal size fell to $751 million during the second quarter, down from $820 million in first-quarter 2023 and $849 million in fourth-quarter 2022. The top 10 percentages averaged 51% in 2021, 55% in 2022, 62% in the first four deals of 2023, and nearly 65% in the second quarter.

Of the eight conduit transactions that priced in second-quarter 2023, we rated five (see table 1). The eight offerings had an average of just 28 loans, with an average deal size of $751 million.

Table 1

Summary of S&P Global Ratings-reviewed conduits(i)
Weighted averages Q2 2023 Q1 2023 Q4 2022 2022 2021 2020 2019
No. of transactions reviewed 8 4 4 24 30 28 52
No. of transactions rated 5 1 2 10 22 14 36
Average deal size (mil. $) 751 820 849 950 1008 888 926
Average no. of loans 28 37 41 49 60 44 50
S&P Global Ratings' LTV (%) 80.9 84.0 86.3 94.3 96 93.7 93.5
S&P Global Ratings' DSC (x) 1.56 1.54 1.71 2.07 2.41 2.39 1.93
Final pool Herf/S&P Global Ratings' Herf 18.7/22.1 21.1/26.4 23.5/31.7 25.1/34.3 27.7/32.5 24.1/33.1 27.7/33.7
% of full-term IO (final pools) 82.4 75.0 69.2 77 71.5 70.7 61.6
% of partial IO (final pools) 4.8 9.3 12.0 10.1 16.1 17.9 21.4
S&P Global Rating's NCF haircut (%) (14.7) (15.3) (14.3) (15.5) (16.0) (15.8) (13.4)
S&P Global Ratings' value variance (%) (34.8) (36.4) (36.4) (39.6) (41.6) (40.0) (36.0)
(i)Market statistics within the table represent every deal priced within a selected vintage or quarter, not just the ones we analyzed. LTV--Loan-to-value. DSC--Debt service coverage. Herf--Herfindahl-Hirschman Index score. IO--Interest-only. NCF--Net cash flow. CE--Credit enhancement.

Property Type Exposures Continue To Shift Within Conduits

Property-type compositions have been an interesting story in recent quarters.

The industrial property concentration level matched the record 18% from first-quarter 2023 in the second quarter, making it one of the strongest-performing sectors. The office sector has dwindled as investors are limiting exposure given the ongoing uncertainty. The second-quarter office exposure was about 23%, down 5% q/q. Retail, which has been performing better of late (absent the remaining challenges for lower-quality secondary/tertiary market malls to secure long-term financing), has seen its share rise year-over-year, despite dropping q/q to 28%. Lodging, following broad improvements in RevPAR following the pandemic, sits at low double digits, while apartment loans remain largely dominated by the government sponsored entities. The rise in the "other" category was mostly mixed-use properties. Self-storage increased throughout 2022 (7% of deals) but took a hiatus in 2023 (1% of deals), although we have seen some large single borrower deals backed by that niche sector.

Chart 2

image

Meanwhile, In Single-Borrower CMBS…

Six transactions worth about $3 billion in quarter one were followed by seven transactions worth a little over $4 billion in quarter two. This is down significantly from $33 billion across 38 transactions in the first half of 2022.

The property-type exposure for SASBs continues to evolve coming out of the pandemic. Taking the roughly $7 billion from the first half as a whole, we've seen about $2 billion each from lodging and self-storage, a little over a billion from data centers, and under a billion (each) in industrial, mixed-use, and retail.

Chart 3

image

Of the seven deals priced in the second quarter, we reviewed six and rated one. Of the six deals priced in the first quarter, we reviewed five and rated two.

Table 2

Summary of S&P Global Ratings- reviewed SASBs
Q2 2023 Q1 2023 Q4 2022 Q3 2022 Q2 2022 Q1 2022 Q4 2021 Q3 2021 Q2 2021
No. of transactions reviewed 6 5 3 8 6 20 22 19 20
No. of transactions rated 1 2 2 2 2 5 12 9 7
Average deal size (mil. $) 628 712 450 841 1740 615 747 547 853
S&P Global Ratings' LTV (%) 87.3 75.1 93.2 107.1 108.2 128.7 116.4 112.7 122.9
S&P Global Ratings capitalization rate (%) 8.0 8.4 7.1 7.8 8.4 7.8 7.6 8.3 7.8
S&P Global Rating's NCF haircut (%) (13.1) (14.1) (11.9) (16.7) (19.1) (15.4) (16.6) (17.0) (19.5)
S&P Global Ratings' value variance (%) (32.6) (34.6) (44.5) (41.5) (45.5) (45.9) (47.7) (43.4) (43.3)
Primary markets (%) 60.1 27.2 53.7 37.1 54.1 62.2 55.6 60.5 59.3
Secondary markets (%) 27.7 35.8 24.5 26.1 40.3 24.9 37.5 20.0 30.7
Tertiary markets (%) 12.2 37.0 21.7 36.8 5.6 12.9 6.9 19.5 10.1
Fixed rate (%) 50 60.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 21.0 4.6 21.0 15.0
Floating rate (%) 50 40.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 79.0 95.4 79.0 85.0
Note: The statistics, aside from average deal size, within this table reflect only those deals that we reviewed. SASB--Single-asset single borrower -LTV--Loan-to-value.

Elevated SASB leverage in recent vintages has been a concern, although the levels have come down in the limited sample sizes of 2023 driven by the same forces affecting leverage in conduit loans. When we decline to provide preliminary feedback on a deal (one instance apiece in the first and second quarters of 2023, two in the fourth quarter of 2022), it is generally due to high leverage. The share of fixed-rate SASBs has grown to levels not seen since well before the pandemic (albeit with a small sample size) suggesting for some that rates might remain higher for longer.

During the past two quarters, we've rated a deal backed by a hotel portfolio (LAQ 2023-LAQ), a transaction backed by a 42-property portfolio comprising mostly retail and industrial assets (OAKST 2022-NLP), and a data center deal (DATA 2023-CNTR).

Related Criteria

This report does not constitute a rating action.

Primary Credit Analyst:Senay Dawit, New York + 1 (212) 438 0132;
senay.dawit@spglobal.com
Secondary Contacts:Rachel Buck, Englewood + 1 (303) 721 4928;
rachel.buck@spglobal.com
James C Digney, New York + 1 (212) 438 1832;
james.digney@spglobal.com
Ryan Butler, New York + 1 (212) 438 2122;
ryan.butler@spglobal.com
Global Structured Finance Research:James M Manzi, CFA, Washington D.C. + 1 (202) 383 2028;
james.manzi@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.

 

Create a free account to unlock the article.

Gain access to exclusive research, events and more.

Already have an account?    Sign in