NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Link to Fitch Ratings' Report: Towd Point Mortgage Trust 2016-5 (US RMBS)
Fitch Ratings expects to rate Towd Point Mortgage Trust 2016-5 (TPMT 2016-5) as follows:
--$354,378,000 class A1 notes 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$35,768,000 class A2 notes 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$31,366,000 class M1 notes 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
--$27,514,000 class M2 notes 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$23,662,000 class B1 notes 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$19,810,000 class B2 notes 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable.
The following classes will not be rated by Fitch:
--$14,857,000 class B3 notes;
--$21,461,000 class B4 notes;
--$21,461,423 class B5 notes.
The notes are supported by one collateral group that consisted of 2,517 seasoned performing and re-performing mortgages with a total balance of approximately $550.3 million (which includes $21.2 million, or 3.85%, of the aggregate pool balance in non-interest-bearing deferred principal amounts) as of the cut-off date.
The 'AAAsf' rating on the class A1 notes reflects the 35.60% subordination provided by the 6.50% class A2, 5.70% class M1, 5.00% class M2, 4.30% class B1, 3.60% class B2, 2.70% class B3, 3.90% class B4 and 3.90% class B5 notes.
Fitch's ratings on the class notes reflect the credit attributes of the underlying collateral, the quality of the servicer: Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. (SPS),rated 'RPS1-', and the representation (rep) and warranty framework, minimal due diligence findings and the sequential pay structure.
KEY RATING DRIVERS
Distressed Performance History (Concern): The collateral pool consists primarily of peak-vintage seasoned re-performing loans (RPLs), including loans that have been paying for the past 24 months, which Fitch identifies as "clean current" (71%), and loans that are current but have recent delinquencies or incomplete paystrings, identified as "dirty current" (29%). All loans were current as of the cutoff date. 77.8% of the loans have received modifications.
Due Diligence Compliance Findings (Concern): The third-party review (TPR) firm's due diligence review resulted in approximately 10.5% 'C' and 'D' graded loans. For 61 loans, the due diligence results showed issues regarding high cost testing - the loans were either missing the final HUD1 or used alternate documentation to test - and therefore a slight upward revision to the model output loss severity (LS) was applied, as further described in the Third-Party Due Diligence section beginning on page 6. In addition, timelines were extended on 165 loans that were missing final modification documents.
Servicing Transfer Risk (Concern): At the time of this presale, a number of loans had not yet transferred to the servicer, Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. (SPS). The servicing transfer is expected to be completed prior to closing. To account for the risk that some borrowers become delinquent as a result of the servicing transfer, Fitch increased its loss expectations 25 basis points at each rating category. To the extent that servicing transfer delinquencies are higher than expected in the period between the publication of the presale and the transaction closing date, Fitch may adjust up its loss expectations provided in the presale report.
No Servicer P&I Advances (Mixed): The servicer will not be advancing delinquent monthly payments of P&I, which reduces liquidity to the trust. However, as P&I advances made on behalf of loans that become delinquent and eventually liquidate reduce liquidation proceeds to the trust, the loan-level LS are less for this transaction than for those where the servicer is obligated to advance P&I. Structural provisions and cash flow priorities, together with increased subordination, provide for timely payments of interest to the 'AAAsf' and 'AAsf' rated classes.
Sequential-Pay Structure (Positive): The transaction's cash flow is based on a sequential-pay structure whereby the subordinate classes do not receive principal until the senior class is repaid in full. Losses are allocated in reverse-sequential order. Furthermore, the provision to re-allocate principal to pay interest on the 'AAAsf' and 'AAsf' rated notes prior to other principal distributions is highly supportive of timely interest payments to those classes, in the absence of servicer advancing.
Limited Life of Rep Provider (Concern): FirstKey Mortgage, LLC (FirstKey), as rep provider, will only be obligated to repurchase a loan due to breaches prior to the payment date in January 2018. Thereafter, a reserve fund will be available to cover amounts due to noteholders for loans identified as having rep breaches. Amounts on deposit in the reserve fund, as well as the increased level of subordination, will be available to cover additional defaults and losses resulting from rep weaknesses or breaches occurring on or after the payment date in January 2018. If FirstKey does not fulfill its obligation to repurchase a mortgage loan due to a breach, Cerberus Global Residential Mortgage Opportunity Fund, L.P. (the responsible party) will repurchase the loan.
Tier 2 Representation Framework (Concern): Fitch considers the representation, warranty, and enforcement (RW&E) mechanism construct for this transaction to be consistent with what it views as a Tier 2 framework, due to the inclusion of knowledge qualifiers and the exclusion of loans from certain reps as a result of third-party due diligence findings. Thus, Fitch increased its 'AAAsf' loss expectations by roughly 229 bps to account for a potential increase in defaults and losses arising from weaknesses in the reps.
Timing of Recordation and Document Remediation (Neutral): An updated title and tax search, as well as a review to confirm that the mortgage and subsequent assignments were recorded in the relevant local jurisdiction, was also performed. Per the representations provided in the transaction documents, all loans have either all been recorded in the appropriate jurisdiction, are in the process of being recorded, or will be sent for recordation within 12 months of the closing date.
While the expected timelines for recordation and remediation are viewed by Fitch as reasonable, Fitch believes that FirstKey's oversight for completion of these activities serves as a strong mitigant to potential delays. In addition, the obligation of FirstKey or Cerberus Global Residential Mortgage Opportunity Fund, L.P. to repurchase loans, for which assignments are not recorded and endorsements are not completed by the payment date in January 2018, aligns the issuer's interests regarding completing the recordation process with those of noteholders.
Clean Current Loans (Positive): Fitch's analysis of loans that have had clean pay histories for 24 months or more found that, for these loans, its loan loss model projected a probability of default (PD) that was more punitive than that indicated by actual delinquency roll rate projections. To account for this difference, Fitch reduced the pool's lifetime default expectations by approximately 9.3%.
Deferred Amounts (Negative): Non-interest-bearing principal forbearance amounts totaling $21.48 million (3.90%) of the unpaid principal balance) are outstanding on 548 loans. Fitch included the deferred amounts when calculating the borrower's LTV and sLTV despite the lower payment and amounts not being owed during the term of the loan. The inclusion resulted in higher PDs and LS than if there were no deferrals. Fitch believes that borrower default behavior for these loans will resemble that of the higher LTVs, as exit strategies (that is, sale or refinancing) will be limited relative to those borrowers with more equity in the property.
Solid Alignment of Interest (Positive): A majority-owned affiliate of FirstKey will acquire and retain a 5% eligible vertical interest in each class of the securities to be issued.
Fitch's analysis incorporated one criteria variations from the "U.S. RMBS Seasoned and Re-performing Loan Criteria" as described below.
The variation is non application of a default penalty to income documentation for loans with less than full income documentation that are over five years seasoned. Fitch conducted analysis comparing the performance between loans that were full documentation and non-full documentation at origination. The analysis showed that after 5 years of seasoning, the performance was similar. The impact on the loss expectations from application of this variation resulted in lower loss expectations of roughly 100 basis points depending on the rating category.
Fitch's analysis incorporates sensitivity analyses to demonstrate how the ratings would react to steeper market value declines (MVDs) than assumed at both the metropolitan statistical area (MSA) and national levels. The implied rating sensitivities are only an indication of some of the potential outcomes and do not consider other risk factors that the transaction may become exposed to or be considered in the surveillance of the transaction.
Fitch conducted sensitivity analysis determining how the ratings would react to steeper MVDs at the national level. The analysis assumes MVDs of 10%, 20%, and 30%, in addition to the model-projected 37.4% at 'AAAsf'. The analysis indicates there is some potential rating migration with higher MVDs, compared with the model projection.
Fitch also conducted sensitivities to determine the stresses to MVDs that would reduce a rating by one full category, to non-investment grade, and to 'CCCsf'.
Fitch's stress and rating sensitivity analysis are discussed in its presale report released today 'Towd Point Mortgage Trust 2016-5', available at 'www.fitchratings.com' or by clicking on the link.
USE OF THIRD-PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G-10
Fitch was provided with Form ABS Due Diligence-15E (Form 15E) as prepared by WestCor Land Title Insurance Company (WestCor), Clayton Holdings LLC, and American Mortgage Consultants (AMC)/JCIII & Associates, Inc. (JCIII). The third-party due diligence described in Form 15E focused on: regulatory compliance, pay history, servicing comments, the presence of key documents in the loan file and data integrity. In addition, WestCor and AMC were retained to perform an updated title and tax search, as well as a review to confirm that the mortgages were recorded in the relevant local jurisdiction and the related assignment chains.
A regulatory compliance and data integrity review was completed on 100% of the pool. A pay history review was conducted on 100% of the pool, and a servicing comment review was completed on the loans which have experienced a delinquency in the past 12 months.
Fitch considered this information in its analysis and based on the findings, Fitch made minor adjustments to its analysis:
Fitch made an adjustment on 61 loans that were subject to federal, state, and/or local predatory testing. These loans contained material violations including an inability to test for high cost violations or confirm compliance, which could expose the trust to potential assignee liability. These loans were marked as 'indeterminate'. Typically the HUD issues are related to missing the Final HUD, illegible HUDs, incomplete HUDs due to missing pages, or only having estimated HUDs. The final HUD1 was not used to test for High Cost loans. To mitigate this risk, Fitch assumed a 100% LS for loans in the states that fall under Freddie Mac's do not purchase list of 'high cost' or 'high risk'. 10 loans were affected by this approach.
For the remaining 51 loans, where the properties are not located in the states that fall under Freddie Mac's do not purchase list, the likelihood of all loans being high cost is low. However, we assume the trust could potentially incur notable legal expenses. Fitch increased its loss severity expectations by 5% for these loans to account for the risk.
There were 165 loans missing modification documents or a signature on modification documents. For these loans, timelines were extended by an additional three months, in addition to the six-month timeline extension applied to the entire pool.
REPRESENTATIONS, WARRANTIES AND ENFORCEMENT MECHANISMS
A description of the transaction's representations, warranties and enforcement mechanisms (RW&Es) that are disclosed in the offering document and which relate to the underlying asset pool is available by accessing the appendix referenced under Related Research below. The appendix also contains a comparison of these RW&Es to those Fitch considers typical for the asset class as detailed in the Special Report titled "Representations, Warranties and Enforcement Mechanisms in Global Structured Finance Transactions," dated May 2016.
Sources of Information:
In addition to the information sources identified in Fitch's criteria listed below, Fitch's analysis incorporated data tapes, due diligence results, deal structure and legal documents provided on the transaction's 17g5 website available on 'www.17g5.com'.
Additional information is available at www.fitchratings.com.
Counterparty Criteria for Structured Finance and Covered Bonds (pub. 01 Sep 2016)
Criteria for Interest Rate Stresses in Structured Finance Transactions and Covered Bonds (pub. 26 Oct 2016)
Criteria for Rating Caps and Limitations in Global Structured Finance Transactions (pub. 16 Jun 2016)
Global Structured Finance Rating Criteria (pub. 27 Jun 2016)
Rating Criteria for U.S. Residential and Small Balance Commercial Mortgage Servicers (pub. 23 Apr 2015)
U.S. RMBS Cash Flow Analysis Criteria (pub. 15 Apr 2016)
U.S. RMBS Loan Loss Model Criteria (pub. 12 May 2016)
U.S. RMBS Master Rating Criteria (pub. 27 Jun 2016)
U.S. RMBS Seasoned and Re-Performing Loan Criteria (pub. 12 May 2016)
U.S. RMBS Surveillance and Re-REMIC Criteria (pub. 15 Nov 2016)
Dodd-Frank Rating Information Disclosure Form
ABS Due Diligence Form 15E 1
ABS Due Diligence Form 15E 2
ABS Due Diligence Form 15E 3
Copyright © 2016 by Fitch Ratings, Inc., Fitch Ratings Ltd. and its subsidiaries. 33 Whitehall Street, NY, NY 10004. Telephone: 1-800-753-4824, (212) 908-0500. Fax: (212) 480-4435. Reproduction or retransmission in whole or in part is prohibited except by permission. All rights reserved. In issuing and maintaining its ratings and in making other reports (including forecast information), Fitch relies on factual information it receives from issuers and underwriters and from other sources Fitch believes to be credible. Fitch conducts a reasonable investigation of the factual information relied upon by it in accordance with its ratings methodology, and obtains reasonable verification of that information from independent sources, to the extent such sources are available for a given security or in a given jurisdiction. The manner of Fitch's factual investigation and the scope of the third-party verification it obtains will vary depending on the nature of the rated security and its issuer, the requirements and practices in the jurisdiction in which the rated security is offered and sold and/or the issuer is located, the availability and nature of relevant public information, access to the management of the issuer and its advisers, the availability of pre-existing third-party verifications such as audit reports, agreed-upon procedures letters, appraisals, actuarial reports, engineering reports, legal opinions and other reports provided by third parties, the availability of independent and competent third- party verification sources with respect to the particular security or in the particular jurisdiction of the issuer, and a variety of other factors. Users of Fitch's ratings and reports should understand that neither an enhanced factual investigation nor any third-party verification can ensure that all of the information Fitch relies on in connection with a rating or a report will be accurate and complete. Ultimately, the issuer and its advisers are responsible for the accuracy of the information they provide to Fitch and to the market in offering documents and other reports. In issuing its ratings and its reports, Fitch must rely on the work of experts, including independent auditors with respect to financial statements and attorneys with respect to legal and tax matters. Further, ratings and forecasts of financial and other information are inherently forward-looking and embody assumptions and predictions about future events that by their nature cannot be verified as facts. As a result, despite any verification of current facts, ratings and forecasts can be affected by future events or conditions that were not anticipated at the time a rating or forecast was issued or affirmed.
The information in this report is provided "as is" without any representation or warranty of any kind, and Fitch does not represent or warrant that the report or any of its contents will meet any of the requirements of a recipient of the report. A Fitch rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a security. This opinion and reports made by Fitch are based on established criteria and methodologies that Fitch is continuously evaluating and updating. Therefore, ratings and reports are the collective work product of Fitch and no individual, or group of individuals, is solely responsible for a rating or a report. The rating does not address the risk of loss due to risks other than credit risk, unless such risk is specifically mentioned. Fitch is not engaged in the offer or sale of any security. All Fitch reports have shared authorship. Individuals identified in a Fitch report were involved in, but are not solely responsible for, the opinions stated therein. The individuals are named for contact purposes only. A report providing a Fitch rating is neither a prospectus nor a substitute for the information assembled, verified and presented to investors by the issuer and its agents in connection with the sale of the securities. Ratings may be changed or withdrawn at any time for any reason in the sole discretion of Fitch. Fitch does not provide investment advice of any sort. Ratings are not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Ratings do not comment on the adequacy of market price, the suitability of any security for a particular investor, or the tax-exempt nature or taxability of payments made in respect to any security. Fitch receives fees from issuers, insurers, guarantors, other obligors, and underwriters for rating securities. Such fees generally vary from US$1,000 to US$750,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent) per issue. In certain cases, Fitch will rate all or a number of issues issued by a particular issuer, or insured or guaranteed by a particular insurer or guarantor, for a single annual fee. Such fees are expected to vary from US$10,000 to US$1,500,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent). The assignment, publication, or dissemination of a rating by Fitch shall not constitute a consent by Fitch to use its name as an expert in connection with any registration statement filed under the United States securities laws, the Financial Services and Markets Act of 2000 of the United Kingdom, or the securities laws of any particular jurisdiction. Due to the relative efficiency of electronic publishing and distribution, Fitch research may be available to electronic subscribers up to three days earlier than to print subscribers.
For Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan and South Korea only: Fitch Australia Pty Ltd holds an Australian financial services license (AFS license no. 337123) which authorizes it to provide credit ratings to wholesale clients only. Credit ratings information published by Fitch is not intended to be used by persons who are retail clients within the meaning of the Corporations Act 2001