---

       T R O U B L E D   C O M P A N Y   R E P O R T E R

                          E U R O P E

          Wednesday, March 9, 2022, Vol. 23, No. 43

                           Headlines



B E L A R U S

BELARUS: Fitch Lowers LongTerm Foreign Currency IDR to 'CCC'


G E R M A N Y

SCHUR FLEXIBLES: Moody's Cuts CFR to Caa3 & Alters Outlook to Neg.


I R E L A N D

ADAGIO VI: Moody's Affirms 'B1' Rating on EUR11MM Class F Notes
ALME LOAN III: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on EUR20MM Cl. E-R Notes
AVOCA CLO XI: Moody's Affirms B1 Rating on EUR15.8MM Cl. F-R Notes
OTRANTO PARK: Moody's Assigns (P)B3 Rating to Class F Notes
RICHMOND PARK: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on EUR31MM Cl. E-R Notes

SEGOVIA EUROPEAN 3-2017: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating to Cl. F Notes


I T A L Y

ALBA 11 SPV: Moody's Hikes Rating on Class C Notes to Ba2


L U X E M B O U R G

COVIS FINCO: S&P Assigns 'B' LongTerm ICR, Outlook Stable


R U S S I A

AHML 2014-1: Moody's Cuts Rating on RUB6323MM Class A3 Notes to B2
KRASNOYARSK KRAI: S&P Lowers LongTerm Currency ICRs to 'CCC-'
LENINGRAD OBLAST: S&P Lowers LongTerm Currency ICRs to 'CCC-'
MOSCOW: S&P Lowers LongTerm Currency ICRs to 'CCC-', On Watch Neg.
SAMARA OBLAST: S&P Lowers LongTerm Currency ICRs to 'CCC-'

SVYAZINVESTNEFTEKHIM: Fitch Lowers Foreign Currency IDRs to 'B-'
YAMAL-NENETS AUTONOMOUS: S&P Lowers LongTerm ICR to 'CCC-'
[*] Fitch Lowers LongTerm IDRs of 3 Russian Banks to 'B'
[*] RUSSIA: Departing Foreign Cos to Get Fast-Tracked Bankruptcy
[*] S&P Cuts ICRs on 52 Russian Companies & Utilities to 'CCC-'

[*] S&P Cuts Rating on Russian Insurers on Adverse Economic Climate
[*] S&P Lowers ICRs on Russian Banks to 'CCC-/C', On Watch Negative


S E R B I A

PROKUPAC: Is Up for Sale for EUR17.1MM, April 11 Bid Deadline


S W I T Z E R L A N D

SBERBANK AG: Fitch Lowers LT Issuer Default Rating to 'RD'


U K R A I N E

DTEK RENEWABLES: S&P Lowers ICR to 'CCC', On Watch Negative
UKRAINE: Moody's Cuts Issuer Ratings & Unsec. Debt Ratings to Caa2
VF UKRAINE: S&P Lowers ICR to 'B-' After Sovereign Downgrade


U N I T E D   K I N G D O M

BLUE CO: Creditors Still Waiting for Payouts
BULB: Rescue Costs Expected to Soar as Gas Prices Rocket
CONSORT HEALTHCARE: Moody's Lowers Rating on GBP93.3MM Bonds to B3
EG GROUP: Fitch Alters Outlook on 'B-' LongTerm IDR to Positive
KERNEL HOLDING: S&P Lowers ICR to 'B-', On Watch Negative

MCCOLL'S RETAIL: PayPoint Resumes Services for Clients, Customers
MIDAS GROUP: Collapse to Hit Subcontractors, Ex-Directors Warn
STANLINGTON NO. 2: Moody's Assigns (P)B3 Rating to Class F Notes
SVEN CHRISTIANSEN: Enters Administration, 150 Jobs Affected

                           - - - - -


=============
B E L A R U S
=============

BELARUS: Fitch Lowers LongTerm Foreign Currency IDR to 'CCC'
------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded Belarus's Long-Term Foreign Currency
Issuer Default Rating (IDR) to 'CCC' from 'B'.  Fitch typically
does not assign Outlooks or apply modifiers to sovereigns with a
rating of 'CCC' or below.

EU CALENDAR DEVIATION DISCLOSURE

Under EU credit rating agency (CRA) regulation, the publication of
sovereign reviews is subject to restrictions and must take place
according to a published schedule, except where it is necessary for
CRAs to deviate from this in order to comply with their legal
obligations. Fitch interprets this provision as allowing us to
publish a rating review in situations where there is a material
change in the creditworthiness of the issuer that Fitch believes
makes it inappropriate for us to wait until the next scheduled
review date to update the rating or Outlook/Watch status. The next
scheduled review date for Fitch's sovereign rating on Belarus will
be 29 April 2022 but Fitch believes that developments in the
country warrant such a deviation from the calendar and Fitch's
rationale for this is set out in the first part (High weight
factors) of the Key Rating Drivers section below.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The downgrade of Belarus's IDRs reflects the following key rating
drivers and their relative weights:

High

Significant Macro-Financial Stability Risks:  New sanctions and the
possibility of additional measures related to Belarus's role in
Russia's invasion of Ukraine, combined with close economic and
financial links to Russia, create significant risks to
macro-financial stability and raise uncertainty over the
willingness and ability of Belarus to meet its external
obligations. Fitch is uncertain over the willingness of Russia to
provide the financial support Fitch considers necessary for Belarus
to meet it 2023 Eurobond repayment. In addition, public and
external finances will be hit amid pre-existing constraints on
financing flexibility, macroeconomic performance will deteriorate
and geopolitical risks remain elevated, in Fitch's view.

Further Sanctions Imposed:  Sanctions introduced against Belarus
since the start of the conflict build upon those put in place after
the post-election political crisis in 2020. They widen restrictions
on some state banks, cover the local subsidiaries of Russian banks
and encompass SOEs producing defence and security equipment. New EU
sanctions will deepen those imposed on exports in 2020 and close
some loopholes that have marred their effectiveness.

Sanctions Risk High:  Fitch sees a significant risk of a tightening
of sanctions against Belarus. In Fitch's view, the endorsement by
referendum on 27 February of a new constitution does not provide a
way out of a domestic political situation that has increased the
already high economic and financial reliance on Russia or a
sanctions de-escalation path.

Banking Sector Sanctions Vulnerability:  The deepening of banking
sector sanctions to those comparable with Russia would pose
significant challenges. Availability of FX liquidity is low
relative to FX requirements and the central bank has little
capacity to provide FX (international reserves were USD8.5 billion
at end-January, around 2.2 months of current external payments).
The banking sector has a large exposure to the government and SOEs
and faced asset quality pressures in 2021.

Tightening of Financing Constraints:  Russian support appears
critical for Belarus to repay its USD800 million Eurobond due in
February 2023. Financing sources were already constrained by
pre-existing sanctions and new export sanctions will hit
foreign-currency (FC) earnings. Total FC sovereign debt repayments
still appear manageable in 2022, as they are dominated by payments
to Russia and related entities, China, and bonds on the domestic
and Russian markets. Fitch could envisage sanctions that would
impair the sovereign's ability to make payments. The limited
availably of financing will constrain the authorities' ability to
support the economy without hitting macroeconomic stability.

Exchange Rate Vulnerabilities:  Sanctions and macroeconomic turmoil
in Russia will weaken the Belarussian rouble, aggravating
vulnerabilities caused by the high dollarisation of public and
private sector debt and pushing up inflation. General government
debt/GDP is more than 20pp below the peer median, but around 90% is
FC-denominated. The weakening of the Belarusian and Russia roubles
will feed into inflation that has been in double digits since
September 2021.

Low Growth:  Sanctions and domestic confidence effects will hit
near-term growth significantly. The economy navigated sanctions
reasonably well in 2021, in part benefiting from loopholes on key
exports products, and their closure will hurt performance.
Financing constraints will likely necessitate tighter fiscal policy
and monetary policy is likely to remain restrictive. The
macroeconomic impact of sanctions will be compounded by the shock
faced by key trading partners. Russia is the destination for around
40% of Belarusian goods exports and the main source of FDI, while
Ukraine accounts for a further 10%. Medium-term growth prospects
were already a credit weakness due to adverse demographic dynamics
and a large public sector facing productivity and efficiency
challenges.

Belarus's 'CCC' rating also reflects the following rating drivers:

Mixed Structural Indicators:  Belarus has a high per capita income
relative to peers and a clean debt repayment record, with debt
repayments having had priority over other expenditure items in the
central government budget. However, governance indicators, as
measured by the World Bank, are significantly weaker than peers and
the political stalemate after the 2020 elections remains
unresolved.

ESG - Governance:  Belarus has an ESG Relevance Score (RS) of '5'
for both Political Stability and Rights and for the Rule of Law,
Institutional and Regulatory Quality and Control of Corruption, as
is the case for all sovereigns. These scores reflect the high
weight that the World Bank Governance Indicators (WBGI) have in
Fitch's proprietary Sovereign Rating Model. Belarus has a low WBGI
ranking at 24th percentile, reflecting the high concentration of
power in the hands of President Lukashenko who has been in office
since 1994, a relatively low level of rights for participation in
the political process, moderate institutional capacity and a
moderate level of corruption.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factor that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- Increased signs of a probable default event, for instance from
    severe external liquidity stress, reduced capacity of the
    government to access external financing or evidence that
    willingness to service debt has diminished.

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- Structural/External: De-escalation of geopolitical tensions
    resulting in less severe sanctions and improved confidence in
    Belarus's ability and willingness to repay debt.

-- Macro/External: Lower risk of macro-financial instability
    reflected in a sustained reduction of pressures on banking
    sector liquidity and international reserves, for example due
    to reduced geopolitical uncertainty or sanctions having a less
    severe impact.

SOVEREIGN RATING MODEL (SRM) AND QUALITATIVE OVERLAY (QO)

In accordance with its rating criteria, Fitch's sovereign rating
committee has not utilised the SRM and QO to explain the ratings in
this instance. Ratings of 'CCC' and below are instead guided by the
rating definitions.

Fitch's SRM is the agency's proprietary multiple regression rating
model that employs 18 variables based on three-year centred
averages, including one year of forecasts, to produce a score
equivalent to a LT FC IDR. Fitch's QO is a forward-looking
qualitative framework designed to allow for adjustment to the SRM
output to assign the final rating, reflecting factors within
Fitch's criteria that are not fully quantifiable and/or not fully
reflected in the SRM.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Sovereigns, Public Finance
and Infrastructure issuers have a best-case rating upgrade scenario
(defined as the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in
a positive direction) of three notches over a three-year rating
horizon; and a worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the
99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative
direction) of three notches over three years. The complete span of
best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating
categories ranges from 'AAA' to 'D'. Best- and worst-case scenario
credit ratings are based on historical performance.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

Belarus has an ESG Relevance Score of '5' for Political Stability
and Rights as World Bank Governance Indicators have the highest
weight in Fitch's SRM and are therefore highly relevant to the
rating and a key rating driver with a high weight. As Belarus has a
percentile rank below 50 for the respective Governance Indicator,
this has a negative impact on the credit profile.

Belarus has an ESG Relevance Score of '5' for Rule of Law,
Institutional & Regulatory Quality and Control of Corruption as
World Bank Governance Indicators have the highest weight in Fitch's
SRM and are therefore highly relevant to the rating and are a key
rating driver with a high weight. As Belarus has a percentile rank
below 50 for the respective Governance Indicators, this has a
negative impact on the credit profile.

Belarus has an ESG Relevance Score of '4'for Human Rights and
Political Freedoms as the Voice and Accountability pillar of the
World Bank Governance Indicators is relevant to the rating and a
rating driver. As Belarus has a percentile rank below 50 for the
respective Governance Indicator, this has a negative impact on the
credit profile.

Belarus has an ESG Relevance Score of '4' for International
Relations and Trade, reflecting the detrimental impact of sanctions
and close economic linkages, dependence on bilateral financial
support and complex relationship with Russia, which are relevant to
the rating and a rating driver with a negative impact on the credit
profile.

Belarus has an ESG Relevance Score of '4[+]' for Creditor Rights as
willingness to service and repay debt is relevant to the rating and
is a rating driver for Belarus, as for all sovereigns. As Belarus
has track record of 20+ years without a restructuring of public
debt and captured in Fitch's SRM variable, this has a positive
impact on the credit profile.

Except for the matters discussed above, the highest level of ESG
credit relevance, if present, is a score of '3'. This means ESG
issues are credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on
the entity, either due to their nature or to the way in which they
are being managed by the entity.




=============
G E R M A N Y
=============

SCHUR FLEXIBLES: Moody's Cuts CFR to Caa3 & Alters Outlook to Neg.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the corporate family
rating of Schur Flexibles GmbH ("Schur" or "the company") to Caa3
from B2 and its probability of default rating to Caa3-PD from
B2-PD. Schur Flexibles GmbH is the parent company of an Austrian
group that manufacturers flexible plastic packaging containers.

Concurrently, Moody's has downgraded to Caa3 from B2 the ratings on
the EUR475 million backed senior secured term loan B (TLB) due 2028
and on the EUR100 million backed senior secured revolving credit
facility (RCF) due 2027. The outlook on the ratings was changed to
negative from ratings under review. The action concludes the review
that commenced on February 18, 2022.

"The multi-notch downgrade follows the allegations related to
compliance breaches and accounting fraud by Schur's former senior
executives," says Donatella Maso, a Moody's Vice President --
Senior Analyst, and lead analyst for Schur.

"The company's EBITDA for 2020 and 2021 appears to be significantly
inflated, leading to a sharp deterioration in credit metrics and an
unsustainable capital structure, while the company needs to secure
additional liquidity sources in the near term to avoid a default,"
adds Ms. Maso.

The rating action reflects corporate governance considerations
associated with Schur's unsustainable capital structure and
inadequate liquidity profile (financial strategy and risk
management), accounting fraud allegations linked to the former
management team (management credibility and track record) and the
unreliability of the company's financial statements (compliance and
reporting), all of which are captured under Moody's General
Principles for Assessing Environmental, Social and Governance Risk
Methodology for assessing ESG risks.

RATINGS RATIONALE

Following allegations of compliance breaches and accounting
irregularities performed by Schur's former senior management
executives, the company hired several advisors to further
investigate on these matters. Although the investigation is still
ongoing, preliminary findings indicate a shortfall of EUR41 million
in the company's 2020 EBITDA, a significantly lower than expected
EBITDA forecast for 2021 and higher debt due to increased
utilization of its supplier financing lines. As a result, Moody's
adjusted leverage will increase well above 20x at the end of 2021
compared to 6.4x in Moody's previous forecasts.

Even assuming some recovery in EBITDA over the next two years,
largely driven by lower administrative costs, Schur's leverage will
remain in excess of 15x and its free cash flow will remain negative
until 2023, leading to an unsustainable capital structure. In
addition, the current geopolitical uncertainties as well as the
associated increase in raw material prices poses a further risk to
these forecasts.

These developments are also having a material negative impact on
the company's liquidity and capital structure. In order to address
both, Schur has to reach agreements with the various financing
parties, the outcome of which is uncertain at this stage, and/or
receive further support from its shareholders, in addition to the
EUR23.3 million received in January 2022 in the form of a
shareholder loan.

Schur's liquidity has materially weakened following these events,
as the company cannot access its EUR85 million available RCF. The
company's liquidity depends on its ability to renew the supplier
financing lines, given that approximately EUR47 million is due by
mid-April, to maintain its limits with credit insurers and its
payment terms with suppliers. The company also has to pay EUR5
million of TLB interests by the end of March. From May onwards,
Schur will need to secure external funding of at least EUR30-40
million to continue operating.

The accounting irregularities might require the restatement of
historic financial statements or trigger a material adverse change.
Schur is seeking to agree a standstill with the senior secured
lenders to waive current or potential events of default and some
flexibility in acceding additional credit lines to support the
business in the coming months.

In addition to the uncertainty associated with the outcome of these
negotiations, Moody's believes that Schur's capital structure is
unsustainable with a restructuring likely in the near term in the
absence of material support from shareholders.

STRUCTURAL CONSIDERATIONS

Schur's debt structure comprises a EUR475 million backed senior
secured TLB and a EUR100 million backed senior secured RCF all
issued by Schur Flexibles GmbH. The loan facilities are rated Caa3,
in line with the CFR, because they represent most of the debt in
the capital structure. The debt facilities are primarily secured by
share pledges. Moody's views debt with this type of security
package to be akin to unsecured debt. However, the facilities are
guaranteed by material subsidiaries representing not less than 75%
of the group's EBITDA. The probability of default rating (PDR) is
also in line with the CFR.

RATING OUTLOOK

The negative outlook reflects the uncertainty associated with the
outcome of the ongoing negotiations with the financing parties
regarding Schur's capital structure and liquidity as well as the
level of shareholder support, which could result in significant
losses for its lenders.

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS

Positive rating pressure is unlikely in the near term but it could
develop if the likelihood of a restructuring is substantially
reduced, the company restores a solid liquidity platform and its
operating performance significantly improves.

The ratings could be downgraded if there is a material worsening in
the company's prospects in respect of a debt restructuring and in
expectations for debt recoveries, or if there is further
deterioration in the company's liquidity.

LIST OF AFFECTED RATINGS

Downgrades:

Issuer: Schur Flexibles GmbH

Probability of Default Rating, Downgraded to Caa3-PD from B2-PD

LT Corporate Family Rating, Downgraded to Caa3 from B2

BACKED Senior Secured Bank Credit Facility, Downgraded to Caa3
from B2

Outlook Actions:

Issuer: Schur Flexibles GmbH

Outlook, Changed To Negative From Rating Under Review

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in these ratings was Packaging
Manufacturers: Metal, Glass and Plastic Containers published in
December 2021.

COMPANY PROFILE

Schur Flexibles GmbH is the parent company of the Austrian based
manufacturer of flexible packaging products for specialty markets
in consumer packaging. The company supplies its products to a broad
customer base serving the food (66%), healthcare (11%), specialties
(11%) and tobacco (12%) end market segments. It operates 23
production sites across 12 European countries with more than 2,000
employees. Schur's majority shareholder is B&C Group with 80% share
while private equity firm Lindsay Goldberg LLC retains a 20%
share.




=============
I R E L A N D
=============

ADAGIO VI: Moody's Affirms 'B1' Rating on EUR11MM Class F Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the following
notes issued by Adagio VI CLO Designated Activity Company:

EUR32,000,000 Class B-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2031, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2017 Assigned Aa2
(sf)

EUR10,000,000 Class B-2 Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2031,
Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2017 Assigned Aa2 (sf)

Moody's has also affirmed the ratings on the following notes:

EUR205,000,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2031, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2017 Assigned Aaa
(sf)

EUR29,500,000 Class C Deferrable Mezzanine Floating Rate Notes due
2031, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2017 Assigned A2
(sf)

EUR19,000,000 Class D Deferrable Mezzanine Floating Rate Notes due
2031, Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2017 Assigned Baa2
(sf)

EUR17,300,000 Class E Deferrable Junior Floating Rate Notes due
2031, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2017 Assigned Ba2
(sf)

EUR11,000,000 Class F Deferrable Junior Floating Rate Notes due
2031, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2017 Assigned B1
(sf)

Adagio VI CLO Designated Activity Company, issued in December 2017,
is a collateralised loan obligation (CLO) backed by a portfolio of
mostly high-yield senior secured European loans. The portfolio is
managed by AXA Investment Managers, Inc. The transaction's
reinvestment period will end in May 2022.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating upgrades on the Class B-1 and B-2 Notes are primarily a
result of the benefit of the shorter period of time remaining
before the end of the reinvestment period in May 2022.

In light of reinvestment restrictions during the amortisation
period, and therefore the limited ability to effect significant
changes to the current collateral pool, Moody's analysed the deal
assuming a higher likelihood that the collateral pool
characteristics would maintain an adequate buffer relative to
certain covenant requirements.

The key model inputs Moody's uses in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and the weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers.

In its base case, Moody's used the following assumptions:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: EUR347.12m

Defaulted Securities: EUR0.95m

Diversity Score: 53

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2863

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 4.44 years

Weighted Average Spread (WAS) (before accounting for Euribor
floors): 3.52%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 4.25%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 45.07%

Par haircut in OC tests and interest diversion test: None

The default probability derives from the credit quality of the
collateral pool and Moody's expectation of the remaining life of
the collateral pool. The estimated average recovery rate on future
defaults is based primarily on the seniority of the assets in the
collateral pool. In each case, historical and market performance
and a collateral manager's latitude to trade collateral are also
relevant factors. Moody's incorporates these default and recovery
characteristics of the collateral pool into its cash flow model
analysis, subjecting them to stresses as a function of the target
rating of each CLO liability it is analysing.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
December 2021.

Counterparty Exposure:

The rating action took into consideration the notes' exposure to
relevant counterparties, such as account bank, using the
methodology "Moody's Approach to Assessing Counterparty Risks in
Structured Finance" published in May 2021. Moody's concluded the
ratings of the notes are not constrained by these risks.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the ratings:

This transaction is subject to a high level of macroeconomic
uncertainty, which could negatively affect the ratings on the note,
in light of uncertainty about credit conditions in the general
economy. In particular, the length and severity of the economic and
credit shock precipitated by the global coronavirus pandemic will
have a significant impact on the performance of the securities. CLO
notes' performance may also be impacted either positively or
negatively by (1) the manager's investment strategy and behaviour
and (2) divergence in the legal interpretation of CDO documentation
by different transactional parties because of embedded
ambiguities.

Additional uncertainty about performance is due to the following:

Portfolio amortisation: Following the end of the reinvestment
period in May 2022, the main source of uncertainty in this
transaction will be the pace of amortisation of the underlying
portfolio, which can vary significantly depending on market
conditions and have a significant impact on the notes' ratings.
Amortisation could accelerate as a consequence of high loan
prepayment levels or collateral sales by the collateral manager, or
be delayed by an increase in loan amend-and-extend restructurings.
Fast amortisation would usually benefit the ratings of the notes
beginning with the notes having the highest prepayment priority.

Weighted average life: The notes' ratings are sensitive to the
weighted average life assumption of the portfolio, which could
lengthen as a result of the manager's decision to reinvest in new
issue loans or other loans with longer maturities, or participate
in amend-to-extend offerings. Moody's tested for a possible
extension of the actual weighted average life in its analysis. The
effect on the ratings of extending the portfolio's weighted average
life can be positive or negative depending on the notes'
seniority.

Recovery of defaulted assets: Market value fluctuations in
trustee-reported defaulted assets and those Moody's assumes have
defaulted can result in volatility in the deal's
over-collateralisation levels. Further, the timing of recoveries
and the manager's decision whether to work out or sell defaulted
assets can also result in additional uncertainty. Moody's analysed
defaulted recoveries assuming the lower of the market price or the
recovery rate to account for potential volatility in market prices.
Recoveries higher than Moody's expectations would have a positive
impact on the notes' ratings.


ALME LOAN III: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on EUR20MM Cl. E-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the following
notes issued by ALME Loan Funding III Designated Activity Company:

2032, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Oct 5, 2020 Affirmed Aa2
(sf)

EUR8,000,000 Class B-2-R Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2032,
Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Oct 5, 2020 Affirmed Aa2 (sf)

Moody's has also affirmed the ratings on the following notes:

EUR250,400,000 Class A-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2032, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Oct 5, 2020 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

EUR28,000,000 Class C-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2032, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on Oct 5, 2020
Affirmed A2 (sf)

EUR25,200,000 Class D-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2032, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Oct 5, 2020
Confirmed at Baa3 (sf)

EUR20,000,000 Class E-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2032, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Oct 5, 2020
Confirmed at Ba3 (sf)

ALME Loan Funding III Designated Activity Company, issued in
December 2014, is a collateralised loan obligation (CLO) backed by
a portfolio of mostly high-yield senior secured European loans. The
portfolio is managed by Apollo Management International LLP. The
transaction's reinvestment period will end in April 2022.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating upgrades on the Class B-1-R and Class B-2-R are
primarily a result of the benefit of the shorter period of time
remaining before the end of the reinvestment period in April 2022.

The affirmations on the ratings on the Class A-R, Class C-R, Class
D-R and Class E-R Notes are primarily a result of the expected
losses on the notes remaining consistent with their current ratings
after taking into account the CLO's latest portfolio, its relevant
structural features and its actual over-collateralization (OC)
levels.

In light of reinvestment restrictions during the amortisation
period, and therefore the limited ability to effect significant
changes to the current collateral pool, Moody's analysed the deal
assuming a higher likelihood that the collateral pool
characteristics would maintain an adequate buffer relative to
certain covenant requirements. In particular, Moody's assumed that
the deal will benefit from a shorter amortisation profile and
higher spread levels than it had assumed at the last rating action
in October 2020.

The key model inputs Moody's uses in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and the weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers.

In its base case, Moody's used the following assumptions:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: EUR400.7 million

Diversity Score: 54

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2894

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 4.9 years

Weighted Average Spread (WAS) (before accounting for Euribor
floors): 3.62%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 3.83%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 45.85%

Par haircut in OC tests and interest diversion test: 0.0%

The default probability derives from the credit quality of the
collateral pool and Moody's expectation of the remaining life of
the collateral pool. The estimated average recovery rate on future
defaults is based primarily on the seniority of the assets in the
collateral pool. In each case, historical and market performance
and a collateral manager's latitude to trade collateral are also
relevant factors. Moody's incorporates these default and recovery
characteristics of the collateral pool into its cash flow model
analysis, subjecting them to stresses as a function of the target
rating of each CLO liability it is analysing.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
December 2021.

Counterparty Exposure:

The rating action took into consideration the notes' exposure to
relevant counterparties, such as account bank and swap provider,
using the methodology "Moody's Approach to Assessing Counterparty
Risks in Structured Finance" published in May 2021. Moody's
concluded the ratings of the notes are not constrained by these
risks.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the ratings:

This transaction is subject to a high level of macroeconomic
uncertainty, which could negatively affect the ratings on the note,
in light of uncertainty about credit conditions in the general
economy. In particular, the length and severity of the economic and
credit shock precipitated by the global coronavirus pandemic will
have a significant impact on the performance of the securities. CLO
notes' performance may also be impacted either positively or
negatively by (1) the manager's investment strategy and behaviour
and (2) divergence in the legal interpretation of CDO documentation
by different transactional parties because of embedded
ambiguities.

Additional uncertainty about performance is due to the following:

Weighted average life: The notes' ratings are sensitive to the
weighted average life assumption of the portfolio, which could
lengthen as a result of the manager's decision to reinvest in new
issue loans or other loans with longer maturities, or participate
in amend-to-extend offerings. Moody's tested for a possible
extension of the actual weighted average life in its analysis. The
effect on the ratings of extending the portfolio's weighted average
life can be positive or negative depending on the notes'
seniority.


AVOCA CLO XI: Moody's Affirms B1 Rating on EUR15.8MM Cl. F-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the following
notes issued by Avoca CLO XI Designated Activity Company:

EUR20,000,000 Class B-1R-R Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due
2030, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 19, 2021 Upgraded to
Aa1 (sf)

EUR27,000,000 Class B-2R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2030, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 19, 2021 Upgraded to
Aa1 (sf)

EUR13,000,000 Class B-3R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2030, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 19, 2021 Upgraded to
Aa1 (sf)

Moody's has also affirmed the ratings on the following notes:

EUR300,000,000 (current outstanding amount EUR271,872,000) Class
A-R-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2030, Affirmed Aaa
(sf); previously on Jul 19, 2021 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

EUR21,000,000 Class C-1R Deferrable Mezzanine Floating Rate Notes
due 2030, Affirmed A1 (sf); previously on Jul 19, 2021 Upgraded to
A1 (sf)

EUR15,000,000 Class C-2R Deferrable Mezzanine Floating Rate Notes
due 2030, Affirmed A1 (sf); previously on Jul 19, 2021 Upgraded to
A1 (sf)

EUR23,000,000 Class D-R Deferrable Mezzanine Floating Rate Notes
due 2030, Affirmed Baa1 (sf); previously on Jul 19, 2021 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

EUR27,500,000 Class E-R Deferrable Junior Floating Rate Notes due
2030, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 19, 2021 Affirmed Ba2
(sf)

EUR15,800,000 Class F-R Deferrable Junior Floating Rate Notes due
2030, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on Jul 19, 2021 Affirmed B1
(sf)

Avoca CLO XI Designated Activity Company, issued in June 2014 and
refinanced in May 2017 and November 2019 is a collateralised loan
obligation (CLO) backed by a portfolio of mostly high-yield senior
secured European loans. The portfolio is managed by KKR Credit
Advisors (Ireland) Unlimited Co. The transaction's reinvestment
period ended in June 2021.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The upgrades on the ratings on the Class B-1R-R, B-2R and B-3R
Notes are primarily a result of the deleveraging of the Class A-R-R
notes following amortisation of the underlying portfolio since the
last rating action in July 2021. The affirmations to the ratings on
the Class A-R-R, C-1R, C-2R, D-R, E-R and F-R Notes are due to the
deleveraging of the Class A-R-R notes following amortisation of the
underlying portfolio since the last rating action in July 2021.

The Class A-R-R notes have paid down by approximately EUR28.13
million (9.38%) since the last rating action in July 2021 and since
closing. As a result of the deleveraging, over-collateralisation
(OC) has increased. According to the trustee report dated January
2022[1] the Class A/B, Class C, Class D, Class E and Class F OC
ratios are reported at 142.2%, 128.2%, 120.7%, 112.8% and 108.7%
compared to July 2021[2] levels of 138.8%, 126.2%, 119.3%, 111.9%
and 108.1%, respectively.

Key model inputs:

The key model inputs Moody's uses in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and the weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers.

In its base case, Moody's used the following assumptions:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: EUR471.78m

Defaulted Securities: EUR0m

Diversity Score: 57

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2824

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 4.43 years

Weighted Average Spread (WAS) (before accounting for Euribor
floors): 3.48%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 4.07%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 45.25%

Par haircut in OC tests and interest diversion test: 0%

The default probability derives from the credit quality of the
collateral pool and Moody's expectation of the remaining life of
the collateral pool. The estimated average recovery rate on future
defaults is based primarily on the seniority of the assets in the
collateral pool. In each case, historical and market performance
and a collateral manager's latitude to trade collateral are also
relevant factors. Moody's incorporates these default and recovery
characteristics of the collateral pool into its cash flow model
analysis, subjecting them to stresses as a function of the target
rating of each CLO liability it is analysing.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
December 2021.

Counterparty Exposure:

The rating action took into consideration the notes' exposure to
relevant counterparties, such as account bank and swap providers,
using the methodology "Moody's Approach to Assessing Counterparty
Risks in Structured Finance" published in May 2021. Moody's
concluded the ratings of the notes are not constrained by these
risks.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the ratings:

This transaction is subject to a high level of macroeconomic
uncertainty, which could negatively affect the ratings on the note,
in light of uncertainty about credit conditions in the general
economy. In particular, the length and severity of the economic and
credit shock precipitated by the global coronavirus pandemic will
have a significant impact on the performance of the securities. CLO
notes' performance may also be impacted either positively or
negatively by (1) the manager's investment strategy and behaviour
and (2) divergence in the legal interpretation of CDO documentation
by different transactional parties because of embedded
ambiguities.

Additional uncertainty about performance is due to the following:

Portfolio amortisation: The main source of uncertainty in this
transaction is the pace of amortisation of the underlying
portfolio, which can vary significantly depending on market
conditions and have a significant impact on the notes' ratings.
Amortisation could accelerate as a consequence of high loan
prepayment levels or collateral sales by the collateral manager or
be delayed by an increase in loan amend-and-extend restructurings.
Fast amortisation would usually benefit the ratings of the notes
beginning with the notes having the highest prepayment priority.


OTRANTO PARK: Moody's Assigns (P)B3 Rating to Class F Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service announced that it has assigned the
following provisional ratings to notes to be issued by Otranto Park
CLO DAC (the "Issuer"):

EUR272,800,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2035, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

EUR44,000,000 Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2035,
Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

EUR26,400,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2035, Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

EUR29,700,000 Class D Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2035, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

EUR22,000,000 Class E Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2035, Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

EUR12,100,000 Class F Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2035, Assigned (P)B3 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rationale for the ratings is based on a consideration of the
risks associated with the CLO's portfolio and structure as
described in Moody's methodology.

The Issuer is a managed cash flow CLO. At least 90% of the
portfolio must consist of senior secured obligations and up to 10%
of the portfolio may consist of senior unsecured obligations,
second-lien loans, mezzanine obligations and high yield bonds. The
portfolio is expected to be 85% ramped up as of the closing date
and to comprise of predominantly corporate loans to obligors
domiciled in Western Europe. The remainder of the portfolio will be
acquired during the 6 month ramp-up period in compliance with the
portfolio guidelines.

Blackstone Ireland Limited ("Blackstone") will manage the CLO. It
will direct the selection, acquisition and disposition of
collateral on behalf of the Issuer and may engage in trading
activity, including discretionary trading, during the transaction's
4.6 year reinvestment period. Thereafter, subject to certain
restrictions, purchases are permitted using principal proceeds from
unscheduled principal payments and proceeds from sales of credit
risk obligations or credit improved obligations.

In addition to the six classes of notes rated by Moody's, the
Issuer will issue EUR35.9 million of Subordinated Notes which are
not rated.

The transaction incorporates interest and par coverage tests which,
if triggered, divert interest and principal proceeds to pay down
the notes in order of seniority.

Methodology underlying the rating action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
December 2021.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the ratings:

The rated notes' performance is subject to uncertainty. The notes'
performance is sensitive to the performance of the underlying
portfolio, which in turn depends on economic and credit conditions
that may change. The collateral manager's investment decisions and
management of the transaction will also affect the notes'
performance.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3 of
the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in December 2021.

Moody's used the following base-case modeling assumptions:

Par Amount: EUR440,000,000

Diversity Score: 52

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2900

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.65%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 4.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 43%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 7.5 years

RICHMOND PARK: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on EUR31MM Cl. E-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the following
notes issued by Richmond Park CLO Designated Activity Company:

EUR 18,500,000 Class B-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2031, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 7, 2021 Upgraded to
Aa1 (sf)

EUR 15,000,000 Class B-2 Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2031,
Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 7, 2021 Upgraded to Aa1
(sf)

EUR23,100,000 Class B-3 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2031, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 7, 2021 Upgraded to
Aa1 (sf)

Moody's has also affirmed the ratings on the following notes:

EUR321,900,000 (Current outstanding amount EUR 266,505,512) Class
A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2031, Affirmed Aaa (sf);
previously on Jul 7, 2021 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

EUR13,000,000 Class C-1 Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031, Affirmed A1 (sf); previously on Jul 7, 2021
Upgraded to A1 (sf)

EUR21,000,000 Class C-2 Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031, Affirmed A1 (sf); previously on Jul 7, 2021
Upgraded to A1 (sf)

EUR22,800,000 Class D-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031, Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on Jul 7, 2021
Affirmed Baa2 (sf)

EUR31,000,000 Class E-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Jul 7, 2021
Affirmed Ba3 (sf)

EUR14,300,000 Class F Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Jul 7, 2021
Affirmed Caa1 (sf)

Richmond Park CLO Designated Activity Company, originally issued in
January 2014, is a collateralised loan obligation (CLO) backed by a
portfolio of mostly high-yield senior secured European and US
loans. The portfolio is managed by Blackstone Ireland Limited. The
transaction's reinvestment period ended in July 2021.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating upgrades on the Class B-1, B-2 and B-3 Notes are
primarily a result of the deleveraging of the most senior notes
following amortisation of the underlying portfolio since the last
rating action in July 2021.

The Class A Notes have paid down by approximately EUR55.39 million
(17.2%) since the last rating action in July 2021. As a result of
the deleveraging, over-collateralisation (OC) has increased across
the capital structure. According to the trustee report dated
February 10, 2022 [1] the Class A/B, Class C, Class D and Class E
OC ratios are reported at 141.17%, 127.73%, 120.06% and 111.00%
compared to June 2021 [2] levels of 135.16%, 124.02%, 117.52% and
109.71%, respectively.

In light of reinvestment restrictions during the amortisation
period, and therefore the limited ability to effect significant
changes to the current collateral pool, Moody's analysed the deal
assuming a higher likelihood that the collateral pool
characteristics would maintain an adequate buffer relative to
certain covenant requirements. In particular, Moody's assumed that
the deal will benefit from a shorter amortisation profile than it
had assumed at the last rating action in July 2021.

The key model inputs Moody's uses in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and the weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers.

In its base case, Moody's used the following assumptions:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: EUR456,155,933

Defaulted Securities: none

Diversity Score: 52

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2976

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 3.87 years

Weighted Average Spread (WAS) (before accounting for Euribor
floors): 3.46%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 3.86%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 45.4%

Par haircut in OC tests and interest diversion test: none

The default probability derives from the credit quality of the
collateral pool and Moody's expectation of the remaining life of
the collateral pool. The estimated average recovery rate on future
defaults is based primarily on the seniority of the assets in the
collateral pool. In each case, historical and market performance
and a collateral manager's latitude to trade collateral are also
relevant factors. Moody's incorporates these default and recovery
characteristics of the collateral pool into its cash flow model
analysis, subjecting them to stresses as a function of the target
rating of each CLO liability it is analysing.

Moody's notes that the February 2022 trustee report was published
at the time it was completing its analysis of the January 2022
data. Key portfolio metrics such as WARF, diversity score, weighted
average spread and life, and OC ratios exhibit little or no change
between these dates. Moody's has incorporated into its analysis
EUR22.2m of unscheduled principal proceeds shown in the February
2022 trustee report [1].

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
December 2021.

Counterparty Exposure:

The rating action took into consideration the notes' exposure to
relevant counterparties, such as account bank and swap provider,
using the methodology "Moody's Approach to Assessing Counterparty
Risks in Structured Finance" published in May 2021. Moody's
concluded the ratings of the notes are not constrained by these
risks.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the ratings:

This transaction is subject to a high level of macroeconomic
uncertainty, which could negatively affect the ratings on the note,
in light of uncertainty about credit conditions in the general
economy. In particular, the length and severity of the economic and
credit shock precipitated by the global coronavirus pandemic will
have a significant impact on the performance of the securities. CLO
notes' performance may also be impacted either positively or
negatively by (1) the manager's investment strategy and behaviour
and (2) divergence in the legal interpretation of CDO documentation
by different transactional parties because of embedded ambiguities
and (3) the additional expected loss associated with hedging
agreements in this transaction which may also impact the ratings
negatively.

Additional uncertainty about performance is due to the following:

Portfolio amortisation: The main source of uncertainty in this
transaction is the pace of amortisation of the underlying
portfolio, which can vary significantly depending on market
conditions and have a significant impact on the notes' ratings.
Amortisation could accelerate as a consequence of high loan
prepayment levels or collateral sales by the collateral manager or
be delayed by an increase in loan amend-and-extend restructurings.
Fast amortisation would usually benefit the ratings of the notes
beginning with the notes having the highest prepayment priority.


SEGOVIA EUROPEAN 3-2017: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating to Cl. F Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service announced that it has assigned the
following definitive ratings to refinancing notes issued by Segovia
European CLO 3-2017 DAC (the "Issuer"):

EUR248,000,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2035, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

EUR30,000,000 Class B-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2035, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

EUR10,000,000 Class B-2 Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2035,
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

EUR28,000,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2035, Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

EUR26,000,000 Class D Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2035, Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

EUR20,000,000 Class E Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2035, Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

EUR11,000,000 Class F Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2035, Definitive Rating Assigned B3 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rationale for the ratings is based on a consideration of the
risks associated with the CLO's portfolio and structure as
described in Moody's methodology.

As part of this reset, the Issuer has increased the target par
amount by EUR75 million to EUR400 million.

As part of this refinancing, the Issuer has extended the
reinvestment period to around 4.4 years and the weighted average
life to 8.5 years. It has also amended certain concentration
limits, definitions and minor features. The Issuer has included the
ability to hold workout obligations.

The Issuer is a managed cash flow CLO. At least 90% of the
portfolio must consist of secured senior loans or senior secured
bonds and up to 10% of the portfolio may consist of unsecured
senior loans, second-lien loans, high yield bonds and mezzanine
loans. The underlying portfolio is expected to be approximately 70%
ramped as of the closing date and to comprise of predominantly
corporate loans to obligors domiciled in Western Europe. The
remainder of the portfolio will be acquired during the 3 month
ramp-up period in compliance with the portfolio guidelines.

The effective date determination requirements of this transaction
are weaker than those for other European CLOs because satisfaction
of the Caa concentration limit is not required as of the effective
date. Moody's believes that the absence of any requirement to
satisfy the Caa concentration limit as of the effective date could
give rise to a more barbelled portfolio rating distribution.
However, Moody's concedes that satisfaction of (i) the other
concentration limits, (ii) each of the coverage test and (iii) each
of the collateral quality test can mitigate such barbelling risk.
As a result of introducing relatively weaker effective date
determination requirements, the CLO notes' outstanding ratings
could be negatively affected around the effective date, despite
satisfaction of the transaction's effective date determination
requirements.

HPS Investment Partners CLO (UK) LLP ("HPS") will continue to
manage the CLO. It will direct the selection, acquisition and
disposition of collateral on behalf of the Issuer and may engage in
trading activity, including discretionary trading, during the
transaction's 4.4 year reinvestment period. Thereafter, subject to
certain restrictions, purchases are permitted using principal
proceeds from unscheduled principal payments and proceeds from
sales of credit risk obligations and credit improved obligations.

The transaction incorporates interest and par coverage tests which,
if triggered, divert interest and principal proceeds to pay down
the notes in order of seniority.

In addition to the seven classes of notes rated by Moody's, the
Issuer will issue EUR100,000 of Class Z-1 Notes due 2035,
EUR5,000,000 of Class Z-2 Notes due 2035, EUR100,000 of Class Z-3
Notes due 2035, which are not rated and subordinated to the rated
notes. The Class Z-1 Notes and the Class Z-2 Notes accrue interest
in an amount equivalent to a certain proportion of the senior and
subordinated management fees and their notes' interest payments
rank pari passu with the payment of the senior and subordinated
management fee, respectively. The Class Z-3 Notes accrue interest
in an amount equivalent to a certain portion of the incentive
management fee ranking pari passu with the payment of such fee.
Finally, the Issuer will also issue EUR18,500,000 of Additional
Subordinated Notes which are not rated and together with
EUR37,200,000 of Existing Subordinated Notes will form the
EUR55,700,000 Subordinated Notes.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
December 2021.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the ratings:

The rated notes' performance is subject to uncertainty. The notes'
performance is sensitive to the performance of the underlying
portfolio, which in turn depends on economic and credit conditions
that may change. The collateral manager's investment decisions and
management of the transaction will also affect the notes'
performance.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3 of
the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in December 2021.

Moody's used the following base-case modeling assumptions:

Target Par Amount: EUR400 million

Diversity Score : 57

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3065

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.75%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 4.5%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 43.5%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 7.5 years




=========
I T A L Y
=========

ALBA 11 SPV: Moody's Hikes Rating on Class C Notes to Ba2
---------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of several
classes of notes in Alba 10 SPV S.r.l. and Alba 11 SPV S.r.l. The
rating actions reflect the increased levels of credit enhancement
for the affected notes.

Moody's affirmed the ratings of the notes that had sufficient
credit enhancement to maintain their current ratings. Maximum
achievable rating is Aa3 (sf) for structured finance transactions
in Italy, driven by the corresponding local currency country
ceiling of the country. In both transactions, the current Eligible
Investments definition would also limit further upgrades above
Aa3(sf) for the junior and mezzanine notes.

Issuer: Alba 10 SPV S.r.l.

EUR200 million (current outstanding balance EUR 89.8M) Class A2
Notes, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Sep 2, 2021 Affirmed Aa3
(sf)

EUR130 million Class B Notes, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Sep
2, 2021 Affirmed Aa3 (sf)

EUR75 million Class C Notes, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on
Sep 2, 2021 Upgraded to Baa1 (sf)

Issuer: Alba 11 SPV S.r.l.

EUR498.7 million (current outstanding balance EUR 233.0M) Class A1
Notes, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Sep 2, 2021 Affirmed Aa3
(sf)

EUR300 million Class A2 Notes, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on
Sep 2, 2021 Affirmed Aa3 (sf)

EUR143.6 million Class B Notes, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on
Sep 2, 2021 Upgraded to A3 (sf)

EUR131.1 million Class C Notes, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously
on Sep 2, 2021 Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The upgrade rating actions are prompted by an increase in the
credit enhancement for the affected tranches.

Increased Credit Enhancement

Sequential amortization led to the increase of the credit
enhancement available in these transactions. For instance, the
credit enhancement for the Class C Notes in Alba 10 SPV S.r.l. has
increased to 33.96% from 28.83% since the last rating action. The
credit enhancement for Class B and C Notes in Alba 11 SPV S.r.l.
has increased to 32.31% and 18.99% from 29.53% and 17.78%
respectively since the last rating action.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was 'Equipment
Lease and Loan Securitizations Methodology' published in August
2021.

Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the ratings:

Factors or circumstances that could lead to an upgrade of the
ratings include (1) performance of the underlying collateral that
is better than Moody's expected, (2) an increase in available
credit enhancement, (3) improvements in the credit quality of the
transaction counterparties and (4) a decrease in sovereign risk.

Factors or circumstances that could lead to a downgrade of the
ratings include (1) an increase in sovereign risk, (2) performance
of the underlying collateral that is worse than Moody's expected,
(3) deterioration in the notes' available credit enhancement and
(4) deterioration in the credit quality of the transaction
counterparties.




===================
L U X E M B O U R G
===================

COVIS FINCO: S&P Assigns 'B' LongTerm ICR, Outlook Stable
---------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its 'B' long-term issuer credit rating
to Covis Finco S.a.r.l. and 'B' issue rating to its first-lien
debt, which comprises the $595 million dollar-denominated
first-lien term loan and the EUR309 million euro-denominated
first-lien term loan. S&P also assigned its 'CCC+' issue rating to
the $312 million second-lien term loan.

The stable outlook indicates that S&P expects the group to
integrate the recent product acquisitions well, and to mitigate the
impact of generic competition with business development
initiatives, overall achieving an adjusted EBITDA margin of 40%-42%
and FOCF to debt of close to 5% in the next 12 months.

Covis Finco S.a r.l, the holding company of Covis Pharma, issued a
$595 million of first-lien term loan, a EUR309 million ($350
million equivalent) first-lien term loan, and a $312 million
second-lien term loan to refinance its capital structure and
finance the acquisition of two respiratory products from
AstraZeneca.

The final issuer credit rating and issue rating on the first-lien
debt are in line with the preliminary ratings S&P assigned on Jan.
10, 2022. The total debt amount was upsized by $57 million to
$1.257 billion from the $1.2 billion initially proposed.
Additionally, Covis has included a second-lien instrument, amended
the amount of its term loans, and cancelled the issuance of its
proposed senior secured notes. There are no other material changes
to the final debt documentation since its original review, or to
its forecasts.

TS&P said, "The stable outlook reflects our expectation that Covis
will integrate the recently acquired assets well and successfully
implement business-development initiatives to partly offset
increased generic competition in the treatment of iron deficiency
anemia. We forecast the group will achieve an S&P Global
Ratings-adjusted EBITDA margin of 40%-42% and FOCF to debt of close
to 5% in the next 12 months. This should help the company to build
resources to acquire assets and accelerate future growth. We expect
the adjusted debt-to-EBITDA ratio will improve to below 6.5x and
the EBITDA interest coverage ratio will be comfortably above 2.0x
in the next 12 months.

"We could take a negative rating action if we observe a
deterioration in Covis' operating performance such that its
profitability comes under pressure and the group is no longer able
to generate high FOCF. This could happen, for example, if fierce
generic competition pressure volumes and prices, or if the pace of
acquisitions accelerates, leading to material integration setbacks
and greater-than-expected costs. Under this scenario, we would
likely see a deterioration in the company's debt-to-EBITDA and
EBITDA interest coverage ratios compared with our base case."

S&P's downside scenario has the following triggers:

-- FOCF to debt significantly and sustainably below 5%; and

-- EBITDA interest coverage of 2.0x or below.

S&P said, "We could consider a positive rating action if Covis
demonstrates its capacity to deleverage to comfortably below 5.0x
on a sustained basis, while it generates high profit margins and
high FOCF. This would most likely happen if the group achieves
greater-than-expected organic expansion of its product portfolio
and continues to apply its disciplined acquisition policy. To
consider an upgrade, we would need to witness an improvement in the
group's scale and product diversification, such that the company
becomes less exposed to generic competition on a specific product.
Additionally, we would need to receive a clearly stated commitment
from the owner to maintain a less leveraged capital structure."

S&P's upside scenario has the following triggers:

-- S&P Global Ratings-adjusted debt-to-EBITDA ratio comfortably
below 5.0x with a clearly stated financial commitment to maintain
debt leverage at that level; and

-- FOCF to debt comfortably in the 10%-15% range.

ESG credit indicators: E-2, S-2, G-3




===========
R U S S I A
===========

AHML 2014-1: Moody's Cuts Rating on RUB6323MM Class A3 Notes to B2
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the ratings of three notes
in Closed Joint Stock Company Mortgage Agent of AHML 2013-1, Closed
Joint Stock Company Mortgage agent of AHML 2014-1 and Closed Joint
Stock Company Mortgage Agent of AHML 2014-2, and placed the ratings
on review for further downgrade. The rating actions are prompted by
the lowering of Russia's local-currency country ceiling to B2 from
Baa1 and the high uncertainty relating to continuity of note
payments in case of operational disruption.

The rating action follows the multi-notch downgrade and maintaining
the review for further downgrade of the Government of Russia's
ratings on March 3, 2022.

Issuer: Closed Joint Stock Company Mortgage Agent of AHML 2013-1

RUB4978M Class A2 Notes, Downgraded to B2 (sf) and Placed On
Review for Possible Downgrade; previously on Feb 14, 2019 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

Issuer: Closed Joint Stock Company Mortgage agent of AHML 2014-1

RUB6323M Class A3 Notes, Downgraded to B2 (sf) and Placed On
Review for Possible Downgrade; previously on Apr 13, 2021 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

Issuer: Closed Joint Stock Company Mortgage Agent of AHML 2014-2

RUB6459M Class A3 Notes, Downgraded to B2 (sf) and Placed On
Review for Possible Downgrade; previously on Apr 13, 2021 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating action is prompted by the lowering of Russia's
local-currency country ceiling to B2 from Baa1 and the high
uncertainty relating to continuity of note payments in case of
operational disruption.

Increased Country Risk

The government of Russia's long-term issuer (local- and
foreign-currency) and senior unsecured (local- and
foreign-currency) debt ratings were downgraded to B3 on March 3,
2022 and remain on review for further downgrade. Concurrently,
Moody's lowered Russia's local- currency country ceiling to B2 from
Baa1. The one-notch gap between the local-currency ceiling and the
sovereign ratings at B3 reflects the increasing unpredictability of
the government's actions and high political risk following the
invasion of Ukraine that could affect all Russian issuers.

As a result, the maximum rating that Moody's can assign to a
domestic Russian issuer under its methodologies, including
structured finance transactions backed by Russian receivables, is
B2 (sf).

Other Factors:

Moody's notes the high uncertainty relating to continuity of note
payments, in case of operational disruption affecting key
transaction counterparties. During the review period Moody's will
reassess the exposure of the transactions to the various
counterparties.

The performance of the transactions has been stable since the last
review in December 2021. However there remains significant
uncertainty around the future performance of mortgage loans in the
transactions due to the negative financial impact on the borrowers
following the imposition of sanctions. During the review period
Moody's will reassess the impact on expected loss as well as MILAN
CE assumptions in consideration of uncertainties posed by the
current macroeconomic environment.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating RMBS Using the MILAN Framework" published in
February 2022.

The analysis undertaken by Moody's at the initial assignment of
ratings for RMBS securities may focus on aspects that become less
relevant or typically remain unchanged during the surveillance
stage.
Factors that would lead to an upgrade or downgrade of the ratings:

Factors or circumstances that could lead to an upgrade of the
ratings include (1) a decrease in sovereign risk.

Factors or circumstances that could lead to a downgrade of the
ratings include (1) an increase in sovereign risk, (2) performance
of the underlying collateral that is worse than Moody's expected,
(3) deterioration in the notes' available credit enhancement and
(4) deterioration in the credit quality of the transaction
counterparties.


KRASNOYARSK KRAI: S&P Lowers LongTerm Currency ICRs to 'CCC-'
-------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings, on March 7, 2022, lowered its long-term foreign
and local currency issuer credit ratings on Krasnoyarsk Krai to
'CCC-' from 'BB'. At the same time, S&P placed these ratings on
CreditWatch with negative implications.

As "sovereign ratings" (as defined in EU CRA Regulation 1060/2009
"EU CRA Regulation"), the ratings on Krasnoyarsk Krai are subject
to certain publication restrictions set out in Art 8a of the EU CRA
Regulation, including publication in accordance with a
pre-established calendar. Under the EU CRA Regulation, deviations
from the announced calendar are allowed only in limited
circumstances and must be accompanied by a detailed explanation of
the reasons for the deviation. In this case, the deviation was
caused by a rating action on the sovereign. The next scheduled
publication on Krasnoyarsk Krai is on May 10, 2022.

CreditWatch

The ratings are on CreditWatch because the sovereign ratings are on
CreditWatch. S&P expects to resolve the CreditWatch placement once
it has more clarity on the technical ability and/or willingness of
the government to honor its debt obligations in full and on time.

Rationale

The rating action follows S&P's downgrade of Russia on March 3,
2022. Under S&P's methodology, a local or regional government (LRG)
can be rated higher than its sovereign if S&P believes that it
exhibits certain characteristics, as described in "Methodology:
Rating Non-U.S. Local And Regional Governments Higher Than The
Sovereign," Dec. 15, 2014. These include:

-- The LRG's ability to maintain stronger credit characteristics
than the sovereign in a stress scenario, such as having
predominantly locally derived revenue (that is, a lack of
dependence on central government revenue, subsidies or other
government transfers);

-- A predictable, stable institutional framework that limits the
risk of negative sovereign intervention, such as revenue and
expenditure autonomy supported by both constitutional and statutory
provisions; and

-- The LRG's ability to mitigate negative intervention from the
sovereign through high financial flexibility and independent
treasury management.

S&P does not currently believe that Russian LRGs, including
Krasnoyarsk Krai, meet these conditions.

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) credit factors for this
change in credit rating/outlook and/or CreditWatch status:

-- Other governance factors

In accordance with S&P's relevant policies and procedures, the
Rating Committee was composed of analysts that are qualified to
vote in the committee, with sufficient experience to convey the
appropriate level of knowledge and understanding of the methodology
applicable. At the onset of the committee, the chair confirmed that
the information provided to the Rating Committee by the primary
analyst had been distributed in a timely manner and was sufficient
for Committee members to make an informed decision.

After the primary analyst gave opening remarks and explained the
recommendation, the Committee discussed key rating factors and
critical issues in accordance with the relevant criteria.
Qualitative and quantitative risk factors were considered and
discussed, looking at track-record and forecasts.

The committee's assessment of the key rating factors is reflected
in the Ratings Score Snapshot above.

The chair ensured every voting member was given the opportunity to
articulate his/her opinion. The chair or designee reviewed the
draft report to ensure consistency with the Committee decision. The
views and the decision of the rating committee are summarized in
the above rationale and outlook. The weighting of all rating
factors is described in the methodology used in this rating
action.

  Ratings List

  DOWNGRADED; CREDITWATCH/OUTLOOK ACTION  
                                  TO              FROM
  KRASNOYARSK KRAI
  
   Issuer Credit Rating    CCC-/Watch Neg/--    BB/Stable/--


LENINGRAD OBLAST: S&P Lowers LongTerm Currency ICRs to 'CCC-'
-------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings, on March 7, 2022, lowered its long-term foreign
and local currency issuer credit ratings on Leningrad Oblast to
'CCC-' from 'BB+'. At the same time, S&P placed these ratings on
CreditWatch with negative implications.

As "sovereign ratings" (as defined in EU CRA Regulation 1060/2009
"EU CRA Regulation"), the ratings on Leningrad Oblast are subject
to certain publication restrictions set out in Art 8a of the EU CRA
Regulation, including publication in accordance with a
pre-established calendar. Under the EU CRA Regulation, deviations
from the announced calendar are allowed only in limited
circumstances and must be accompanied by a detailed explanation of
the reasons for the deviation. In this case, the deviation was
caused by a rating action on the sovereign. The next scheduled
publication on Leningrad Oblast is on June 10, 2022.

CreditWatch

The ratings are on CreditWatch because the sovereign ratings are on
CreditWatch. S&P expects to resolve the CreditWatch placement once
it has more clarity on the technical ability and/or willingness of
the government to honor its debt obligations in full and on time.

Rationale

S&P said, "The rating action follows our downgrade of Russia on
March 3, 2022. Under our methodology, a local or regional
government (LRG) can be rated higher than its sovereign if we
believe that it exhibits certain characteristics, as described in
"Methodology: Rating Non-U.S. Local And Regional Governments Higher
Than The Sovereign," Dec. 15, 2014." These include:

-- The LRG's ability to maintain stronger credit characteristics
than the sovereign in a stress scenario, such as having
predominantly locally derived revenue (that is, a lack of
dependence on central government revenue, subsidies or other
government transfers);

-- A predictable, stable institutional framework that limits the
risk of negative sovereign intervention, such as revenue and
expenditure autonomy supported by both constitutional and statutory
provisions; and

-- The LRG's ability to mitigate negative intervention from the
sovereign through high financial flexibility and independent
treasury management.

S&P does not currently believe that Russian LRGs, including
Leningrad Oblast, meet these conditions.

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) credit factors for this
change in credit rating/outlook and/or CreditWatch status:

-- Other governance factors

In accordance with S&P's relevant policies and procedures, the
Rating Committee was composed of analysts that are qualified to
vote in the committee, with sufficient experience to convey the
appropriate level of knowledge and understanding of the methodology
applicable. At the onset of the committee, the chair confirmed that
the information provided to the Rating Committee by the primary
analyst had been distributed in a timely manner and was sufficient
for Committee members to make an informed decision.

After the primary analyst gave opening remarks and explained the
recommendation, the Committee discussed key rating factors and
critical issues in accordance with the relevant criteria.
Qualitative and quantitative risk factors were considered and
discussed, looking at track-record and forecasts.

The committee's assessment of the key rating factors is reflected
in the Ratings Score Snapshot above.

The chair ensured every voting member was given the opportunity to
articulate his/her opinion. The chair or designee reviewed the
draft report to ensure consistency with the Committee decision. The
views and the decision of the rating committee are summarized in
the above rationale and outlook. The weighting of all rating
factors is described in the methodology used in this rating
action.

  Ratings List

  DOWNGRADED; CREDITWATCH/OUTLOOK ACTION  
                                     TO            FROM
  LENINGRAD OBLAST

   Issuer Credit Rating     CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BB+/Stable/--


MOSCOW: S&P Lowers LongTerm Currency ICRs to 'CCC-', On Watch Neg.
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings, on March 7, 2022, lowered its long-term foreign
and local currency issuer credit ratings -- as well as the senior
unsecured debt rating -- on City of Moscow to 'CCC-' from 'BBB-'.
At the same time, S&P placed these ratings on CreditWatch with
negative implications.

As "sovereign ratings" (as defined in EU CRA Regulation 1060/2009
"EU CRA Regulation"), the ratings on City of Moscow are subject to
certain publication restrictions set out in Art 8a of the EU CRA
Regulation, including publication in accordance with a
pre-established calendar. Under the EU CRA Regulation, deviations
from the announced calendar are allowed only in limited
circumstances and must be accompanied by a detailed explanation of
the reasons for the deviation. In this case, the deviation was
caused by a rating action on the sovereign. The next scheduled
publication on City of Moscow is on Aug. 5, 2022.

CreditWatch

The ratings are on CreditWatch because the sovereign ratings are on
CreditWatch. S&P expects to resolve the CreditWatch placement once
it has more clarity on the technical ability and/or willingness of
the government to honor its debt obligations in full and on time.

Rationale

The rating action follows S&P's downgrade of Russia on March 3,
2022. Under S&P's methodology, a local or regional government (LRG)
can be rated higher than its sovereign if it believes that it
exhibits certain characteristics, as described in "Methodology:
Rating Non-U.S. Local And Regional Governments Higher Than The
Sovereign," Dec. 15, 2014. These include:

-- The LRG's ability to maintain stronger credit characteristics
than the sovereign in a stress scenario, such as having
predominantly locally derived revenue (that is, a lack of
dependence on central government revenue, subsidies or other
government transfers);

-- A predictable, stable institutional framework that limits the
risk of negative sovereign intervention, such as revenue and
expenditure autonomy supported by both constitutional and statutory
provisions; and

-- The LRG's ability to mitigate negative intervention from the
sovereign through high financial flexibility and independent
treasury management.

S&P does not currently believe that Russian LRGs, including City of
Moscow, meet these conditions.

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) credit factors for this
change in credit rating/outlook and/or CreditWatch status:

-- Other governance factors

In accordance with S&P's relevant policies and procedures, the
Rating Committee was composed of analysts that are qualified to
vote in the committee, with sufficient experience to convey the
appropriate level of knowledge and understanding of the methodology
applicable. At the onset of the committee, the chair confirmed that
the information provided to the Rating Committee by the primary
analyst had been distributed in a timely manner and was sufficient
for Committee members to make an informed decision.

After the primary analyst gave opening remarks and explained the
recommendation, the Committee discussed key rating factors and
critical issues in accordance with the relevant criteria.
Qualitative and quantitative risk factors were considered and
discussed, looking at track-record and forecasts.

The committee's assessment of the key rating factors is reflected
in the Ratings Score Snapshot above.

The chair ensured every voting member was given the opportunity to
articulate his/her opinion. The chair or designee reviewed the
draft report to ensure consistency with the Committee decision. The
views and the decision of the rating committee are summarized in
the above rationale and outlook. The weighting of all rating
factors is described in the methodology used in this rating
action.

  Ratings List

  DOWNGRADED; CREDITWATCH/OUTLOOK ACTION  
                                    TO           FROM
  MOSCOW (CITY OF)

   Issuer Credit Rating     CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

   Senior Unsecured         CCC-/Watch Neg      BBB-


SAMARA OBLAST: S&P Lowers LongTerm Currency ICRs to 'CCC-'
----------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings, on March 7, 2022, lowered its long-term foreign
and local currency issuer credit ratings -- as well as the senior
unsecured debt rating -- on Samara Oblast to 'CCC-' from 'BB+'. At
the same time, S&P placed these ratings on CreditWatch with
negative implications.

As "sovereign ratings" (as defined in EU CRA Regulation 1060/2009
"EU CRA Regulation"), the ratings on Samara Oblast are subject to
certain publication restrictions set out in Art 8a of the EU CRA
Regulation, including publication in accordance with a
pre-established calendar. Under the EU CRA Regulation, deviations
from the announced calendar are allowed only in limited
circumstances and must be accompanied by a detailed explanation of
the reasons for the deviation. In this case, the deviation was
caused by a rating action on the sovereign. The next scheduled
publication on Samara Oblast is on April 1, 2022.

CreditWatch

The ratings are on CreditWatch because the sovereign ratings are on
CreditWatch. S&P expects to resolve the CreditWatch placement once
it has more clarity on the technical ability and/or willingness of
the government to honor its debt obligations in full and on time.

Rationale

The rating action follows S&P's downgrade of Russia on March 3,
2022. Under our methodology, a local or regional government (LRG)
can be rated higher than its sovereign if we believe that it
exhibits certain characteristics, as described in "Methodology:
Rating Non-U.S. Local And Regional Governments Higher Than The
Sovereign," Dec. 15, 2014. These include:

-- The LRG's ability to maintain stronger credit characteristics
than the sovereign in a stress scenario, such as having
predominantly locally derived revenue (that is, a lack of
dependence on central government revenue, subsidies or other
government transfers);

-- A predictable, stable institutional framework that limits the
risk of negative sovereign intervention, such as revenue and
expenditure autonomy supported by both constitutional and statutory
provisions; and

-- The LRG's ability to mitigate negative intervention from the
sovereign through high financial flexibility and independent
treasury management.

S&P does not currently believe that Russian LRGs, including Samara
Oblast, meet these conditions.

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) credit factors for this
change in credit rating/outlook and/or CreditWatch status:

-- Other governance factors

In accordance with S&P's relevant policies and procedures, the
Rating Committee was composed of analysts that are qualified to
vote in the committee, with sufficient experience to convey the
appropriate level of knowledge and understanding of the methodology
applicable. At the onset of the committee, the chair confirmed that
the information provided to the Rating Committee by the primary
analyst had been distributed in a timely manner and was sufficient
for Committee members to make an informed decision.

After the primary analyst gave opening remarks and explained the
recommendation, the Committee discussed key rating factors and
critical issues in accordance with the relevant criteria.
Qualitative and quantitative risk factors were considered and
discussed, looking at track-record and forecasts.

The committee's assessment of the key rating factors is reflected
in the Ratings Score Snapshot above.

The chair ensured every voting member was given the opportunity to
articulate his/her opinion. The chair or designee reviewed the
draft report to ensure consistency with the Committee decision. The
views and the decision of the rating committee are summarized in
the above rationale and outlook. The weighting of all rating
factors is described in the methodology used in this rating
action.

  Ratings List

  DOWNGRADED; CREDITWATCH/OUTLOOK ACTION  
                                   TO             FROM
  SAMARA OBLAST

   Issuer Credit Rating    CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BB+/Positive/--

   Senior Unsecured        CCC-/Watch Neg      BB+


SVYAZINVESTNEFTEKHIM: Fitch Lowers Foreign Currency IDRs to 'B-'
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded OJSC Svyazinvestneftekhim (SINEK)'s
Long-Term Foreign-Currency Issuer Default Ratings (IDRs) to 'B-'
from 'BBB-' and placed its IDRs and debt ratings on Rating Watch
Negative (RWN).

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Following the recent downgrade of Tatarstan. Fitch has downgraded
SINEK's Long-Term IDRs as it is credit-linked to Tatarstan's
ratings.

The downgrade reflects Fitch's unchanged assessment of the strength
of linkage with the Republic of Tatarstan and the republic's
incentive to support SINEK since Fitch's last review in 2021. The
RWN on SINEK's ratings reflect that on the republic's IDRs.

DERIVATION SUMMARY

Under its Government-Related Entities (GRE) Rating Criteria, Fitch
classifies SINEK as a credit-linked entity to the Republic of
Tatarstan and applies a top-down approach, based on its assessment
of the strength of linkage with and incentive to support by the
republic. SINEK's GRE support score leads to SINEK's IDRs being one
notch below those of Tatarstan.

DEBT RATINGS

The senior unsecured debt of LLC Sinek-Finance, SINEK's SPV, has
been downgraded to 'B-' from 'BBB-' and placed on RWN, as it ranks
pari pasu with SINEK's debt, rated at 'B-', on par with SINEK's
IDR.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factor that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- An upgrade of Tatarstan's rating/removal from RWN.

Factor that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- A downgrade of Tatarstan's rating.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Sovereigns, Public Finance
and Infrastructure issuers have a best-case rating upgrade scenario
(defined as the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in
a positive direction) of three notches over a three-year rating
horizon; and a worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the
99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative
direction) of three notches over three years. The complete span of
best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating
categories ranges from 'AAA' to 'D'. Best- and worst-case scenario
credit ratings are based on historical performance.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

Unless otherwise disclosed in this section, the highest level of
ESG credit relevance is a score of '3'. This means ESG issues are
credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on the entity,
either due to their nature or the way in which they are being
managed by the entity.


YAMAL-NENETS AUTONOMOUS: S&P Lowers LongTerm ICR to 'CCC-'
----------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings, on March 7, 2022, lowered its long-term foreign
and local currency issuer credit ratings on Yamal-Nenets Autonomous
Okrug to 'CCC-' from 'BBB-'. At the same time, S&P placed the
ratings on CreditWatch with negative implications.

As "sovereign ratings" (as defined in EU CRA Regulation 1060/2009
"EU CRA Regulation"), the ratings on Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Okrug
are subject to certain publication restrictions set out in Art 8a
of the EU CRA Regulation, including publication in accordance with
a pre-established calendar. Under the EU CRA Regulation, deviations
from the announced calendar are allowed only in limited
circumstances and must be accompanied by a detailed explanation of
the reasons for the deviation. In this case, the deviation was
caused by a rating action on the sovereign. The next scheduled
publication on Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Okrug is on June 3, 2022.

CreditWatch

The ratings are on CreditWatch because the sovereign ratings are on
CreditWatch. S&P expects to resolve the CreditWatch placement once
we have more clarity on the technical ability and/or willingness of
the government to honor its debt obligations in full and on time.

Rationale

S&P said, "The rating action follows our downgrade of Russia on
March 3, 2022.  Under our methodology, a local or regional
government (LRG) can be rated higher than its sovereign if we
believe that it exhibits certain characteristics, as described in
"Methodology: Rating Non-U.S. Local And Regional Governments Higher
Than The Sovereign," Dec. 15, 2014. These include:

-- The LRG's ability to maintain stronger credit characteristics
than the sovereign in a stress scenario, such as having
predominantly locally derived revenue (that is, a lack of
dependence on central government revenue, subsidies, or other
government transfers);

-- A predictable, stable institutional framework that limits the
risk of negative sovereign intervention, such as revenue and
expenditure autonomy supported by both constitutional and statutory
provisions; and

-- The LRG's ability to mitigate negative intervention from the
sovereign through high financial flexibility and independent
treasury management.

S&P does not currently believe that Russian LRGs, including
Yamal-Nenets Autonomous Okrug, meet these conditions.

Environmental, social, and governance (ESG) credit factors for this
change in credit rating/outlook and/or CreditWatch status:

-- Other governance factors

In accordance with S&P's relevant policies and procedures, the
Rating Committee was composed of analysts that are qualified to
vote in the committee, with sufficient experience to convey the
appropriate level of knowledge and understanding of the methodology
applicable. At the onset of the committee, the chair confirmed that
the information provided to the Rating Committee by the primary
analyst had been distributed in a timely manner and was sufficient
for Committee members to make an informed decision.

After the primary analyst gave opening remarks and explained the
recommendation, the Committee discussed key rating factors and
critical issues in accordance with the relevant criteria.
Qualitative and quantitative risk factors were considered and
discussed, looking at track-record and forecasts.

The committee's assessment of the key rating factors is reflected
in the Ratings Score Snapshot above.

The chair ensured every voting member was given the opportunity to
articulate his/her opinion. The chair or designee reviewed the
draft report to ensure consistency with the Committee decision. The
views and the decision of the rating committee are summarized in
the above rationale and outlook. The weighting of all rating
factors is described in the methodology used in this rating
action.

  Ratings List

  DOWNGRADED; CREDITWATCH/OUTLOOK ACTION  
                                     TO              FROM
  YAMAL-NENETS AUTONOMOUS OKRUG

  Issuer Credit Rating         CCC-/Watch Neg/--  BBB-/Stable/--


[*] Fitch Lowers LongTerm IDRs of 3 Russian Banks to 'B'
--------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded PJSC Bank Zenit's (Zenit), Public
Joint-Stock Company MTS Bank's (MTSB), and JSB Almazergienbank's
Long-Term Issuer Default Ratings (IDRs) to 'B' and Viability
Ratings (VRs) to 'b'.  All the ratings have been placed on Rating
Watch Negative (RWN).

The rating actions follow Fitch's downgrade of Russia's sovereign
rating to 'B'/RWN on March 2, 2022.

Sanctions imposed by the US and the EU put significant pressure on
Russian banks' profiles, undermining their ability to service
obligations in foreign currency, and in the medium term could lead
to a significant weakening of lenders' financial profiles. The
Central Bank of Russia's (CBR) ability to support banks with
foreign currency has also severely been weakened due to sanctions
potentially blocking a large proportion of its reserves, although
support in local currency is still available, as evident in
increased rouble borrowings by banks from the CBR.

Rating Withdrawals

Fitch has withdrawn the Support Ratings of all three banks, as they
are no longer relevant to the agency's coverage following the
publication of its updated Bank Rating Criteria on November 12,
2021. In line with the updated criteria, Fitch has assigned
Shareholder Support Ratings (SSR) of 'ccc+' to Zenit and MTSB and
'ccc' to Almazregienbank.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The banks' IDRs are now driven by their VRs. The downgrades of the
banks' IDRs to 'B' and VRs to 'b' capture the heightened country
and sovereign risks and the close linkage of their credit profiles
with that of the Russian sovereign.

The RWNs on the banks' ratings mirror that on the sovereign rating,
but also reflect increased pressures on the banks' profiles as a
result of recent sanctions imposed against Russia, although these
three banks are not under sanctions. Regulatory forbearance
measures introduced by the CBR should help the banks manage their
asset-quality and capital metrics; however, risks to the banks'
profiles and their ability to service debt are very high.

Key Rating Driver 1

Zenit's and MTSB's SSRs of 'ccc+' reflect the possibility that the
banks will be supported by their shareholders, PJSC Tatneft (B/RWN)
and PJSC Mobile TeleSystems (B/RWN), respectively, but that support
cannot be relied on, given high country and sovereign risks and
moderate synergies with the corporate shareholders.

Almazregienbank's SSR of 'ccc' reflects its limited strategic
importance for Republic of Sakha (Yakutia; B/RWN) and the low
flexibility of the local authorities to provide immediate
extraordinary support.

The RWNs on the banks' SSRs mirror that on the parents' ratings.

Key Rating Driver 2

Zenit's senior unsecured debt rating has been downgraded to
'B'/'RR4' and placed on RWN in line with the bank's IDRs.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- The banks' IDRs and debt ratings could be downgraded if their
    VRs are downgraded. The VRs are primarily sensitive to changes
    in the sovereign rating. Ratings could also be downgraded in
    the absence of a sovereign downgrade, if the operating
    environment results in substantial deterioration of the banks'
    financial profiles.

-- The IDRs could also be downgraded if the banks' ability to
    service their obligations is impaired further by sanctions or
    by restrictions on payments by the Russian authorities leading
    to material economic losses for creditors.

-- The SSRs could be downgraded if the ability or propensity of
    the shareholders to provide support weakens.

Factor that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- Ratings could be upgraded or affirmed in case of a similar
    action on the sovereign rating.

VR ADJUSTMENTS

The operating environment score of 'b' is below the 'bb' category
implied score, due to the following adjustment reason: 'sovereign
rating' (negative).

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Financial Institutions and
Covered Bond issuers have a best-case rating upgrade scenario
(defined as the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in
a positive direction) of three notches over a three-year rating
horizon; and a worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the
99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative
direction) of four notches over three years. The complete span of
best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating
categories ranges from 'AAA' to 'D'. Best- and worst-case scenario
credit ratings are based on historical performance.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

Almazregienbank has an ESG Relevance Score of '4' for Governance
Structure in view of significant exposure to related parties and
Sakha's involvement in the management of the bank at board level
and, in particular, in its business origination. This has a
moderate negative impact on the bank's credit profile due to
governance risks and involvement in directed financing, and is
relevant to the ratings in conjunction with other factors.

Unless otherwise disclosed in this section, the highest level of
ESG credit relevance is a score of '3'. This means ESG issues are
credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on the entity,
either due to their nature or the way in which they are being
managed by the entity.


[*] RUSSIA: Departing Foreign Cos to Get Fast-Tracked Bankruptcy
----------------------------------------------------------------
Reuters reports that foreign companies that want to leave Russia
will receive fast-tracked bankruptcy protections or can hand their
stakes over to local managers until they return to Russia, First
Deputy Prime Minister Andrei Belousov said on March 4.

Western sanctions imposed on Russia in punishment for its invasion
of Ukraine have prompted dozens of global companies to pause
operations in the country and some, including energy majors BP and
Shell have said they will exit the country entirely, Reuters
relates.

According to Reuters, the government said in a statement on
Telegram the fast-track bankruptcy plan "will support the
employment and social well-being of citizens so that bona fide
entrepreneurs can ensure the effective functioning of business".


[*] S&P Cuts ICRs on 52 Russian Companies & Utilities to 'CCC-'
---------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings downgraded 52 Russian corporates and utilities
companies to 'CCC-', the same level as the foreign currency rating
and the transfer and convertibility assessment on Russia, to
reflect the heightened sovereign risk for all Russian corporate
issuers. At the same time, S&P placed all its issuer credit and
issue ratings on these companies on CreditWatch with negative
implications.

On March 3, 2022, S&P Global Ratings lowered its foreign and local
currency sovereign credit ratings on Russia to 'CCC-/C' from
'BB+/B' and 'BBB-/A-3', respectively. S&P also revised downward our
transfer and convertibility assessment to 'CCC-' from 'BBB-'. The
ratings remain on CreditWatch with negative implications, where S&P
placed them on Feb. 25, 2022.

S&P said, "The sovereign downgrade reflects the consequences of
Russia's military conflict with Ukraine, which has prompted a new
round of G7 government sanctions, including ones targeting the
foreign exchange reserves of The Central Bank of Russia (CBR). This
has rendered a large part of these reserves inaccessible,
undermining the CBR's ability to act as a lender of last resort and
impairing what had been--until recently--Russia's standout credit
strength: its net external liquidity position.

"The downgrade of these 52 Russian corporates and utilities
companies follows the imposition of measures that we believe will
likely substantially increase their risk of default. Among these
are capital controls introduced by authorities that aim at
shielding the ruble from the impact of severe economic sanctions
while preserving remaining useable reserve buffers. The new G7
government restrictions were imposed on Russia in response to its
military actions in Ukraine. We understand from public information
and press reports that capital-control measures entail the ban on
cross-border financial flows, including debt service payments of
both the private sector and the government. We believe this will
very likely restrict the ability of nonresident domestic and
foreign currency bondholders to receive interest and/or principal
payments on time.

"Therefore, the rating actions reflect our view of the
uncertainties for virtually all rated Russian corporates and
utilities companies, whether they are government-related entities
or privately owned companies, around their technical ability to
make timely debt payments (interest and/or principal) to all
creditors and in full, due to measures imposed by the Russian
government, irrespective of their financial capacity to pay."

CreditWatch

S&P said, "The CreditWatch negative placement on all the affected
entities indicates that we could lower the ratings further over the
next few weeks. We expect to resolve the CreditWatch placement once
we have more clarity on the technical ability and/or willingness of
the companies to honor their debt obligations to all creditors in
full and on time."

DOWNGRADED; CREDITWATCH/OUTLOOK ACTION

                                ISSUER CREDIT RATING
                              TO                 FROM
                        -----------------   ---------------
LUKOIL PJSC             CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB/Stable/--

ALROSA PJSC             CCC-/Watch Neg/C    BBB-/Stable/A-3

GAZPROM PJSC            CCC-/Watch Neg/C    BBB-/Stable/A-3

GAZPROM CAPITAL OOO     CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

GAZPROM NEFT PJSC       CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

ROSNEFT OIL CO. PJSC    CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

ROSNEFT INTERNATIONAL
HOLDINGS LTD.           CCC-/Watch Neg/C    BBB-/Stable/A-3

MAGNITOGORSK IRON AND
STEEL WORKS PJSC        CCC-/Watch Neg/C    BBB-/Stable/A-3

TRANSNEFT PJSC          CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

SEVERSTAL PAO           CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

MMC NORILSK NICKEL PJSC CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

TMK PAO                 CCC-/Watch Neg/--   B+/Negative/--

NLMK PJSC               CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

NOVATEK PJSC            CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB/Stable/--

EURASIA DRILLING CO.
LTD.                    CCC-/Watch Neg/C    BB+/Stable/B

HOLDING CO.
METALLOINVEST JSC       CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

EVRAZHOLDING FINANCE
LLC                     CCC-/Watch Neg/C    BB+/Stable/B

PHOSAGRO PJSC           CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

PETROPAVLOVSK PLC       CCC-/Watch Neg/--   B-/Stable/--

SIBUR HOLDING PJSC      CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

EUROCHEM GROUP AG       CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BB/Stable/--

POLYUS PJSC             CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BB+/Stable/--

EVRAZ PLC               CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BB+/Stable/--

CORPORATION
VSMPO-AVISMA PSC        CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BB+/Stable/--

ROSTELECOM PJSC         CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BB+/Stable/--

MOSENERGO PJSC          CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

MOBILE TELESYSTEMS PJSC CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

SISTEMA (PJSFC)         CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BB/Positive/--

FEDERAL GRID CO. OF
THE UNIFIED ENERGY
SYSTEM                  CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

RUSSIAN RAILWAYS JSC    CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

MEGAFON PJSC            CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BB+/Stable/--

SOVCOMFLOT PAO          CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

X5 RETAIL GROUP N.V.    CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BB+/Stable/--

X5 FINANCE OOO          CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BB+/Stable/--

VODOKANAL ST. PETERSBURG CCC-/Watch Neg/C   BB+/Stable/B

ETALON LENSPETSSMU JSC  CCC-/Watch Neg/C    B-/Positive/B

RUSHYDRO PJSC           CCC-/Watch Neg/C    BBB-/Stable/A-3

ROSSETI MOSCOW REGION
PJSC                    CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BB+/Stable/--

ROSSETI CENTRE, PJSC    CCC-/Watch Neg/C    BB+/Stable/B

MOSVODOKANAL JSC        CCC-/Watch Neg/C    BBB-/Stable/A-3

ATOMIC ENERGY POWER
CORP. JSC               CCC-/Watch Neg/C    BBB-/Stable/A-3

ER-TELECOM              CCC-/Watch Neg/--   B+/Stable/--

MAGNIT PJSC             CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BB+/Stable/--

KATREN JSC SPC          CCC-/Watch Neg/C    BB+/Stable/B

ROSSETI PJSC            CCC-/Watch Neg/C    BBB-/Stable/A-3

DELOPORTS LLC           CCC-/Watch Neg/--   B+/Stable/--

TRANSFIN-M PC           CCC-/Watch Neg/C    B/Negative/B

SCF CAPITAL DAC         CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--

TGC-1 PJSC              CCC-/Watch Neg/C    BBB-/Stable/A-3

SETL GROUP LLC          CCC-/Watch Neg/C    B+/Positive/B

LEADER INVEST JSC       CCC-/Watch Neg/C    B-/Positive/B

YANDEX N.V.             CCC-/Watch Neg/--   BBB-/Stable/--


[*] S&P Cuts Rating on Russian Insurers on Adverse Economic Climate
-------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings has taken negative rating actions on its rated
Russian insurers. The rating actions reflect its view of the
heightened likelihood of financial and business vulnerability
caused by rapidly escalating geopolitical and economic risks in
Russia. The rating actions follow the downgrade and negative
CreditWatch placement on the Russian sovereign on March 3, 2022.

The rating actions include the following:

-- S&P lowered to 'CCC+' and placed on CreditWatch developing the
ratings on Alfastrakhovanie OAO, Energogarant PJSIC, Ingosstrakh
Insurance Co., Lexgarant Insurance Co. Ltd., Insurance Co.
RESO-GARANTIA and its non-operating holding company Stanpeak Ltd.,
Sogaz Insurance, and VSK Insurance JSC. This reflects the
combination of the lowering of the sovereign credit rating on
Russia, the negative CreditWatch placement on Russia, and the
ability of the insurers to withstand a short-term stress.

-- S&P lowered the ratings on Sberbank Insurance LLC to 'CCC-',
placed the ratings on CreditWatch negative, and then withdrew them
at the issuer's request. The downgrade and CreditWatch negative
placement reflect the combination of the lowering of the sovereign
credit rating on Russia, the negative CreditWatch placement on
Russia, and the pressure on Sberbank group's creditworthiness.

S&P said, "Russia's military conflict with Ukraine has prompted a
new round of G7 government sanctions that we believe will likely
substantially increase the risk of sovereign default. The sanctions
also imposed restrictions that deny or significantly diminish the
access of the Russian banking system to the global financial
system, markets, and infrastructure. We believe these risks could
permeate into the Russian insurance and reinsurance sector and
potentially pose challenges related to insurers' ability to access
global markets or to meet financial commitments."

Russian insurers are facing escalating uncertainty regarding
potential operational or financial restrictions and access to
liquidity, making them vulnerable to deterioration in economic or
geopolitical conditions. S&P considers the impact of recent
sanctions and possible additional ones could further intensify
volatility in domestic markets and the local currency, or limit
access to international markets and currencies, which in turn could
erode the profitability, liquidity, and capital positions of
domestic insurers.

That said, S&P believes that the insurers will likely be able to
meet their financial commitments over the near term, thanks to low
leverage on balance sheets, their current ability to transact with
international markets, and potential domestic reinsurance backstop
facilities. S&P also notes some favorable factors such as
geographical diversity of operations, deposits in foreign banks
that can be used to pay foreign obligations, and insurers' ability
to access domestic assets to pay for local obligations.

Lexgarant, in particular, benefits from its focus on international
business and its foreign currency deposits outside Russia. S&P
however believes the risks for Lexgarant relate more to potentially
progressing sanctions, which may prohibit it from accessing the
international insurance market considering its concentration on
international aviation business.

For these reasons, the ratings on all the above-mentioned insurers
(with the exception of Sberbank Insurance) are above the Russian
sovereign ratings. S&P said, "Considering Sberbank group's wider
integration with the domestic economy, we believe its
creditworthiness is more influenced by sovereign-related risks
compared to the other insurers. As a result, we have lowered the
ratings on Sberbank Insurance to the same level as the sovereign
ratings and we are withdrawing the ratings at the issuer's
request."

CreditWatch

S&P said, "The CreditWatch placements reflect our opinion that
increased geopolitical and economic risks in Russia will weigh on
insurers' creditworthiness. The developing implications of the
CreditWatch indicate the likelihood of additional positive or
negative rating actions on all, or some, Russian insurers within
the next 90 days.

"We aim to resolve the CreditWatch once we have obtained sufficient
information on the risks involved, whether they will materialize,
and their likely impact."

  Ratings List

  ALFASTRAKHOVANIE PLC  

  DOWNGRADED; CREDITWATCH ACTION  
                                        TO            FROM
  ALFASTRAKHOVANIE PLC

  Financial Strength Rating   CCC+/Watch Dev/--  BBB-/Watch Neg/--

  ENERGOGARANT PJSIC              

  DOWNGRADED; CREDITWATCH ACTION  
                                        TO            FROM
  ENERGOGARANT PJSIC

  Issuer Credit Rating        CCC+/Watch Dev/--  BB/Watch Neg/--

  Financial Strength Rating   CCC+/Watch Dev/--  BB/Watch Neg/--

  SOGAZ INSURANCE               

  DOWNGRADED; CREDITWATCH ACTION  
                                        TO            FROM
  SOGAZ INSURANCE

  Issuer Credit Rating        CCC+/Watch Dev/--  BBB-/Watch Neg/--

  Financial Strength Rating   CCC+/Watch Dev/--  BBB-/Watch Neg/--

  INGOSSTRAKH INSURANCE CO.            

  DOWNGRADED; CREDITWATCH ACTION  
                                        TO            FROM
  INGOSSTRAKH INSURANCE CO.

  Issuer Credit Rating        CCC+/Watch Dev/--  BBB-/Watch Neg/--

  Financial Strength Rating   CCC+/Watch Dev/--  BBB-/Watch Neg/--

  LEXGARANT INSURANCE CO. LTD.           

  DOWNGRADED; CREDITWATCH ACTION  
                                        TO            FROM
  LEXGARANT INSURANCE CO. LTD.

  Issuer Credit Rating        CCC+/Watch Dev/--  BB-/Watch Neg/--

  Financial Strength Rating   CCC+/Watch Dev/--  BB-/Watch Neg/--

  VSK INSURANCE JSC                

  DOWNGRADED; CREDITWATCH ACTION  
                                        TO            FROM
  VSK INSURANCE JSC

  Financial Strength Rating   CCC+/Watch Dev/--  BB/Watch Neg/--

  SBERBANK INSURANCE LLC             

  DOWNGRADED  
                                        TO            FROM
  SBERBANK INSURANCE LLC

  Financial Strength Rating   CCC-/Watch Neg/--  BB+/Watch Neg/--

  NOT RATED  

  SBERBANK INSURANCE LLC

  Financial Strength Rating            NR        CCC-/Watch Neg/--

  STANPEAK LTD. LLC              

  DOWNGRADED; CREDITWATCH ACTION  
                                        TO            FROM

  STANPEAK LTD. LLC

  Issuer Credit Rating       CCC+/Watch Dev/--   BB/Watch Neg/--

  RESO-GARANTIA INSURANCE CO.

  Issuer Credit Rating       CCC+/Watch Dev/--   BBB-/Watch Neg/--

  Financial Strength Rating  CCC+/Watch Dev/--   BBB-/Watch Neg/--

  NR--Not Rated


[*] S&P Lowers ICRs on Russian Banks to 'CCC-/C', On Watch Negative
-------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings said that, following its downgrade of Russia on
March 3, 2022, it has lowered its long- and short-term issuer
credit ratings on Russian financial institutions, their related
companies, and their debt issues to 'CCC-/C' and placed them on
CreditWatch with negative implications.

S&P said, "The downgrade of the banks follows the lowering of our
foreign currency sovereign credit ratings on Russia to 'CCC-/C'
from 'BB+/B' and the local currency ratings to 'CCC-/C' from
'BBB-/A-3'; all sovereign ratings remain on CreditWatch negative.
We also revised downward our transfer and convertibility assessment
on Russia to 'CCC-' from 'BBB-'.

"The downgrade follows the imposition of measures that we believe
will likely substantially increase the risk of financial
institutions' default. To mitigate the resulting high exchange rate
and financial market volatility, and to preserve remaining foreign
currency buffers, Russia's authorities have--among other
steps--introduced capital-control measures that we understand could
constrain banks from honoring their obligations in full and on
time. More severe G-7 government sanctions and other restrictions
were imposed on Russia in response to its accelerated military
actions in Ukraine."

CreditWatch

S&P said, "The ratings remain on CreditWatch negative to indicate
that we could lower them further over the next few weeks. We expect
to resolve the CreditWatch placement once we have more clarity on
the technical ability and/or willingness of financial institutions
to honor their obligations in full and on time."

  Ratings List

  * ABH FINANCIAL LTD.
  --------------------
  DOWNGRADED                      TO    FROM
                                            --    ----
  ABH FINANCIAL LTD.

  Issuer Credit Rating        CCC-/Watch Neg/C    BB-/Watch Neg/B

  ALFA-BANK JSC

  Issuer Credit Rating        CCC-/Watch Neg/C    BB+/Watch Neg/B

  ABH FINANCIAL LTD.

  Senior Unsecured              CCC-/Watch Neg    BB-/Watch Neg

  ALFA HOLDING ISSUANCE PLC

  Senior Unsecured              CCC-/Watch Neg    BB-/Watch Neg

  DOWNGRADED; CREDITWATCH ACTION
                                            TO    FROM
  ALFA-BANK JSC

  Commercial Paper                  C/Watch Neg    B

  * CB RENAISSANCE CREDIT LLC
  ---------------------------
  DOWNGRADED                      TO    FROM
                                            --    ----
  CB RENAISSANCE CREDIT LLC

  Issuer Credit Rating       CCC-/Watch Neg/C     B+/Watch Neg/B

  * CENTROCREDIT BANK JSC
  -----------------------
  DOWNGRADED; CREDITWATCH ACTION     TO     FROM
                                            --    ----
  CENTROCREDIT BANK JSC

  Issuer Credit Rating       CCC-/Watch Neg/C     B+/Watch Neg/B

  * CONCERN ROSSIUM LLC
  ---------------------
  DOWNGRADED                                TO     FROM
                                            --    ----
  CONCERN ROSSIUM LLC

  Issuer Credit Rating       CCC-/Watch Neg/C     B+/Watch Neg/B

  CREDIT BANK OF MOSCOW

  Issuer Credit Rating       CCC-/Watch Neg/C     BB/Watch Neg/B

  CBOM FINANCE PLC

  Senior Unsecured             CCC-/Watch Neg     BB/Watch Neg

  * GAZPROMBANK JSC
  -----------------
  DOWNGRADED                            TO     FROM
                                            --    ----
  BANK GPB INTERNATIONAL S.A.
  GAZPROMBANK JSC
  GAZPROMBANK (SWITZERLAND) LTD.

  Issuer Credit Rating       CCC-/Watch Neg/C    BB+/Watch Neg/B

  GAZPROMBANK JSC

  Senior Unsecured             CCC-/Watch Neg    BB+/Watch Neg

  DOWNGRADED; CREDITWATCH ACTION           TO     FROM
                                            --    ----
  GPB FINANCE PLC

  Commercial Paper                C/Watch Neg     B

  * BANK SOYUZ
  ------------
  DOWNGRADED                                TO     FROM
                                            --    ----
  BANK SOYUZ

  Issuer Credit Rating       CCC-/Watch Neg/C     BB-/Watch Neg/B

  * RN BANK JSC   
  -------------
  DOWNGRADED                     TO     FROM
                                            --    ----
  RN BANK JSC

  Issuer Credit Rating       CCC-/Watch Neg/C     BB+/Watch Neg/B

  * RAIFFEISENBANK AO
  -------------------
  DOWNGRADED                     TO     FROM
                                            --    ----
  RAIFFEISENBANK AO

  Issuer Credit Rating       CCC-/Watch Neg/C     BB+/Watch Neg/B

  * RUSSIAN STANDARD BANK JSC
  ---------------------------
  DOWNGRADED                     TO     FROM
                                            --    ----
  RUSSIAN STANDARD BANK JSC

  Issuer Credit Rating       CCC-/Watch Neg/C     B/Watch Neg/B

  * UNICREDIT BANK AO
  -------------------
  DOWNGRADED                     TO     FROM
                                            --    ----
  UNICREDIT BANK AO

  Issuer Credit Rating       CCC-/Watch Neg/C     BB+/Watch Neg/B

  * URAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT
  ----------------------------------------------     
  DOWNGRADED                     TO     FROM
                                            --    ----
  URAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT

  Issuer Credit Rating       CCC-/Watch Neg/C     B/Watch Neg/B




===========
S E R B I A
===========

PROKUPAC: Is Up for Sale for EUR17.1MM, April 11 Bid Deadline
-------------------------------------------------------------
Branislav Urosevic at SeeNews reports that Serbia's Deposit
Insurance Agency said it is offering for sale bankrupt alcoholic
drinks producer Prokupac for EUR17.1 million (US$18.6 million).

According to SeeNews, the agency said in a statement on March 7 the
call for bids will end on April 11, at 2:00 p.m. local time, while
the bids will be opened the same day at 2:15 p.m.

It did not provide further details about the assets included,
SeeNew notes.

The bankruptcy supervisor, Zorica Mihajlovic, told local news
portal eKapija that Prokupac has "substantial property in the
territory of Serbia, in Sarajevo [in Bosnia and Herzegovina] and
[in] Montenegro", SeeNew relates.

Prokupac was founded in 1958, according to trade registry data.
The company went bankrupt in 2014, SeeNews discloses.




=====================
S W I T Z E R L A N D
=====================

SBERBANK AG: Fitch Lowers LT Issuer Default Rating to 'RD'
----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings, on March 7, 2022, downgraded the Long-Term Issuer
Default Rating (IDR) of Sberbank (Switzerland) AG (SBS) to 'RD'
from 'BBB'.

Fitch has also withdrawn SBS's Support Rating of '2' as it is no
longer relevant for the agency's coverage following the publication
of its updated Bank Rating Criteria on 12 November 2021. In line
with the updated criteria, Fitch has assigned a Shareholder Support
Rating (SSR) of 'no support'.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The rating action follows the announcement on 4 March 2022 by the
Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA) that it has
ordered protective measures at SBS. In particular, FINMA has
ordered a deferral of the bank's deposit payments until 2 May 2022,
which Fitch views as evidence of restricted default.

FINMA also ordered a wide-ranging ban on payments and transactions.
The bank will need FINMA's approval to make payments or
transactions that are not necessary for its operations as a bank.
According to FINMA's press release, the bank has decided not to
engage in any new business until further notice and is largely
restructuring and reducing its business activities. FINMA also
announced that that it will appoint an investigating agent to the
bank.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factor that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- Not applicable as the ratings are on 'RD'.

Factor that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- The ratings are likely to be upgraded when the payment
    moratorium is lifted and SBS returns to full operations.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Financial Institutions and
Covered Bond issuers have a best-case rating upgrade scenario
(defined as the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in
a positive direction) of three notches over a three-year rating
horizon; and a worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the
99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative
direction) of four notches over three years. The complete span of
best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating
categories ranges from 'AAA' to 'D'. Best- and worst-case scenario
credit ratings are based on historical performance.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

Unless otherwise disclosed in this section, the highest level of
ESG credit relevance is a score of '3'. This means ESG issues are
credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on the entity,
either due to their nature or the way in which they are being
managed by the entity.




=============
U K R A I N E
=============

DTEK RENEWABLES: S&P Lowers ICR to 'CCC', On Watch Negative
-----------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings lowered its ratings on Ukrainian electricity
producer DTEK Renewables and its senior unsecured debt to 'CCC'
from 'CCC+', and placed them on CreditWatch with negative
implications.

The CreditWatch placement indicates that S&P could lower the
ratings if payments from Guaranteed Buyer cease, resulting in a
potential default within the next 12 months. S&P will also closely
monitor if the DTEK's assets are at risk of severe damage from the
ongoing conflict.

This rating action follows S&P's downgrade of Ukraine on Feb. 25,
2022.

S&P said, "Following Russia's military intervention into Ukraine,
we believe that Ukraine could face disruptions in its key economic
sectors, including its gas pipeline networks and agricultural
exports. There is also a heightened risk, in our view, of cyber
attacks on Ukraine with the aim of weakening its private-sector
operations. We believe that the conflict could prevent the
Ukrainian government from utilizing already committed fundings,
which would put pressure on the sovereign's liquidity and
creditworthiness.

"Although DTEK's cash collection from Guaranteed Buyer, the
state-owned monopoly offtaker of its electricity, had improved as
of mid-February, we see uncertainty regarding future payments,
given the Russia-Ukraine conflict.We believe that there is a risk
that payments could cease should the government be required to
allocate more resources toward defense rather than electricity
production or not be able to use its committed funds. We
acknowledge that DTEK received the guaranteed payments at least
until January 2022.

"DTEK's assets are at risk of being damaged in further bombings and
its operations being put on hold under Ukrenergo's restrictions.
DTEK currently owns and operates seven projects located in southern
Ukraine that represent 950 megawatts (MW) of total installed
capacity and is gradually building and commissioning Tiligul, a
500-MW wind farm. Due to their location, we believe DTEK's assets
might be at risk of damage or destruction from bombings. We
understand that DTEK's priority would be to repair its facilities
to ensure production under martial law."

If payments from Guaranteed Buyer cease, this would be disruptive
and further pressure DTEK's liquidity. At the end of 2021, DTEK had
about EUR30 million in cash according to our estimates and about
EUR40 million in its debt service account for deleveraging and
interest payments on its Eurobond. In addition, S&P previously
expected about EUR215 million of cash flow generation for 2022.
This would have adequately covered debt payments of about EUR65
million in 2022 and capital expenditures of about EUR190 million.
However, if cash collection is disrupted, the company might not be
able to sustain the impact of unexpected events, including the
ongoing Russia-Ukraine conflict.

S&P Global Ratings acknowledges a high degree of uncertainty about
the extent, outcome, and consequences of Russia's military
intervention in Ukraine. Irrespective of the duration of military
hostilities, sanctions and related political risks are likely to
remain in place for some time. Potential effects could include
dislocated commodities markets -- notably for oil and gas -- supply
chain disruptions, inflationary pressures, weaker growth, and
capital market volatility. As the situation evolves, S&P will
update its assumptions and estimates accordingly.

The CreditWatch placement stems from S&P's view of multiple risks
to DTEK's liquidity and operations resulting from Russia's military
intervention into Ukraine.

S&P expects to resolve the CreditWatch placement within 90 days.

ESG credit indicator: E-2, S-2, G-4


UKRAINE: Moody's Cuts Issuer Ratings & Unsec. Debt Ratings to Caa2
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the Government of
Ukraine's foreign and domestic currency long-term issuer ratings
and foreign currency senior unsecured debt ratings to Caa2 from B3.
The ratings remain on review for further downgrade.

The two-notch downgrade of Ukraine's ratings and the decision to
maintain the ratings on review for further downgrade were triggered
by the intensification of Russia's (B3 review for downgrade)
military invasion of Ukraine. The ongoing review was initially
triggered on February 25 by the start of Russia's military invasion
of Ukraine.

The key drivers behind the decision to downgrade Ukraine's ratings
are:

1. The Russian invasion of Ukraine, which will impair Ukraine's
ability and possibly willingness to service its debt;

2. The severe impact that Russia's invasion will have on Ukraine´s
economic and fiscal strength due to extensive damage to its
productive capacity.

The intensification of the military invasion of Ukraine could have
implications for sovereign debt repayments. Moody's believes
Ukraine's buffers and forthcoming substantial international
financial support will not be sufficient to fully offset liquidity
risks stemming from Ukraine's debt repayment needs, given the large
economic and fiscal costs the invasion will inflict on the
country.

Moreover, the heavy human toll and the damage to Ukraine's
productive capacity that the military invasion will inflict will
have a severe impact on Ukraine's economic and fiscal strength, and
the military conflict could also disrupt Ukraine´s existing
institutions and governance set up.

The review period will allow Moody's to better assess the extent to
which the invasion leads to long-lasting economic damage. It will
also allow Moody's to better assess the extent to which the
invasion could disrupt Ukraine's existing institutions and
governance setup. Furthermore, the review period will allow Moody's
to assess the extent of the financial support that Ukraine will
receive from the international community and the country´s ability
to continue meeting its debt obligations under a period of military
conflict.

Concurrently, Ukraine's local and foreign currency ceilings have
been lowered to Caa1 from B2. The one-notch gap between the local
currency ceiling and the sovereign rating reflects the low
predictability of government and institutions and elevated domestic
political and geopolitical risks which create considerable policy
uncertainty, while external vulnerabilities remain elevated. The
foreign currency ceiling is aligned to the local currency ceiling,
reflecting weak policy effectiveness, already limited capital
account openness and elevated external indebtedness with limited
foreign exchange reserves.

RATINGS RATIONALE

RATIONALE FOR THE DOWNGRADE TO Caa2 FROM B3

FIRST DRIVER: THE RUSSIAN INVASION OF UKRAINE WHICH WILL IMPAIR
UKRAINE'S ABILITY AND POSSIBLY WILLINGNESS TO SERVICE DEBT

The intensification of Russia's military invasion of Ukraine that
started on February 24, 2022 could have implications for sovereign
debt repayments. The scale and scope of the military conflict goes
beyond Moody's initial expectations and will inflict large economic
and fiscal costs on Ukraine. While Ukraine benefits from improved
fiscal and external buffers relative to the 2014-15 military
conflict, in Moody's view, these will not be sufficient to fully
offset liquidity risks given reduced funding options, foreign
investor outflows and mounting pressure on the external position.

The government faces external repayments of around $6 billion in
2022 and between $2-6 billion (1-4% of GDP) each year over the next
decade. Although foreign currency reserves of $27.5 billion
available at the end of January 2022 covered those needs, they will
come under increasing pressure at a time of reduced foreign
currency inflows, particularly as the country's financing options
are reduced amid heightened borrowing costs and a sustained
depreciation of the hryvnia.

Ukraine is benefiting from substantial international financial
support, which will help to shore up liquidity but is unlikely to
be sufficient to cushion the full impact of the Russian invasion on
Ukraine's credit profile. Moody's estimates that international
institutions and governments have so far committed around $15
billion, including loans from the International Monetary Fund, the
World Bank, the European Investment Bank (EIB, Aaa stable) and the
European Union (EU, Aaa stable).

While domestic banks have been the main source of refinancing in
recent years, they are unlikely to have the capacity to
significantly further absorb government debt amid financial sector
disruption from the invasion and the risk of significant deposit
withdrawals. Moreover, the introduction of capital controls has
complicated the participation of foreign investors although the
government is seeking to raise further funding through its war bond
initiative after issuing a one-year war bond equivalent to $270
million on 1 March, and has since eased capital control
restrictions.

While the current government has continued to honour its financial
obligations since the start of the military invasion, including the
payment of coupons of around $300 million on eurobonds on March 1,
a prolonged military conflict would add to Ukraine's financing
needs in the form of higher military spending, weighing on the
government's finances and its ability to continue to repay its
debt.

Moreover, the Russian invasion poses risks to Ukraine's current
institutions and governance setup, with potential negative
implications for the willingness to honour existing debt
obligations.

SECOND DRIVER: THE SEVERE IMPACT OF RUSSIA'S BROADENED INVASION ON
UKRAINE'S ECONOMIC AND FISCAL STRENGTH DUE TO EXTENSIVE DAMAGE TO
ITS PRODUCTIVE CAPACITY

Moody's expects that the broadened invasion of Ukraine by Russia
will cause material and lasting damage to Ukraine's economic and
fiscal strength. The intensification of the military conflict and
the targeting of large cities has already and will likely continue
to cause significant damage to Ukraine's infrastructure, although
it is not currently possible to assess the exact magnitude of that
damage. Even if the military conflict is brought to an end
relatively soon and significant external support is provided to
help reconstruction, it will likely take a significant amount of
time to repair the extensive damage to the country's productive
capacity caused by the military conflict. Moreover, the heavy human
toll that the military conflict will inflict, together with a
significant displacement of the population, will exacerbate already
challenging demographic trends and durably constrain Ukraine's
economic potential.

The magnitude and scope of the damage on the economy caused by the
invasion will also weaken Ukraine's fiscal strength and its ability
to service its debt. While it is not possible to estimate the exact
magnitude of the fiscal impact of the military conflict at this
stage, Moody's expects it will result in a significant increase in
Ukraine's general government debt burden from an estimated 54% of
GDP at the end of 2021 given higher fiscal deficits and as the
large share of foreign currency debt exposes government finances to
currency depreciation.

At the same time, the invasion and its aftermath will act as a drag
on the government's financial resources. Repairs to key public
infrastructure will materially weigh on government spending.
Moreover, the severity of the economic damage from the military
conflict will have long-lasting negative implications for the
government's revenue generation capacity.

RATIONALE FOR MAINTAINING THE REVIEW FOR FURTHER DOWNGRADE

The review period will allow Moody's to better assess the extent to
which the invasion leads to long-lasting economic damage. It will
also allow Moody's to better assess the extent to which the
invasion could disrupt Ukraine's existing institutions and
governance setup. Furthermore, the review period will also allow
Moody´s to better understand the extent to which international
financial support allows Ukraine to cover its debt obligations and
any liquidity pressures stemming from the government's external
refinancing needs.

ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, GOVERNANCE CONSIDERATIONS

Ukraine's ESG Credit Impact Score is highly negative (CIS-4),
reflecting moderately negative exposures to environmental and
social risks, and a very weak governance profile. The latter,
together with moderate wealth levels, helps to explain Ukraine's
relatively low resilience to E and S risks.

Ukraine is moderately exposed to environmental risks. These include
physical climate risks, carbon transition and the weak preservation
of natural capital, reflected in its low agriculture yields despite
its abundance of very fertile black soil, which explains its E-3
issuer profile score. Its exposure to physical climate risk is
exacerbated by the importance of the agricultural sector (both in
terms of economic contribution and employment), which makes the
country's exports vulnerable to climate change and adverse weather
events. Ukraine's exposure to carbon transition comes from the fact
that transit of gas from Russia to Europe via Ukraine provides a
valuable source of foreign-exchange revenue.

Exposure to social risks is highly negative (S-4 issuer profile
score) and reflects unfavourable demographics and risks related to
labour and income, with relatively high youth unemployment, as well
as weak health outcomes, and this is despite favourable educational
attainment. A persistent demographic drag will likely constrain
Ukraine's scope for strengthening its economic competitiveness. In
addition, the on-going military conflict and the dislocation of
large parts of the population this entails increases risks around
the health and safety and access to basic services of the
population as well as the access to housing.

Ukraine has a very highly negative governance profile score (G-5
issuer profile), reflecting weaknesses in the rule of law and
widespread corruption, which hinders the business environment and
disrupts access to concessional financing, as well as a track
record of sovereign defaults.

GDP per capita (PPP basis, US$): 13,129 (2020 Actual) (also known
as Per Capita Income)

Real GDP growth (% change): -3.8% (2020 Actual) (also known as GDP
Growth)

Inflation Rate (CPI, % change Dec/Dec): 5% (2020 Actual)

Gen. Gov. Financial Balance/GDP: -5.7% (2020 Actual) (also known as
Fiscal Balance)

Current Account Balance/GDP: 3.4% (2020 Actual) (also known as
External Balance)

External debt/GDP: 80.8% (2020 Actual)

Economic resiliency: b3

Default history: At least one default event (on bonds and/or loans)
has been recorded since 1983.

On March 3, 2022, a rating committee was called to discuss the
rating of Ukraine, Government of. The main points raised during the
discussion were: The issuer's economic fundamentals, including its
economic strength, have materially decreased. The issuer's
institutions and governance strength have not materially changed.
The issuer's fiscal or financial strength, including its debt
profile, has materially decreased. The issuer's susceptibility to
event risks has very materially increased.

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OF UKRAINE'S RATINGS

Given the review for downgrade, an upgrade of Ukraine's ratings is
remote.

Ukraine's Caa2 ratings would likely be confirmed at their current
level if the armed invasion is brought to an end relatively
swiftly, containing the overall damage from the military conflict
on Ukraine's economic and fiscal strength and leaving Moody's
confident that the government will remain able and willing to
continue to honour its debt repayment obligations. The provision
and disbursement of additional international financial support
which helps to shore up the country's financing position and limit
acute government liquidity and external risks would be a key factor
supporting the confirmation of the ratings at the Caa2 level.

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO A DOWNGRADE OF UKRAINE'S RATINGS

A prolongation, further intensification and further geographic
expansion of the military invasion, resulting in very significant
additional damage to Ukraine's economic strength beyond Moody's
current expectations, would put downward pressure on the ratings. A
disruption of Ukraine´s existing institutions and governance setup
would also exert negative credit pressure. Ukraine's ratings could
also be downgraded if international financial support proved
insufficient to effectively mitigate mounting liquidity risks.

The publication of this rating action deviates from the previously
scheduled release dates in the UK sovereign calendar published on
www.moodys.com. This action was prompted by the intensification of
Russia's military assault in Ukraine.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was Sovereign
Ratings Methodology published in November 2019.


VF UKRAINE: S&P Lowers ICR to 'B-' After Sovereign Downgrade
------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings lowered its long-term issuer credit and issue
ratings on PrJSC VF Ukraine to 'B-' from 'B' and placed them on
CreditWatch with negative implications. S&P also revised down VF
Ukraine's stand-alone credit profile (SACP) to 'b+' from 'bb-'.

On Feb. 26, 2022, S&P lowered its sovereign ratings on Ukraine to
'B-' from 'B' and placed them on CreditWatch with negative
implications.

S&P also lowered its country risk assessment for Ukraine because
Russia's military assault poses risks to Ukraine's economic growth
and financial stability.

The CreditWatch negative mirrors that on Ukraine and reflects the
multiple risks to Ukraine's economy and financial and political
stability stemming from Russia's military assault.

The rating actions follow the lowering of S&P's sovereign credit
rating on Ukraine as well as S&P's recent country risk revision to
Ukraine to very high, from high.

S&P said, "Our issuer credit rating on VF Ukraine is capped at the
level of the 'B-' transfer and convertibility (T&C) assessment on
Ukraine. This reflects our view of the likelihood that the
Ukrainian government would restrict access to foreign exchange
liquidity for Ukrainian companies. As VF Ukraine is a nonexport
company and all its revenue comes from Ukraine, we cap our rating
at 'B-'.

"Our base case on VF Ukraine is subject to the uncertainties driven
by Russia's military assault on Ukraine.To date there has not been
any material damage to VF Ukraine's telecommunications
infrastructure nor any material disruptions to its operations. We
also understand that Ukraine's local currency depreciation against
the dollar has been relatively modest so far at less than 10%. We
note, however, risks to liquidity that could stem from excessive
foreign exchange volatility given that all the company's debt is in
hard currency while its bond documentation includes a maintenance
covenant set at 2.5x net debt to EBITDA (its reported leverage was
1.0x as of third-quarter 2021).

"We base the 'b+' SACP on VF Ukraine's status as the No. 2 provider
of mobile telecom services in its domestic market, its increasing
average revenue per unit, high profitability, and strong free cash
flow conversion.The SACP is constrained, however, by the very high
country risk, regulatory and foreign exchange risk, and the
company's limited scale and diversification."

S&P Global Ratings acknowledges a high degree of uncertainty about
the extent, outcome, and consequences of Russia's military
intervention in Ukraine.

Irrespective of the duration of military hostilities, sanctions and
related political risks are likely to remain in place for some
time. Potential effects could include dislocated commodities
markets -- notably for oil and gas -- supply chain disruptions,
inflationary pressures, weaker growth, and capital market
volatility. As the situation evolves, S&P will update its
assumptions and estimates accordingly.

The CreditWatch negative mirrors that on Ukraine and reflects the
multiple risks to Ukraine's economy and financial and political
stability stemming from Russia's military assault. S&P expects to
resolve the CreditWatch following the resolution of the CreditWatch
on the sovereign, which is expected in the next 90 days.

ESG credit indicators: E-2, S-2, G-4




===========================
U N I T E D   K I N G D O M
===========================

BLUE CO: Creditors Still Waiting for Payouts
--------------------------------------------
John Hyde at The Law Society Gazette reports that dozens of
creditors left out of pocket with the collapse of a City firm are
still waiting for a payout more than three years after the business
went into administration.

According to The Law Society Gazette, a progress report by
liquidators handling the affairs of Blue Co London LLP (formerly
Ince & Co LLP) has revealed that 44 claims have been received from
unsecured creditors, worth a total of GBP41.7 million.

This group was previously told that a dividend would be paid by
July 20, 2021, but the report states this was not possible because
of outstanding queries over the value of "substantial" claims
received by the joint liquidators, The Law Society Gazette
discloses.  Those handling the liquidation say they will "shortly"
be able to issue a further notice of intended dividend, The Law
Society Gazette notes.

Maritime specialist Ince & Co LLP went into administration at the
end of 2018 and was immediately acquired by listed firm Gordon
Dadds, The Law Society Gazette recounts.  This firm subsequently
rebranded its legal business The Ince Group from May 2019, The Law
Society Gazette states.

Joint liquidators from insolvency specialist Quantuma were
appointed in December 2020, having previously acted as joint
administrators, The Law Society Gazette relates.

According to The Law Society Gazette, the report notes that in
total, the joint administrators drew GBP561,423 in fees and
expenses, while the joint liquidators have so far drawn time costs
coming to GBP209,723.

It had been estimated that legal fees for the liquidation period
would come to GBP5,000, but this figure has ballooned to almost
GBP340,000 because of proceedings issued in France and the
substantive costs incurred arriving at settlements with former Ince
partners regarding their overdrawn loan accounts, The Law Society
Gazette discloses.  Solicitor fees of around GBP315,000 have been
agreed with Pinsent Masons, with a further GBP23,375 spent on
counsel fees, according to The Law Society Gazette.

All of which continues to eat into the pot available to creditors
from the remnants of the Ince & Co business, The Law Society
Gazette states.  The final administrators' report from December
2020 stated that funds of GBP2.8 million were held at the time,
with the remaining debtor ledger coming to GBP409,190, The Law
Society Gazette notes.


BULB: Rescue Costs Expected to Soar as Gas Prices Rocket
--------------------------------------------------------
Proactive reports that Bulb, the collapsed energy company, could
end up costing double initial estimates to rescue due to the impact
of the Ukraine war on gas prices.

According to Proactive, reports suggest government officials
predicted the bail-out would cost GBP1.7 billion when the firm went
into administration in November, but that estimate has now risen to
GBP3 billion as gas prices have rocketed again.

Bulb was the largest independent energy supplier to fail due to the
pressure of a price cap and soaring wholesale gas prices with
around 1.7 million customers when the administrator was called in,
Proactive discloses.

It still has around 1.5 million according to Sky News, which
reported that costs are soaring because the government decided that
the administrator, Teneo Restructuring, could not hedge the cost of
gas, Proactive notes.

UK gas prices currently are around ten times the level of a year
ago with concerns over supplies from Russia sending the price
rocketing again recently, Proactive states.

According to Proactive, a spokesperson for the Department for
Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy told Sky: "The Special
Administrator of Bulb is obligated to keep costs of the
administration process as low as possible, and we continue to
engage closely with them throughout to ensure maximum value for
money for taxpayers."

Bulb's collapse was considered too big for regulator Ofgem's
Supplier of Last Resort scheme that sees other suppliers bid for a
failed group's customer base, so it was placed into a rare kind of
administration known as a SAR or special administration regime,
Proactive relays.


CONSORT HEALTHCARE: Moody's Lowers Rating on GBP93.3MM Bonds to B3
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded to B3 from Ba2 the
underlying and backed ratings for the GBP93.3 million index-linked
guaranteed senior secured bonds due 2041 (the "Bonds") issued by
Consort Healthcare (Tameside) plc ("ProjectCo") and placed the
ratings on review for downgrade. The outlook has been changed to
ratings under review from negative.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating action reflects the protracted and critical nature of
negotiations between ProjectCo and the Tameside and Glossop
Integrated Care NHS Foundation Trust (the "Trust") in attempting to
reach a commercial settlement over defects which are causing both
very significant deductions from the monthly Unitary Payment ("UP")
and the award of very high levels of service failure points by the
Trust. Deductions began in the November 2020 UP, representing
performance in September 2020, and following the Trust bringing in
an independent third-party consultancy, P2G LLP, to monitor the
project.

ProjectCo and the Trust have entered into several short-term
Standstill Agreements since then, under which deductions accrue but
are not withheld from the UP; the latest of which expired on
January 21, 2022. In February 2022, the Trust requested that the
parties move to formal adjudication under the Dispute Resolution
Procedure ("DRP") in the Project Agreement and, as no standstill
was currently in effect, withheld the entirety of the February UP.

These actions represent a significant escalation between ProjectCo
and the Trust, and increased financial pressure on ProjectCo. The
rating agency forecasts that ProjectCo will be able to make its
March 31, 2022 debt service obligations of GBP2.7 million if it
receives the March UP, but would be required to utilise the Debt
Service Reserve Account ("DSRA") if this payment is also withheld.
If the Trust continues to withhold monthly payments beyond March
2022, then the point will soon be reached where Project Co will not
be unable to make operational payments, without drawing on reserves
which would require the consent of the security trustee, or without
other sources of funding.

If the parties proceed to adjudication, which will also involve
construction contractor Balfour Beatty, Moody's understands a
further Standstill Agreement may be entered into, which could
protect ProjectCo from further UP cash deductions. However, it is
unclear whether the Trust would seek to accrue the deductions, to
apply at a later date.

If the Trust is successful in adjudication, the accrued deductions
would likely crystalise against ProjectCo. The rating agency
estimates that this may be up to GBP14 million, depending on if
accrued deductions are capped at the monthly UP amount and if the
GBP1.2 million of cash deductions made by the Trust and then
subsequently paid to ProjectCo, is required to be returned. The
Trust had previously paid this GBP1.2 million to ProjectCo on a
without prejudice basis so it could meet its September 2021 debt
service obligations without needing to utilise its DSRA.

Moody's understands that the parties have agreed to discuss the
potential of spreading any settlement amount, following
adjudication, across the remainder of the concession period, being
approximately 19.5 years.

Based on the quantum of SFPs awarded, the Trust retains the right
to terminate the Project Agreement with ProjectCo. However, Moody's
understands that the Trust has not begun any formal termination
proceedings.

The review for downgrade reflects short-term uncertainty over
whether the March 2022 UP and subsequent UPs will be withheld by
the Trust and the ability of ProjectCo to make operational payments
and meet its September 2022 debt service obligations.

The Bonds benefit from an unconditional and irrevocable guarantee
of scheduled principal and interest from Ambac Assurance UK Limited
(Ambac). However, on April 7, 2011, Moody's ratings on Ambac were
withdrawn and accordingly the backed rating reflects the rating of
the Project on a stand-alone basis.

Consort Healthcare (Tameside) plc is a special purpose company that
in September 2007 signed a PA with the then Tameside and Glossop
Acute Services NHS Trust to redevelop the existing Tameside General
Hospital site in Ashton-under-Lyne, Greater Manchester and to
provide certain hard FM services until August 2041.

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS

Given the review for downgrade, Moody's currently does not envisage
any upward rating pressure. The ratings could be confirmed if: (1)
ProjectCo can meet its March 2022 debt service obligation without
the need to draw on reserves and UP receipts resume from the Trust;
(2) the outcome of adjudication is significantly better than
Moody's base case, either through a lower quantum or a profile
which limits the financial pressure on ProjectCo; and (3) ongoing
deductions are curtailed through extended standstills or by
agreement between the parties.

Conversely, Moody's could downgrade the ratings if: (1) March 2022
debt service obligations cannot be met through cashflow alone; (2)
the outcome of adjudication is applied in a way that places
additional financial pressure on ProjectCo; (3) high levels of
deductions continue while the adjudication process is underway; or
(4) the Trust begins formal termination procedures.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was Operational
Privately Financed Public Infrastructure (PFI/PPP/P3) Projects
Methodology published in June 2021.


EG GROUP: Fitch Alters Outlook on 'B-' LongTerm IDR to Positive
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has revised the Outlook on EG Group Limited's (EG)
Long-Term Issuer Default Rating (IDR) to Positive from Stable, and
affirmed the Long-Term IDR at 'B-'. Fitch has also affirmed EG's
senior secured instrument ratings at 'B'/'RR3' and second-lien
instrument ratings at 'CCC'/'RR6'.

The Positive Outlook reflects the enhanced scale, diversification
and increased earnings as synergies from prior large acquisitions
have materialised. This results in expected deleveraging
capabilities below 8.0x on a funds from operations (FFO)-basis, or
below 7.0x measured as lease-adjusted debt/EBITDAR over the next
12-18 months.

The 'B-' IDR continues to reflect high leverage following a large
number of successive, mainly debt-funded, acquisitions although
Fitch now sees execution risks receding. Fitch's forecasts
incorporate normalisation of fuel gross margin and further recovery
in volumes. Fitch expects continued delivery of synergies and
successful integration of recently acquired businesses.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Leverage Remains High: Fitch forecasts FFO adjusted gross leverage
to remain high at about 8.0x in 2022 (versus 8.6x in 2021). The
Positive Outlook reflects Fitch's view of potential for
deleveraging towards 7.5x over the rating horizon. This is subject
to EG balancing its appetite for further expansion with
deleveraging towards an IPO with the management's medium-term
target of 4.0x-4.5x net debt/EBITDA. Foreign-currency movements of
about USD0.4 billion have helped offset about USD1 billion gross
debt raised during 2021.

Large Scale Achieved: EG has achieved a scale, with its EBITDAR
exceeding USD1.5 billion in 2021, which maps to a 'bbb' rating
category. New auditors provided unqualified audit opinion to 2020
results without material restatements, confirming the material step
up in EBITDA from underlying trading, acquired businesses and
delivery of synergies. Fitch has revised the ESG Relevance Score
for Financial Transparency to '3' from '4', reflecting that this no
longer has a negative impact on the credit rating. Solid
performance in 2021 captures material growth of foodservice segment
and stabilised margin for the grocery segment, along with continued
recovery in fuel volumes, supported by strong fuel margin.

Profitability Growth: Fitch forecasts an increase in EBITDA to
USD1.6 billion in 2023. Fitch expects that inflationary cost
pressures relating to goods, energy and labour cost are passed on
to consumers, perhaps with some lag, if not offset by EG. Fitch
conservatively applies a 10% haircut to synergies, which is smaller
than under previous forecasts, reflecting the management's record
of synergy delivery. Fitch's EBITDA is after rental costs (USD298
million in 2021), in line with Fitch's criteria.

Fitch forecasts broadly neutral free cash flow (FCF) post deferred
tax payments (USD76 million in 2022) and USD600 million capex, with
the FCF margin trending towards 1% thereafter, enabling some
deleveraging.

Fuel Margin to Normalise: Fitch expects some downward pressure on
fuel gross margin, considering the current geo-political tensions
potentially leading to a more structural rising oil price
environment. Fitch's forecasts assume that gross margin will remain
above pre-pandemic levels (7cpl-8cpl in 2018-2019), but below
average during 2020-2021. Fuel contributed 47% to gross profit in
2021.

Expanding Foodservice: EG has materially increased its exposure to
standalone foodservice sites (579 at end-2021) in the UK via its
acquisitions of Leon, Cooplands and KFC sites from Amsric and
Herbert Group. This may have different demand dynamics to
foodservice outlets on petrol filling stations (PFS) depending on
the quality of location and price point. Group-wide gross profit
from foodservice doubled in 2021. High-margin foodservice and
grocery segments contribute over 75% of gross profit in the UK &
Ireland.

Grocery segment contributes more than half of gross profit in the
US, and the increase in grocery margin helped offset slight
reduction in gross profits from fuel in 2021. Both continental
Europe and Australia are less diversified into non-fuel
activities.

Leading Global PFS Operator: EG's rating remains fundamentally
supported by EG's scale, diversification by product or services and
by region, and its positions in western Europe, the US and
Australia as a leading PFS and convenience retail/foodservice
operator, following a large number of acquisitions since 2018.
Increased purchasing scale allows EG to benefit from a stronger
negotiating position on fuel contracts with oil majors.

DERIVATION SUMMARY

The majority of EG's business is broadly comparable to that of
other peers that Fitch covers in its food/non-food retail rating
and credit-opinion portfolios, although the "company-owned
company-operated" model should provide more flexibility and
profitability for EG.

EG can be compared to UK's motorway services group Moto Ventures
Limited (Moto; WD) and, to a lesser extent, to emerging-markets oil
product storage/distributor/PFS vertically integrated operators
such as Puma Energy Holdings Pte. Ltd (BB-/Stable) and Vivo Energy
Plc (BB+/Stable).

EG is materially larger and more geographically diversified with
exposure to 10 markets, including the US, Australia and Western
European countries, against Moto's concentration in the UK,
although strategically positioned in more protected motorway
locations. Moto benefits from robust business model amid its
long-dated infrastructure asset base and less-discretionary nature
of motorway customers, reflected in a higher EBITDAR margin than
for EG. However, during the pandemic, traffic decline was more
pronounced on motorways, thus it temporarily had a more negative
impact on Moto's fuel volumes and retail-segment revenue than on
EG's. Both companies invest funds to increase their exposure to the
higher-margin convenience and foodservice operations.

Both EG and Moto have pursued aggressive financial policies leading
to high leverage. EG has followed an aggressive debt-funded M&A
strategy that relies on synergy realisation to ensure long-term
deleveraging. For Moto, this was reflected in regular dividend
distributions pre-pandemic, which were partly covered by FCF.

KEY ASSUMPTIONS

Fitch's key assumptions within its rating case for the issuer
include:

-- Annual fuel volumes to increase towards 21-22 billion litres
    in FY22 and FY23;

-- Fuel margin ahead of pre-pandemic level, but below the average
    during 2020-2021;

-- Total gross profit evenly split between fuel and non-fuel;

-- Working capital to remain structurally negative over the
    rating horizon reflecting the unwind of deferred taxes (USD550
    million);

-- Capex to increase by about USD600 million per annum;

-- No further M&A currently factored in the next four years.
    However, if further acquisitions materialise, Fitch would
    assess their impact based on their scale, funding, multiples
    paid and how accretive to earnings they are, including
    synergies.

Fitch's Key Recovery Rating Assumptions:

According to Fitch's bespoke recovery analysis, higher recoveries
would be realised by preserving the business model using a
going-concern (GC) approach, reflecting EG's structurally
cash-generative business. This is despite EG's reasonable asset
backing in the form of EG's sites, but real value to creditors is
embedded in such assets remaining operational rather than
liquidated.

EG's GC EBITDA assumption incorporates recent acquisitions,
including the acquisition of the OMV filling station business in
Germany that is still to be finalised, but excludes the cancelled
Asda forecourts business purchase. The GC EBITDA estimate of
USD1.175 million reflects Fitch's view of a sustainable,
post-reorganisation EBITDA level upon which Fitch bases the
enterprise valuation. The assumption also reflects corrective
measures taken in the reorganisation to offset the adverse
conditions that triggered default such as cost-cutting efforts or a
material business repositioning.

In a distressed scenario, Fitch believes that a 5.5x multiple
reflects a conservative view of the weighted average value of EG's
portfolio. As per its criteria, Fitch assumes EG's revolving credit
facility (RCF) and local-currency debt facilities to be fully drawn
and takes 10% off the enterprise value to account for
administrative claims.

Our waterfall analysis generated a ranked recovery for the senior
secured facilities, in the 'RR3' band, indicating a 'B' instrument
rating, a one-notch uplift from the IDR. The waterfall analysis
output percentage on current metrics and assumptions is 57% (up
from 55% previously). The second-lien debt instrument remains in
the 'RR6' band and has an instrument rating at 'CCC', two notches
below the IDR.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

-- A continued recovery following pandemic-related disruptions
    and successful integration of acquired businesses, increasing
    EBITDA towards USD1.6 billion along with expanding margins;

-- Increased commitment to a financial policy, with FFO lease
    adjusted gross leverage below 8.0x and/or total adjusted
    debt/EBITDAR declining to 7.0x or below on a sustained basis;

-- FFO fixed-charge coverage or EBITDAR/Interest + Rents at 2.0x
    or higher on a sustained basis;

-- Positive FCF on a sustained basis.

Factor that could, individually or collectively, lead to the
Stabilisation of Outlook:

-- Stagnating or slightly declining EBITDA along with declining
    margins, in tandem with FFO lease-adjusted gross leverage
    remaining above 8.5x or total adjusted debt/EBITDAR above
    7.5x.

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

-- Negative impact from rising oil prices and/or deterioration in
    other segments leading to material EBITDA margin attrition
    after including the newly acquired businesses;

-- FFO lease-adjusted leverage increasing to/above 9.5x or total
    adjusted debt/EBITDAR increasing to/above 8.5x, both on a
    sustained basis;

-- FFO fixed-charge coverage or EBITDAR/Interest + Rents
    sustainably below 1.5x, along with deteriorating liquidity;

-- Neutral-to-negative FCF on a sustained basis.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Non-Financial Corporate
issuers have a best-case rating upgrade scenario (defined as the
99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a positive
direction) of three notches over a three-year rating horizon; and a
worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the 99th
percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative direction)
of four notches over three years. The complete span of best- and
worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating categories ranges
from 'AAA' to 'D'. Best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings are
based on historical performance.

LIQUIDITY AND DEBT STRUCTURE

Satisfactory Liquidity: Total available liquidity, including
available cash balances, was about USD1.1 billion at end-2021
(excluding Fitch's assumed restricted cash of USD150 million).
Available liquidity will reduce once EG pays USD484 million for the
OMV acquisition in 1H22. Fitch expects about USD75 million outflow
in 2022 against a total of USD550 million outstanding deferred
taxes as at end-2021, which will unwind through to 2027.

Our forecasts envisage that FCF generation will be neutral to
positive, even after the tax deferral payments. Fitch views the
need to meaningfully utilise the RCF for operations as low. A
portion of the RCF (about USD100 million) matures in 2022, with the
remainder (nearly USD500 million) maturing in 2024. The bulk of
debt maturities are in 2025-2026.

ESG Considerations

Fitch has revised the ESG Relevance Score for Financial
Transparency to '3' from '4', compared to the previous review,
reflecting that this no longer has a negative impact on the credit
rating. Unless otherwise disclosed in this section, the highest
level of ESG credit relevance is a score of '3'. This means ESG
issues are credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on
the entity, either due to their nature or the way in which they are
being managed by the entity.

ISSUER PROFILE

EG Group Limited is a leading global PFS, convenience and
foodservice operator.


KERNEL HOLDING: S&P Lowers ICR to 'B-', On Watch Negative
---------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings lowered its issuer credit rating on
Ukraine-based Kernel Holding and its issue rating on its senior
unsecured notes to 'B-' from 'B+', and placed them on CreditWatch
with negative implications.

The CreditWatch negative placement mirrors that on the sovereign
and reflects the uncertainty that the conflict bears on Ukraine's
economy and financial and agricultural export capacity, and
therefore that of Kernel.

S&P said, "We think Kernel's creditworthiness has deteriorated
substantially following the outbreak of conflict in Ukraine. We
have revised our assessment of the company's business risk to
vulnerable from weak, reflecting our recent revision of the country
risk assessment on Ukraine to very high from high previously. Our
business risk assessment on Kernel is very sensitive to changes in
our country risk assessment for Ukraine because all its
revenue-generating physical assets are located in the country. The
ongoing conflict in Ukraine poses risks to Ukraine's economic
growth, financial stability, external position, and public
finances. Ukraine now faces the possibility of disruption to key
economic sectors, such as its significant agricultural exports and
gas pipeline network. As a result of the conflict, we now align our
ratings on Ukraine with those of the sovereign, reflecting the
severe disruption on the company's operations as it temporarily
suspended its grain export and oilseed processing operations in the
country. Moreover, we see material operational risks in 2022
stemming from high disruption in Kernel's supply chain, production,
and export capabilities, with particularly poor harvesting
conditions in Ukraine as key planting takes place over the next few
weeks, which could hamper the company's earnings and cash flows
over the next 12 months."

S&P's ratings on Kernel continue to reflect the company's adequate
liquidity assessment. As of Sept. 30, 2021, the company had about
$533.8 million of cash on balance sheet. In December, Kernel repaid
the remaining $212.8 million under its January 2022 Eurobond and it
does not face large long-term debt maturities until October 2024,
when its $300 million 6.5% fixed-rate coupon notes are due. S&P
notes that the military conflict with Russia took place in the
second half of the fiscal year ending June 30, 2022 (FY2022), which
is normally past the working capital-intense period. Kernel holds
sizable amounts of its cash holdings abroad in stable Western
jurisdictions such as Austria, France, the Netherlands, and
Switzerland, which has historically supported its ratings above the
sovereign rating on Ukraine. Moreover, 97% of the company's revenue
is denominated in hard currency (mainly the U.S. dollar) due to the
export-led business model. That said, we see the potential from the
short-term disruption of operations and uncertainty around asset
conditions in the affected parts of Ukraine as key reasons for
aligning the issuer credit rating on Kernel with the sovereign
rating on Ukraine.

S&P Global Ratings acknowledges a high degree of uncertainty about
the extent, outcome, and consequences of the military conflict
between Russia and Ukraine.

Irrespective of the duration of military hostilities, sanctions and
related political risks are likely to remain in place for some
time. Potential effects could include dislocated commodities
markets -- notably for oil and gas -- supply chain disruptions,
inflationary pressures, weaker growth, and capital market
volatility. As the situation evolves, S&P will update its
assumptions and estimates accordingly. See our macroeconomic and
credit updates here: Russia-Ukraine Macro, Market, & Credit Risks.
Note that the timing of publication for rating decisions on
European issuers is subject to European regulatory requirements.

CreditWatch

S&P said, "The CreditWatch placement of our ratings on Kernel and
its senior unsecured notes mirrors that on the sovereign rating on
Ukraine, which speaks to the multiple risks to Ukraine's economy,
balance of payments, public finances, and financial and political
stability stemming from the conflict. We could lower our ratings on
Kernel if we lowered our foreign currency long-term sovereign
credit rating on Ukraine. This could happen should the uncertainty
posed by the conflict lead to a drain on Ukraine's external
liquidity or a rise in contingent liabilities from its commercial
banking system. The rating might also come under pressure if we
expected the military actions would prevent the Ukrainian
authorities from servicing commercial debt.

"On a stand-alone basis, downward rating pressure on Kernel could
occur if there is continued disruption on supply-chain, production
and if current trade flow restrictions prolong, such that we see
clear indications of a rapid and sharp deterioration in the
company's liquidity position. We aim to resolve the CreditWatch
within 90 days."


MCCOLL'S RETAIL: PayPoint Resumes Services for Clients, Customers
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Alice Leader at The Grocer reports that PayPoint is back up and
running at all McColl's stores.

It comes after PayPoint suspended bill payment services in the
majority of McColl's stores in a bid "to ensure the continuity of
its services for its clients and customers", The Grocer relates.

According to The Grocer, at the time, a PayPoint spokesman said:
"Further to McColl's Retail Group's statement on February 28,
PayPoint has implemented measures to ensure the continuity of its
services for its clients and customers.

"After discussions with the McColl's leadership team, PayPoint can
confirm it has suspended bill payment services in the majority of
McColl's sites until further notice."

The move was in response to McColl's announcing it was in talks
with lenders to prevent a collapse into administration, The Grocer
notes.

As reported by the Troubled Company Reporter-Europe on Feb. 28,
2022, Sky News disclosed that McColl's Retail Group, one of
Britain's biggest convenience store chains, is racing to secure new
funding to stave off a collapse that could put thousands of jobs at
risk.  Sky News has learnt that McColl's is working with advisers
on attempts to find a buyer or third parties willing to inject
fresh capital into the business.  According to Sky News, city
sources said this weekend that McColl's had a matter of weeks to
secure new funding, with millions of pounds of its bank debt being
sold to hedge funds and few obvious options to guarantee its
future.  If McColl's fails to secure new funding and is forced into
administration, it would be the largest insolvency in the UK retail
sector by the size of the workforce since the collapse of Edinburgh
Woollen Mill Group in 2020, Sky News noted.

McColl's has endured torrid trading conditions and now has a market
capitalisation of less than GBP20 million, Sky News disclosed.  The
company carries debts of almost GBP170 million, with a lending
syndicate that includes Barclays, HSBC, NatWest Group and Santander
UK, according to Sky News.


MIDAS GROUP: Collapse to Hit Subcontractors, Ex-Directors Warn
--------------------------------------------------------------
Tiya Thomas-Alexander at Construction News reports that four former
directors of Midas Group, which went into administration last
month, have expressed concerns about the impact on its network of
subcontractors.

The construction and property services firm with a turnover of
GBP290 million went down owing creditors GBP22.1 million, and its
administrators said that unsecured creditors were not unlikely to
get paid, Construction News relates.

Len Lewis, Tony Davis, Frank Heal and Richard Smith, who were
directors at the firm over 20 years ago said they were concerned
about the supply chain effects, Construction News relays, citing
Business Live.

According to Construction News, in a joint statement they said: "In
recent weeks, we have been greatly saddened to see our former
company fall catastrophically into administration and more recently
to be made sickeningly aware of the enormous indebtedness which it
is predicted will result in the unsecured creditors, the great
majority of whom are subcontractors, recovering nothing of what
they are owed."

The former directors also said that the collapse of Midas and the
hit to the supply chain demonstrated how the construction industry
was failing its subcontractors, Construction News notes.

Administrators from Teneo Financial Advisory published a report
with details about the cash owed by Midas, listing around 2,000
businesses affected by the administration.

While unsecured creditors would most likely lose their money, the
administrators said the secured creditor Lloyds Bank would be paid
what it was owed "in its entirety", which was around GBP95,000,
Construction News discloses.  Preferential creditors, other than
those owed money by the parent company Midas Group Ltd, were also
unlikely to recover money from the firm in administration,
Construction News states.

The company, as cited by Construction News, said it had been
affected by "the Covid pandemic, ongoing shortages of materials and
labour, and significant cost inflation".  In the administration
process, 303 jobs were lost, while a sale of the property services
group Mi-space saved 46 jobs, according to Construction News.

Last year, the company reported a GBP2 million pre-tax loss on
revenue of GBP291.3 million, its first loss in 40 years,
Construction News recounts.


STANLINGTON NO. 2: Moody's Assigns (P)B3 Rating to Class F Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to Notes
issued by Stanlington No. 2 PLC:

GBP[]M Class A Mortgage Backed Floating Rate Notes due June 2045,
Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

GBP[]M Class B Mortgage Backed Floating Rate Notes due June 2045,
Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

GBP[]M Class C Mortgage Backed Floating Rate Notes due June 2045,
Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

GBP[]M Class D Mortgage Backed Floating Rate Notes due June 2045,
Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

GBP[]M Class E Mortgage Backed Floating Rate Notes due June 2045,
Assigned (P)Ba2 (sf)

GBP[]M Class F Mortgage Backed Floating Rate Notes due June 2045,
Assigned (P)B3 (sf)

Moody's has not assigned a rating to the GBP[]M Class Z1 Mortgage
Backed Notes due June 2045, to the GBP[]M Class Z2 Mortgage Backed
Notes due June 2045 and to the GBP[]M Class X Mortgage Backed
Floating Rate Notes due June 2045.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The Notes are backed by a pool of UK residential non-conforming and
buy-to-let (BTL) mortgage loans originated by multiple lenders:
GMAC-RFC Limited (currently known as Paratus AMC Limited,
"Paratus", NR), Bluestone Mortgages Limited (formerly known as
Basinghall Finance Limited and Basinghall Finance PLC, NR), First
Alliance Mortgage Company Limited (NR), Victoria Mortgage Funding
Limited (NR) and Paratus. 49.7% of the portfolio was previously
securitized in Stanlington No. 1 PLC and 49.9% in Ciel No 1. PLC.

The portfolio of assets amount to approximately GBP 295 million as
of November 30, 2021 pool cutoff date. The general reserve fund
will be funded to 1% of the Class A to Class Z1 Notes' principal
balance at closing. The general reserve fund has two sub-ledgers,
an amortising liquidity reserve sized at 1.0% of Class A and B
Notes' outstanding principal balance, and a credit reserve sized at
1.0% of Class A to Class Z1 Notes' principal balance at closing
less any amounts in the liquidity reserve fund. The total credit
enhancement for the Class A Notes will be 14% .

The ratings are primarily based on the credit quality of the
portfolio, the structural features of the transaction and its legal
integrity.

According to Moody's, the transaction benefits from various credit
strengths such as: (i) the 14.5 years seasoning of the pool is
significantly higher than the average of UK RMBS transactions and
over twelve years of the portfolio historical data is available;
(ii) the portfolio has a low WA current loan-to-indexed value ratio
of 57.5% as calculated by Moody's; (iii) no further loan advances
or product switches are allowed; and (iv) a liquidity and credit
reserve are available as described above.

However, Moody's notes that the transaction features some credit
challenges such as: (i) high arrears, predominantly in the
Stanlingon No. 1 legacy portfolio, reflect the non-conforming
nature of the borrowers and have resulted in capitalised fees
and/or arrears of 2.2% of the current pool balance for over 1,400
loans; (ii) 94% of the loans have bullet repayments; (iii) the
transaction has relatively low excess spread, given WA interest of
the pool is 2.7%; (iv) a basis mismatch between the interest rates
received on the loans and the interest rates payable on the notes;
and (v) an unrated servicer (Paratus). Various mitigants have been
included in the transaction structure such as a back-up servicer
facilitator (Intertrust Management Limited, NR) which is obliged to
appoint a back-up servicer if necessary. The portfolio
characteristics and the absence of a basis swap has been considered
in Moody's cashflow analysis.

Moody's determined the portfolio lifetime expected loss of 2.7% and
MILAN credit enhancement ("MILAN CE") of 14% related to borrower
receivables. The expected loss captures Moody's expectations of
performance considering the current economic outlook, while the
MILAN CE captures the loss Moody's expect the portfolio to suffer
in the event of a severe recession scenario. Expected defaults and
MILAN CE are parameters used by Moody's to calibrate its lognormal
portfolio loss distribution curve and to associate a probability
with each potential future loss scenario in the ABSROM cash flow
model to rate RMBS.

Portfolio expected loss of 2.7%: This is based on Moody's
assessment of the lifetime loss expectation for the pool taking
into account: (i) the collateral performance of the loans to date,
as observed in the previously securitised portfolios; (ii) the
current macroeconomic environment in the UK and the impact of
future interest rate rises on the performance of the mortgage
loans; and (iii) the fact that 12.3% of the pool was in arrears as
of the pool cutoff date, of which 5.3% is more than 90 days in
arrears.

MILAN CE of 14%: This follows Moody's assessment of the
loan-by-loan information taking into account the following key
drivers: (i) the collateral performance of the underlying loans to
date as described above; (ii) the weighted average current
loan-to-value of 83.5%; (iii) the average seasoning of the pool of
14.5 years, which is significantly higher than the UK RMBS sector;
(iv) interest-only loans comprise 94% of the pool; and (v) the fact
that for 44% of the pool proof of income has either not been
verified or the borrower has self-certified their income.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating RMBS Using the MILAN Framework" published in
February 2022.

The analysis undertaken by Moody's at the initial assignment of
ratings for RMBS securities may focus on aspects that become less
relevant or typically remain unchanged during the surveillance
stage.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS:

Factors that would lead to an upgrade of the ratings include: (i)
significantly better than expected performance of the pool together
with an increase in credit enhancement of Notes; or (ii) a
deleveraging of the capital structure.

Factors that would lead to a downgrade of the ratings include: (i)
increased counterparty risk leading to potential operational risk
of servicing or cash management interruptions; and (ii) economic
conditions being worse than forecast resulting in higher arrears
and losses.


SVEN CHRISTIANSEN: Enters Administration, 150 Jobs Affected
-----------------------------------------------------------
John Corser at Express & Star reports that all remaining staff at a
Black Country-based furniture manufacturer have been made redundant
after the firm entered administration.

According to Express & Star, around 150 people lost their jobs with
the sudden closure of the Sven Christiansen factory at First
Avenue, Pensnett Estate, last month.

Efforts to find a buyer for the company had been unsuccessful,
Express & Star notes.

Its working capital was negatively impacted by the Covid-19
pandemic and Brexit, Express & Star discloses.

Despite registering record customer orders, the company had built
up a considerable debt pile during the pandemic and performance was
said to have been disrupted by the implementation of new IT
systems, Express & Star states.

Diana Frangou and Glen Carter of RSM UK Restructuring Advisory were
appointed as joint administrators to Sven Christiansen on March 3,
Express & Star relates.

"The cashflow issues were such that, following the lack of a buyer
for the business as a going concern, the directors had no
alternative but to cease trading and to place the company into
administration," Express & Star quotes Ms. Frangou as saying.

Sven Christiansen had been trading for 47 years, with the majority
of its staff based in the Black Country.

All remaining furniture in its showrooms and design studio are
being sold and machinery and equipment has been sold at auction,
Express & Star discloses.



                           *********


S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Troubled Company Reporter-Europe is a daily newsletter co-
published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.
Marites O. Claro, Rousel Elaine T. Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante,
Julie Anne L. Toledo, Ivy B. Magdadaro, and Peter A. Chapman,
Editors.

Copyright 2022.  All rights reserved.  ISSN 1529-2754.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior
written permission of the publishers.

Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to
be reliable, but is not guaranteed.

The TCR Europe subscription rate is US$775 per half-year,
delivered via e-mail.  Additional e-mail subscriptions for
members of the same firm for the term of the initial subscription
or balance thereof are US$25 each.  For subscription information,
contact Peter Chapman at 215-945-7000.


                * * * End of Transmission * * *