DBRS Confirms Ratings on Noria 2018-1

DBRS Ratings GmbH (DBRS) confirmed the following ratings on the bonds issued by Noria 2018-1 (the Issuer):

-- Class A Notes confirmed at AAA (sf)
-- Class B Notes confirmed at AA (sf)
-- Class C Notes confirmed at A (sf)
-- Class D Notes confirmed at BBB (sf)
-- Class E Notes confirmed at BB (sf)
-- Class F Notes confirmed at B (sf)
-- Class G Notes confirmed at C (sf)

The rating on the Class A Notes addresses the timely payment of interest and ultimate payment of principal on or before the legal final maturity date. The ratings on the Class B Notes, Class C Notes, Class D Notes, Class E Notes, Class F Notes and Class G Notes address the ultimate payment of interest and principal on or before the legal final maturity date.

The confirmations follow an annual review of the transaction and are based on the following analytical considerations:

-- Portfolio performance, in terms of delinquencies, defaults and losses.
-- Probability of default (PD), loss given default (LGD) and expected loss assumptions on the remaining receivables.
-- Current available credit enhancement (CE) to the notes to cover the expected losses at their respective rating levels.
-- No revolving termination events have occurred.

Noria 2018-1 is a securitisation collateralised by a portfolio of personal, debt consolidation and sales finance loans granted by BNP Paribas Personal Finance. The transaction has an initial 12 month revolving period, which is scheduled to end on 25 June 2019.

PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE
As of May 2019, loans that were two- to three-months in arrears represented 0.3% of the outstanding portfolio balance, the 90+ delinquency ratio was 0.2% and the cumulative default ratio stood at 1.0%.

PORTFOLIO ASSUMPTIONS
DBRS conducted a loan-by-loan analysis of the remaining pool of receivables and updated its base case PD and LGD assumptions on the outstanding portfolio to 5.9% and 60.0%, respectively.

CREDIT ENHANCEMENT
As of the May 2019 payment date, CE to the Class A, Class B, Class C, Class D, Class E, Class F and Class G Notes has remained unchanged since closing at 24.0%, 17.8%, 12.3%, 9.8%, 6.8%, 4.3% and 0%, respectively, due to the revolving period.

The transaction benefits from a liquidity reserve of EUR 14.4 million, as of May 2019. The reserve target amount is equal to 1% of the initial balance of the Class A, Class B, Class C and Class D Notes. It is available to cover senior expenses and swap payments. The reserve has been at its target of EUR 14.4 million since closing.

BNP Paribas SA acts as the Special Dedicated Account Bank and BNP Paribas Securities Services acts as the Account Bank. Based on the DBRS public rating of BNP Paribas SA at AA (low) and the private rating of BNP Paribas Securities services, the downgrade provisions outlined in the transaction documents, and other mitigating factors inherent in the transaction structure, DBRS considers the risk arising from the exposure to the account banks to be consistent with the ratings assigned to the notes, as described in DBRS's "Legal Criteria for European Structured Finance Transactions" methodology.

BNP Paribas Personal Finance acts as the swap counterparty for the transaction. DBRS's private rating of BNP Paribas Personal Finance is above the first rating threshold as described in DBRS's "Derivative Criteria for European Structured Finance Transactions" methodology.

The transaction structure was analysed with Intex DealMaker.

Notes:
All figures are in euros unless otherwise noted.

The principal methodology applicable to the ratings is the “Master European Structured Finance Surveillance Methodology”. DBRS has applied the principal methodology consistently and conducted a review of the transaction in accordance with the principal methodology.

A review of the transaction legal documents was not conducted as the legal documents have remained unchanged since the most recent rating action.

Other methodologies referenced in this transaction are listed at the end of this press release. These may be found on www.dbrs.com at: http://www.dbrs.com/about/methodologies.

For a more detailed discussion of the sovereign risk impact on Structured Finance ratings, please refer to “Appendix C: The Impact of Sovereign Ratings on Other DBRS Credit Ratings” of the “Rating Sovereign Governments” methodology at: http://dbrs.com/research/333487/rating-sovereign-governments.pdf.

The sources of data and information used for these ratings include investor reports provided by the Management Company France Titrisation, and loan-level data provided by the European DataWarehouse GmbH.

DBRS did not rely upon third-party due diligence in order to conduct its analysis.

At the time of the initial ratings, DBRS was supplied with third-party assessments. However, this did not impact the rating analysis.

DBRS considers the data and information available to it for the purposes of providing these ratings to be of satisfactory quality.

DBRS does not audit or independently verify the data or information it receives in connection with the rating process.

The last rating action on this transaction took place on 26 June 2018, when DBRS finalised its provisional ratings on the notes.

The lead analyst responsibilities for this transaction have been transferred to Alfonso Candelas.

Information regarding DBRS ratings, including definitions, policies and methodologies is available at www.dbrs.com.

To assess the impact of changing the transaction parameters on the rating, DBRS considered the following stress scenarios as compared with the parameters used to determine the rating (the Base Case):

-- DBRS expected a lifetime base case PD and LGD for the pool based on a review of the current assets. Adverse changes to asset performance may cause stresses to base case assumptions and therefore have a negative effect on credit ratings.
-- The base case PD and LGD of the current pool of loans for the Issuer are 5.9% and 60.0%, respectively.
-- The risk sensitivity overview below illustrates the ratings expected if the PD and LGD increase by a certain percentage over the base case assumption. For example, if the LGD increases by 50%, the rating on the Class A Notes would be expected to fall to AA (low) (sf), assuming no change in the PD. If the PD increases by 50%, the rating on the Class A Notes would be expected to fall to AA (low) (sf), assuming no change in the LGD. Furthermore, if both the PD and LGD increase by 50%, the rating on the Class A Notes would be expected to fall to BBB (high) (sf).

Class A Notes Risk Sensitivity:
-- 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of AA (sf)
-- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of AA (low) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD, expected rating of AA (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD, expected rating of AA (low) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of A (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of A (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of A (low) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (high) (sf)

Class B Notes Risk Sensitivity:
-- 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of A (sf)
-- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of A (low) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD, expected rating of A (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD, expected rating of A (low) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of A (low) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (low) (sf)

Class C Notes Risk Sensitivity:
-- 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD, expected rating of BBB (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD, expected rating of BBB (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (high) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (low) (sf)

Class D Notes Risk Sensitivity:
-- 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BBB (sf)
-- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD, expected rating of BBB (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD, expected rating of BB (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (low) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (low) (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of B (high) (sf)

Class E Notes Risk Sensitivity:
-- 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of BB (sf)
-- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating of B (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD, expected rating of BB (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD, expected rating of B (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of B (high) (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating below B (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating of B (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating below B (sf)

Class F Notes Risk Sensitivity:
-- 25% increase in LGD, expected rating below B (sf)
-- 50% increase in LGD, expected rating below B (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD, expected rating below B (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD, expected rating below B (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating below B (sf)
-- 25% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating below B (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 25% increase in LGD, expected rating below B (sf)
-- 50% increase in PD and 50% increase in LGD, expected rating below B (sf)

The Class G Notes rating would not be impacted by a hypothetical change in either the PD or LGD.

For further information on DBRS historical default rates published by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) in a central repository, see: http://cerep.esma.europa.eu/cerep-web/statistics/defaults.xhtml.

Ratings assigned by DBRS Ratings GmbH are subject to EU and US regulations only.

Lead Analyst: Alfonso Candelas, Senior Vice President
Rating Committee Chair: Christian Aufsatz, Managing Director
Initial Rating Date: 25 May 2018

DBRS Ratings GmbH
Neue Mainzer Straße 75
60311 Frankfurt am Main Deutschland
Geschäftsführer: Detlef Scholz
Amtsgericht Frankfurt am Main, HRB 110259

The rating methodologies used in the analysis of this transaction can be found at: http://www.dbrs.com/about/methodologies.

-- Legal Criteria for European Structured Finance Transactions
-- Master European Structured Finance Surveillance Methodology
-- Operational Risk Assessment for European Structured Finance Servicers
-- Rating European Consumer and Commercial Asset-Backed Securitisations
-- Interest Rate Stresses for European Structured Finance Transactions
-- Derivative Criteria for European Structured Finance Transactions
-- Operational Risk Assessment for European Structured Finance Originators

A description of how DBRS analyses structured finance transactions and how the methodologies are collectively applied can be found at: http://www.dbrs.com/research/278375.

For more information on this credit or on this industry, visit www.dbrs.com or contact us at info@dbrs.com.