USD $277.1 million of debt securities affected
New York, March 11, 2011 -- Moody's Investors Service announced today that it has upgraded the ratings
of the following notes issued by Nob Hill CLO, Limited:
U.S. $210,000,000 Class A-1 Senior
Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2018 Notes (current balance of $203,750,942.95),
Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on June 5, 2009 Downgraded
to Aa3 (sf);
U.S. $23,000,000 Class A-2 Senior
Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2018 Notes, Upgraded to A1 (sf);
previously on June 5, 2009 Downgraded to Baa2 (sf);
U.S. $11,350,000 Class B Senior Secured
Floating Rate Notes Due 2018 Notes, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously
on June 5, 2009 Downgraded to Ba1 (sf);
U.S. $14,145,000 Class C Secured Deferrable
Floating Rate Notes Due 2018 Notes, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf);
previously on June 5, 2009 Downgraded to Ba3 (sf);
U.S. $13,580,000 Class D Secured Deferrable
Floating Rate Notes Due 2018 Notes, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously
on November 23, 2010 Caa3 (sf) Placed Under Review for Possible
Upgrade;
U.S. $11,300,000 Class E Secured Deferrable
Floating Rate Notes Due 2018 Notes, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf);
previously on November 23, 2010 C (sf) Placed Under Review for Possible
Upgrade.
RATINGS RATIONALE
According to Moody's, the rating actions taken on the notes
result primarily from improvement in the credit quality of the underlying
portfolio and an increase in the transaction's overcollateralization
ratios since the rating action in June 2009. Based on the February
2011 trustee report, the weighted average rating factor is 2846
compared to 3241 in May 2009, and securities rated Caa1/CCC+
or below make up approximately 13.4% of the underlying portfolio
versus 21% in May 2009. The deal also experienced a decrease
in defaults. In particular, the dollar amount of defaulted
securities has decreased to about $6.9 million from approximately
$21.4 million in May 2009.
The overcollateralization ratios of the rated notes have also improved
since the rating action. The Class A/B, Class C, Class
D and Class E overcollateralization ratios are reported at 121.5%,
114.7%, 108.9 and 104.4%,
respectively, versus May 2009 levels of 113.2%,
107.0%, 101.6 and 97.4%,
respectively. Moody's also notes that the Class D and Class
E Notes are no longer deferring interest and that all previously deferred
interest has been paid in full.
Due to the impact of revised and updated key assumptions referenced in
"Moody's Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" and
"Annual Sector Review (2009): Global CLOs," 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 $276.2 million, defaulted par of $8.9
million, a weighted average default probability of 30.5%
(implying a WARF of 4000), a weighted average recovery rate upon
default of 43.5%, and a diversity score of 55.
These 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.
Nob Hill CLO, Limited, issued in July 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 August 2009.
Moody's Investors Service did not receive or take into account a
third-party due diligence report on the underlying assets or financial
instruments related to the monitoring of this transaction in the past
six months.
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 August 2009.
In addition to the base case analysis described above, Moody's also
performed sensitivity analyses to test the impact on all rated notes of
various default probabilities. Below is a summary of the impact
of different default probabilities (expressed in terms of WARF levels)
on all rated notes (shown in terms of the number of notches' difference
versus the current model output, whereby a positive difference corresponds
to lower expected losses), assuming that all other factors are held
equal:
Moody's Adjusted WARF -20% (3200):
Class A1: +1
Class A2: +3
Class B: +2
Class C: +2
Class D: +2
Class E: +3
Moody's Adjusted WARF +20% (4800):
Class A1: -2
Class A2: -1
Class B: -2
Class C: -2
Class D: -2
Class E: -1
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 2012 and 2014 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) Weighted average life: The notes' ratings are sensitive
to the weighted average life assumption of the portfolio, which
may be extended due to the manager's decision to reinvest into new
issue loans or other loans with longer maturities and/or participate in
amend-to-extend offerings. Moody's tested for
a possible extension of the actual weighted average life in its analysis.
3) 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 lower of reported and covenanted values
for weighted average rating factor, weighted average spread,
weighted average coupon, 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. In addition, Moody's publishes
a weekly summary of structured finance credit, ratings and methodologies,
available to all registered users of our web site, at www.moodys.com/SFQuickCheck.
REGULATORY DISCLOSURES
Information sources used to prepare the credit rating are the following:
parties involved in the ratings, public information, and confidential
and proprietary Moody's Investors Service information.
Moody's Investors Service considers the quality of information available
on the issuer or obligation satisfactory for the purposes of maintaining
a credit rating.
Moody's adopts all necessary measures so that the information it uses
in assigning a credit 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 ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on Moodys.com
for the last rating action and the rating history.
The date on which some Credit Ratings were first released goes back to
a time before Moody's Investors Service's Credit Ratings were fully digitized
and accurate data may not be available. Consequently, Moody's
Investors Service 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 the Credit Policy page on Moodys.com for the methodologies
used in determining ratings, further information on the meaning
of each rating category and the definition of default and recovery.
New York
Jacqueline Yuen
Analyst
Structured Finance Group
Moody's Investors Service
JOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376
SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653
New York
David H. Burger
VP - Senior Credit Officer
Structured Finance Group
Moody's Investors Service
JOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376
SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653
Moody's Investors Service
250 Greenwich Street
New York, NY 10007
U.S.A.
JOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376
SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653
Moody's upgrades the ratings of notes issued by Nob Hill CLO, Limited
