Reuters logo
Fitch Takes Rating Actions on Four Russian Consumer Banks
November 1, 2017 / 4:12 PM / 22 days ago

Fitch Takes Rating Actions on Four Russian Consumer Banks

(The following statement was released by the rating agency) MOSCOW/LONDON, November 01 (Fitch) Fitch Ratings has upgraded Home Credit and Finance Bank's (HCFB) Long-Term Issuer Default Ratings to 'BB-' from 'B+'; affirmed OTP Bank's Long-Term IDRs at 'BB' and upgraded its Viability Rating (VR) to 'bb-' from 'b+'. Fitch has affirmed Tinkoff Bank's Long-Term IDRs at 'BB-'. The Outlooks on the three banks are Stable. The agency has also downgraded Orient Express Bank's (OEB) Long-Term IDRs to 'CCC' from 'B-'. A full list of rating actions is at the end of this rating action commentary. KEY RATING DRIVERS IDRS and VRS The rating actions (except the downgrade of OEB) reflect the continued recovery of the Russian consumer finance market due to reduced credit losses on the back of tighter underwriting and economic recovery, and lower funding costs and improved profitability, which coupled with modest growth also supports capitalisation. At the same time, the ratings continue to capture the segment's volatile nature with potential asset quality risks stemming from borrowers' still high debt burdens and growing competition due to limited inflow of new borrowers. The upgrade of HCFB's IDRs to 'BB-' and OTP's VR to 'bb-' mainly reflects stronger earnings at both banks underpinned by lower credit losses and reduced funding costs, and improved capitalisation. The affirmation of Tinkoff's IDRs at 'BB-' reflects robust profitability metrics, continued improvement of asset quality, and healthy capital ratios, which are likely to be preserved given strong internal capital generation, which should offset high lending growth rates. The downgrade of OEB's IDRs to'CCC' mainly reflects Fitch's view that the quality of the bank's capital has weakened markedly following the merger with Uniastrumbank due to the latter's significant exposure to investment property, non-traded equities and risky corporate loans (together these amount to RUB33.9 billion or 122% of FCC), which may be a source of negative mark-to-market adjustments or impairment in the future. At the same time regulatory capitalisation is very tight, which coupled with the bank's loss making performance in regulatory accounts in 9M17 suggests that continued compliance with capital requirements (including increasing from next year capital conservation buffer) could be challenging without external support. In 1H17 the average retail credit losses of the four banks (defined as the increase in retail loans overdue above 90 days, plus write-offs, divided by average performing loans) declined to 8% from 10% in 2016 (19% in 2015), helped by reduced risk appetites, seasoning of older, weaker-quality loans and stabilisation of the operating environment. Credit losses were highest at OEB (14%) and moderate for Tinkoff (9%), OTP (7%) and HCFB (6%). The latter three banks' credit losses should remain within the single digit range, in Fitch's view. OEB's retail book asset quality is also likely to improve, but this may be offset by risks from the corporate book (35% of gross loans), as of the 20 largest exposures (accounting for over 60% of gross corporate loans) Fitch considers about half (RUB15 billion, or 0.6x FCC) to be high-risk. New lending volumes have been muted at most banks, with OTP's and HCFB's loan books contracting in 2016-1H17 by 19% and 9%, respectively, while recent growth at OEB was largely due to the merger with Uniastrumbank in 1Q17. Tinkoff was the only bank among peers reporting a rapid 40% growth in 2016-1H17, supported by strong internal capital generation. Improved asset quality metrics, along with declining funding costs, helped banks to strengthen bottom line results. Both Tinkoff and HCFB reported robust annualised ROAE of 46% and 31%, respectively, in 1H17, while OTP's more moderate 11% was mostly due to higher operating expenses. OEB reported 17% ROAE in 1H17, but it was largely due to one-off securities revaluation, while core earnings were negative after adjusting for this one-off gain and about 15% of accrued interest income that is not received in cash. OEB was also loss making in regulatory accounts in 9M17 due to sizeable impairment charges. Pre-impairment profitability is solid and significantly above credit losses at Tinkoff (22% of average performing retail loans in 1H17), OTP (13%) and HCFB (12%), allowing Tinkoff to absorb a sizeable 13pp increase in credit losses before becoming loss making, while safety margins were moderate 6pp and 7pp at HCFB and OTP, respectively. Cash-based pre-impairment profitability at OEB (excluding non-core earnings and non-collected accrued interest) was a low 6% of average performing loans in 1H17, which is significantly below 11% of NPLs originated during the period. Capitalisation remains strong at OTP, HCFB and Tinkoff with end-1H17 Fitch Core Capital ratios of 24%, 19% and 16%, respectively, supported by the banks' improved profitability and deleveraging (OTP and HCFB). OEB's capital position with a 12% FCC ratio is undermined by its sizeable exposure to investment properties (RUB12 billion, 0.4x FCC), high-risk loans (0.6x FCC), deferred tax assets (0.2x FCC) and illiquid equity investments (0.2x FCC). Regulatory capital ratios are lower at all banks (end-9M17 Tier 1 of 14.4%, 9.4% and 12.3% at Tinkoff, HCFB and OTP, respectively; minimum is 7.875% with buffers applicable from 2018), reflecting higher statutory risk weights for unsecured retail loans and higher operational risk charge. OEB's regulatory capitalisation is tight (total capital ratio of 9.7%, which is below the minimum level of 9.875% including the buffer effective from 2018). Coupled with its loss-making performance, this suggests the bank may need external support to remain compliant. The introduction of IFRS 9 will have a moderately negative effect on the capitalisation of all banks, except OTP, which has already created additional provisions, but Fitch believes these will be offset by banks' strong internal capital generation (except OEB). There are some contingent risks in case of HCFB related to sizeable 1.7x double leverage at the holding company level at end-1H17 (defined as the equity investments in subsidiaries divided by holdco equity) and in case of OTP due to RUB4.5 billion (0.2x FCC) exposure to sister microfinance company. However, Fitch believes these risks are moderate, as HCFB's holdco seems to have good market access and is likely to be able to refinance the debt without needing to upstream liquidity/capital from the bank. In case of OTP the risks are covered by the parent, which considers both the bank and the microfinance company as a single business. Funding and liquidity metrics are reasonable at all banks, underpinned by low reliance on wholesale debt and strong deposit collection capacity, although the latter is more vulnerable at OEB given the bank's weaker profile. All banks are funded mainly by retail deposits (60% - 80% of end-1H17 liabilities), which are price-sensitive, but have proven to be relatively sticky through the cycle, as the majority of these fall under the deposits insurance system. Liquidity buffers are reasonable at all banks, covering about 45%, 40% and 33% of total customer deposits, at Tinkoff, HCFB and OTP, respectively, and a somewhat lower 25% at OEB. SUPPORT RATINGS AND SUPPORT RATING FLOORS OTP's IDRs and Support Rating reflect potential support the bank may receive, if needed, from its parent bank, Hungary-based OTP Bank Plc. Fitch believes that the parent would have a high propensity to support OTP in light of its majority ownership (98%), high level of integration, common branding and reputational damage for the parent from a potential default of OTP. Tinkoff, HCFB and OEB's '5' Support Ratings reflect Fitch's view that support from the banks' shareholders, although possible, cannot be relied upon. The Support Ratings and Support Rating Floors of 'No Floor' also reflect that support from the Russian authorities, although possible given the banks' considerable deposit bases, cannot be relied upon due to the banks' small sizes and lack of overall systemic importance. Accordingly, the IDRs of Tinkoff, HCFB and OEB are based on their intrinsic financial strength, as reflected by their VRs. SENIOR UNSECURED AND SUBORDINATED DEBT RATINGS Fitch has affirmed Tinkoff's senior unsecured debt rating at 'BB-', in line with its Long-Term IDRs, reflecting Fitch's view of average recovery prospects, in case of default. The subordinated debt ratings of HCFB and Tinkoff are notched down one level from their VRs (the banks' VRs are in line with their IDRs), including (i) zero notches for additional non-performance risk relative to the VR, as Fitch believes these instruments should only absorb losses once a bank reaches, or is very close to, the point of non-viability; and (ii) one notch for loss severity, reflecting below-average recoveries in case of default. Fitch has also affirmed the rating of Tinkoff's perpetual additional Tier 1 notes at 'B-', three notches below the bank's VR. The notching reflects (i) higher loss severity relative to senior unsecured creditors; and (ii) non-performance risk due to the option to cancel coupon payments at Tinkoff's discretion. The latter is more likely if the capital ratios fall in the capital buffer zone, although this risk is reasonably mitigated by Tiknoff's stable financial profile and general policy of maintaining decent headroom over minimum capital ratios (core Tier 1 ratio was 9.8% at end-9M17 versus the minimum 6.375% with buffers applicable from 2018). RATING SENSITIVITIES OTP's IDR is sensitive to changes in Fitch's assessment of Hungarian OTP Bank Plc's propensity and ability to provide support to its Russian subsidiary. OTP's VR and HCFB and Tinkoff's ratings may come under pressure if there is renewed pressure on banks' asset quality and profitability, leading to capital erosion, but Fitch views this as unlikely in the near term. Upside potentials for Tinkoff and HCFB's ratings and OTP's VR are limited and would require a significant diversification of business and earnings, leading to a material decrease in exposure to the Russian consumer finance market. OEB's ratings could be further downgraded in case the bank has to create significant reserves against is high-risk and non-core assets, or if it asset quality metrics deteriorate further, leading to material capital erosion. Conversely, improvement of bank's profitability and asset quality metrics, while also bolstering capital ratios, would be credit positive. The rating actions are as follows: HCFB Long-Term Foreign- and Local-Currency IDRs: upgraded to 'BB-' from 'B+'; Outlooks Stable Short-Term Foreign-Currency IDR: affirmed at 'B' Viability Rating: upgraded to 'bb-' from 'b+' Support Rating: affirmed at '5' Support Rating Floor: affirmed at 'No Floor' Subordinated debt (issued by Eurasia Capital SA) Long-term rating: upgraded to 'B+' from 'B' Tinkoff Long-Term Foreign- and Local-Currency IDRs: affirmed at 'BB-'; Outlooks Stable Short-Term Foreign-Currency IDR: affirmed at 'B' Viability Rating: affirmed at 'bb-' Support Rating: affirmed at '5' Support Rating Floor: affirmed at 'No Floor' Senior unsecured debt Long-term rating: affirmed at 'BB-' Subordinated debt (issued by TCS Finance DAC) Long-term rating: affirmed at 'B+' Hybrid capital instrument (issued by TCS Finance DAC) Long-term rating: affirmed at 'B-' OTP Long-Term Foreign- and Local-Currency IDRs: affirmed at 'BB', Outlooks Stable Short-Term Foreign-Currency IDR: affirmed at 'B' Viability Rating: upgraded to 'bb-' from 'b+' Support Rating: affirmed at '3' OEB Long-Term Foreign- and Local-Currency IDRs: downgraded to 'CCC' from 'B-' Short-Term Foreign-Currency IDR: downgraded to 'C' from 'B' Viability Rating: downgraded to 'ccc' from 'b-' Support Rating: affirmed at '5' Support Rating Floor: affirmed at 'No Floor' Contacts: Primary Analyst Alyona Agrenenko Associate Director +7 495 956 2409 Fitch Ratings CIS Ltd 26 Valovaya Street Moscow 115054 Secondary Analyst Ilya Sarzhin Analyst +7 495 956 9983 Committee Chairperson Alexander Danilov Senior Director +7 495 956 2408 Media Relations: Julia Belskaya von Tell, Moscow, Tel: +7 495 956 9908, Email: julia.belskayavontell@fitchratings.com; Peter Fitzpatrick, London, Tel: +44 20 3530 1103, Email: peter.fitzpatrick@fitchratings.com. Additional information is available on www.fitchratings.com Applicable Criteria Global Bank Rating Criteria (pub. 25 Nov 2016) here Additional Disclosures Dodd-Frank Rating Information Disclosure Form here Solicitation Status here#solicitation Endorsement Policy here ALL FITCH CREDIT RATINGS ARE SUBJECT TO CERTAIN LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS. PLEASE READ THESE LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS BY FOLLOWING THIS LINK: here. IN ADDITION, RATING DEFINITIONS AND THE TERMS OF USE OF SUCH RATINGS ARE AVAILABLE ON THE AGENCY'S PUBLIC WEB SITE AT WWW.FITCHRATINGS.COM. PUBLISHED RATINGS, CRITERIA, AND METHODOLOGIES ARE AVAILABLE FROM THIS SITE AT ALL TIMES. FITCH'S CODE OF CONDUCT, CONFIDENTIALITY, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, AFFILIATE FIREWALL, COMPLIANCE, AND OTHER RELEVANT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ARE ALSO AVAILABLE FROM THE CODE OF CONDUCT SECTION OF THIS SITE. DIRECTORS AND SHAREHOLDERS RELEVANT INTERESTS ARE AVAILABLE here. FITCH MAY HAVE PROVIDED ANOTHER PERMISSIBLE SERVICE TO THE RATED ENTITY OR ITS RELATED THIRD PARTIES. DETAILS OF THIS SERVICE FOR RATINGS FOR WHICH THE LEAD ANALYST IS BASED IN AN EU-REGISTERED ENTITY CAN BE FOUND ON THE ENTITY SUMMARY PAGE FOR THIS ISSUER ON THE FITCH WEBSITE. Copyright © 2017 by Fitch Ratings, Inc., Fitch Ratings Ltd. and its subsidiaries. 33 Whitehall Street, NY, NY 10004. Telephone: 1-800-753-4824, (212) 908-0500. Fax: (212) 480-4435. Reproduction or retransmission in whole or in part is prohibited except by permission. All rights reserved. In issuing and maintaining its ratings and in making other reports (including forecast information), Fitch relies on factual information it receives from issuers and underwriters and from other sources Fitch believes to be credible. Fitch conducts a reasonable investigation of the factual information relied upon by it in accordance with its ratings methodology, and obtains reasonable verification of that information from independent sources, to the extent such sources are available for a given security or in a given jurisdiction. The manner of Fitch’s factual investigation and the scope of the third-party verification it obtains will vary depending on the nature of the rated security and its issuer, the requirements and practices in the jurisdiction in which the rated security is offered and sold and/or the issuer is located, the availability and nature of relevant public information, access to the management of the issuer and its advisers, the availability of pre-existing third-party verifications such as audit reports, agreed-upon procedures letters, appraisals, actuarial reports, engineering reports, legal opinions and other reports provided by third parties, the availability of independent and competent third- party verification sources with respect to the particular security or in the particular jurisdiction of the issuer, and a variety of other factors. Users of Fitch’s ratings and reports should understand that neither an enhanced factual investigation nor any third-party verification can ensure that all of the information Fitch relies on in connection with a rating or a report will be accurate and complete. Ultimately, the issuer and its advisers are responsible for the accuracy of the information they provide to Fitch and to the market in offering documents and other reports. In issuing its ratings and its reports, Fitch must rely on the work of experts, including independent auditors with respect to financial statements and attorneys with respect to legal and tax matters. Further, ratings and forecasts of financial and other information are inherently forward-looking and embody assumptions and predictions about future events that by their nature cannot be verified as facts. As a result, despite any verification of current facts, ratings and forecasts can be affected by future events or conditions that were not anticipated at the time a rating or forecast was issued or affirmed. The information in this report is provided “as is” without any representation or warranty of any kind, and Fitch does not represent or warrant that the report or any of its contents will meet any of the requirements of a recipient of the report. A Fitch rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a security. This opinion and reports made by Fitch are based on established criteria and methodologies that Fitch is continuously evaluating and updating. Therefore, ratings and reports are the collective work product of Fitch and no individual, or group of individuals, is solely responsible for a rating or a report. The rating does not address the risk of loss due to risks other than credit risk, unless such risk is specifically mentioned. Fitch is not engaged in the offer or sale of any security. All Fitch reports have shared authorship. Individuals identified in a Fitch report were involved in, but are not solely responsible for, the opinions stated therein. The individuals are named for contact purposes only. A report providing a Fitch rating is neither a prospectus nor a substitute for the information assembled, verified and presented to investors by the issuer and its agents in connection with the sale of the securities. Ratings may be changed or withdrawn at any time for any reason in the sole discretion of Fitch. Fitch does not provide investment advice of any sort. Ratings are not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Ratings do not comment on the adequacy of market price, the suitability of any security for a particular investor, or the tax-exempt nature or taxability of payments made in respect to any security. Fitch receives fees from issuers, insurers, guarantors, other obligors, and underwriters for rating securities. Such fees generally vary from US$1,000 to US$750,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent) per issue. In certain cases, Fitch will rate all or a number of issues issued by a particular issuer, or insured or guaranteed by a particular insurer or guarantor, for a single annual fee. Such fees are expected to vary from US$10,000 to US$1,500,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent). The assignment, publication, or dissemination of a rating by Fitch shall not constitute a consent by Fitch to use its name as an expert in connection with any registration statement filed under the United States securities laws, the Financial Services and Markets Act of 2000 of the United Kingdom, or the securities laws of any particular jurisdiction. Due to the relative efficiency of electronic publishing and distribution, Fitch research may be available to electronic subscribers up to three days earlier than to print subscribers. For Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan and South Korea only: Fitch Australia Pty Ltd holds an Australian financial services license (AFS license no. 337123) which authorizes it to provide credit ratings to wholesale clients only. Credit ratings information published by Fitch is not intended to be used by persons who are retail clients within the meaning of the Corporations Act 2001

Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.
0 : 0
  • narrow-browser-and-phone
  • medium-browser-and-portrait-tablet
  • landscape-tablet
  • medium-wide-browser
  • wide-browser-and-larger
  • medium-browser-and-landscape-tablet
  • medium-wide-browser-and-larger
  • above-phone
  • portrait-tablet-and-above
  • above-portrait-tablet
  • landscape-tablet-and-above
  • landscape-tablet-and-medium-wide-browser
  • portrait-tablet-and-below
  • landscape-tablet-and-below