articles Ratings /ratings/en/research/articles/241031-asia-pacific-financial-institutions-monitor-4q-2024-government-support-buttresses-bank-ratings-13302196.xml content esgSubNav
In This List
COMMENTS

Asia-Pacific Financial Institutions Monitor 4Q 2024: Government Support Buttresses Bank Ratings

COMMENTS

Credit FAQ: Will Nigerian Banks' Recapitalization Materially Strengthen Their Resilience?

COMMENTS

Hong Kong's Commercial Real Estate Downturn Is Spreading To Banks

COMMENTS

Banking Industry Country Risk Assessment Update: October 2024

COMMENTS

Banking Risk Indicators: October 2024 Update


Asia-Pacific Financial Institutions Monitor 4Q 2024: Government Support Buttresses Bank Ratings

image

Relative rating stability across Asia-Pacific financial institutions sector is likely to persist into 2025.  That's despite heightened uncertainties affecting operating conditions.

Banks are balancing a range of risks of varying intensity, including potential spillover from tensions in the Middle East, property market woes in numerous jurisdictions, and the overarching risk of an economic hard landing.  Our base case, however, is that most banks will contend with these risks into the new year. About 91% of bank ratings are on stable outlook.

Our base case assumes most Asia-Pacific governments support systemically important private sector commercial banks.  We maintain that extraordinary support would be available for these banks in the unlikely event it is needed.

Our view on government support in Asia-Pacific differs from that on Western Europe and the U.S. (see chart 1).  In our view, bailout, rather than bail-in, is the more likely resolution tool in the unlikely event of a banking crisis affecting Asia-Pacific. Links between ratings on sovereigns and financial institutions remain critical as does the capacity and willingness of sovereigns to support banks.

In Western Europe and the U.S., our view is that additional loss-absorbing capacity (ALAC) is the more likely resolution tool, if extraordinary support was needed.  Most sovereign ratings across Asia-Pacific are on stable outlook, which, in part, underpins our view of continuing rating stability for systemically important banks. Most systemically important banks in Asia-Pacific currently benefit from modest rating uplift because of government support. Recent positive rating actions for some regional financial institutions stem from improved sovereign outlooks in select Asia-Pacific countries. Positive sovereign rating developments in India and Mongolia led to bank upgrades in 2024.

Chart 1

image

Our views on support also take into account that occasional government intervention may still be necessary in banking jurisdictions where we see government support as uncertain, such as in Western Europe and the U.S.  Equally, we envisage that additional loss-absorbing capacity could absorb losses in certain jurisdictions where we see the government as being supportive to systemically important private sector commercial banks.

In late May, we revised the rating outlook on India to positive from stable.  Sovereign and stand-alone factors led to positive outlooks on Indian banks. Underpinning this is the country's forecast strong growth of 6.5%-7% over the next three years, which favors expansion in the financial sector. Asset quality in the sector is also improving.

We raised the sovereign credit ratings on Mongolia with a positive outlook because of the outperformance of the country's economy and prospects of much stronger growth than peers.  We raised the ratings on two Mongolian banks, Golomt Bank JSC and Trade and Development Bank JSC, to 'B+' from 'B' due to reduced economic risks, improving regulatory supervision, and enhanced business stability (see "Two Mongolian Banks Upgraded To 'B+' On Improved Business Stability; Outlooks Stable," published on RatingsDirect on Oct. 9, 2024).

In contrast, we lowered the rating on Bangladesh because of elevated political tension in the country.  The ratings on two banks, BRAC Bank Ltd. (B+/Stable/B) and Dutch-Bangla Bank PLC (B/Stable/B), were unaffected by the sovereign downgrade. They have been largely maintaining positive net foreign exchange positions. Unlike some larger peers, they have been able to meet their foreign-exchange obligations on time; these are mostly in the form of trade-related letters of credit (see "Bangladesh's Volatile Political Situation Elevates Banking Sector Risks," Aug. 14, 2024).

India Fincos Treading Ahead Cautiously

We believe rated and unrated finance companies have strong capital levels to support high loan growth.  Healthy economic growth and digitalization are underpinning robust credit growth. Technologically advanced and well-capitalized finance companies are likely to benefit more than the banks.

At the same time, we expect a host of regulatory actions by the Reserve Bank of India to enhance compliance and safeguard customers.  Increased compliance costs may limit the ability of smaller companies to compete in the sector (see "Indian Fincos' Balancing Act: Will The Regulatory Burden Crimp High Credit Growth?," Sept. 24, 2024).

Climate Risks Hit Several South and Southeast Asian Economies

We expect Thai banks to weather the impact of flood damage.  Flooding from heavy rainfall has hit several provinces, mostly in Thailand's north, including the tourist city of Chiang Mai. The Thai Chamber of Commerce estimated damages at Thai baht (THB) 30 billion (US$900 million; approximately 0.17% of GDP) as of Sept. 28, 2024. Commercial banks have less than 12% of their branches in northern Thailand. Of these, only a small number have so far been physically affected. Banks' digitalization efforts have gained significant traction since the pandemic struck. This has reduced reliance on physical touchpoints, mitigating disruption to financial services and transactions (see "Thai Financial Sector Will Weather Flood Damage," Oct. 08, 2024).

The effects of a recent typhoon may strain Vietnamese banks' profitability due to debt relief measures for affected borrowers.  The landfall of the category-5 typhoon in Vietnam on Sept. 7, 2024, caused widespread damage and scores of fatalities. The banks' measures include lowering lending rates by 0.5% to 2% to new and existing borrowers until the end of 2024. The extent of the relief could vary according to the levels of damage incurred by the borrowers (see "Your Three Minutes In Vietnamese Banking: Typhoon Debt Relief Measures Could Crimp Profitability," Sept. 26, 2024).

Hong Kong Banks Will Withstand Commercial Real Estate Risk

High vacancy rates amid excess supply of office space and a spillover of weak sentiment from mainland China's property downturn will continue to weigh on the CRE sector in Hong Kong.  Challenges from ongoing strains in the sector will remain manageable, especially for large banks. This is because the large banks we rate usually have healthy collateralization on their secured loan books, which we estimate comprise 60%-70% of their domestic CRE exposures. The portfolios also have an average loan-to-value (LTV) ratio of 50%-55%. While this provides some buffer against a significant drop in property prices, ongoing property revaluations could lead to some increase in the LTV ratios for banks (see "Banking Industry Country Risk Assessment: Hong Kong," Sept. 24, 2024).

Elsewhere, nonbanks in Korea will likely face another year or two of asset-quality strain from their real-estate project financing.  Banks are less vulnerable to real estate pain. Their combined loan exposure to construction and real-estate project financing is about 3%-4% of total loans. Mutual savings banks are small. Credit cooperatives can use the financial resources available at their own federations, which function as a de-facto central bank (see "Will The Center Hold For Asia-Pacific Banks? Panelists Discuss Likely Catalysts For Change In 2025," Sept. 17, 2024.)

China's Latest Stimulus Measures Could Boost Credit Growth

The measures could boost consumer and homebuyer sentiment, and possibly loan growth toward our base-case forecast.  The package could also lead to some upward revision in S&P Global Ratings' GDP forecasts for 2025. However, we do not think the move amounts to a big bang-style stimulus. The fresh initiatives aim to provide relief to local governments, rebuild market confidence, stabilize property prices, and encourage consumption.

The impact on loan growth and asset quality in general will depend on whether these programs boost economic growth.  Expansion of relaxed loans renewal coverage could cloud transparency for reported nonperforming loans. But the stimulus has a limited impact on our broader nonperforming asset (NPA) assessment because this already captures unclassified problem loans.

In our base case, we forecast loan growth of about 9% annually over 2024-2026, versus 8.1% year on year in the first nine months of 2024   (see "Will China's Latest Stimulus Initiatives Achieve Lift-Off?," Oct. 25, 2024).

Australia's Unique Proposal Is Unlikely To Be Widely Replicated

The Australian regulatory proposal to phase out banks' additional tier 1 (AT1) capital should address the unique systemic risks posed by high retail investor exposure to Australian bank AT1 securities.  Domestic retail investors hold about half of such instruments, a concentration that may prove problematic in the event of a banking crisis. Nonetheless, S&P Global Ratings thinks a phaseout has the potential to weaken stand-alone credit standings for some Australian banks.

On Sept. 10, 2024, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) released a discussion paper that proposes to replace AT1 capital, predominantly with tier 2 (T2) instruments.  If the regulator's proposal were implemented without offsetting actions, many Australian banks' going-concern loss-absorbing capital would weaken. Specifically so, if the AT1 instruments are predominantly replaced with T2 instruments, which can only absorb losses when a bank is no longer viable.

This would be unlikely to affect issuer credit ratings on most banks but could lead us to lower ratings on some T2 instruments, including those issued by the four major Australian banks.  Moreover, ratings on their instruments currently classified as AT1 could face offsetting positive and negative pressures. Any rating actions would be subject to certainty in relation to APRA's proposed changes as well as banks' responses (see "Phasing Out Bank AT1--An Australian Solution To An Australian Dilemma," Sept. 18, 2024).

Capital Ratios Are Likely To Normalize Over The Next Two Years

We expect the top 200 rated banks' risk-adjusted capital (RAC) ratios will normalize over the next two years, after an increase in 2023.  Despite the banking sector turmoil in the U.S. and, to a lesser extent, Europe, most of the top 200 rated banks, ranked by their regulatory tier 1 capital, reported good earnings in 2023. Banks mainly benefited from higher net interest margins due to contractionary monetary policies globally. The increase in interest revenues mostly offset the rise in provisions and higher funding costs, while declining--albeit still positive--credit demand slowed the increase in S&P Global Ratings' risk-weighted assets. We think major banks adopted prudent capital management strategies, given economic concerns and upcoming regulatory changes (see "Top 200 Rated Banks' Capital Ratios Are On A Stable Trend," Oct. 21, 2024).

BICRA Changes

Over the past quarter (through Oct. 30, 2024), the following changes have been made to our Banking Industry Country Risk Assessments (BICRAs) in Asia-Pacific.

Malaysia:

We revised our assessment of industry risk to '3' from '4' for Malaysia. Operating conditions are improving for Malaysian banks. The risk of negative intervention from the government has reduced, in our view. Consequently, banks in the country should be better placed to adequately price risks, such that their revenues cover expenses, expected losses, and the cost of capital over an economic cycle without having to take excessive risks.

Mongolia:

We revised our assessment of economic risk to '8' from '9' for Mongolia and revised some scores on economic risk-related factors. We also revised our industry risk trend to positive from stable. Economic risks for Mongolian banks have diminished, in our view. The country has a promising economic outlook. We forecast its real GDP growth will average about 6% annually through 2027, backed by robust exports of commodities such as coal and copper. Moderating inflation and higher public sector wages have also increased household consumption. Mongolia's increased economic resilience should improve operating conditions for banks. Robust demand for credit as the economy expands and decreased volatility in banks' asset quality underpin our view. The industry risk trend of the banking sector is also improving. This is in view of Mongolia's evolving institutional framework, although the banking regulations in the country are relaxed compared with the international standards.

We have published the following comprehensive BICRA reports in the past quarter in Asia-Pacific.

The table below presents S&P Global Ratings' views about key risks and risk trends for banking sectors in Asia-Pacific countries where we rate banks. For more detailed information, please refer to the latest BICRA on a given country. According to our methodology, BICRAs fall into groups from'1' to '10', ranging from what we view as the lowest-risk banking systems (group '1') to the highest-risk (group '10').

image

Table 1

Real GDP forecast
Change from prior forecast
(% year over year) 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2024 2025 2026
Australia 2 1.1 2.2 2.4 2.4 0 0.1 0
China 5.2 4.6 4.3 4.5 4.5 -0.2 -0.3 -0.1
Hong Kong 3.3 3.3 2.7 2.5 2.2 0.0 -0.2 0.0
India 8.2 6.8 6.9 7.0 7.0 0.0 0.0 0.0
Indonesia 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.9 4.9 0.0 0.0 0.0
Japan 1.7 0.0 1.3 0.9 0.9 -0.7 0.2 0.0
Malaysia 3.5 5.1 4.8 4.5 4.4 0.8 0.3 0.1
New Zealand 0.9 1.0 2.3 2.4 2.4 -0.1 -0.2 -0.1
Philippines 5.5 5.7 6.2 6.4 6.5 -0.1 0.1 -0.1
Singapore 1.1 2.4 2.5 2.6 2.6 0.2 0.0 0.0
South Korea 1.4 2.3 2.0 2.0 2.0 -0.3 -0.4 0.0
Taiwan 1.3 4.2 2.1 2.4 2.4 0.2 0.0 0.0
Thailand 1.9 2.8 3.1 3.0 3.1 -0.6 -0.2 -0.2
Vietnam 5.0 6.2 6.8 6.7 6.6 0.4 0.1 0.0
Asia Pacific 4.9 4.4 4.4 4.4 4.4 -0.1 -0.1 -0.1
For India, 2023 = FY 2023 / 24, 2024 = FY 2024 / 25, 2025 = FY 2025 / 26, 2026 = FY 2026 / 27, 2027 = FY 2027 / 28. Source: S&P Global Ratings Economics.

Issuer credit ratings and component scores for the top 60 Asia-Pacific banks
Institution Opco L-T ICR/outlook Anchor Business position Capital and earnings Risk position Funding and liquidity Comparable rating analysis SACP or group SACP Type of support No. of notches of support Additional factor adjustment
Australia

Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Ltd.

AA-/Stable a- Strong Strong Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 a+ Sys. Imp. 1 0

Commonwealth Bank of Australia

AA-/Stable a- Strong Strong Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 a+ Sys. Imp. 1 0

Macquarie Bank Ltd.

A+/Stable a- Adequate Strong Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 a Sys. Imp. 1 0

National Australia Bank Ltd.

AA-/Stable a- Strong Strong Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 a+ Sys. Imp. 1 0

Westpac Banking Corp.

AA-/Stable a- Strong Strong Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 a+ Sys. Imp. 1 0
China

Agricultural Bank of China Ltd.

A/Stable bb+ Very Strong Adequate Adequate Strong/Strong 0 bbb+ GRE 2 0

Bank of China Ltd.

A/Stable bbb- Very Strong Adequate Adequate Strong/Strong 0 a- GRE 1 0

Bank of Communications Co. Ltd.

A-/Stable bb+ Strong Adequate Adequate Strong/Adequate 0 bbb- GRE 3 0

China CITIC Bank Corp. Ltd.

A-/Stable bb+ Adequate Moderate Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 bb+ Group 4 0

China Construction Bank Corp.

A/Stable bb+ Very Strong Adequate Adequate Strong/Strong 0 bbb+ GRE 2 0

China Merchants Bank Co. Ltd.

A-/Stable bb+ Strong Adequate Strong Strong/Strong 0 bbb+ Sys. Imp. 1 0

China Minsheng Banking Corp. Ltd.

BBB-/Stable bb+ Adequate Constrained Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 bb Sys. Imp. 2 0

Hua Xia Bank Co. Ltd.

BBB-/Stable bb+ Adequate Moderate Moderate Adequate/Adequate 0 bb GRE 2 0

Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Ltd.

A/Stable bb+ Very Strong Adequate Adequate Strong/Strong 0 bbb+ GRE 2 0

Postal Savings Bank Of China Co. Ltd.

A/Stable bb+ Strong Moderate Adequate Strong/Strong 0 bbb GRE 3 0

Shanghai Pudong Development Bank Co. Ltd.

BBB/Stable bb+ Adequate Constrained Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 bb GRE 3 0
Hong Kong

Bank of China (Hong Kong) Ltd.

A+/Stable bbb+ Strong Strong Adequate Strong/Strong 0 a+ Sys. Imp. 1 (1)

Standard Chartered Bank (Hong Kong) Ltd.

A+/Stable bbb+ Adequate Strong Adequate Strong/Strong 0 a Sys. Imp. 1 0

Bank of East Asia Ltd. (The)

A-/Stable bbb+ Adequate Adequate Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 bbb+ Sys. Imp. 1 0

Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corp. Ltd. (The)

AA-/Stable bbb+ Strong Strong Adequate Strong/Strong 0 a+ Sys. Imp. 1 0
India

Axis Bank Ltd.

BBB-/Positive bbb- Strong Adequate Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 bbb None 0 (1)

Kotak Mahindra Bank

BBB-/Positive bbb- Adequate Strong Adequate Adequate/Adequate (1) bbb- None 0 0

HDFC Bank Ltd.

BBB-/Positive bbb- Strong Strong Strong Adequate/ Strong 0 a- None 0 (3)

ICICI Bank Ltd. §

BBB-/Positive bbb- Strong Strong Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 bbb+ None 0 (2)

State Bank of India

BBB-/Positive bbb- Strong Moderate Adequate Strong/Strong 0 bbb None 0 (1)
Indonesia

Bank Mandiri (Persero) PT

BBB/Stable bb+ Strong Strong Moderate Adequate/Strong 0 bbb- GRE 1 0

Bank Rakyat Indonesia (Persero) Tbk. PT

BBB/Stable bb+ Strong Strong Moderate Adequate/Strong 0 bbb- GRE 1 0
Japan

Chiba Bank Ltd.

A-/Stable bbb+ Adequate Adequate Strong Adequate/Strong 0 a- None 0 0

Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group Inc.*

A/Stable bbb+ Strong Adequate Adequate Strong/Strong 0 a None 0 0

Mizuho Financial Group Inc.*

A/Stable bbb+ Strong Moderate Adequate Strong/Strong 0 a- Sys. Imp. 1 0

Nomura Holdings Inc.*

A-/Stable bbb+ Moderate Strong Moderate Adequate/Adequate 0 bbb Sys. Imp. 2 0

Norinchukin Bank

A/Negative bbb+ Moderate Strong Moderate Strong/Strong 0 bbb+ Sys. Imp. 2 0

Resona Holdings*

A/Stable bbb+ Adequate Adequate Adequate Strong/Strong 0 a- Sys. Imp. 1 0

Shinkin Central Bank

A/Stable bbb+ Adequate Strong Moderate Adequate/Strong 0 bbb+ Sys. Imp. 2 0

Shizuoka Bank Ltd.

A-/Stable bbb+ Adequate Strong Adequate Adequate/Strong 0 a- None 0 0

Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group Inc.*

A/Stable bbb+ Strong Adequate Adequate Strong/Strong 0 a None 0 0
Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Holdings* A/Stable bbb+ Strong Moderate Strong Adequate/Strong 0 a- Sys. Imp. 1 0
Korea

Industrial Bank of Korea

AA-/Stable bbb+ Adequate Adequate Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 bbb+ GRE 4 0

KEB Hana Bank

A+/Stable bbb+ Strong Adequate Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 a- Sys. Imp. 2 0

Kookmin Bank

A+/Stable bbb+ Strong Adequate Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 a- Sys. Imp. 2 0

Nonghyup Bank

A+/Stable bbb+ Strong Adequate Adequate Strong/ Adequate 0 a- GRE 2 0

Shinhan Bank

A+/Stable bbb+ Strong Adequate Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 a- Sys. Imp. 2 0

Woori Bank

A+/Stable bbb+ Strong Adequate Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 a- Sys. Imp. 2 0
Malaysia

Public Bank Bhd.

A-/Stable bbb Strong Strong Strong Strong/Strong (1) a None 0 (1)

Malayan Banking Bhd.

A-/Stable bbb Strong Adequate Adequate Strong/Strong 0 a- None 0 0

CIMB Bank Bhd.

A-/Stable bbb Strong Adequate Adequate Strong/Strong 0 a- None 0 0
New Zealand

ANZ Bank New Zealand Ltd.

AA-/Stable bbb Strong Strong Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 a- Group 3 0

ASB Bank Ltd.

AA-/Stable bbb Strong Strong Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 a- Group 3 0

Bank of New Zealand

AA-/Stable bbb Strong Strong Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 a- Group 3 0

Westpac New Zealand Ltd.

AA-/Stable bbb Strong Strong Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 a- Group 3 0
Philippines

Bank of the Philippine Islands

BBB+/ Stable bbb- Strong Strong Adequate Adequate/ Strong 0 bbb+ None 0 0
Singapore

DBS Bank Ltd.

AA-/Stable bbb+ Strong Adequate Adequate Strong/ Strong 0 a Sys. Imp. 2 0

Oversea-Chinese Banking Corp. Ltd.

AA-/Stable bbb+ Strong Adequate Adequate Strong/ Strong 0 a Sys. Imp. 2 0

United Overseas Bank Ltd.

AA-/Stable bbb+ Strong Adequate Adequate Strong/ Strong 0 a Sys. Imp. 2 0
Taiwan

CTBC Bank Co. Ltd.

A/Stable bbb Strong Strong Adequate Adequate/Strong 0 a- Sys. Imp. 1 0

Mega International Commercial Bank Co. Ltd.

A+/Stable bbb Strong Strong Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 a- Sys. Imp. 2 0
Thailand

Bangkok Bank Public Co. Ltd.

BBB+/Stable bb Strong Adequate Adequate Strong/ Strong 0 bbb- Sys. Imp. 2 0

KASIKORNBANK PCL

BBB/Stable bb Strong Adequate Adequate Adequate/Strong 0 bb+ Sys. Imp. 2 0

Krung Thai Bank Public Co. Ltd.

BBB-/Positive bb Adequate Adequate Adequate Adequate/Adequate 0 bb Sys. Imp. 2 0

Siam Commercial Bank Public Co. Ltd.

BBB/Stable bb Strong Adequate Adequate Adequate/Strong 0 bb+ Sys. Imp. 2 0
Data as of October 17, 2024. In "Type of Support" column, "None" includes some banks where ratings uplift because of support factors may be possible but none is currently included. (For example, this column includes some systemically important banks where systemic importance results in no rating uplift). *Holding company; the rating reflects that on the main operating company. §This ICR applies to the foreigncurrency Rating only. ICR--Issuer credit rating. GRE--Government-related entity. SACP--Stand-alone credit profile. Opco--Operating company. L-T--Long term. Sys. Imp.--Systemically important. ALAC--Additional loss-absorbing capacity. N/A--Not applicable. Sov --Capped by Sovereign Rating. Source: S&P Global Ratings.

Table 3

Recent rating actions: Asia-Pacific banks
Release Date Legal name Country From To
October 15, 2024

Toronto Dominion (South East Asia) Ltd.

Singapore AA-/Negative/A-1+ A+/Stable/A-1
October 9, 2024

Trade and Development Bank JSC

Mongolia B/Stable/B B+/Stable/B
October 9, 2024

Golomt Bank JSC

Mongolia B/Stable/B B+/Stable/B
October 4, 2024

Development Bank of Mongolia LLC

Mongolia B/Stable/B B+/Positive/B
August 27, 2024

Taishin International Bank Co. Ltd.

Taiwan BBB+/Stable/A-2 BBB+/WatchDev/A-2/WatchDev
August 27, 2024

Taishin Financial Holding Co. Ltd.

Taiwan BBB/Stable/A-2 BBB/WatchNeg/A-2/WatchNeg
August 27, 2024

Taiwan Shin Kong Commercial Bank Co. Ltd.

Taiwan BBB-/Negative/A-3 BBB-/WatchDev/A-3/WatchDev
July 30, 2024

Norfina Ltd.

Australia A+/WatchPos/A-1/WatchPos AA-/Stable/A-1+
*Recent rating actions are for the period July 1, 2024 to October 17, 2024. The list refers to banks and bank holding companies (banks) where the rating has been upgraded or downgraded, or the outlook has been changed. Banks where the ratings have been affirmed or the outlooks have not been changed are not included in the list.

Related Research

Banking Sector Research

Economic And Credit Conditions Research

Ratings Methodology News

Other Research

Please see Instant Insights: Key Takeaways From Our Research, published Oct. 16, 2024, which is a curated compilation of the key takeaways from our most up-to-date thought leadership.

Webcasts: Asia-Pacific Banking Insights

In the last quarter, we held the following webcasts to share our views on Asia-Pacific and other banking topics. The replays are available on

https://www.spglobal.com/ratings/en/events/webcast-replays/index#

  • Nine Takeaways From European Banks' Results And The Future Role Of Central Bank Refinancings, Sept. 17, 2024
  • What is Behind our BB- Rating on Muangthai Capital Public Co. Ltd., Sept. 16, 2024
  • Asia-Pacific Financial Institutions Virtual Conference 2024: Emerging Risks—Emerging Opportunities, Sept. 11, 2024
  • Alternative Investment Fund Subscription Lines, Sept. 9, 2024
  • Australian Property Spotlight 2024, July 30, 2024
  • Cyber Risk Insights: Through the APAC Lens, July 24, 2024
  • Global Banks Midyear Outlook 2024 - APAC/EMEA Session, July 17, 2024
  • 2024 Global Emerging Markets Virtual Conference: Is Emerging Asia Picking Up Steam?, July 3, 2024

This report does not constitute a rating action.

S&P Global Ratings Australia Pty Ltd holds Australian financial services license number 337565 under the Corporations Act 2001. S&P Global Ratings' credit ratings and related research are not intended for and must not be distributed to any person in Australia other than a wholesale client (as defined in Chapter 7 of the Corporations Act).

Primary Credit Analyst:Gavin J Gunning, Melbourne + 61 3 9631 2092;
gavin.gunning@spglobal.com
Secondary Contacts:Ryan Tsang, CFA, Hong Kong + 852 2533 3532;
ryan.tsang@spglobal.com
Geeta Chugh, Mumbai + 912233421910;
geeta.chugh@spglobal.com
Kensuke Sugihara, Tokyo + 81 3 4550 8475;
kensuke.sugihara@spglobal.com
Vera Chaplin, Melbourne + 61 3 9631 2058;
vera.chaplin@spglobal.com
Susan Chu, Hong Kong (852) 2912-3055;
susan.chu@spglobal.com
Sharad Jain, Melbourne + 61 3 9631 2077;
sharad.jain@spglobal.com
Peter Sikora, Melbourne + 61 3 9631 2094;
peter.sikora@spglobal.com
Nico N DeLange, Sydney + 61 2 9255 9887;
nico.delange@spglobal.com
Lisa Barrett, Melbourne + 61 3 9631 2081;
lisa.barrett@spglobal.com
HongTaik Chung, CFA, Hong Kong + 852 2533 3597;
hongtaik.chung@spglobal.com
Daehyun Kim, CFA, Hong Kong + 852 2533 3508;
daehyun.kim@spglobal.com
Emily Yi, Hong Kong + 852 2532 8091;
emily.yi@spglobal.com
Chizuru Tateno, Tokyo + 81 3 4550 8578;
chizuru.tateno@spglobal.com
Ming Tan, CFA, Singapore + 65 6216 1095;
ming.tan@spglobal.com
Phyllis Liu, CFA, FRM, Hong Kong +852 2532 8036;
phyllis.liu@spglobal.com
Yiran Zhong, Hong Kong 25333582;
yiran.zhong@spglobal.com
Xi Cheng, Shanghai + 852 2533 3582;
xi.cheng@spglobal.com
Eunice Fan, Taipei +886-2-2175-6818;
eunice.fan@spglobal.com
YuHan Lan, Taipei +886-2-2175-6810;
yuhan.lan@spglobal.com
Andy Chang, CFA, FRM, Taipei +886-2-2175-6815;
andy.chang@spglobal.com
Research Assistant:Priyal Shah, CFA, 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 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