Moody's also affirms the ratings on $166 million of notes
New York, October 18, 2016 -- Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the following notes
issued by Kodiak CDO II, Ltd.:
U.S. $338,000,000 Class A-1 Senior
Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2042 (current balance of $79,469,441),
Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on February 10, 2016 Upgraded
to Baa3 (sf)
U.S. $53,000,000 Class A-2 Senior
Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2042 Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously
on February 10, 2016 Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)
Moody's also affirmed the ratings on the following notes:
U.S. $80,000,000 Class A-3 Senior
Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2042 Affirmed B1 (sf); previously
on February 10, 2016 Upgraded to B1 (sf)
U.S. $81,000,000 Class B-1 Senior
Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2042 Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously
on January 31, 2014 Upgraded to Caa3 (sf)
U.S. $5,000,000 Class B-2 Senior
Secured Fixed/Floating Rate Notes Due 2042 Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously
on January 31, 2014 Upgraded to Caa3 (sf)
Kodiak CDO II, Ltd., issued in June 2007, is
a collateralized debt obligation backed mainly by a portfolio of REIT
trust preferred securities (TruPS), with small exposures to insurance
TruPS, TruPS CDO tranches, corporate bonds, and CMBS
and CRE CDO securities.
RATINGS RATIONALE
The rating actions are primarily a result of the deleveraging of the Class
A-1 notes and an increase in the transaction's over-collateralization
ratios since June 2016.
The Class A-1 notes have paid down by approximately 14.4%
or $34.5 million since June 2016 using principal proceeds
from the redemption of the underlying assets and the diversion of excess
interest proceeds. Based on Moody's calculations, the
OC ratios for Class A-1 and Class A-2 notes have improved
to 461.0% and 276.6%, respectively,
from June 2016 levels of 350.3% and 239.1%,
respectively. The Class A-1 notes will continue to benefit
from the diversion of excess interest and the use of proceeds from redemptions
of any assets in the collateral pool. The diversion of excess interest
to pay down the Class A-1 notes will increase after the two outstanding
hedges mature in February 2017.
The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as
par, weighted average rating factor, and weighted average
recovery rate, are based on its methodology and could differ from
the trustee's reported numbers. In its base case, Moody's
analyzed the underlying collateral pool has having a performing par and
principal proceeds balance of $366.5 million, defaulted/deferring
par of $91.6 million, a weighted average default probability
of 60.7% (implying a WARF of 4701), and a weighted
average recovery rate upon default of 13.7%. In addition
to the quantitative factors Moody's explicitly models, qualitative
factors are part of rating committee considerations. Moody's considers
the structural protections in the transaction, the risk of an event
of default, recent deal performance under current market conditions,
the legal environment and specific documentation features. All
information available to rating committees, including macroeconomic
forecasts, inputs from other Moody's analytical groups, market
factors, and judgments regarding the nature and severity of credit
stress on the transactions, can influence the final rating decision.
Methodology Underlying the Rating Action
The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Approach
to Rating TruPS CDOs," published in October 2016. Please
see the Rating Methodologies page on www.moodys.com for
a copy of this methodology.
Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:
This transaction is subject to a number of factors and circumstances that
could lead to either an upgrade or downgrade of the ratings, as
described below:
1) Macroeconomic uncertainty: TruPS CDOs performance could be negatively
affected by uncertainty about credit conditions in the general economy.
2) Portfolio credit risk: Credit performance of the assets collateralizing
the transaction that is better than Moody's current expectations
could have a positive impact on the transaction's performance.
Conversely, asset credit performance weaker than Moody's current
expectations could have adverse consequences on the transaction's
performance.
3) Deleveraging: One source of uncertainty in this transaction is
whether deleveraging from unscheduled principal proceeds and excess interest
proceeds will continue and at what pace. Note repayments that are
faster than Moody's current expectations could have a positive impact
on the notes' ratings, beginning with the notes with the highest
payment priority.
4) Exposure to non-publicly rated assets: The deal contains
a large number of securities whose default probability Moody's assesses
through credit scores derived using credit estimates. Because these
are not public ratings, they are subject to additional uncertainties.
Loss and Cash Flow Analysis:
Moody's applied a Monte Carlo simulation framework in Moody's
CDOROM™ to model the loss distribution for TruPS CDOs. The
simulated defaults and recoveries for each of the Monte Carlo scenarios
defined the reference pool's loss distribution. Moody's
then used the loss distribution as an input in its CDOEdge™ cash
flow model. CDOROM™ is available on www.moodys.com
under Products and Solutions -- Analytical models,
upon receipt of a signed free license agreement.
The portfolio of this CDO contains mainly TruPS issued by small to medium
sized REIT companies that Moody's does not rate publicly.
To evaluate the credit quality of bank TruPS that do not have public ratings,
Moody's REIT group assesses their credit quality using the REIT
firms' annual financials.
In addition to the base case analysis, Moody's also conducted sensitivity
analyses to test the impact of a number of default probabilities on the
rated notes relative to the base case modeling results, which may
be different from the current public ratings of the notes. Below
is a summary of the impact of different default probabilities (expressed
in terms of WARF) on all of the rated notes (by the difference in the
number of notches versus the current model output, for which a positive
difference corresponds to lower expected loss):
Assuming a two-notch upgrade to assets with below-investment
grade ratings or rating estimates (WARF of 2803)
Class A-1: +2
Class A-2: +3
Class A-3: +4
Class B-1: +5
Class B-2: +5
Assuming a two-notch downgrade to assets with below-investment
grade ratings or rating estimates (WARF of 5368)
Class A-1: 0
Class A-2: -1
Class A-3: -3
Class B-1: -3
Class B-2: -3
REGULATORY DISCLOSURES
For further specification of Moody's key rating assumptions and sensitivity
analysis, see the sections Methodology Assumptions and Sensitivity
to Assumptions of the disclosure form.
Moody's describes its loss and cash flow analysis in the section
"Ratings Rationale" of this press release.
Moody's quantitative analysis entails an evaluation of scenarios
that stress factors contributing to sensitivity of ratings and take into
account the likelihood of severe collateral losses or impaired cash flows.
Moody's weights the impact on the rated instruments based on its
assumptions of the likelihood of the events in such scenarios occurring.
For ratings issued on a program, series or category/class of debt,
this announcement provides certain 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 certain regulatory disclosures in relation
to the credit rating action on the support provider and in relation to
each particular credit rating action for securities that derive their
credit ratings from the support provider's credit rating.
For provisional ratings, this announcement provides certain 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.
For any affected securities or rated entities receiving direct credit
support from the primary entity(ies) of this credit rating action,
and whose ratings may change as a result of this credit rating action,
the associated regulatory disclosures will be those of the guarantor entity.
Exceptions to this approach exist for the following disclosures,
if applicable to jurisdiction: Ancillary Services, Disclosure
to rated entity, Disclosure from rated entity.
Regulatory disclosures contained in this press release apply to the credit
rating and, if applicable, the related rating outlook or rating
review.
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.
Please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on www.moodys.com
for additional regulatory disclosures for each credit rating.
Xixian Feng
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
Oktay Veliev
VP - Sr Credit Officer/Manager
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