USD $333 million of debt securities affected
New York, July 27, 2011 -- Moody's Investors Service announced today that it has upgraded the ratings
of the following notes issued by Canyon Capital CLO 2006-1 Ltd.:
U.S. $226,000,000 Class A-1 Senior
Floating Rate Notes due 2020 (current balance of $219,814,233),
Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on June 22, 2011 Aa2 (sf)
Placed under review for possible upgrade;
U.S. $40,000,000 Class A-2 Senior
Variable Funding Floating Rate Notes due 2020 (current balance of 38,905,174),
Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on June 22, 2011 Aa2 (sf)
Placed under review for possible upgrade;
U.S. $15,200,000 Class B Floating Rate
Notes due 2020, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on June 22,
2011 A2 (sf) Placed under review for possible upgrade;
U.S. $22,800,000 Class C Floating Rate
Deferrable Notes due 2020, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously
on June 22, 2011 Ba1 (sf) Placed under review for possible upgrade;
U.S. $22,800,000 Class D Floating Rate
Deferrable Notes due 2020, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously
on June 22, 2011 B1 (sf) Placed under review for possible upgrade;
U.S. $13,300,000 Class E Floating Rate
Deferrable Notes due 2020, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously
on June 22, 2011 Caa3 (sf) Placed under review for possible upgrade.
RATINGS RATIONALE
According to Moody's, the rating actions taken on the notes are
primarily a result of applying Moody's revised CLO assumptions described
in "Moody's Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published
in June 2011. The primary changes to the modeling assumptions include
(1) a removal of the temporary 30% default probability macro stress
implemented in February 2009 as well as (2) increased BET liability stress
factors and increased recovery rate assumptions.
The actions also reflect consideration of credit improvement of the underlying
portfolio and an increase in the transaction's overcollateralization
ratios since the rating action in July 2009. Based on the July
2011 trustee report, the weighted average rating factor is currently
2737 compared to 3074 in July 2009. Additionally, the Class
A/B, Class C, Class D, and Class E overcollateralization
ratios are reported at 129.82%, 119.85%,
111.3%, and 106.85%, respectively,
versus July 2009 levels of 123.2%, 113.79%,
105.72%, and 101.46%, respectively,
and all overcollateralization tests are in compliance.
Due to the impact of revised and updated key assumptions referenced in
"Moody's Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published
in June 2011, key model inputs used by Moody's in its analysis,
such as par, weighted average rating factor, diversity score,
and weighted average recovery rate, may be different from the trustee's
reported numbers. In its base case, Moody's analyzed the
underlying collateral pool to have a performing par and principal proceeds
balance of $356 million, defaulted par of $2 million,
a weighted average default probability of 23.07% (implying
a WARF of 2963), a weighted average recovery rate upon default of
48%, and a diversity score of 47. The default and
recovery properties of the collateral pool are incorporated in cash flow
model analysis where they are subject to stresses as a function of the
target rating of each CLO liability being reviewed. The default
probability is derived from the credit quality of the collateral pool
and Moody's expectation of the remaining life of the collateral pool.
The average recovery rate to be realized on future defaults is based primarily
on the seniority of the assets in the collateral pool. In each
case, historical and market performance trends and collateral manager
latitude for trading the collateral are also factors.
Canyon Capital CLO 2006-1 Ltd., issued in August 2006,
is a collateralized loan obligation backed primarily by a portfolio of
senior secured loans.
The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Approach to
Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in June 2011.
Please see the Credit Policy page on www.moodys.com for
a copy of this methodology.
Moody's modeled the transaction using the Binomial Expansion Technique,
as described in Section 2.3.2.1 of the "Moody's Approach
to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" rating methodology published
in June 2011.
Moody's notes that this transaction is subject to a high level of macroeconomic
uncertainty, as evidenced by 1) uncertainties of credit conditions
in the general economy and 2) the large concentration of speculative-grade
debt maturing between 2013 and 2015 which may create challenges for issuers
to refinance. CDO notes' performance may also be impacted by 1)
the manager's investment strategy and behavior and 2) divergence in legal
interpretation of CDO documentation by different transactional parties
due to embedded ambiguities.
Sources of additional performance uncertainties are described below:
1) Recovery of defaulted assets: Market value fluctuations in defaulted
assets reported by the trustee and those assumed to be defaulted by Moody's
may create volatility in the deal's overcollateralization levels.
Further, the timing of recoveries and the manager's decision
to work out versus sell defaulted assets create additional uncertainties.
Moody's analyzed defaulted recoveries assuming the lower of the
market price and the recovery rate in order to account for potential volatility
in market prices.
2) Other collateral quality metrics: The deal is allowed to reinvest
and the manager has the ability to deteriorate the collateral quality
metrics' existing cushions against the covenant levels. Moody's
analyzed the impact of assuming the worse of reported and covenanted values
for weighted average rating factor, weighted average spread,
weighted average coupon, weighted average life, and diversity
score. However, as part of the base case, Moody's considered
spread levels higher than the covenant levels due to the large difference
between the reported and covenant levels.
Further information on Moody's analysis of this transaction is available
on www.moodys.com.
REGULATORY DISCLOSURES
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 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.
New York
Shan Lai
Associate Analyst
Structured Finance Group
Moody's Investors Service, Inc.
JOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376
SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653
New York
Rodrigo Araya
Senior Vice President
Structured Finance Group
Moody's Investors Service, Inc.
JOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376
SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653
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 upgrades the ratings of CLO notes issued by Canyon Capital CLO 2006-1 Ltd.