Refine
Year of publication
- 2005 (3)
Document Type
- Report (3) (remove)
Language
- English (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (3)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (3)
Keywords
- ABS (2)
- securitisation (2)
- structured finance (2)
- CDO (1)
- CLO (1)
- SME (1)
- asset securitisation (1)
- asset-backed (1)
- asymmetric information (1)
- auction model (1)
Institute
Asset securitisation as a risk management and funding tool : what does it hold in store for SMES?
(2005)
The following chapter critically surveys the attendant benefits and drawbacks of asset securitisation on both financial institutions and firms. It also elicits salient lessons to be learned about the securitisation of SME-related obligations from a cursory review of SME securitisation in Germany as a foray of asset securitisation in a bank-centred financial system paired with a strong presence of SMEs in industrial production. JEL Classification: D81, G15, M20
Although the commoditisation of illiquid asset exposures through securitisation facilitates the disciplining effect of capital markets on the risk management, private information about securitised debt as well as complex transaction structures could possibly impair the fair market valuation. In a simple issue design model without intermediaries we maximise issuer proceeds over a positive measure of issue quality, where a direct revelation mechanism (DRM) by profitable informed investors engages endogenous price discovery through auction-style allocation preference as a continuous function of perceived issue quality. We derive an optimal allocation schedule for maximum issuer payoffs under different pricing regimes if asymmetric information requires underpricing. In particular, we study how the incidence of uninformed investors at varying levels of valuation uncertainty and their function of clearing the market effects profitable informed investment. We find that the issuer optimises own payoffs at each valuation irrespective of the applicable pricing mechanism by awarding informed investors the lowest possible allocation (and attendant underpricing) that still guarantees profitable informed investment. Under uniform pricing the composition of the investor pool ensures that informed investors appropriate higher profit than uninformed types. Any reservation utility by issuers lowers the probability of information disclosure by informed investors and the scope of issuers to curtail profitable informed investment. JEL Classifications: D82, G12, G14, G23
As a sign of ambivalence in the regulatory definition of capital adequacy for credit risk and the quest for more efficient refinancing sources collateral loan obligations (CLOs) have become a prominent securitisation mechanism. This paper presents a loss-based asset pricing model for the valuation of constituent tranches within a CLO-style security design. The model specifically examines how tranche subordination translates securitised credit risk into investment risk of issued tranches as beneficial interests on a designated loan pool typically underlying a CLO transaction. We obtain a tranchespecific term structure from an intensity-based simulation of defaults under both robust statistical analysis and extreme value theory (EVT). Loss sharing between issuers and investors according to a simplified subordination mechanism allows issuers to decompose securitised credit risk exposures into a collection of default sensitive debt securities with divergent risk profiles and expected investor returns. Our estimation results suggest a dichotomous effect of loss cascading, with the default term structure of the most junior tranche of CLO transactions (“first loss position”) being distinctly different from that of the remaining, more senior “investor tranches”. The first loss position carries large expected loss (with high investor return) and low leverage, whereas all other tranches mainly suffer from loss volatility (unexpected loss). These findings might explain why issuers retain the most junior tranche as credit enhancement to attenuate asymmetric information between issuers and investors. At the same time, the issuer discretion in the configuration of loss subordination within particular security design might give rise to implicit investment risk in senior tranches in the event of systemic shocks. JEL Classifications: C15, C22, D82, F34, G13, G18, G20