Presentation IQ 10/15 Sp Capitaliq Fixed Income North America Q2 2015
User Manual: IQ 10/15
Open the PDF directly: View PDF .
Page Count: 25
Download | |
Open PDF In Browser | View PDF |
FIXED INCOME IQ Credit Markets Quarterly Fixed Income Trends North America July 2015│ Issue 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS North America Market Trends……..………………………………………………………..5 Market Indices Corporate Yield Curves Investment Grade vs. High Yield Market Activity Sovereign CDS Heat Map Sovereign CDS Deep Dive: United States Credit Trends...……………………………………………………………..12 Ratings Trends CDS Market Sentiment CDS Market Outliers Fundamental and Market Implied Default Risk ̶ PD Market Signals and PD Fundamentals Quantitatively Viewed Ratings Outliers Financial Ratio Trends..……………………………………………….…..19 Issuance Trends..…………………………………………………………...21 Ratings Issuance Security Issuance High Yield Covenant Trends Please click on the links below to access research on other regions or visit http://www.spcapitaliq.com/ourthinking/research.html?category=market: Latin America Europe 2 EDITORS’ NOTE High yield performed well in Q2 2015, while investment grade posted losses as the market began to anticipate rate increases in the second half of 2015. Spreads increased but other risk signals remained varied. Q2 2015 Overview: - Overall, credit markets were mixed – Anticipation of rate increases caused investors to shed investment grade debt while high yield posted positive returns for second quarter in a row. - U.S. sovereign risk decreased as global market volatility in China and Europe strengthened the U.S. as a safe haven. - Spreads increased for most sectors and investment grade – Markets re-priced risk upwards this quarter for all sectors and for investment grade debt. Only high yield debt saw spreads tighten from last quarter. - Risk signals mixed this quarter - Median equity market-based probabilities of default improved on a quarterly basis while fundamental probabilities of default showed deterioration in all but one sector. - Issuance continues to be healthy – Issuance increased in most ratings categories on a year-over-year basis with the biggest increase coming from the BBB spectrum, following a similar trend from last quarter. AUTHORS: Jay Bhankharia, CFA Senior Manager Investment Management S&P Capital IQ James Elder Director Corporates and Financial Institutions S&P Capital IQ 3 MARKET TRENDS Relative Performance of Fixed Income Indices NOTES: • • As of June 30th, the S&P U.S. Investment Grade and High Yield Corporate Bond Indices generated -2.52% and .66% in total returns, respectively during the last three months. During that same period, the S&P 500® finished the quarter with a .28% gain. As the economy slowly continued to strengthen with labor markets maintaining momentum, investors were looking for rates to increase which caused investment grade bonds to drop in Q2 2015. High yield was the top performer in Q2 as equity prices were volatile due to global market issues stemming from Greece and China. S&P U.S. Investment Grade Corporate Bond Index QTD TRR % S&P U.S. High Yield Corporate Bond Index QTD TRR % S&P 500 (TR) QTD TRR % 4% 2% 0% -2% -4% Source: S&P Capital IQ as of July 1, 2015. 5 10 Year BBB Sector Z-Spreads NOTES: • • All sector z-spreads widened this quarter, coinciding with similar movement in Treasury rates. 240 220 The largest widening on a percentage basis in Q2 was in financials, which moved from 160bps to 181bps. Telecom and IT ended the quarter with the smallest widening on an absolute basis. Cons. Discr. Cons. Staples 200 Bps • Energy Financials 180 Healthcare Industrials 160 IT Materials Telecom. 140 Utilities 120 BPS Change Total % Change Cons. Discr. Cons. Staples Energy Financials Healthcare Industrials IT Materials Telecom. Utilities 20 16 12 21 18 13 11 15 7 18 11.49% 10.46% 5.48% 13.13% 11.54% 8.18% 5.70% 8.52% 3.45% 11.92% All spreads and yield curves are proprietary data developed from buy-side indicative quotes. All bonds are USD denominated. Source: S&P Capital IQ as of July 1, 2015. 6 Z-Spread Ratings Term Structure (Quarter over Quarter) • • • Investment grade zspreads widened over the quarter, across the term structure. Within the investment grade space, we observed a parallel shift upward throughout the term structure. Similar to last quarter in high yield, we noticed the BB curve tightened much more on the long end while the B curve experienced greater tightening on the short end. The tightening of the BB spreads was much stronger this quarter than Q1 2015. 9% AAA15 Q2 8% AAA15 Q1 7% AA15 Q2 6% AA15 Q1 5% A15 Q2 A15 Q1 4% BBB15 Q2 3% BBB15 Q1 2% BB15 Q2 1% BB15 Q1 0% B15 Q2 -1% 1M 3M 6M 9M 1Y 2Y 3Y 4Y 5Y 6Y 7Y 8Y 9Y 10Y 11Y 12Y 13Y 14Y 15Y 16Y 17Y 18Y 19Y 20Y 21Y 22Y 23Y 24Y 25Y 26Y 27Y 28Y 29Y 30Y NOTES: B15 Q1 bps Change QoQ 1Y 5Y 10Y 15Y 20Y 30Y AAA 4.67 4.67 4.67 4.67 4.67 4.67 AA 7.40 7.40 7.40 7.40 7.40 7.40 A 11.17 11.17 11.17 11.17 11.17 11.17 BBB 13.35 13.35 13.35 13.35 13.35 13.35 BB -8.82 -17.90 -25.96 -25.96 -33.81 -35.23 B -22.85 -17.82 -13.35 -13.35 -9.01 -8.22 All spreads and yield curves are proprietary data developed from buy-side indicative quotes. All bonds are USD denominated. Source: S&P Capital IQ as of July 1, 2015. 7 Investment Grade vs. High Yield Market Activity NOTES: • • Market activity fell from its a 12-month high in March for both investment grade and high yield. In the second quarter, activity hit lows in May but rebounded in June. Within high yield, telecom and energy had the most activity. Within investment grade, telecom and IT led the way with the most activity. More Market Activity 1.45 1.55 1.65 1.75 1.85 1.95 Less Market Activity 2.05 S&P High Yield Corporate Index (MAS) MAS S&P High Yield Corporate Index S&P Investment Grade Corporate Index S&P Investment Grade Corporate Index (MAS) 6/30/14 7/31/14 8/29/14 9/30/14 10/31/14 11/30/14 12/31/14 1/30/15 2/27/15 3/31/15 4/30/15 5/29/15 6/30/15 1.71 1.80 1.67 1.66 1.70 1.87 2.02 1.93 2.02 1.62 1.82 1.85 1.66 1.61 1.60 1.61 1.60 1.62 1.70 1.79 1.78 1.73 1.58 1.67 1.72 1.66 Source: S&P Capital IQ as of July 1, 2015. Market Activity Score (MAS) is a derived analytic created to provide an indication of the level of trade and market activity associated with a given security. It is developed from a review of all available trades and quotes based on price staleness, number of quotes/market makers and trade data. It is scaled from 1 (high MAS) to 5 (low MAS). 8 Sovereign CDS Heat Map NOTES: • • • The heat map provides a quarterover-quarter view of the bps change in sovereign CDS spreads. The country with the largest increase in CDS spreads was Greece, as debt repayment issues lingered. Its spreads widened by 3,974 bps throughout the quarter. The countries with the largest improvement in CDS spread were Ukraine and Venezuela. Their spreads tightened by 3,521 and 300 bps, respectively. Country 6/30/2015 Avg # Quotes CDS per Day Spread CDS Most Risky Greece Venezuela Ukraine Cyprus Nigeria El Salvador Pakistan Lebanon Russia Egypt 6739 4691 4096 437 425 416 410 358 341 313 200 to 10 >200 200 to 10 <10 <10 <10 <10 <10 >200 <10 14 15 15 16 16 20 20 20 21 31 <10 200 to 10 200 to 10 200 to 10 >200 200 to 10 >200 >200 200 to 10 <10 CDS Least Risky Swiss Confederation Norway Sweden United States of America Germany Denmark United Kingdom Netherlands Finland New Zealand Source: S&P Capital IQ as of July 1, 2015. 9 Sovereign CDS Regional Focus: United States NOTES: • • • The U.S. CDS spread compared to G5 nations. 50 45 The U.S. saw a tightening in its CDS spread throughout the quarter moving from 18.5 to 15.6 bps. The U.S. is now the country with the tightest CDS spread closely followed by Germany and the U.K. Japan was the biggest mover again this quarter, with its spread widening by 22.7% to 43.3 bps. 40 35 30 Bps • 25 20 15 10 5 0 Germany United States of America United States BPS Change Total % Change -2.84 -15.3% United Kingdom -1.27 -6.0% United Kingdom Japan 8.03 22.7% Japan France -2.79 -6.9% France Germany -0.82 -4.8% Source: S&P Capital IQ as of July 1, 2015. 10 CREDIT TRENDS S&P Ratings Trends NOTES: • There was much more activity as the count of upgrades and downgrades surpassed last quarter. Q2 2015 saw a reversal in the upgrade to downgrade trend for the 3rd straight quarter. The number of companies with positive outlook decreased this quarter to 5% from 8% last quarter. S&P Ratings Services Outlook: • • Risk aversion could be amplified by Greece's exit from the Eurozone, or from credit contagion associated with decelerating Chinese GDP growth, but we see these as manageable nearterm risks. The need for monetary stimulus in the U.S. is fading, but disrupted credit markets or disappointing economic news could slow the pace of Fed policy normalization. Rating Actions Upgrades Outlook/Credit Watch Watch Neg 2% Downgrades 160 Watch Pos Developing 1% 1% Watch Dev 0% 140 Negative 11% Positive 5% 120 100 80 60 Stable 80% 40 20 0 2015 Q1 2015 Q2 Rating Distribution 800 600 400 200 0 Constituents include all rated companies with a Local Currency Long Term Rating and S&P Capital IQ sector classification in the U.S. and Canada. Source: S&P Capital IQ as of July 1, 2015 and Global Credit Portal ‘Credit Conditions: A Resilient U.S. Economy Shields North America Credit Conditions From Increasing Risks’ published on July 14, 2015. 12 CDS Market Sentiment By Sector NOTES: • Overall, the CDS market indicated better perceived credit quality in 5 of the 10 sectors than did their corresponding S&P Ratings. The reversal came in the telecom sector. The highest positive notch differences came from industrials. 1.0 0.8 Notch Difference • VALUE CONVERSION: 1.2 Financials and telecom had the strongest negative sentiment in CDS vs. S&P Ratings in Q2 2015. 0.6 0.4 14 Q3 0.2 14 Q4 15 Q1 0.0 15 Q2 -0.2 -0.4 -0.6 14 Q3 14 Q4 15 Q1 15 Q2 Cons. Discr. CDS S&P MDS Rating 13.01 13.18 13.16 13.15 12.93 12.89 12.98 12.98 Cons. Staples CDS S&P MDS Rating 15.25 15.54 15.62 15.68 15.47 15.43 15.27 15.22 Energy CDS S&P MDS Rating 15.17 14.98 14.92 14.61 15.29 15.35 15.12 14.92 Financials CDS S&P MDS Rating 15.51 15.64 15.63 15.50 15.88 15.90 15.90 15.90 Healthcare CDS S&P MDS Rating 16.53 16.57 16.70 16.40 16.10 16.07 16.10 16.13 Industrials CDS S&P MDS Rating 15.65 15.78 15.89 15.64 15.02 15.12 15.07 15.13 CDS MDS IT 14.84 14.84 15.19 15.26 S&P Rating 15.29 15.35 15.35 15.35 Materials CDS S&P MDS Rating 14.52 14.37 14.33 14.11 14.46 14.46 14.35 14.35 S&P Rating AAA AA+ AA AAA+ A ABBB+ BBB BBBBB+ BB BBB+ B BCCC+ CCC CCCCC C D SD NR Telecom. CDS S&P MDS Rating 13.80 13.50 13.60 13.20 13.80 13.80 13.60 13.60 CDS MDS aaa aa+ aa aaa+ a abbb+ bbb bbbbb+ bb bbb+ b bccc+ ccc ccccc c d sd nr Value 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Utilities CDS S&P MDS Rating 16.18 15.90 16.13 15.73 15.23 15.23 15.23 15.22 The Market Derived Signal (MDS) is a quantitative analytic that uses Credit Default Swaps (CDS) to facilitate the interpretation of how the CDS markets generally view the credit quality of well-known firms and sovereigns. It aims to capture the market’s sentiment regarding an entity’s perceived credit risk. One of the objectives of the MDS is to identify where market sentiment may differ from the issuer credit rating. CDS spreads are used to compute the difference between an entity’s actual spread and expected spread for a given rating. Universe is all companies that have an S&P Long-Term Local Rating, primary headquarters in the U.S. or Canada, and an S&P Capital IQ sector classification. Source: S&P Capital IQ as of July 1, 2015. 13 CDS Market Outliers NOTES: • We have highlighted companies with some of the biggest divergences between their S&P Rating and their CDS Market Derived Signal in red. This provides us with a list of firms whose market sentiment is significantly different than its Rating. As shown by the blue circles, the vast majority of firms were scored +/- 3 notches from their Credit Rating. We notice that the CDS market has more bullish outliers than bearish, especially in the lower end of the investment grade spectrum. In addition, as compared to last quarter we observe more outliers in the B rated spectrum that have CDS spreads trading at higher levels. Both trends are similar to last quarter. Company CDS MDS Positive Divergence American Electric Power Co., Inc. MeadWestvaco Corporation aa a bbb CDS MDS Score • aaa bb bb b ccc c d D/NR C CCC B BB Rating BBB A AA AAA CDS MDS S&P Rating a+ BBB a+ BBB Rohm and Haas Company a+ BBB Hospira Inc. Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P. The E. W. Scripps Company H. J. Heinz Company a BBB- a BBB- bbb+ bbb BB BB- Alcatel-Lucent USA, Inc. CDS MDS Negative Divergence General Electric Capital Corporation bb+ B a AA+ Berkshire Hathaway Inc. a- AA Amazon.com Inc. The Toronto-Dominion Bank Diamond Offshore Drilling, Inc. Chesapeake Energy Corporation bbb+ AA- bbb+ AA- bb BBB+ b BB+ Transocean Inc. b BB+ General Electric Company a- AA+ The Market Derived Signal (MDS) is a quantitative analytic that uses Credit Default Swaps (CDS) to facilitate the interpretation of how the CDS markets generally view the credit quality of well-known firms and sovereigns. It aims to capture the market’s sentiment regarding an entity’s perceived credit risk. One of the objectives of the MDS is to identify where market sentiment may differ from the issuer credit rating. CDS spreads are used to compute the difference between an entity’s actual spread and expected spread for a given rating. Universe is all companies that have an S&P Long-Term Local Rating, primary headquarters in the U.S. or Canada, and an S&P Capital IQ sector classification. Source: S&P Capital IQ as of July 1, 2015 14 Equity Market Sentiment Implied Default Risk By Sector NOTES: • • • In Q2 2015, 8 of the 10 sectors had improving PD Market Signals. Telecom, consumer staples, and financials changed to tightening from widening PDs this quarter. Overall median PDs decreased by 11% in Q2 continuing its trend from Q1. Financials had the largest improvement in PD in addition to being one of the safer sectors. Additionally, energy continued to see its credit improve as oil prices stabilized. 4/1/2015 6/30/2015 % Change Cons. Discr. 0.15% 0.14% -6.23% PD Market Signals (Median) 1.00% Cons. Discr. Cons. Staples Energy 0.10% Financials Healthcare Industrials 0.01% IT Materials Telecom. Utilities 0.00% Grand Total Cons. Staples Energy -56.41% -40.54% 0.04% 0.02% 1.01% 0.60% Financials 0.05% 0.02% -62.00% Healthcare 0.03% 0.03% 15.25% Industrials IT 0.09% 0.08% 0.04% 0.04% -10.99% -5.13% Materials 0.28% 0.28% -0.71% Telecom. 0.60% 0.39% -34.73% Utilities 0.07% 0.08% 12.41% Grand Total 0.12% 0.11% -10.59% S&P Capital IQ’s proprietary probability of default (PD) model, ‘Market Signals’, is a unique analytical model which provides daily changing, 1-year forward looking PDs of publicly listed companies based on a cutting-edge econometric framework. Universe is all companies that have an S&P Long-Term Local Rating, primary headquarters in the U.S. or Canada, and an S&P Capital IQ sector classification. Source: S&P Capital IQ as of July 1, 2015. 15 Fundamental Implied Default Risk By Sector NOTES: • • • PD Fundamentals Fundamentals deteriorated during the second quarter as median PDs increased by 3% year-over-year. Most Risky and Worsening 1.20% 9 of the 10 sectors show worsening PDs on a year-overyear basis as compared to only 4 out of 10 last quarter. The healthcare sector had two consecutive quarters of median credit improvement. Telecom sector fundamentals continue to worsen by the largest percentage, similar to last quarter. Telecom 1.00% Probabiity of Default Level • 0.80% Cons. Discr. 0.60% IT 0.40% 0.20% Industrials Grand Total Energy Healthcare Materials Least Risky and Improving Cons. Staples Financials Utilities 0.00% -6% -4% -2% 0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% % Change in PD Level (YoY) % Change (YoY) PD Level (Median) Cons. Discr. Cons. Staples Energy Financials Healthcare Industrials IT Materials Telecom. Utilities Grand Total 5% 7% 1% 3% -3% 2% 0% 11% 13% 5% 3% 0.75% 0.39% 0.39% 0.15% 0.37% 0.56% 0.53% 0.70% 1.03% 0.21% 0.41% S&P Capital IQ’s proprietary probability of default (PD) model, ‘PD Model Fundamentals’, provides an innovative approach to assessing potential default that separates credit risk into two components—financial risk and business risk. The PDs are applicable for any public or private company and provide a short- to mid-term view of credit risk. They are based purely on fundamental data—financial ratios and macro factors – and are updated when new financials are released or there is some change in the macro factors. Universe is all companies that have an S&P Long-Term Local Rating, primary headquarters in the U.S. or Canada, and an S&P Capital IQ sector classification. Source: S&P Capital IQ as of July 1, 2015. 16 Quantitatively Viewed Ratings Outliers NOTES: • We have highlighted companies with some of the biggest divergences between their S&P Rating and their purely quantitative CreditModel (CM) Score in red. This provides us with a list of firms with fundamental attributes that make them positive or negative outliers. As shown by the blue circles, the vast majority of firms were scored +/3 notches from their Credit Rating. Within the universe we observed a higher distribution of companies with higher CM Scores than Ratings, continuing from last quarter. aaa Company aa bbb bb S&P Rating CVR Refining, LP bbb- B+ IAMGOLD Corp. bbb- B+ Visteon Corporation bbb- B+ Gulfport Energy Corp. bb+ B Life Time Fitness, Inc. bb+ B Paragon Offshore plc The Wendy's Company Office Depot, Inc. bb+ bb+ bb B B B- bbb+ AA- bbb bbb- A+ A bbb- A bb+ A- bb+ A- bb+ A- bb+ A- CreditModel Negative Divergence b Madison Gas and Electric Company Northwest Natural Gas Company Gaz Métro inc The Sherwin-Williams Company Adobe Systems Incorporated ccc c d D/NR CM Score CreditModel Positive Divergence a CM Score • C CCC B BB BBB A AA AAA Altera Corp. Northern Natural Gas Company Nova Gas Transmission Ltd. Rating Lower-case nomenclature is used to differentiate S&P Capital IQ’s PD CreditModel Scores from credit ratings issued by Standard & Poor’s Rating Services. CreditModel Score is trained on ratings, rather than on default data, which helps CreditModel generate a long-term stable view of credit risk that is aligned with a ratings process. Source: S&P Capital IQ as of July 1, 2015. 17 FINANCIAL RATIO TRENDS Financial Ratio Trends NOTES: • • Debt/Total Capital levels continued to rise year-over-year for both universes. On a quarter-overquarter basis, investment grade companies have seen debt/total capital levels rise to 45% from 44%. EBITDA/Interest Coverage levels were down significantly for high yield companies going from 6.9 to 5.9 over the last year. Investment grade remains relatively flat for the past year. Cash Flows/Debt levels declined as companies continued to issue more debt due to low interest rates. HY 70 18 16 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 60 (%) • EBITDA/Interest Coverage Debt/Total Capital 50 2011 Q1 40 2012 Q1 30 2013 Q1 20 2014 Q1 2015 Q1 10 0 HY IG 2011 Q1 2012 Q1 IG 2013 Q1 2014 Q1 2015 Q1 Cash Flow From Ops/Debt HY 0.14 0.12 0.10 0.08 0.06 0.04 0.02 0.00 2011 Q1 2012 Q1 IG 2013 Q1 2014 Q1 2015 Q1 Universe is all non-financial companies that have an S&P Long-Term Local Rating, primary headquarters in the U.S. or Canada, and an S&P Capital IQ sector classification. Source: S&P Capital IQ as of July 1, 2015. 19 ISSUANCE TRENDS Issuance Trends By Rating Category NOTES: • • • $140 $120 ($($Bil)) Issuance was higher at the lower end of investment grade issuers. BBB saw the largest increase in new volume. $100 $80 Q2 2014 $60 Q2 2015 Only BB issuers increased issuance within high yield, while the riskiest areas in high yield saw declines in issuance. $40 7 of the 10 sectors increased issuance year-over-year with IT having the largest increase. $300 Some of the biggest issuers this quarter include AT&T and Abbvie. $20 $0 AAA AA A BBB BB B CCC $250 ($($Bil)) • $160 $200 $150 Q2 2014 $100 Q2 2015 $50 $0 Cons. Discr. Cons. Staples Energy Financials Healthcare Industrials IT Materials Telecom. Utilities Issuers are public and private companies globally that issue USD debt in U.S. bond markets. Securities include bonds, convertibles, notes and MTNs. Amounts are aggregated by Date of Issuance. All values in USD $ billions. Source: S&P Capital IQ as of July 1, 2015. 21 Covenants for High Yield Issuance NOTES: • • • The graph represents the percentage of companies with each type of covenant within new high yield issuance. We observed a slight increase in Q2 2015 covenants from low levels in Q1 amid weaker high yield issuance markets. The fixed charge covenant continues to stay at lower levels compared to 2014. 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 0% 2013 Q2 2013 Q3 2013 Q4 Fixed Charge Coverage 2014 Q1 2014 Q2 2014 Q3 Dividend Related Payments 2014 Q4 2015 Q1 2015 Q2 Indebtedness Universe incudes all high yield corporate debt issuance that is denominated in USD. Source: S&P Capital IQ as of July 1, 2015. 22 Contact Us The Americas +1 212 438 8701 +1 888 806 5541 Asia-Pacific +852 2533 3588 Europe, Middle East or Africa +44 (0) 20 7176 1233 How to Subscribe to Fixed Income IQ Fixed Income IQ is published for S&P Capital IQ clients and select professionals. To receive a copy of the report, please register online or send an email to fixedincomeiq@spcapitaliq.com and request inclusion in our distribution. Submit Feedback to the Editor Please contact us at fixedincomeiq@spcapitaliq.com with feedback and editorial suggestions. Media Inquiries Please contact Michael Privitera at michael.privitera@spcapitaliq.com. www.spcapitaliq.com/trial 23 Disclosures S&P Capital IQ is analytically and editorially independent from S&P Ratings Services. CreditModel and PD Market Signals (and various Market Derived Signals) are analytical tools but are not credit ratings. Neither CreditModel, PD Market Signals nor credit ratings should be considered to be investment advice. A credit rating from Standard & Poor's Ratings Services is an opinion of the rated organization's creditworthiness and involves both qualitative and quantitative characteristics. CreditModel and PD Scores are based on but differ significantly from Standard & Poor's Ratings Services criteria and do not include a qualitative assessment or opinion. CreditModel and PD Market Signal scores are represented by lowercase nomenclature to differentiate them from S&P Ratings Services credit ratings. Charts, graphs and screenshots are provided for illustrative purposes only. Copyright © 2015 by Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC (S&P), a part of McGraw Hill Financial. All rights reserved. STANDARD & POOR’S and S&P are registered trademarks of Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC. CAPITAL IQ is a registered trademark of Capital IQ, Inc. iPad is a trademark of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Microsoft, Excel, PowerPoint, and Outlook are registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. No content (including ratings, credit-related analyses and data, valuations model, software or other application or output therefrom) or any part thereof (Content) may be modified, reverse engineered, reproduced or distributed in any form by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of Standard & Poor’s Financial Services LLC or its affiliates (collectively, S&P). The Content shall not be used for any unlawful or unauthorized purposes. S&P and any third-party providers, as well as their directors, officers, shareholders, employees or agents (collectively S&P Parties) do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or availability of the Content. S&P Parties are not responsible for any errors or omissions (negligent or otherwise), regardless of the cause, for the results obtained from the use of the Content, or for the security or maintenance of any data input by the user. The Content is provided on an “as is” basis. S&P PARTIES DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE, FREEDOM FROM BUGS, SOFTWARE ERRORS OR DEFECTS, THAT THE CONTENT’S FUNCTIONING WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR THAT THE CONTENT WILL OPERATE WITH ANY SOFTWARE OR HARDWARE CONFIGURATION. In no event shall S&P Parties be liable to any party for any direct, indirect, incidental, exemplary, compensatory, punitive, special or consequential damages, costs, expenses, legal fees, or losses (including, without limitation, lost income or lost profits and opportunity costs or losses caused by negligence) in connection with any use of the Content even if advised of the possibility of such damages. Credit-related and other analyses, including ratings, and statements in the Content are statements of opinion as of the date they are expressed and not statements of fact. S&P’s opinions, analyses and rating acknowledgment decisions (described below) are not recommendations to purchase, hold, or sell any securities or to make any investment decisions, and do not address the suitability of any security. S&P assumes no obligation to update the Content following publication in any form or format. The Content should not be relied on and is not a substitute for the skill, judgment and experience of the user, its management, employees, advisors and/or clients when making investment and other business decisions. S&P does not act as a fiduciary or an investment advisor except where registered as such. While S&P has obtained information from sources it believes to be reliable, S&P does not perform an audit and undertakes no duty of due diligence or independent verification of any information it receives. To the extent that regulatory authorities allow a rating agency to acknowledge in one jurisdiction a rating issued in another jurisdiction for certain regulatory purposes, S&P reserves the right to assign, withdraw or suspend such acknowledgement at any time and in its sole discretion. S&P Parties disclaim any duty whatsoever arising out of the assignment, withdrawal or suspension of an acknowledgment as well as any liability for any damage alleged to have been suffered on account thereof. S&P keeps certain activities of its business units separate from each other in order to preserve the independence and objectivity of their respective activities. As a result, certain business units of S&P may have information that is not available to other S&P business units. S&P has established policies and procedures to maintain the confidentiality of certain non-public information received in connection with each analytical process. S&P may receive compensation for its ratings and certain analyses, normally from issuers or underwriters of securities or from obligors. S&P reserves the right to disseminate its opinions and analyses. S&P’s public ratings and analyses are made available on its Web sites, www.standardandpoors.com (free of charge), and www.ratingsdirect.com and www.globalcreditportal.com (subscription), and may be distributed through other means, including via S&P publications and third-party redistributors. Additional information about our ratings fees is available at www.standardandpoors.com/usratingsfees. 24
Source Exif Data:
File Type : PDF File Type Extension : pdf MIME Type : application/pdf PDF Version : 1.4 Linearized : Yes Author : Stacey Weihe Company : The McGraw-Hill Companies Create Date : 2015:07:27 14:34:45-04:00 Modify Date : 2015:08:11 13:56:16-04:00 Tagged PDF : Yes XMP Toolkit : Adobe XMP Core 5.4-c005 78.147326, 2012/08/23-13:03:03 Metadata Date : 2015:08:11 13:56:16-04:00 Creator Tool : Acrobat PDFMaker 10.1 for PowerPoint Document ID : uuid:c52a5171-3889-4519-9008-d1ed338a04d7 Instance ID : uuid:d8d77843-6b26-407e-89b5-297c3568c616 Format : application/pdf Title : PowerPoint Presentation Creator : Stacey Weihe Producer : Adobe PDF Library 10.0 Page Layout : SinglePage Page Count : 25EXIF Metadata provided by EXIF.tools