DZ BANK AG. Semiannual update. Exhibit 1 Scorecard ratios of DZ BANK AG 13.0% 58.6% 10% Capital: Tangible Common Equity/Risk-Weighted Assets

Transcription

1 CREDIT OPINION 2 November 217 DZ BANK AG Semiannual update Update Summary We rate DZ BANK AG Deutsche Zentral-Genossenschaftsbank's (DZ BANK) senior unsecured debt Aa3/P-1 and its deposits Aa1/P-1. Further, we assign a Baseline Credit Assessment (BCA), an a2 Adjusted BCA and Aa1(cr)/P-1(cr) Counterparty Risk Assessments (CR Assessment). RATINGS DZ BANK AG Domicile Frankfurt am Main, Germany Long Term Debt Aa3 Type Senior Unsecured - Fgn Curr Outlook Positive Long Term Deposit Aa1 Type LT Bank Deposits - Fgn Curr Outlook Stable Please see the ratings section at the end of this report for more information. The ratings and outlook shown reflect information as of the publication date. DZ BANK's ratings reflect (1) its BCA; (2) the a2 Adjusted BCA, which includes three notches of affiliate support uplift, reflecting very high support available from the cooperative sector; (3) the results of our Advanced Loss Given Failure (LGF) analysis, which provide one notch of rating uplift for the senior unsecured debt ratings and three notches for the deposit ratings from the a2 Adjusted BCA; and (4) a moderate probability of government support, yielding one notch of support uplift. DZ BANK's BCA reflects the group's satisfactory asset quality, sound regulatory capital ratios and solid funding structure, which benefits from the cash surplus in the cooperative sector. At the same time, the BCA takes into account DZ BANK's relatively high leverage. Exhibit 1 Scorecard ratios of DZ BANK AG DZ BANK AG (BCA: ) Median -rated banks 14% 7% 13.% 12% Analyst Contacts 6% Alexander Hendricks, CFA Associate Managing Director - Banking alexander.hendricks@moodys.com Carola Schuler Managing Director Banking carola.schuler@moodys.com CLIENT SERVICES Americas Asia Pacific Japan EMEA % 5% 8% 4% 6% 3% 4% 2% 2% 3.2% 1%.2% % % Asset Risk: Problem Loans/ Gross Loans Capital: Tangible Common Equity/Risk-Weighted Assets Profitability: Net Income/ Tangible Assets Solvency Factors (LHS) Note: TCE = Tangible Common Equity, TBA = Tangible Banking Assets Source: Moody's Investors Service Funding Structure: Market Funds/ Tangible Banking Assets Liquid Resources: Liquid Banking Assets/Tangible Banking Assets Liquidity Factors (RHS) Liquidity Factors Katharina Barten Sr Vice President katharina.barten@moodys.com Solvency Factors 58.6% 1%

2 Credit strengths» The benign German credit environment supports solid asset quality; higher-risk assets and participations are manageable» Absolute capitalisation has strengthened, and continued profit retention drives steady improvement» Earnings are well diversified, and pre-provision income represents relatively strong risk charge coverage» DZ BANK's sound funding structure and liquidity resources benefit from access to sector funds Credit challenges» DZ BANK's balance-sheet leverage will remain high, and prospective regulatory changes could further reduce its regulatory capital ratios, following a reduction in H1 217» The group's specialist in transportion finance, DVB BANK S.E. (DVB, Aa1 stable/aa3 positive, b31), adds concentrated sector exposures, in particular in the troubled ship and offshore finance sectors Rating outlook» The outlook on the Aa1 long-term deposit ratings is stable, and the outlook on the Aa3 long-term senior unsecured debt and issuer ratings is positive.» The positive outlook on DZ BANK's senior unsecured debt ratings reflects the potential for higher uplift from our Loss Given Failure (LGF) analysis for this liability class. For this analysis, we will consider additional data on DZ BANK's evolving liability structure, in particular on the exact amount of non-structured senior unsecured debt relative to total assets. Factors that could lead to an upgrade» Upward pressure on DZ BANK s long-term ratings could be exerted by (1) a higher BCA; (2) an improvement in the cooperative sector s financial strength, which could result in additional rating uplift for affiliate support; and/or (3) higher volumes of senior unsecured debt and/or instruments subordinated to senior unsecured debt relative to total banking assets, which could lead to additional rating uplift from our Advanced LGF analysis for senior debt instruments. The potential for a higher LGF result does not apply to DZ BANK's deposit and senior-senior unsecured debt ratings because, with three notches of rating uplift from the Adjusted BCA, the respective ratings already benefit from the highest possible LGF result.» An upgrade of DZ BANK s BCA would be subject to a reduction in risk concentrations relative to capital and/or a further improvement in its absolute capital levels. In addition, the realisation of cost synergies following the integration of the former WGZ BANK's operations could support a higher BCA. Factors that could lead to a downgrade» A downgrade of the bank s debt and deposit ratings could arise (1) from a BCA downgrade; (2) in the unlikely event that the cooperative sector s financial strength deteriorates, or that the commitment of the sector to supporting its members shows signs of deterioration; and/or (3) if DZ BANK displays a liability structure with a materially lower volume of senior debt relative to its total banking assets. The latter could result in removing the one notch of rating uplift for unsecured debt resulting from our Advanced LGF analysis.» We would consider downgrading DZ BANK's BCA if substantial unexpected risks were to emerge from the bank's commercial banking activities, and/or if the group's loss-absorption capacity materially decreases. This publication does not announce a credit rating action. For any credit ratings referenced in this publication, please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on for the most updated credit rating action information and rating history. 2 2 November 217

3 Key indicators Exhibit 2 DZ BANK AG (Consolidated Financials) [1] Total Assets (EUR billion) Total Assets (USD billion) Tangible Common Equity (EUR billion) Tangible Common Equity (USD billion) Problem Loans / Gross Loans (%) Tangible Common Equity / Risk Weighted Assets (%) Problem Loans / (Tangible Common Equity + Loan Loss Reserve) (%) Net Interest Margin (%) PPI / Average RWA (%) Net Income / Tangible Assets (%) Cost / Income Ratio (%) Market Funds / Tangible Banking Assets (%) Liquid Banking Assets / Tangible Banking Assets (%) Gross Loans / Due to Customers (%) CAGR/Avg [1] All figures and ratios are adjusted using Moody's standard adjustments [2] Basel III - fully-loaded or transitional phase-in; IFRS [3] Basel II; IFRS [4] May include rounding differences due to scale of reported amounts [5] Compound Annual Growth Rate (%) based on time period presented for the latest accounting regime [6] Simple average of periods presented for the latest accounting regime. [7] Simple average of Basel III periods presented Source: Moody's Financial Metrics Profile DZ BANK AG acts as central bank, corporate bank and parent holding company of the DZ BANK Group. Since the merger with the former WGZ BANK on 1 August 216, it has been the sole cooperative central institution for Germany's cooperative sector. DZ BANK Group is Germany's second-largest banking group by total assets, based on data as of 3 June 217. DZ BANK's credit profile benefits from its diversified bancassurance franchise because the bank owns and consolidates several of the sector's key financial service providers. These include R+V Versicherungen (R+V), Union Investment Management AG (UMH), Bausparkasse Schwäbisch Hall (BSH), Deutsche Genossenschafts-Hypothekenbank (DG HYP), and WL BANK AG Westfälische Landschaft Bodenkreditbank (WL BANK) which are domestic market-leading franchises in insurance, fund management, residential mortgage lending, commercial real estate and public-sector finance, respectively. DZ BANK has profit-and-loss transfer agreements in place for some of these institutions. Our credit assessment is based on consolidated financials. Detailed credit considerations DZ BANK's strong capitalisation is illustrated by comfortable buffers over new minimum requirements Following several years of gradually strengthening capital ratios, DZ BANK reported a 13.% Common Equity Tier 1 (CET1) ratio as of end-june 217, down from the 14.5% ratio reported as of year-end 216, based on the full application of Basel III rules. The decrease in the CET1 ratio by 1.5 percentage points was due to a regulatory change related to DZ BANK's (previously more accommodating) risk weighting of various ownership stakes, in particular the one of its insurance subsidiary R+V. The ownership stake was previously riskweighted at 1% which, under the new rules, has been adjusted upwards to 37%. However, even the reduced CET1 ratio implies a comfortable buffer in the context of the regulatory Pillar 2 Requirement (P2R SREP requirement) of 7.85% for Our Tangible Common Equity (TCE) ratio also stood reduced at 13.% as of June 217 (216: 14.5%, 215: 12.7%). The TCE ratio excludes a portion of intangible assets, but does not include the various regulatory deductions. DZ BANK's fully phased-in 4.1% regulatory leverage ratio as of June was unchanged from that as of year-end 216. While the leverage ratio was below the average of DZ BANK's peer group in the same rating category, we take into account the diluting effect on this ratio of large pass-through interbank lending positions that result from DZ BANK's function as the central clearing institution for the whole cooperative sector. The bank's TCE relative to total assets remained stable at 3.9% during the six months to June. 3 2 November 217

4 While we have a moderately positive outlook for DZ BANK's leverage ratio, we anticipate that its CET1 ratio may decline in the next 12 months, albeit purely owing to further regulatory changes. The European Central Bank's aim to harmonise risk weightings under the Standardized Approach and the Internal-Ratings-Based Approach may result in higher capital requirements, in particular for collateralised lending. In this context, we note that 96% of DZ BANK's 54 billion real estate lending volume was risk-weighted based on the Internal-Ratings-Based Approach as of year-end 216. Although the impact on DZ BANK's risk weightings and regulatory ratios cannot be forecast at this stage, the combination of the bank's comfortable capital buffers to the minimum SREP ratio and its good capital-retention capacity imply that the group is relatively well positioned to absorb this impact. DZ BANK's capital-retention capacity which is helped by very modest dividend payouts, strongly supports the bank's BCA and ratings. We assign a baa1 Capital score which includes a mild downward adjustment to account for the group's relatively high leverage. Benign German credit environment supports sound asset quality; DVB's high-risk shipping assets remain manageable DZ BANK's asset risk is sound, except for the 13.9 billion ship and offshore finance exposure which is mostly housed at DVB. DVB's ship and offshore lending book recorded a fast quality erosion and rising provisioning needs during the three quarters to June 217, as stress mounted in the global maritime transportation and offshore sectors. That said, DVB's higher-risk exposures remain manageable in a group context, in particular based on the substantial loss absorption capacity of DZ BANK's pre-provision income. The group's ship and offshore finance exposure accounted for 3.6% of its 381 billion total lending volume as of June 217, and was equivalent to roughly 75% of DZ BANK's 17.5 billion CET1 capital. Despite the sharp deterioration of the ship and offshore finance sectors, DZ BANK recorded a mild improvement in its asset quality metrics as of June 217. In H1 217, the reported volume of non-performing loans reduced to 5.6 billion, from 5.8 billion as of December 216. That said, this reduction was predominantly due to favourable currency effects, further aided by foreclosures and principal repayments on NPLs at DVB. Based on a total loan book of 176 billion and our measure of problem loans of 4.5 billion, DZ BANK's problem loan ratio decreased to 2.5% at end-june 217, down from the 2.9% at year-end 216. For the calculation of the problem loan ratio, we use the amount of impaired assets relating to customer loans plus unimpaired customer loans more than 9 days past due. DZ BANK largest sector concentration relates to mortgage lending which, following the merger with WGZ BANK in 216, more than doubled to 47 billion as of year-end 216. This portfolio performs well, benefitting from the benign credit conditions in Germany. The former WGZ BANK's very low level of impaired loans had resulted in a dilution of the group's problem loan ratio in 216. While we expect the benign credit environment for most segments in corporate banking to last throughout 217, DZ BANK's ship and offshore finance exposures will likely cause elevated provisioning and write-downs in H2 217 and beyond. The high risk for this portfolio is illustrated by the group's 466 million net risk charge at DVB for H1 217 which, on an annualised basis, implies a steep 4.4% write-down on DVB's 21 billion loan book. We do not consider DZ BANK's problem loan ratio to adequately capture the various risks emanating from risk concentrations, the bank's material investments and participations, as well as related credit and market risks. To fully reflect these risks, we have adjusted the Asset Risk score down to. DZ BANK's earnings are sound and well diversified; pre-provision income allows for satisfactory loss absorption With annual reported pre-tax profits ranging between 2.2 billion billion during the three years to end-216, DZ BANK's results were strong and have allowed for satisfactory profit retention. The group's profits are relatively volatile because valuation gains and losses on its sizeable fixed-income holdings can cause material swings. At the same time, DZ BANK earnings strongly benefit from the stabilising effect of its broadly diversified, partially uncorrelated, businesses, and modest dividend payouts allow for satisfactory profit retention. DZ BANK estimates its sustainable pre-tax profits level at 1.5 billion to 2. billion which we consider somewhat ambitious for 217 considering (1) the exceptionally high taxes of 451 million paid in H1 217, which led to the comparatively modest 488 million net profit for the period; and (2) our expectation of persistently high credit losses at transportation lender DVB. For 218 and beyond, however, we consider this a realistic range which, albeit lower than the levels during recent years, still allows for satisfactory loss absorption by the income statement. Although the group will gradually benefit from leveraging synergy potential from centralising 4 2 November 217

5 and streamlining back-office functions, and from savings on infrastructure investments, it may take up to two years until it can fully realise these synergies. In the near term, profits will remain constrained by (1) adverse cost effects; (2) persistent revenue pressures in a low-interest-rate environment; and (3) gradually normalising risk charges after several years of very low loan-loss provisions. The group expects this to save 1 million- 15 million in costs per annum from strategic, commercial and regulatory synergies once the merger with WGZ is operationally fully implemented. DZ BANK reported a 939 million pre-tax profit for the six months to June 217, which was 4% below the 1.57 billion reported for the same period of 216, even though only the H1 217 result includes the (profitable) operations of the former WGZ. The decline was mostly driven by the 532 million pre-tax loss contributed by DVB, after a 15 million positive contribution in H Notwithstanding this impact, DZ BANK's pre-provision income (before a 58 million one-off charge) for H1 217 remained robust at 1.4 billion, benefitting from higher core revenue, i.e. net interest income (+4.7%) and fee income (+18.9%). DZ BANK's larger subsidiaries mostly contributed very healthy results. Taking all of the above into account, we assign a ba2 Profitability score for DZ BANK, which is above-average in the context of our rated German banks portfolio. Sound funding structure and liquidity DZ BANK strongly benefits from its position within the cash-rich cooperative sector, and its low-risk funding structure strongly underpins the group's BCA. DZ BANK has an effective centralised treasury function that ensures access to funds and adequate structural funding of all subsidiaries. The group's funding structure somewhat in 216, as illustrated by its mildly higher level of customer deposits relative to its total assets and the bank's higher long-term ratio of 94% (215: 89%). DZ BANK's long-term ratio describes the degree of matched funding for assets with maturities above one year. Importantly, for its funding, DZ Group can rely on its continued access to the cooperative member banks' excess liquidity, which strongly mitigates the group's partial dependence on market funds. Of the 132 billion due to banks at half-year 217, 52 billion, or 4%, was from fellow members in the co-operative sector. The bank's capital market instruments of 71 billion include 2 billion of covered bonds. DZ BANK reported a large 54 billion pool of liquid securities as of June 217, of which 47 billion was unencumbered collateral eligible for ECB funding. The Liquidity Coverage Ratio was strong at 135%. To reflect DZ BANK's sound funding structure and strong liquidity, we assign a baa1 Funding Structure score, which includes positive adjustments for market funds that are regularly available from the cooperative sector and development banks. The Liquid Resources score includes a downward adjustment for the encumbered portion of liquid assets. Support and structural considerations Affiliate support DZ BANK's a2 Adjusted BCA benefits from the strong fundamentals of and our assessment of a very high probability of support from the German co-operative banking association, Genossenschaftliche FinanzGruppe Volksbanken und Raiffeisenbanken. Its central organisation, Bundesverband der Deutschen Volksbanken und Raiffeisenbanken (BVR), provides support to all members through its institutional protection scheme. As a member of the co-operative group of banks, DZ BANK is highly likely to receive affiliate support in case of need. This support materially reduces the probability of default, as the co-operative group's cross-sector support mechanism aims to stabilise its members by avoiding any form of loss-participation by creditors or bail-in. Our affiliate support assumptions result in three notches of rating uplift from the BCA, benefitting DZ BANK's debt, deposit and subordinated instrument ratings. Loss Given Failure In our Advanced LGF analysis, we consider the risks faced by the different debt and deposit classes across the liability structure in resolution. We assume residual TCE of 3% and post-failure losses of 8% of tangible banking assets, a 25% run-off in junior wholesale deposits and a 5% run-off in preferred deposits. These ratios are in line with our standard assumptions. We base our calculation on the assumption that deposits and complex structured notes are preferred to most senior unsecured debt instruments, in line with the new German insolvency legislation that effectively subordinated senior bonds and notes to deposits in resolution as of January November 217

6 » For DZ BANK's deposits and senior-senior unsecured debt, rated Aa1 stable, our LGF analysis indicates an extremely low loss given failure, leading to a three-notch uplift from the bank's a2 Adjusted BCA.» For senior unsecured debt issued by DZ BANK, rated Aa3 positive, our LGF analysis indicates a low loss given failure, leading to a one-notch uplift from the bank's a2 Adjusted BCA. We expect upward pressure on this result, which could lead to an additional notch of rating uplift, as indicated by the positive outlook on the issuer and regular senior unsecured debt ratings.» For senior subordinated debt issued by DZ BANK, rated A3, our LGF analysis indicates a high loss given failure, positioning this rating one notch below the a2 Adjusted BCA.» The non-cumulative trust preferred securities issued by DZ BANK Capital Funding Trust I (ISIN: DE978337) are rated Baa2(hyb), that is, three notches below the Adjusted BCA, which reflects their non-cumulative coupon skip mechanism linked to a balancesheet trigger.» The non-cumulative trust preferred securities issued by DZ BANK Capital Funding Trust II, DZ BANK Capital Funding Trust III and DZ BANK Perpetual Funding Issuer (Jersey) are rated Baa3(hyb), four notches below the Adjusted BCA. This reflects (1) the risks inherent in discretionary interest payments and mandatory non-payment triggers; and (2) the deeply subordinated nature of the securities: in bankruptcy or resolution, they would rank junior to profit participation rights (Genussscheine) and silent participations (Stille Beteiligungen). A loss at DZ BANK Group would be among the key triggers for the omission of interest payments. Government support Although German banks operate in an environment of materially weakened prospects for financial assistance from the government, we maintain one notch of rating uplift in our senior unsecured debt and deposit ratings for members of the co-operative banking group, reflecting our assumptions of a modest support probability. Our government support assumptions included in DZ BANK's ratings reflect the size and high systemic relevance, at the domestic level, of the group of cooperative banks. Such support would probably not be provided to the bank directly, but to its central association, BVR, in the unlikely event that the association cannot stem (or cannot provide quickly enough) the required support based on the sector's combined financial strengths. Counterparty Risk Assessment (CR Assessment) CR Assessments are opinions of how counterparty obligations are likely to be treated if a bank fails, and are distinct from debt and deposit ratings in that they (1) consider only the risk of default rather than both the likelihood of default and the expected financial loss suffered in the event of default, and (2) apply to counterparty obligations and contractual commitments rather than debt or deposit instruments. The CR Assessment is an opinion of the counterparty risk related to a bank's covered bonds, contractual performance obligations (servicing), derivatives (for example, swaps), letters of credit, guarantees and liquidity facilities. DZ BANK's CR Assessment is positioned at Aa1(cr)/P-1(cr). The bank's Aa1(cr) CR Assessment is positioned four notches above the a2 Adjusted BCA, three notches of which are based on the buffer against default provided to the senior obligations represented by the CR Assessment, by more subordinated instruments, primarily senior unsecured debt. To determine the CR Assessment, we focus purely on subordination, taking no account of the volume of the instrument class. About Moody's Bank Scorecard Our scorecard is designed to capture, express and explain in summary form our Rating Committee's judgement. When read in conjunction with our research, a fulsome presentation of our judgement is expressed. As a result, the output of our scorecard may materially differ from that suggested by raw data alone (though it has been calibrated to avoid the frequent need for strong divergence). The scorecard output and the individual scores are discussed in rating committees and may be adjusted up or down to reflect conditions specific to each rated entity. 6 2 November 217

7 Rating methodology and scorecard factors Exhibit 3 DZ BANK AG Macro Factors Weighted Macro Profile Strong + Factor 1% Historic Macro Ratio Adjusted Score Credit Trend Assigned Score Key driver #1 Key driver #2 Solvency Asset Risk Problem Loans / Gross Loans 3.2% a3 Non lending credit risk Capital market risk Capital TCE / RWA 12.9% a3 baa1 Nominal leverage Capital retention Profitability Net Income / Tangible Assets.2% b1 ba2 Return on assets Expected trend Combined Solvency Score Liquidity Funding Structure Market Funds / Tangible Banking Assets 58.6% Liquid Resources Liquid Banking Assets / Tangible Banking Assets 52.4% Combined Liquidity Score Financial Profile Business Diversification Opacity and Complexity Corporate Behavior Total Qualitative Adjustments Sovereign or Affiliate constraint: Scorecard Calculated BCA range Assigned BCA Affiliate Support notching Adjusted BCA b3 baa1 Market funding quality aa2 Asset encumbrance baa3 baa1 Aaa baa1-baa3 -a2 Balance Sheet is not applicable. 7 2 November 217

8 Debt class Counterparty Risk Assessment Senior senior unsecured bank debt Deposits Senior unsecured bank debt Dated subordinated bank debt Instrument class Counterparty Risk Assessment Senior senior unsecured bank debt Deposits Senior unsecured bank debt Dated subordinated bank debt De Jure waterfall De Facto waterfall Notching LGF Assigned Additional Preliminary LGF notching Rating Instrument Sub- Instrument SubDe Jure De Facto Notching Guidance notching Assessment volume + ordination volume + ordination vs. subordination subordination Adjusted BCA aa2 (cr) aa aa a a3 Loss Given Failure notching Additional Preliminary Rating Assessment Notching aa2 (cr) aa2 aa2 a1 a3 Government Support notching Local Currency Rating Aa1 (cr) Aa1 Aa1 Aa3 A3 Foreign Currency Rating --Aa1 Aa3 A3 Source: Moody's Financial Metrics Ratings Exhibit 4 Category DZ BANK AG Outlook Bank Deposits Baseline Credit Assessment Adjusted Baseline Credit Assessment Counterparty Risk Assessment Issuer Rating Senior Unsecured Subordinate Commercial Paper -Dom Curr Other Short Term -Dom Curr Moody's Rating Stable(m) Aa1/P-1 a2 Aa1(cr)/P-1(cr) Aa3 Aa3 A3 P-1 (P)P-1 DZ BANK AG, NEW YORK BRANCH Commercial Paper P-1 Source: Moody's Investors Service Output of the Baseline Credit Assessment Scorecard Our Scorecard is designed to capture, express and explain in summary form our Rating Committee's judgment. When read in conjunction with our research, a fulsome presentation of our judgement is expressed. As a result, the output of our scorecard may materially differ from that suggested by raw data alone (though it has been calibrated to avoid the frequent need for strong divergence). The scorecard output and the individual scores are discussed in rating committees and may be adjusted up or down to reflect conditions specific to each rated entity. 8 2 November 217

9 Endnotes 1 The ratings shown in this report are the bank's long-term deposit rating and outlook, the long-term senior unsecured debt rating and outlook, and the BCA. 2 The ratio refers to the Supervisory Review and Evaluation Process, an annual exercise undertaken by the European Central Bank that results in a bank's SREP minimum capital requirements, or SREP ratio. 9 2 November 217

10 217 Moody s Corporation, Moody s Investors Service, Inc., Moody s Analytics, Inc. and/or their licensors and affiliates (collectively, MOODY S ). All rights reserved. CREDIT RATINGS ISSUED BY, INC. AND ITS RATINGS AFFILIATES ( MIS ) ARE MOODY S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES, AND MOODY S PUBLICATIONS MAY INCLUDE MOODY S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES. MOODY S DEFINES CREDIT RISK AS THE RISK THAT AN ENTITY MAY NOT MEET ITS CONTRACTUAL, FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS AS THEY COME DUE AND ANY ESTIMATED FINANCIAL LOSS IN THE EVENT OF DEFAULT. CREDIT RATINGS DO NOT ADDRESS ANY OTHER RISK, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: LIQUIDITY RISK, MARKET VALUE RISK, OR PRICE VOLATILITY. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY S OPINIONS INCLUDED IN MOODY S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT STATEMENTS OF CURRENT OR HISTORICAL FACT. MOODY S PUBLICATIONS MAY ALSO INCLUDE QUANTITATIVE MODEL-BASED ESTIMATES OF CREDIT RISK AND RELATED OPINIONS OR COMMENTARY PUBLISHED BY MOODY S ANALYTICS, INC. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY S PUBLICATIONS DO NOT CONSTITUTE OR PROVIDE INVESTMENT OR FINANCIAL ADVICE, AND CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT AND DO NOT PROVIDE RECOMMENDATIONS TO PURCHASE, SELL, OR HOLD PARTICULAR SECURITIES. NEITHER CREDIT RATINGS NOR MOODY S PUBLICATIONS COMMENT ON THE SUITABILITY OF AN INVESTMENT FOR ANY PARTICULAR INVESTOR. MOODY S ISSUES ITS CREDIT RATINGS AND PUBLISHES MOODY S PUBLICATIONS WITH THE EXPECTATION AND UNDERSTANDING THAT EACH INVESTOR WILL, WITH DUE CARE, MAKE ITS OWN STUDY AND EVALUATION OF EACH SECURITY THAT IS UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR PURCHASE, HOLDING, OR SALE. MOODY S CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR USE BY RETAIL INVESTORS AND IT WOULD BE RECKLESS AND INAPPROPRIATE FOR RETAIL INVESTORS TO USE MOODY S CREDIT RATINGS OR MOODY S PUBLICATIONS WHEN MAKING AN INVESTMENT DECISION. IF IN DOUBT YOU SHOULD CONTACT YOUR FINANCIAL OR OTHER PROFESSIONAL ADVISER. ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS PROTECTED BY LAW, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO, COPYRIGHT LAW, AND NONE OF SUCH INFORMATION MAY BE COPIED OR OTHERWISE REPRODUCED, REPACKAGED, FURTHER TRANSMITTED, TRANSFERRED, DISSEMINATED, REDISTRIBUTED OR RESOLD, OR STORED FOR SUBSEQUENT USE FOR ANY SUCH PURPOSE, IN WHOLE OR IN PART, IN ANY FORM OR MANNER OR BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, BY ANY PERSON WITHOUT MOODY S PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT. All information contained herein is obtained by MOODY S from sources believed by it to be accurate and reliable. Because of the possibility of human or mechanical error as well as other factors, however, all information contained herein is provided AS IS without warranty of any kind. MOODY'S adopts all necessary measures so that the information it uses in assigning a credit rating is of sufficient quality and from sources MOODY'S considers to be reliable including, when appropriate, independent third-party sources. However, MOODY S is not an auditor and cannot in every instance independently verify or validate information received in the rating process or in preparing the Moody s publications. To the extent permitted by law, MOODY S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability to any person or entity for any indirect, special, consequential, or incidental losses or damages whatsoever arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information, even if MOODY S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers is advised in advance of the possibility of such losses or damages, including but not limited to: (a) any loss of present or prospective profits or (b) any loss or damage arising where the relevant financial instrument is not the subject of a particular credit rating assigned by MOODY S. To the extent permitted by law, MOODY S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors and suppliers disclaim liability for any direct or compensatory losses or damages caused to any person or entity, including but not limited to by any negligence (but excluding fraud, willful misconduct or any other type of liability that, for the avoidance of doubt, by law cannot be excluded) on the part of, or any contingency within or beyond the control of, MOODY S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers, arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or the use of or inability to use any such information. NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OF ANY SUCH RATING OR OTHER OPINION OR INFORMATION IS GIVEN OR MADE BY MOODY S IN ANY FORM OR MANNER WHATSOEVER. Moody s Investors Service, Inc., a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody s Corporation ( MCO ), hereby discloses that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by Moody s Investors Service, Inc. have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to Moody s Investors Service, Inc. for appraisal and rating services rendered by it fees ranging from $1,5 to approximately $2,5,. MCO and MIS also maintain policies and procedures to address the independence of MIS s ratings and rating processes. Information regarding certain affiliations that may exist between directors of MCO and rated entities, and between entities who hold ratings from MIS and have also publicly reported to the SEC an ownership interest in MCO of more than 5%, is posted annually at under the heading Investor Relations Corporate Governance Director and Shareholder Affiliation Policy. Additional terms for Australia only: Any publication into Australia of this document is pursuant to the Australian Financial Services License of MOODY S affiliate, Moody s Investors Service Pty Limited ABN AFSL and/or Moody s Analytics Australia Pty Ltd ABN AFSL (as applicable). This document is intended to be provided only to wholesale clients within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 21. By continuing to access this document from within Australia, you represent to MOODY S that you are, or are accessing the document as a representative of, a wholesale client and that neither you nor the entity you represent will directly or indirectly disseminate this document or its contents to retail clients within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 21. MOODY S credit rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a debt obligation of the issuer, not on the equity securities of the issuer or any form of security that is available to retail investors. It would be reckless and inappropriate for retail investors to use MOODY S credit ratings or publications when making an investment decision. If in doubt you should contact your financial or other professional adviser. Additional terms for Japan only: Moody's Japan K.K. ( MJKK ) is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody's Group Japan G.K., which is wholly-owned by Moody s Overseas Holdings Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of MCO. Moody s SF Japan K.K. ( MSFJ ) is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of MJKK. MSFJ is not a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization ( NRSRO ). Therefore, credit ratings assigned by MSFJ are Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings. Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings are assigned by an entity that is not a NRSRO and, consequently, the rated obligation will not qualify for certain types of treatment under U.S. laws. MJKK and MSFJ are credit rating agencies registered with the Japan Financial Services Agency and their registration numbers are FSA Commissioner (Ratings) No. 2 and 3 respectively. MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) hereby disclose that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) for appraisal and rating services rendered by it fees ranging from JPY2, to approximately JPY35,,. MJKK and MSFJ also maintain policies and procedures to address Japanese regulatory requirements. REPORT NUMBER 1 2 November

11 Contributors Katharina Barten Sr Vice President 11 2 November 217 CLIENT SERVICES Mark C Jenkinson Associate Analyst Americas Asia Pacific Japan EMEA