search   Knowledge Bank printable version
 News
 Knowledge Bank
 Deal Information
 International
 Software
 Publications
 Industry Events
 Advocacy Forums
 Links
 Site Utilities
 Contributors
 Free Offers
 Home

Click here to
Update Registration
Information

Please be advised that the use of Securitization.net ®
is subject to the
Terms & Conditions

of use and the
Privacy Policy

Download

Best viewed in

Knowledge Bank > Financial > Banking & Bonds/ Credit & Default Risk
Select an area


FREE Three-week trial of Asset-Backed Alert's newsletter

ABS Issuers Spurning Bond Insurance
Asset Backed Alert, Harrison Scott Publications Inc. (January 19, 2004)

Bond insurers are becoming less significant players in the U.S. securitization market.

Issuers of asset- and mortgage-backed bonds purchased guarantees for only $58.6 billion of new transactions last year, down 45% from $107.3 billion in 2002. As a result, the volume of deals wrapped by market leaders Ambac, MBIA and FSA plummeted - even as overall issuance volume shot up by 27.5%, according to Asset-Backed Alert's ABS Database.

All told, insured transactions accounted for only 7.3% of the $799.7 billion of securitized issues completed in the U.S. last year. A year earlier, bond insurers covered 17% of the market, which totaled $627.1 billion.

Issuers abandoned the guarantors primarily because bond buyers became more willing to accept tight spreads on lower-rated securities backed by mainstream assets, such as auto loans and mortgage products. Sensing an opportunity to save a few dollars on credit enhancement, those issuers opted for senior-subordinate structures instead.

Tightening spreads on uninsured deals were also problematic for bond insurers because it became more difficult for them to charge issuers high premium rates - which are usually justified because of the favorable pricing that wrapped issues garner. Stripped of their ability to turn a decent profit on many conventional securitizations, the insurers actually turned away business and chose instead to seek higher-yielding assignments covering municipal bonds.

The degree to which premiums paid by municipal-bond issuers are offsetting the lost securitization business is tough to gauge, since premiums on a typical ABS or MBS issue are paid over the life of the deal, while tax-exempt issuers tend to pay most of their premiums up-front. For their part, bond insurers claim that they remained profitable in 2003, thanks to a strong flow of business from municipal issuers that needed to refinance outstanding securities and fill budget gaps.

If economic conditions worsen, however, spreads on high-quality securitizations could widen, and that would prompt many issuers to reprogram bond insurers' telephone numbers into their speed dials. Until then, insurers that want to expand their securitization businesses will probably find the most success overseas, where only a small percentage of offerings are currently wrapped, analysts said.

In the meantime, insurers will have to be careful not to rely too heavily on municipal issues, since the Bond Market Association is predicting that the new-issue volume of such products will fall 10-15% in 2004.

The barren market for guarantees on asset- and mortgage-backed securities in the U.S. caused Ambac's insured volume to shrink to $21.9 billion, from $37.3 billion in 2002. Nonetheless, the company was able to cling to the number-one ranking among its peers for the second year in a row.

MBIA's decline was less precipitous, allowing it to leapfrog ahead of FSA into second place. It handled $15.5 billion of transactions in 2003, down from $22.3 billion. While the company insured a market-leading $7.7 billion of auto-loan issues, compared to $3.8 billion by Ambac, its $3.5 billion of mortgage-related transactions were no match for the $15.2 billion of such deals that Ambac wrapped. Those in the know say that MBIA has been the most aggressive in turning down mortgage-backed assignments, due to its belief that the sector offers a poor risk/reward profile.

Number-three FSA insured just $8 billion of deals last year, down a staggering 69.4% from $25.8 billion a year earlier. It fared poorly in both the mortgage-backed arena and the market for auto-loan bonds, where it is usually a strong player.

Fourth-place FGIC, fifth-place XL Capital and number-six ACE Guaranty actually managed to increase their shares of the market, which remain small.

Asset-Backed Alert's bond-insurer ranking includes all new issues of asset- and mortgage-backed securities sold to U.S. investors. It excludes collateralized debt obligations, commercial-paper conduit transactions and secondary-market trades.

 

 

© Copyright 2014. The Mayer Brown Practices. All rights reserved.

Mayer Brown is a global legal services provider comprising legal practices that are separate entities (the “Mayer Brown Practices”). The Mayer Brown Practices are: Mayer Brown LLP and Mayer Brown Europe – Brussels LLP, both limited liability partnerships established in Illinois USA; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales (authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales number OC 303359); Mayer Brown, a SELAS established in France; Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong partnership and its associated entities in Asia; and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. “Mayer Brown” and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in their respective jurisdictions.

Legal Notices | Attorney Advertising | Site Index | Contact Webmaster

*The site links listed on this web site are for reference use only.
The firm does not necessarily sponsor, endorse or verify the accuracy of the content contained in any of these sites.