• We are pleased to announce that the winner of our Feedback Prize Draw for the Winter 2024-25 session and winning £150 of gift vouchers is Zhao Liang Tay. Congratulations to Zhao Liang. If you fancy winning £150 worth of gift vouchers (from a major UK store) for the Summer 2025 exam sitting for just a few minutes of your time throughout the session, please see our website at https://www.acted.co.uk/further-info.html?pat=feedback#feedback-prize for more information on how you can make sure your name is included in the draw at the end of the session.
  • Please be advised that the SP1, SP5 and SP7 X1 deadline is the 14th July and not the 17th June as first stated. Please accept out apologies for any confusion caused.

Special purpose vehicle

A

asbes

Member
Hi

What are the capital requirements for a SPV created when doing a securitisation?

For example when a bank issues a MBS through a SPV and remove these mortgages from it's balance sheet, the capital requirements for the bank will reduce. Will there be any capital requirements for the SPV?

Thanks!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No explicit capital requirement that I am aware of - but would say the implicit capital requirement is that required to obtain the intended credit ratings for the bond tranches (eg. AAA, BB and junk), and those imposed by the buyers of the SPV's securities - i.e. the SPV needs to holds enough capital so investors are willing to buy its securities.

Capital for the SPV could be specified as the stream of cashflows transferred into the SPV rather than capital in the traditional sense of the word - so would rather describe it as collateralisation. SPV's are generally over collateralised (particularly on the AAA tranche) to ensure any individual failures in the underlying mortgage pool doesn't impact on the tranche.

If a sufficient number of mortgages fail, the whole thing falls flat. If the junk tranche was taken on by the bank setting up the SPV, the mortgage failures will hit the bank's own books and large asset losses occur (the kind that hits the evening news & severly impacts on share prices).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
SPVs

Hi
I think this is probably the tip of a very large iceberg, and the legal complexities of SPVs, SPEs, and SPCs (I have no idea what the differences are between these - only heard them quoted) are probably numerous.
My feeling is, as mentioned in the other student response, that SPVs generally have no capital requirement in most cases. In the simplest case, where there is only one tranche of bonds sold to investors, and where the investors get the rights to future capital and income from a bunch of mortgages, I think the investors accept the risk of any losses arising from default. As such, since the bank is not guaranteeing the bonds, there will be no capital required from the banks point of view. Also since the SPV is not guaranteeing the bonds, there will be no capital required from the SPV either. Capital will only be required in situations where the bank or SPV offers a guarantee of some sort.
Where the bank buys a third party guarantee (for example Freddi Mac, ...) from the so called monolines, then these institutions would need capital in order to make those guarantees. So capital would be released from the bank and added at the monoline institution. However, this is not SPV capital, but monoline capital.
Beyond that I dont have much knowledge.
 
Thanks! I agree with your replies.

Perhaps another reason is that a bank needs capital to protect its depositors whose money is used to give mortgages. If the mortgage assets defaults the depositors will lose if there were no capital. That is why the regulators has a responsibility here to force banks to hold sufficient capital.

The SPV on the other hand has no liabilities to depositors but to investors who should scrutinise the issue prior to investing. This links to your reply about indirect requirements to get a certain credit rating.

Does this make sense?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top