Fitch Affirms 13 CLOs From Various Vintages
KEY RATING DRIVERS
The affirmations on all classes included in this review are based on the stable performance of the underlying portfolios since the transactions' inceptions and the sufficient credit enhancement available to the notes. As of the most recent trustee reports, the transactions continue to pass all coverage and collateral quality tests. The credit quality of the underlying portfolios has remained relatively stable, as reflected by the weighted average rating factor (WARF) levels since closing and/or the last review. All CLOs have built par in their underlying portfolios, resulting in higher collateral balances than the target par amounts at closing. There were a total of two defaulted obligors across two CLOs, but the principal balance of each defaulted asset was no more than .37% of the portfolio balance (including principal cash) of WhiteHorse VII, Ltd. and .13% of the portfolio balance of Flatiron CLO 2014-1 Ltd.
Additional details on key performance drivers, such as credit enhancement levels and portfolio credit quality metrics, for each CLO can be found in the U.S. CLO Tracker accessible on 'www.fitchratings.com' or by using the link below.
The transactions included in this rating action originated in 2013-2014 and are managed by INVESCO Senior Secured Management, Inc., Apollo Credit Management (CLO), LLC, American Money Management Corporation, Cutwater Investor Services Corp., Eaton Vance Management, NYL Investors LLC, Jefferies Finance LLC, Steele Creek Investment Management LLC, THL Credit Advisors LLC, TICP CLO II Management, LLC, Allianz Global Investors U.S. LLC, and H.I.G. WhiteHorse Capital, LLC. All CLOs still remain in their respective reinvestment periods.
RATING SENSITIVITIES
The ratings of the notes may be sensitive to the following: asset defaults, significant negative credit migration, lower than historically observed recoveries for defaulted assets, and breaches of concentration limitations or portfolio quality covenants. Fitch conducted rating sensitivity analysis on the closing date of each CLO in this review, incorporating increased levels of defaults and reduced levels of recovery rates, among other sensitivities.
This review was conducted under the framework described in the report 'Global Rating Criteria for Corporate CDOs' using the PCM for projecting future default and recovery levels for the underlying portfolios. Given the stable performances of each transaction, no updated cash flow modeling was completed for this review.
Комментарии