The next month, S&P said the conflict wasn’t significant and it would resume grading the sector. The rater didn’t win any CMBS business for more than a year, then revised its ratings criteria in 2012 before re-entering the market.
Since the pulled deal, S&P has primarily rated single- borrower transactions, in part because it uses a methodology allowing for a more optimistic outlook on a building’s future value than that employed by Moody’s Investors Service, according to bankers that arrange CMBS deals. That opinion allows lenders to build smaller investor cushions and increase their profits.
Without S&P, which has graded 75 percent of single-borrower deals in 2014, issuance of the securities may decline next year since Moody’s and Fitch Ratings require higher credit enhancement levels, according to a Dec. 9 Nomura Holdings Inc. report.
‘Ultimate Losses’
When raters establish tougher criteria, banks can find other options. Wall Street started dropping Moody’s CMBS grades last year after the company demanded greater investor protections to balance increasingly risky loans.
Ratings shopping has become systematic in 2014 as lending guidelines loosen further, leaving investors more exposed to borrower defaults and making new offerings appear safer than they really are, according to Credit Suisse Group AG.
“Most default and loss models are underestimating the ultimate losses on these deals,” the analysts led by Roger Lehman said in a Nov. 21 report.
During the housing bubble that began to burst in 2006, ratings shopping fueled a “race to the bottom” among the companies to avoid losing market share, the U.S. Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations said in a 2011 report.
The credit-grading business was then targeted by lawmakers in the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act to examine whether its business models needed to be changed. The SEC decided to keep the model in place in August, opting instead to increase internal controls and boost disclosures.