CLOs in the Heartland
April 26, 2016
Opening Remarks
Jill Zelter, Managing Director, Fitch Ratings
State of the Capital Markets:
First Quarter 2016 Review and
Second Quarter 2016 Outlook
Randy Schwimmer
Senior Managing Director
Head of Origination & Capital Markets
Churchill Asset Management
T (212) 478-9203 M (646) 584-1362
[email protected]
April 26, 2016
Capital Markets Review – First Quarter 2016
Volatility eases as market conditions stabilize
• US public markets recovered from 4Q lows; dovish Fed eases investor worries about
inflation; China, commodities, and energy take back seat
• HY issuance has modest comeback as fund flows reverse; bond volume at $35.5B,
flat to last quarter, but off sharply from $91.6B for 1Q 2015
• $41B of US leveraged loans was 18.6% off previous quarter ($50.4B) – worst
quarterly performance since 2011; retail loan funds broke a 32-week streak of
outflows in March; YTD still negative at $4.9B
• Middle market sponsored volume of $6B (est.) is lowest in six years
• Risk retention worries and below-hurdle equity returns grind new CLO formation to
near-standstill of $7.1B (vs $25.3 for 1Q 2015)
Sources: S&P Capital IQ, Thomson Reuters LPC
CLOs in the Heartland
4
Capital Markets Review – First Quarter 2016
What’s the setting for debt and equity INVESTORS?
• Low-rate, low-growth environment remains challenging for PE returns; purchase
price multiples close to record highs
• 1Q saw advantage swing to the buy-side as spreads remained wide
• Private credit funds continue to fundraise and invest; regulated banks retreat from
highly leveraged transactions
• Chase for yield winning out over liquidity or credit concerns; institutional investors
have swung back to higher risk alternatives
• With BDCs cash-constrained, second lien has been disintermediated by mezzanine;
unitranche and senior stretch taking larger structure shares
CLOs in the Heartland
5
Capital Markets Review – First Quarter 2016
How about debt and equity ISSUERS?
• Known large cap borrowers getting good terms in broadly syndicated market; story
credits still struggling amid constrained market liquidity
• Larger middle market arrangers with higher holds offering “club execution”
alternative to syndication for increasingly bigger deals (“cargo pants” strategy”)
• Sponsors getting one-stop shop solutions from private credit providers; unitranche
financings providing certainty of execution
• Borrowers and sponsors seeking flexibility at a price; covenants, debt baskets, and
structures all continue to be issuer-friendly
CLOs in the Heartland
6
Capital Markets – Behind the Scenes
CLOs remain a significant share of the institutional market
Institutional investor market share
11.0%
2.3%
6.8%
21.1%
58.8%
Finance Co.
Insurance Co.
Institutional investor market share
CLOs in the Heartland
Hedge, Distressed & High-Yield Funds
Source: S&P LCD, Capital IQ
7
Loan Mutual Funds
CLO
Capital Markets – Behind the Scenes
With deal flow down, banks’ share of loans has rebounded
Primary market for highly leveraged loans (banks vs. non-banks)
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
Institutional investors and finance companies
50%
Banks & securities firms
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2006
2007
Institutional investor market share
CLOs in the Heartland
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
Source: Wells Fargo, S&P LCD Capital IQ
8
2013
2014
2015
1Q16
Capital Markets – Behind the Scenes
Correlation between asset classes has grown since the credit crisis
Correlation between asset classes
100%
90%
Loans vs High Yield
Loans vs Equity
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Shows cumulative correlation between indicated asset classes
CLOs in the Heartland
Source: LSTA, S&P LCD
9
Capital Markets – Behind the Scenes
PE fundraising remains healthy, as expected…
120
$90
105
$80
92
$70
74
$60
$50
69
63
61
52
77
71
75
81
71
70
66
71
40
$20
$34
$25
$20
$35
$36
$27
$36
$37
$82
$35
$77
$54
$60
$41
$59
$46
$36
$45
$65
$57
20
$36
$10
80
60
49
45
$30
100
89
77
61
$40
90
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
$0
2011
2012
2013
Capital Raised ($B)
# of Funds Closed
Source: PitchBook; data for North America
CLOs in the Heartland
2014
10
2015
2016
0
Capital Markets – Behind the Scenes
…while deal flow declines for third consecutive quarter
$250
1,200
1,117
985
829
857
760
1,024
957
1,000
785
814
767
745
$150
1,028 1,030
956
908
$200
813
1,067 1,060
1,070
800
763
695
600
$100
400
$50
$108
$113
$101
$126
$93
$99
$104
$194
$106
$125
$149
$183
$159
$162
$172
$174
$160
$155
$198
$147
$141
200
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
2Q
3Q
4Q
1Q
$0
2011
2012
2013
2014
Capital Invested ($B)
# of Deals
Source: PitchBook; data for North America
CLOs in the Heartland
11
2015
2016
0
Capital Markets – Behind the Scenes
Sense of market stability causes investors to reverse out-flows
Prime-fund flows (weekly reports only)
$2B
$1B
0.51
0.39
0.25
0.17
$0B
-0.75
-$1B
-1.19
-1.17
-1.53
-$2B
-2.12
-2.49
-2.54
Jan
2016
Feb
2016
-$3B
-3.46
-$4B
-$5B
-4.66
Mar
2015
Apr
2015
May
2015
Jun
2015
Jul
2015
Aug
2015
Sep
2015
Source: S&P/LCD
CLOs in the Heartland
12
Oct
2015
Nov
2015
Dec
2015
Mar
2016
Capital Markets – Behind the Scenes
New CLO formation building slowly; lowest volume in four years
Monthly CLO Volume
$18B
16.24
$16B
$14B
13.39
12.74
$12B
11.30
11.16 11.29
10.18
$10B
9.38
7.73
$8B
8.26
$6B
5.66
5.15
7.46
7.33
7.35
6.02
5.57
4.81
4.20
$4B
2.07
$2B
$0B
0.83
Jul 2014
Sep 2014
Nov 2014
Jan 2015
Mar 2015
May 2015
Source: S&P/LCD
CLOs in the Heartland
13
Jul 2015
Sep 2015
Nov 2015
Jan 2016
Mar 2016
Capital Markets – Behind the Scenes
Financing activity with sponsors slumps amid uncertainty
Sponsored Middle Market Volume
30.0
Sponsored
Issuance ($B.)
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
Source: Thomson Reuters LPC
CLOs in the Heartland
14
4Q15
1Q15
2Q14
3Q13
4Q12
1Q12
2Q11
3Q10
4Q09
1Q09
2Q08
3Q07
4Q06
1Q06
2Q05
3Q04
4Q03
1Q03
2Q02
3Q01
4Q00
0.0
1Q00
5.0
Capital Markets – Behind the Scenes
LBO leverage is down, thanks to Leveraged Lending Guidance
7.5x
55%
Institutional MM
7.0x
Large Corp.
50%
6.5x
Equity Contributions
LBO Debt to EBITDA (x)
Institutional MM
Large Corp.
6.0x
5.5x
5.0x
4.5x
45%
40%
35%
30%
4.0x
25%
3.5x
CLOs in the Heartland
15
1Q16
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2003
Source: Thomson Reuters LPC
2004
20%
1Q16
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
3.0x
Capital Markets – Behind the Scenes
10.0
10.0%
8.0
9.0%
6.0
8.0%
4.0
7.0%
2.0
6.0%
0.0
5.0%
-2.0
4.0%
-4.0
3.0%
-6.0
Loan fund flows
Single- B loan yields
2.0%
1.0%
-10.0
0.0%
Jan-11
Mar-11
May-11
Jul-11
Sep-11
Nov-11
Jan-12
Mar-12
May-12
Jul-12
Sep-12
Nov-12
Jan-13
Mar-13
May-13
Jul-13
Sep-13
Nov-13
Jan-14
Mar-14
May-14
Jul-14
Sep-14
Nov-14
Jan-15
Mar-15
May-15
Jul-15
Sep-15
Nov-15
Jan-16
Mar-16
-8.0
Source: Thomson Reuters LPC
CLOs in the Heartland
16
Single B-yields
yields (3 years)
Loan fund flows ($B)
Supply/demand dynamics continue favoring investors
Capital Markets – Behind the Scenes
Better credits get better pricing; liquidity challenged regardless
New-issue yield to maturity for leveraged loans
7.0%
6.5%
BB
B
6.0%
5.5%
5.0%
4.5%
4.0%
3.5%
3.0%
2.5%
2.0%
2Q13
3Q13
4Q13
1Q14
2Q14
3Q14
4Q14
Source: S&P LCD
CLOs in the Heartland
17
1Q15
2Q15
3Q15
4Q15
1Q16
Capital Markets – Behind the Scenes
Middle market illiquidity premium remains around 75 bps
L+700
L+600
L+500
L+400
L+300
L+200
Large Cap
Middle Market
L+100
L+0
Source: S&P LCD; institutional spreads, sponsored transactions; LC = >$50mm ebitda, MM = <$50mm
ebitda
CLOs in the Heartland
18
Capital Markets – Behind the Scenes
Middle market leveraged loan yields up fourth straight quarter
12%
LIB/LIB Floor
11%
LIB Spread
Spread due to OID
10%
All-in-yield (3
3-year)
9%
8%
7%
6%
5%
4%
3%
2%
1%
1Q02
2Q02
3Q02
4Q02
1Q03
2Q03
3Q03
4Q03
1Q04
2Q04
3Q04
4Q04
1Q05
2Q05
3Q05
4Q05
1Q06
2Q06
3Q06
4Q06
1Q07
2Q07
3Q07
4Q07
2008
1Q-3Q09
4Q09
1Q10
2Q10
3Q10
4Q10
1Q11
2Q11
3Q11
4Q11
1Q12
2Q12
3Q12
4Q12
1Q13
2Q13
3Q13
4Q13
1Q14
2Q14
3Q14
4Q14
1Q15
2Q15
3Q15
4Q15
1Q16
0%
Source: Thomson Reuters LPC; all-in middle market institutional yields (3 year)
CLOs in the Heartland
19
Capital Markets – Behind the Scenes
Structural terms remain seller-friendly, despite lower volume
US Covenant-Lite Loans
$275B
$250B
US Covenant-Lite Loans (by purpose)
100%
Volume
Percent
70.0
90%
60.0
$225B
80%
70%
$175B
60%
$150B
50%
$125B
40%
$100B
30%
$75B
20%
$50B
50.0
Refi & All
Other
40.0
30.0
20.0
10.0
10%
$25B
0.0
2004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420151Q151Q16
Jan-11
Mar-11
May-11
Jul-11
Sep-11
Nov-11
Jan-12
Mar-12
May-12
Jul-12
Sep-12
Nov-12
Jan-13
Mar-13
May-13
Jul-13
Sep-13
Nov-13
Jan-14
Mar-14
May-14
Jul-14
Sep-14
Nov-14
Jan-15
Mar-15
May-15
Jul-15
Sep-15
Nov-15
Jan-16
Mar-16
$0B
Div. Recap.
Cov-lite
lite volume ($Bils.)
$200B
M&A/LBO
0%
Source: S&P LCD & Thomson Reuters LPC
CLOs in the Heartland
20
Capital Markets – Behind the Scenes
Energy and commodities push default rate to five-year high
Lagging 12-mo leveraged loan default rate by number
Composition of defaults (LTM thru March 2016)
9%
8%
Oil & Gas
7%
Metals & Mining
6%
Healthcare
5%
Forest Products
4%
3%
Services & Leasing
2%
Electronics/Electric
1%
Retailers (exc Food & Drug)
0%
Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec Dec
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
0%
Source: S&P LCD
CLOs in the Heartland
21
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Capital Markets – Second Quarter 2016 Outlook
Supply/demand balance creating “Goldilocks” effect
• Deal flow will pick up modestly as sponsors work to put “dry powder” to work
• Technicals in broadly syndicated market will continue to favor investors, though
needle likely to swing further sell-side later in second quarter
• Middle market conditions will be constructive for both issuers and investors;
increased direct lender demand balanced by weak CLO and bank appetite
• Unitranche remains hot product; more direct lending capacity coming from new
firms; smaller managers merging or bulking up with JV’s and partnerships
• All-in first-lien loan yields ease to <6% for BSL’s; mid caps remain in 6-7% range
• Senior leverage of 3.5-4x; total of 5-5.5x for traditional middle market; 4.0-4.5x
senior/5.5-6.0x total for larger mid caps; >4.5x senior/6.0x total for BSL
CLOs in the Heartland
22
QUESTIONS
CLOs in the Heartland
23
State of Middle Market Lending
and BDCs
State of Middle Market Lending and BDCs
Moderator:
Mike Simonton, Managing Director, Fitch Ratings
Panelists:
Tom Bax, Treasurer, NXT Capital
Frederick C. Fisher, Partner, Mayer Brown
Brad Hamner, Senior Vice President, Antares Capital
Meghan Neenan, Senior Director, Fitch Ratings
Michael Paladino, Managing Director, Fitch Ratings
Jerry Stahlecker, Executive President, Franklin Square
CLOs in the Heartland
25
Regulatory and Accounting
Update
J. Paul Forrester
Partner
312.701.7366
[email protected]
Sagi Tamir
Partner
212.506.2583
[email protected]
April 26, 2016
Volcker Rule – Legacy CLOs
• The Volcker rule prohibits banking entities from making or
maintaining investments in “covered funds”
• CLOs are generally covered funds since they rely on
Section 3(c)(7) for an exemption from the Investment
Company Act
• Since the adoption of the Volcker rule, the CLO market
generally has been using the “loan securitization”
exclusion under the Volcker rule and has been
“Volckerizing” many legacy CLOs to become eligible
therefor
CLOs in the Heartland
27
Volcker Rule – Legacy CLOs (Con’t)
• However, some legacy CLOs have not yet been “Volckerized”
and prior expectations that they would have been refinanced
are being challenged by current market conditions
• Acknowledging that banks have been important investors in
CLOs, the Federal Reserve Board (FRB) has extended the
conformance period for banks that invest in CLOs until July
2016 and stated that the FRB intended, if banks were making
good faith efforts for conformance, to grant one additional
extension until July 2017 and that they would do so in 2015. So
far, the FRB has not extended such conformance period
CLOs in the Heartland
28
Quick Risk Retention Primer
• Compliance already required for all new RMBS deals; compliance for
all other deals beginning December 24, 2016
• Sponsor of a securitization transaction generally must retain at least
5% of fair value as of the closing date of all “ABS Interests” in the
transaction
• Forms of Risk Retention:
– Eligible vertical interest
• Can be either:
– A single vertical security or
– An interest in each class of ABS Interests issued as part of the securitization transaction
– Eligible horizontal residual interest (or reserve account) or
– Any combination of the above
– Special rules for specific types of deals
CLOs in the Heartland
29
Credit Risk Retention for CLOs
• For CLOs
– Collateral Manager is “sponsor” and required to retain
– Lead Arranger exemption is not practical
– Issue is therefore how to optimally capitalize retention
– 4 possible basic approaches:
• Direct Capitalization
• Capitalized Manager Vehicle (CMV)
• Majority-Owned Affiliate (MOA)
• Capitalized-MOA (C-MOA)
CLOs in the Heartland
30
CLO Industry Reactions
• Why us?
– Not originate-to-distribute
– CLO manager acts as agent for CLO
– Collateral acquired in secondary transactions
• Regulators confused and over-reached
– LSTA sued in November 2014 in DC Court of Appeals claiming that:
• CLO managers are not “securitizers” and cannot be subjected to risk retention
• The federal agencies misconstrued the meaning of “credit risk” by requiring a horizontal equity
slice equal to 5% of the fair value
• The federal agencies acted arbitrarily by failing to consider less costly alternatives proposed by
commenters
– Hearing on February 5 (audio:
https://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/recordings/recordings.nsf/)
CLOs in the Heartland
31
CLO Legislative and Lobbying Efforts
• “Qualified CLO” bill
– Builds on LSTA comment letter to CRR re-proposal
– Passed (as H.R.4166) with bipartisan support out of HFSC in February
2016
– Requires:
• Asset quality
• Asset portfolio diversification
• Alignment of manager and investor interests
• Manager must be a registered investment adviser
• Transparency and reporting for investors
CLOs in the Heartland
32
Risk Retention Solutions in the CLO Market
• Direct capitalization – CLO Manager obtains capital from a related entity
(e.g., its parent) to finance its purchase of risk retention securities and
continues to provide management services to CLO
• Capitalized manager vehicle (CMV) – CLO Manager raises capital from 3rd
party investors through CLO Manager-created CMV to finance its purchase
of risk retention securities. Instead of CLO Manager being the asset
manager, CMV is the primary asset manager. CMV then hires CLO Manager
as sub-advisor. Key accounting consideration is making sure CMV is NOT
consolidated by CLO Manager
• Majority-owned affiliate (MOA) – CLO Manager raises capital from 3rd
party investors through CLO Manager-created MOA to finance the purchase
of risk retention securities. Key accounting consideration is that MOA
MUST BE consolidated by the CLO Manager
CLOs in the Heartland
33
Example – Capitalized Manager Vehicle
CLO Manager
3rd Party
Investor(s)
Economic
interest
Economic
interest
CMV
(Sponsor)
3rd Party
Investor(s)
Asset management agreement
Risk retention interest
Economic
interest
Sub-advisory
agreement
CLO
CLOs in the Heartland
34
Example - Majority-Owned Affiliate
CLO Manager
3rd Party
Investor(s)
Controlling
financial interest
Economic
interest
MOA
(Sponsor)
3rd Party
Investor(s)
Risk retention interest
Economic
interest
Asset
management
agreement
CLOs in the Heartland
CLO
35
Example – Capitalized Majority-Owned Affiliate
rd
CLO Manager
3 Party
Investor(s)
Economic
interest
Economic
interest
rd
MOA
(Sponsor)
3 Party
Investor(s)
Asset management agreement
Risk retention interest
Economic
interest
Sub-advisory
agreement
CLO
CLOs in the Heartland
36
Risk Retention: Fair Value Requirements
• Sponsor of a securitization transaction generally must
retain at least 5% of fair value as of the closing date of all
“ABS Interests” in the transaction
– Fair value determination is not required for vertical risk
retention or the seller’s interest option for revolving pool
securitizations
– Fair value required to be determined using a fair value
measurement framework under U.S. GAAP
CLOs in the Heartland
37
Risk Retention: Pre-pricing Disclosure of Fair Value
• Sponsor must disclose to potential investors a reasonable
period of time prior to sale:
– The fair value of the EHRI that the sponsor expects to retain at
closing (expressed as a percentage of the fair value of all ABS
interests issued in the securitization and dollar amount)
– If the specific prices, sizes or rates of interest of each tranche of
ABS are not known, the sponsor may disclose a range of
expected fair values based on a range of bona fide estimates or
specified prices, sizes or rates of interest
• If disclosing a range of fair values, sponsor must disclose the
method by which it determined any range of prices, tranche sizes
or rates of interest
CLOs in the Heartland
38
Risk Retention: Pre-pricing Disclosure of Fair Value
• Description of the valuation methodology and all key
inputs and assumptions or a “comprehensive description”
of such key inputs and assumptions, including (but not
limited to):
– Discount rates and the basis of forward interest rates used
– Loss given default; default rates and lag time between loss and
recovery
– Prepayment rates
– If description includes a curve(s), a description of the
methodology used to derive the curve(s)
– Summary description of reference data set or other historical
information used to develop key inputs and assumptions
CLOs in the Heartland
39
Risk Retention: Post-Closing Disclosure of Fair Value
• A reasonable period of time after closing, sponsor must
disclose fair value using actual sale prices and final
tranche sizes
– To the extent the valuation methodology or any key inputs
or assumptions that were used to calculate fair value prior
to sale differ from the methodology or key inputs and
assumptions used to determine fair value at closing, a
description of those material differences
CLOs in the Heartland
40
Fair Value Measurement Framework
• ASC Topic 820 defines fair value as:
The price that would be received to sell an asset or
paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction
between market participants at the measurement
date.
CLOs in the Heartland
41
Fair Value Measurement Framework
• Additional key concepts around “fair value”:
– Exit price
– Principal / most advantageous market
– Market participants
– Orderly / active market
– Measurement date
– Valuation techniques
– Fair value hierarchy
CLOs in the Heartland
42
Fair Value Measurement Framework
• Market Approach
– A valuation technique that uses prices and other relevant information
generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable (that
is, similar) assets, liabilities, or a group of assets and liabilities, such as a
business.
• Cost Approach
– A valuation technique that reflects the amount that would be required
currently to replace the service capacity of an asset (often referred to as
current replacement cost).
• Income Approach
– Valuation techniques that convert future amounts (for example, cash
flows or income and expenses) to a single current (that is, discounted)
amount. The fair value measurement is determined on the basis of the
value indicated by current market expectations about those future
amounts.
CLOs in the Heartland
43
Fair Value Measurement Framework
Fair Value Hierarchy
• Level 1
– Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or
liabilities that the reporting entity can access at the measurement date.
• Level 2
– Inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are
observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly.
• Level 3
– Level 3 inputs are unobservable inputs for the asset or liability.
CLOs in the Heartland
44
Accounting Advice Options
• Why engage accountants for advice on application of
consolidation or fair value guidance?
– There are several sections of the risk retention rules that reference
generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP). The two most significant
references are:
• In section _.2 the term majority-owned affiliate (MOA) is defined as
“…an entity (other than the issuing entity) that, directly or indirectly,
majority controls, is majority controlled by or is under common majority
control with, such person. For purposes of this definition, majority control
means ownership of more than 50 percent of the equity of an entity, or
ownership of any other controlling financial interest in the entity, as
determined under GAAP.”
• In section _.4(a)(2) the required 5% eligible horizontal residual interest is
determined by reference to “a fair value measurement framework under
GAAP”.
CLOs in the Heartland
45
Accounting Advice Options
• Why engage accountants for advice on application of
consolidation or fair value guidance? (cont’d)
– To make a determination that a structure is compliant with the risk
retention rules, a manager may wish to engage accountants to provide
advice on GAAP.
– Lawyers may also be engaged to issue an opinion on whether the
securitization structure complies with the risk retention rules. To issue
such an opinion, they may need a certain level of comfort from
accountants on those aspects of the rules that reference GAAP.
CLOs in the Heartland
46
Accounting Advice Options
• What type of accounting advice may be obtained for
ownership of a “controlling financial interest” in the MOA?
(cont’d)
– Engaging a third party accountant:
• If the manager has no auditor (or the audit is of the managed funds only),
engaging a third party accountant is an option.
– In these cases, a third party accounting firm may be engaged to issue a
“report on the application of accounting principles,” which analyzes
whether a controlling financial interest is owned by the manager.
• Also note that some audit firms may not be willing to issue the separate letter
by the engagement partner described above; this may also prompt engaging a
third party accountant.
CLOs in the Heartland
47
Risk Retention and Legal Assurance
• Third party legal opinions are problematic to deliver
– Difficult to make a determination as to how the highest court in a jurisdiction
would interpret the rules
• No judicial decisions, very little regulatory guidance and many interpretive issues
remain
• Lack of customary practice; no common understanding of language used in
opinions or customary expectations regarding diligence
– Analysis relies on facts and, in some cases judgments on GAAP (fair value and
controlling financial interests)
• Compliance burden is on sponsor; no obligation on
counterparties to comply with risk retention rules
CLOs in the Heartland
48
Risk Retention and Legal Assurance
• Emerging consensus of ABA Task Force
– “no violation of law” opinion not appropriate to give, even a reasoned opinion
– negative assurance re disclosures should be appropriate and feasible
• Nothing has come to the attention of counsel that caused them to believe the
disclosures contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a
material fact necessary in order to make the statements , in light of the
circumstances in which they were made, not misleading
• Does not rule out written advice, memos and perhaps opinions
to clients
CLOs in the Heartland
49
QUESTIONS
CLOs in the Heartland
50
Managing CLOs Through the
Cycle
Managing CLOs Through the Cycle
Moderator:
Kevin Kendra, Managing Director, Fitch Ratings
Panelists:
Matthew Andrews, Managing Director, Head of Structured
Credit, CIFC Asset Management LLC
Dan P. Baginski, Portfolio Manager and Director of
Investments, Golub Capital
Keith Oberkfell, Partner, Mayer Brown
Alina Pak, Senior Director, Fitch Ratings
Eddy Piedra, Vice President, Creek Source Capital/4086
Advisors
CLOs in the Heartland
52
QUESTIONS
CLOs in the Heartland
53
Closing Remarks
Kevin Duignan, Managing Director, Fitch Ratings
Mayer Brown comprises 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 Mexico, S.C., a sociedad civil formed
under the laws of the State of Durango, Mexico; Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong partnership and its associated legal practices in Asia; and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. Mayer Brown Consulting (Singapore) Pte. Ltd
and its subsidiary, which are affiliated with Mayer Brown, provide customs and trade advisory and consultancy services, not legal services. "Mayer Brown" and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in their respective jurisdictions.