Posts

A matter of scale in securitisation

Qasim Saif, Vice President and Yuvraj Kundargi, Executive | finserv@vinodkothari.com

Background

The previous financial year witnessed Indian banks entering the securitisation market as originators, marking a positive step towards large-volume transactions. Their participation also raised expectations that non-lending institutions could increasingly come in as investors in such instruments.

Midway through this year, the Reliance group announced a landmark transaction, raising funds through securitisation of loan receivables of its group entities. These loans are proposed to be repaid from the receivables from usage of digital telecommunication infrastructure by Reliance group companies.

Issuances were made by three trusts: Radhakrishna Securitisation Trust, Shivshakti Securitisation Trust, and Siddhivinayak Securitisation Trust with maturities of approximately three, four and five years respectively, and carrying an average coupon of 7.75%.

This transaction represents the largest securitisation issuance in India to date. It is marked by a unique structure where the transaction is not supported by credit enhancements from the originator. Instead, the obligors’ rating, supported by a guarantee from Reliance Industries Ltd., enabled the securities to achieve a AAA rating.

This article discusses the structure of the transaction, its elements, and the flow of funds.

Read more: A matter of scale in securitisation

Understanding the Structure

1. Loan by Originator

The originators, Sikka Ports & Terminals Limited (SPTL) and Jamnagar Utilities & Power Private Limited (JUPL), provided a long-tenure loan to the obligor, Digital Fibre Infrastructure Trust (DFIT). 

However, the maturity of the loan’s principal extends far beyond the tenure of the pass-through certificates (PTCs) issued under the securitisation structure. Out of a total sanction amount of ₹33131 crore, ₹25000 crore was lent out by the originators for a period of 30 years. An additional loan amounting to ₹8131 crore was also extended, but is not being securitised in this transaction.

2. Put Option with Originator

Parallely, the originator entered into a put option agreement with five Reliance group entities, namely, Reliance Industries Holding Pvt. Ltd., Srichakra Commercials LLP, Karuna Commercials LLP, Devarshi Commercials LLP, and Tattvam Enterprises LLP. The put option gave the originator the right to sell the loan receivables to these entities. Since the maturity of the underlying loan is significantly longer than the tenure of PTCs, the trustee would exercise the put option with the group entities and proceeds from sale of the loan receivables would be used for principal repayment.

Section 19A of the SDI Regulations, which specifies the conditions governing securitisation, mandates that no obligor shall have more than 25% in the asset pool at the time of securitisation. This serves to reduce credit concentration by specifying a minimum number of obligors. Entering into an option agreement with five separate entities fulfills these diversification requirements, ensuring compliance with the SDI regulations.

3. Assignment of Receivables to the Securitisation Trust

The originator assigned the loan receivables, along with the receivables under the put option agreement, to the securitisation trusts. Three trusts were involved in this deal: Siddhivinayak, Shivshakti, and Radhakrishna. SPTL assigned its loans to the first two trusts, while JUPL assigned its loan to Radhakrishna. Reliance Industries Holding Pvt. Ltd., one of the option counterparties, is not a part of the structure of the first trust; Siddhivinayak only has four option counterparties.

(all values in ₹ crore) 

Structure of the deal
TrustsSiddhivinayakShivshaktiRadhakrishna
Value of Receivables6780.346943.364461.71
Assignor of ReceivablesSTPLJUPLJUPL
Value of PTCs8000.008000.005000.00
Value of Options1615.931339.92870.24
Number of Option Counterparties455
Principal Repayment from Options6463.726699.624351.22
Principal Repayment from DFIT1536.281300.38648.78
Yield on PTCs7.80%7.73%7.66%
Tenure of PTCs in years543
4. Issuance of Securitised Notes

The trusts issued securitised notes to investors, backed by loan receivables. These notes, or pass-through certificates (PTCs), have varying tenures of five, four, and three years respectively. They also have different yields, as the table above highlights. The notes were rated by two independent agencies, Crisil and Care Edge, and all three issuances were given a AAA rating.           

5. Investor Participation

Roughly three-fourths of the issuance has been subscribed by the country’s leading asset managers, including Aditya Birla Sun Life AMC, HDFC AMC, ICICI Prudential AMC, Nippon Life India AMC, and SBI Funds Management Ltd.

6. Servicing of Securitised Notes
  • Interest payments: Serviced from the interest on the underlying loan by DFIT .
  • Principal repayments: Since the maturity of the underlying loan is significantly longer than the PTCs, the trustee would exercise the put option with the group entities. The proceeds from the sale of the loan under this option were then used to repay the principal to the securitised noteholders.

Read our other articles:

India securitisation volumes 2024: Has co-lending taken the sheen?

Team Finserv | finserv@vinodkothari.com

Three rating agencies reported different numbers, but barring the exception of one, the other two hold that the volumes in FY 24 have been lower than the last peak, FY 20. FY 20 was exceptional – it was the year post ILFS, where all balance sheet lenders and investors to NBFCs rushed to off balance sheet transactions, as bankruptcy remoteness became the key objective. The next year was an exception again – Covid wave. However, FY24 was a year of brisk economic lending, and retail credit expansion. There were, therefore, strong reasons that the watermark reached in FY 20 will be crossed. However, it just remained slightly off that, or, if the numbers given by Care Ratings are to be trusted, marginally crossed the mark.

One obvious reason is the merger of HDFC with HDFC Bank. The two contributed major chunks to Direct assignment volumes. Estimated volume lost due to the merger is around INR 40000 crores[1]. However, the other instrument that has dug a shovel in securitsation/ DA volumes is the rise in co-lending.

Read more

Securitisation: Indian market grows amidst global volume contraction

Timothy Lopes, Manager

finserv@vinodkothari.com

Global Securitisation Volumes, 2022

The global securitisation market in 2022[1] saw a decline in volumes as compared to record issuance volumes seen in the year 2021. The decline was mainly driven by 24% year-on-year decline in volumes in the United States, obviously because of inflation, general economic conditions and low level of business confidence,  coupled with supply chain disruptions and uncertainty caused by the Russia-Ukraine conflict[2].

Read more