OREANDA-NEWS. S&P Global Ratings today took rating actions on six Chrysler Capital Auto Receivables Trust transactions. We raised our ratings on 12 classes and affirmed our ratings on 17 (see list).

The rating actions reflect collateral performance to date and our expectations regarding future collateral performance, as well as each transaction's structure and credit enhancement. Additionally, we incorporated secondary credit factors, including credit stability, payment priorities under various scenarios, and sector - and issuer-specific analysis. Considering these, we believe the creditworthiness of the notes is consistent with the raised and affirmed ratings.

The oldest transaction, 2013-A, is performing in line with our expectations, while the subsequent deals are performing slightly worse than we had initially expected. As a result, we raised our loss estimate for the subsequent five transactions as shown below (see tables 1 and 2).

Table 1COLLATERAL PERFORMANCE (%)(As of the August 2016 distribution date)

Pool Current 60+ daySeries Mo. factor CNL delinq. CCART 2013-A 34 25.45 2.86 2.20CCART 2013-B 33 26.64 3.20 2.16CCART 2014-A 29 31.10 3.27 2.05CCART 2014-B 23 43.41 3.01 1.92CCART 2015-A 16 57.37 2.49 2.06CCART 2015-B 9 75.73 1.13 1.69

Mo.--Month. Delinq.—Delinquencies. CNL--cumulative net loss.

Table 2CNL EXPECTATIONS (%)

Original Revised lifetime lifetimeSeries CNL exp. CNL exp. (As of Sept. 2016)CCART 2013-A 3.50-4.00 3.75-3.95CCART 2013-B 3.50-4.00 4.25-4.45CCART 2014-A 3.50-4.00 4.65-4.85CCART 2014-B 3.50-4.00 5.20-5.50CCART 2015-A 4.00-4.50 5.75-6.25CCART 2015-B 4.25-4.75 5.75-6.25

CNL exp.--Cumulative net loss expectations.

Each transaction contains a sequential principal payment structure in which the notes are paid principal by seniority. Each also has credit enhancement in the form of a non-amortizing reserve account, overcollateralization (O/C), subordination for the higher-rated tranches, and excess spread.

The O/C and reserve accounts are at their required levels. The O/C target also serves as the floor. For the first three transactions, the non-amortizing O/C floor is 2.5% of initial receivables; for 2014-B, it is 4.75% of initial receivables; and for 2015-A and 2015-B, it is 6.75% of initial receivables.

Since the transactions closed, the credit support for each series has increased as a percentage of the amortizing pool balance. Each transaction was structured with a non-amortizing reserve account, O/C, and subordination. The ratings reflect our view that the total credit support as a percentage of the amortizing pool balance, compared with our expected remaining losses, is commensurate with the ratings.

Table 3HARD CREDIT SUPPORT (%)(As of the Aug 2016 distribution date)

Total hard Current total hard credit support credit supportSeries Class at issuance(i) (% of current)(i)CCART 2013-A A-4 14.60 62.28CCART 2013-A B 10.60 46.56CCART 2013-A C 6.00 28.49CCART 2013-A D 1.50 10.81CCART 2013-B A-4 14.60 59.49CCART 2013-B B 10.60 44.48CCART 2013-B C 6.00 27.21CCART 2013-B D 1.50 10.32CCART 2014-A A-3 14.60 50.97CCART 2014-A A-4 14.60 50.97CCART 2014-A B 10.60 38.11CCART 2014-A C 6.00 23.31CCART 2014-A D 1.50 8.84CCART 2014-B A-3 14.60 38.24CCART 2014-B A-4 14.60 38.24CCART 2014-B B 12.10 32.48CCART 2014-B C 7.40 21.65CCART 2014-B D 3.00 11.52CCART 2015-A A-3 18.75 36.17CCART 2015-A A-4 18.75 36.17CCART 2015-A B 15.50 30.50CCART 2015-A C 10.00 20.92CCART 2015-A D 5.00 12.20CCART 2015-B A-2 18.75 27.40CCART 2015-B A-3 18.75 27.40CCART 2015-B A-4 18.75 27.40CCART 2015-B B 15.50 23.11CCART 2015-B C 10.00 15.85CCART 2015-B D 5.00 9.24

(i)Calculated as a percentage of the total receivable pool balance, consisting of a reserve account, overcollateralization, and, if applicable, subordination.

We incorporated a cash flow analysis to assess the loss coverage level, giving credit to excess spread. Our various cash flow scenarios included forward-looking assumptions on recoveries, timing of losses, and voluntary absolute prepayment speeds that we believe are appropriate given each transaction's performance to date. Aside from our break-even cash flow analysis, we also conducted sensitivity analyses for these series to determine the impact that a moderate ('BBB') stress scenario would have on our ratings if losses begin trending higher than our revised base-case loss expectations.

In our view, the results demonstrated that all of the classes have adequate credit enhancement for the current ratings. We will continue to monitor the performance of all of the outstanding transactions to ensure that the credit enhancement remains sufficient, in our view, to cover our cumulative net loss expectations under our stress scenarios for each of the rated classes.