USD 250 million of debt securities affected.
New York, March 22, 2012 -- Moody's Investors Service announced today that it has downgraded the ratings
of the following notes issued by Palisades CDO Ltd.:
U.S. $366,000,000 Class A-1A Floating
Rate Notes Due July 2039 (current outstanding balance of $147,264,967.40),
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on October 29, 2009 Downgraded
to Caa1 (sf);
U.S. $6,000,000 Class A-1B 4.69%
Notes Due July 2039 (current outstanding balance of $2,414,179.79),
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on October 29, 2009 Downgraded
to Caa1 (sf);
U.S. $78,000,000 Class B-1 Floating
Rate Notes Due July 2039, Downgraded to C (sf); previously
on March 20, 2009 Downgraded to Ca (sf);
U.S. $6,000,000 Class B-2 Floating
Rate Notes Due July 2039, Downgraded to C (sf); previously
on March 20, 2009 Downgraded to Ca (sf);
U.S. $15,000,000 Type III Composite Notes
Due July 2039 (current rated balance of $13,126,203.41),
Downgraded to C (sf); previously on March 20, 2009 Downgraded
to Ca (sf);
U.S. $4,800,000 Type IV Composite Notes
Due July 2039 (current rated balance of $2,982,437.53),
Downgraded to C (sf); previously on March 20, 2009 Downgraded
to Ca (sf).
RATINGS RATIONALE
According to Moody's, the rating downgrades today are the result
of deterioration in the credit quality of the underlying portfolio.
Such credit deterioration is observed through numerous factors,
including an increase in the WARF, an increase in the dollar amount
of defaulted securities and a decrease in the transaction's overcollateralization
ratios. Based on the latest trustee report dated February 1,
2012, the WARF of the portfolio has increased to 2476 from 1285
since the last rating action in October 2009. Additionally,
the Class A/B and Class C overcollateralization ratios are reported at
52.4% and 47.5% respectively versus August
2009 levels of 70.9% and 66.7%, respectively.
Palisades CDO Ltd., issued in July 2004, is a collateralized
debt obligation backed primarily by a portfolio of RMBS, CMBS and
SF CDOs originated from 2001 to 2006.
The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Approach to
Rating SF CDOs" published in November 2010. Please see the Credit
Policy page on www.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.
Moody's applied the Monte Carlo simulation framework within CDOROMv2.8
to model the loss distribution for SF CDOs. Within this framework,
defaults are generated so that they occur with the frequency indicated
by the adjusted default probability pool (the default probability associated
with the current rating multiplied by the Resecuritization Stress) for
each credit in the reference. Specifically, correlated defaults
are simulated using a normal (or "Gaussian") copula model that applies
the asset correlation framework. Recovery rates for defaulted credits
are generated by applying within the simulation the distributional assumptions,
including correlation between recovery values.
Together, the simulated defaults and recoveries across each of the
Monte Carlo scenarios define the loss distribution for the reference pool.
Once the loss distribution for the collateral has been calculated,
each collateral loss scenario derived through the CDOROM loss distribution
is associated with the interest and principal received by the rated liability
classes via the CDOEdge cash-flow model . The cash flow
model takes into account the following: collateral cash flows,
the transaction covenants, the priority of payments (waterfall)
for interest and principal proceeds received from portfolio assets,
reinvestment assumptions, the timing of defaults, interest-rate
scenarios and foreign exchange risk (if present). The Expected
Loss (EL) for each tranche is the weighted average of losses to each tranche
across all the scenarios, where the weight is the likelihood of
the scenario occurring. Moody's defines the loss as the shortfall
in the present value of cash flows to the tranche relative to the present
value of the promised cash flows. The present values are calculated
using the promised tranche coupon rate as the discount rate. For
floating rate tranches, the discount rate is based on the promised
spread over Libor and the assumed Libor scenario.
Moody's notes that in arriving at its ratings of SF CDOs, there
exist a number of sources of uncertainty, operating both on a macro
level and on a transaction-specific level. Primary sources
of assumption uncertainty are the extent of the slowdown in growth in
the current macroeconomic environment and the commercial and residential
real estate property markets. While commercial real estate property
markets are gaining momentum, a consistent upward trend will not
be evident until the volume of transactions increases, distressed
properties are cleared from the pipeline and job creation rebounds.
Among the uncertainties in the residential real estate property market
are those surrounding future housing prices, pace of residential
mortgage foreclosures, loan modification and refinancing,
unemployment rate and interest rates.
Moody's rating action today factors in a number of sensitivity analyses
and stress scenarios, discussed below. Results are shown
in terms of the number of notches' difference versus the current model
output, where a positive difference corresponds to lower expected
loss, assuming that all other factors are held equal:
Moody's Caa rated assets notched up by 2 rating notches:
Class A-1: 0
Class B: 0
Moody's Caa rated assets notched down by 2 rating notches:
Class A-1: -1
Class B: 0
Further information on Moody's analysis of this transaction is available
on www.moodys.com
REGULATORY DISCLOSURES
Although this credit rating has been issued in a non-EU country
which has not been recognized as endorsable at this date, this credit
rating is deemed "EU qualified by extension" and may still
be used by financial institutions for regulatory purposes until 30 April
2012. Further information on the EU endorsement status and on the
Moody's office that has issued a particular Credit Rating is available
on www.moodys.com.
For ratings issued on a program, series or category/class of debt,
this announcement provides relevant regulatory disclosures in relation
to each rating of a subsequently issued bond or note of the same series
or category/class of debt or pursuant to a program for which the ratings
are derived exclusively from existing ratings in accordance with Moody's
rating practices. For ratings issued on a support provider,
this announcement provides relevant regulatory disclosures in relation
to the rating action on the support provider and in relation to each particular
rating action for securities that derive their credit ratings from the
support provider's credit rating. For provisional ratings,
this announcement provides relevant regulatory disclosures in relation
to the provisional rating assigned, and in relation to a definitive
rating that may be assigned subsequent to the final issuance of the debt,
in each case where the transaction structure and terms have not changed
prior to the assignment of the definitive rating in a manner that would
have affected the rating. For further information please see the
ratings tab on the issuer/entity page for the respective issuer on www.moodys.com.
Information sources used to prepare the rating are the following:
parties involved in the ratings, public information, and confidential
and proprietary Moody's Investors Service information.
Moody's did not receive or take into account a third-party
assessment on the due diligence performed regarding the underlying assets
or financial instruments related to the monitoring of this transaction
in the past six months.
Moody's considers the quality of information available on the rated
entity, obligation or credit satisfactory for the purposes of issuing
a rating.
Moody's adopts all necessary measures so that the information it
uses in assigning a rating is of sufficient quality and from sources Moody's
considers to be reliable including, when appropriate, independent
third-party sources. However, Moody's is not
an auditor and cannot in every instance independently verify or validate
information received in the rating process.
Please see the ratings disclosure page on www.moodys.com
for general disclosure on potential conflicts of interests.
Please see the ratings disclosure page on www.moodys.com
for information on (A) MCO's major shareholders (above 5%) and
for (B) further information regarding certain affiliations that may exist
between directors of MCO and rated entities as well as (C) the names of
entities that hold ratings from MIS that have also publicly reported to
the SEC an ownership interest in MCO of more than 5%. A
member of the board of directors of this rated entity may also be a member
of the board of directors of a shareholder of Moody's Corporation;
however, Moody's has not independently verified this matter.
Please see Moody's Rating Symbols and Definitions on the Rating Process
page on www.moodys.com for further information on the meaning
of each rating category and the definition of default and recovery.
Please see ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on www.moodys.com
for the last rating action and the rating history.
The date on which some ratings were first released goes back to a time
before Moody's ratings were fully digitized and accurate data may not
be available. Consequently, Moody's provides a date that
it believes is the most reliable and accurate based on the information
that is available to it. Please see the ratings disclosure page
on our website www.moodys.com for further information.
Please see www.moodys.com for any updates on changes to
the lead rating analyst and to the Moody's legal entity that has issued
the rating.
Aniket Deshpande
Associate Analyst
Structured Finance Group
Moody's Investors Service, Inc.
250 Greenwich Street
New York, NY 10007
U.S.A.
JOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376
SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653
Ramon O. Torres
Senior Vice President
Structured Finance Group
JOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376
SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653
Releasing Office:
Moody's Investors Service, Inc.
250 Greenwich Street
New York, NY 10007
U.S.A.
JOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376
SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653
Moody's downgrades the ratings of six classes of notes issued by Palisades CDO Ltd., a SF CDO.