250903.mbx

250903.mbx 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, September 3, 2025, Vol. 26, No. 176 Headlines I R E L A N D ALBACORE EURO II: Moody's Cuts Rating on EUR12MM F Notes to Caa1 BAIN CAPITAL 2025-2: Fitch Assigns B-sf Final Rating to Cl. F Notes CANYON EURO 2025-2: Fitch Assigns B-sf Final Rating on Cl. F Bonds CONTEGO CLO III: Fitch Assigns B-sf Final Rating to Cl. F-RR Notes ROCKFORD TOWER 2018-1: Fitch Assigns B-sf Rating to Cl. F-RR Bonds ROCKFORD TOWER 2021-1: Moody's Affirms B3 Rating on EUR12MM F Notes K A Z A K H S T A N EURASIAN BANK: Moody's Affirms Ba2 Deposit Rating, Outlook Now Neg. L U X E M B O U R G CULLINAN HOLDCO: Moody's Affirms 'Caa1' CFR, Outlook Stable N E T H E R L A N D S OCI NV: Moody's Downgrades CFR to Ba3, Outlook Negative P O R T U G A L ELECTRICIDADE DOS ACORES: Moody's Affirms Ba1 CFR, Outlook Stable U N I T E D K I N G D O M CRAFTWOOD INTERIORS: Bailey Ahmad Named as Joint Administrators JOLLIFFE & CO: Leonard Curtis Named as Joint Administrators MIZEN DEVELOPMENTS: Quantuma Advisory Named as Administrators S & S CONSULTING: Quantuma Advisory Named as Administrators VALENTINE CONVEYANCERS: Ensors Accountants Named as Administrators - - - - - ============= I R E L A N D ============= ALBACORE EURO II: Moody's Cuts Rating on EUR12MM F Notes to Caa1 ---------------------------------------------------------------- Moody's Ratings has taken a variety of rating actions on the following notes issued by AlbaCore Euro CLO II Designated Activity Company: EUR40,000,000 Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2034, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on May 12, 2021 Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf) EUR12,000,000 Class F Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2034, Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on May 12, 2021 Definitive Rating Assigned B3 (sf) Moody's have also affirmed the ratings on the following notes: EUR60,500,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2034, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 12, 2021 Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf) EUR155,000,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Loan due 2034 Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 12, 2021 Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf) EUR32,500,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2034, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 12, 2021 Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf) EUR28,000,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2034, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on May 12, 2021 Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf) EUR25,000,000 Class D Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2034, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on May 12, 2021 Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf) EUR19,000,000 Class E Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2034, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on May 12, 2021 Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf) AlbaCore Euro CLO II Designated Activity Company, issued in May 2021, is a collateralised loan obligation (CLO) backed by a portfolio of mostly high-yield senior secured European loans. The portfolio is managed by AlbaCore Capital LLP. The transaction's reinvestment period ended in August 2025. RATINGS RATIONALE The rating upgrade on the Class B notes is primarily a result of the transaction having reached the end of the reinvestment period in August 2025. The rating downgrade on the Class F notes is primarily a result of the deterioration over-collateralisation ratios over the past 12 months. The affirmations on the ratings on the Class A-1, A-1 Loan, A-2, C, D and E notes are primarily a result of the expected losses on the notes remaining consistent with their current rating levels, after taking into account the CLO's latest portfolio, its relevant structural features and its actual over-collateralisation ratios. The over-collateralisation ratios of the rated notes have deteriorated over the past 12 months. According to the trustee report dated July 2025[1], the Class A/B, Class C, Class D and Class E OC ratios are reported at 135.69%, 123.67%, 114.60% and 108.55% compared to July 2024[2] levels of 137.25%, 125.08%, 115.91% and 109.80%, respectively. There is no class F OC test in the transaction. The key model inputs Moody's uses in Moody's analysis, such as par, weighted average rating factor, diversity score and the weighted average recovery rate, are based on Moody's published methodologies and could differ from the trustee's reported numbers. In Moody's base case, Moody's used the following assumptions: Performing par and principal proceeds balance: EUR389.8m Defaulted Securities: EUR3.2m Diversity Score: 65 Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2905 Weighted Average Life (WAL): 4.5 years Weighted Average Spread (WAS) (before accounting for Euribor/reference rate floors): 3.72% Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 3.99% Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 43.59% The default probability derives from the credit quality of the collateral pool and Moody's expectations 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 Moody's 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 May 2024. Counterparty Exposure: The rating action took into consideration the notes' exposure to relevant counterparties, such as account bank, using the methodology "Structured Finance Counterparty Risks" published in May 2025. 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: 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. 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. 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. Recoveries higher than Moody's expectations would have a positive impact on the notes' ratings. In addition to the quantitative factors that Moody's explicitly modelled, qualitative factors are part of the rating committee's considerations. These qualitative factors include the structural protections in the transaction, its recent performance given the market environment, the legal environment, specific documentation features, the collateral manager's track record and the potential for selection bias in the portfolio. All information available to rating committees, including macroeconomic forecasts, input from Moody's other analytical groups, market factors, and judgments regarding the nature and severity of credit stress on the transactions, can influence the final rating decision. BAIN CAPITAL 2025-2: Fitch Assigns B-sf Final Rating to Cl. F Notes ------------------------------------------------------------------- Fitch Ratings has assigned Bain Capital Euro CLO 2025-2 DAC's notes final ratings, as detailed below. Entity/Debt Rating ----------- ------ Bain Capital Euro CLO 2025-2 DAC Class A Loan LT AAAsf New Rating Class A Notes XS3118861858 LT AAAsf New Rating Class B Notes XS3118863045 LT AAsf New Rating Class C Notes XS3118861932 LT Asf New Rating Class D Notes XS3118863128 LT BBB-sf New Rating Class E Notes XS3118860967 LT BB-sf New Rating Class F Notes XS3118862070 LT B-sf New Rating Class M Notes XS3118863474 LT NRsf New Rating Subordinated Notes XS3134445207 LT NRsf New Rating Transaction Summary Bain Capital Euro CLO 2025-2 DAC is a securitisation of mainly senior secured loans and secured senior bonds (at least 90%) with a component of senior unsecured, mezzanine, and second-lien loans. Net proceeds from the issuance of the notes have been used to fund an identified portfolio with a target par of EUR400 million. The portfolio is actively managed by Bain Capital Credit U.S. CLO Manager II, LP. The collateralised loan obligation (CLO) has a 4.7-year reinvestment period and an 8.5-year weighted average life (WAL) test covenant. KEY RATING DRIVERS Average Portfolio Credit Quality (Neutral): Fitch assesses the average credit quality of obligors at 'B'. The Fitch weighted average rating factor of the identified portfolio is 23.9. High Recovery Expectations (Positive): At least 90% of the portfolio comprises senior secured obligations. Fitch views the recovery prospects for these assets as more favourable than for second lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets. The Fitch weighted average recovery rate of the identified portfolio is 61%. Diversified Portfolio (Positive): The transaction has three matrix sets, corresponding to a top 10 obligor limit of 20% and two fixed-rate asset limits of 5% and 12.5%, respectively. The first matrix set corresponds to a WAL of 8.5 years at closing. The second and third have a WAL of 7.5 years and seven years, respectively, and are effective 12 months and 18 months from closing, subject to the collateral principal amount (defaulted obligation at Fitch-calculated collateral value) being at least at the reinvestment target par balance. The transaction also includes various other concentration limits, including a maximum exposure to the three largest Fitch-defined industries of 40%. These covenants ensure that the asset portfolio will not be exposed to excessive concentration. Portfolio Management (Neutral): The transaction has a 4.7-year reinvestment period and includes reinvestment criteria similar to those of other European transactions. Fitch's analysis is based on a stressed case portfolio with the aim of testing the robustness of the transaction structure against its covenants and portfolio guidelines. Cash Flow Modelling (Positive): The WAL used for the transaction's Fitch-stressed portfolio analysis was reduced by 12 months. This is to account for the strict reinvestment conditions envisaged by the transaction after its reinvestment period, which include passing the coverage tests and the Fitch 'CCC' limitation, and a WAL test covenant that gradually steps down. In Fitch's opinion, these conditions would reduce the effective risk horizon of the portfolio during stress periods. RATING SENSITIVITIES Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative Rating Action/Downgrade A 25% increase of the mean default rate (RDR) and a 25% decrease of the recovery rate (RRR) across all ratings of the identified portfolio would have no impact on the class A to C notes and class A loan, would lead to downgrades of one notch each for the class D and E notes, and to below 'B-sf' for the class F notes. Downgrades, which are based on the identified portfolio, may occur if the loss expectation is larger than assumed, due to unexpectedly high levels of defaults and portfolio deterioration. The class B to F notes each have a rating cushion of two notches, due to the better metrics and shorter life of the identified portfolio than the Fitch-stressed portfolio. There is no cushion for the class A notes and class A loan, as they are at the highest achievable rating. Should the cushion between the identified portfolio and the Fitch-stressed portfolio be eroded either due to manager trading or negative portfolio credit migration, a 25% increase of the mean RDR and a 25% decrease of the RRR across all ratings of the Fitch-stressed portfolio would lead to downgrades of up to four notches each of the class A to D notes and class A loan, and to below 'B-sf' for the class E and F notes. Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive Rating Action/Upgrade A 25% reduction of the mean RDR and a 25% increase in the RRR across all ratings of the Fitch-stressed portfolio would lead to upgrades of up to three notches for the rated notes, except for the 'AAAsf' rated notes. Upgrades during the reinvestment period, which are based on the Fitch-stressed portfolio, may occur on better-than-expected portfolio credit quality and a shorter remaining WAL test, allowing the notes to withstand larger-than-expected losses for the remaining life of the transaction. Upgrades after the end of the reinvestment period may result from stable portfolio credit quality and deleveraging, leading to higher credit enhancement and excess spread being available to cover losses in the remaining portfolio. USE OF THIRD PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G -10 Form ABS Due Diligence-15E was not provided to, or reviewed by, Fitch in relation to this rating action. DATA ADEQUACY The majority of the underlying assets or risk-presenting entities have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally Recognised Statistical Rating Organisations and/or European Securities and Markets Authority- registered rating agencies. Fitch has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio information or information on the risk-presenting entities. Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above, Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies indicates that it is adequately reliable. ESG Considerations Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores for Bain Capital Euro CLO 2025-2 DAC. In cases where Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores in connection with the credit rating of a transaction, programme, instrument or issuer, Fitch will disclose any ESG factor that is a key rating driver in the key rating drivers section of the relevant rating action commentary. CANYON EURO 2025-2: Fitch Assigns B-sf Final Rating on Cl. F Bonds ------------------------------------------------------------------ Fitch Ratings has assigned Canyon Euro CLO 2025-2 DAC final ratings, as detailed below. Entity/Debt Rating ----------- ------ Canyon Euro CLO 2025-2 DAC A XS3114402251 LT AAAsf New Rating A-1 Loan LT AAAsf New Rating A-2 Loan LT AAAsf New Rating B XS3114402335 LT AAsf New Rating C XS3114402418 LT Asf New Rating D XS3114402509 LT BBB-sf New Rating E XS3114402681 LT BB-sf New Rating F XS3114402764 LT B-sf New Rating Sub XS3114402921 LT NRsf New Rating Z XS3114402848 LT NRsf New Rating Transaction Summary Canyon Euro CLO 2025-2 DAC is a securitisation of mainly senior secured obligations (at least 90%) with a component of senior unsecured, mezzanine, second-lien loans and high-yield bonds. Note proceeds have been used to purchase a portfolio with a target par of EUR400 million. The portfolio is actively managed by Canyon CLO Advisors L.P. The CLO has a five-year reinvestment period and a nine-year weighted average life (WAL) covenant. KEY RATING DRIVERS Average Portfolio Credit Quality (Neutral): Fitch places the average credit quality of obligors at 'B'. The Fitch weighted average rating factor of the identified portfolio is 24.5. High Recovery Expectations (Positive): At least 90% of the portfolio comprises senior secured obligations. Fitch views the recovery prospects for these assets as more favourable than for second-lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets. The Fitch weighted average recovery rate of the identified portfolio is 62.4%. Diversified Asset Portfolio (Positive): The transaction includes six matrices, all corresponding to a top 10 obligor concentration limit at 20%. Two matrices are effective at closing and correspond to two fixed-rate asset limits of 5% and 12.5%, and a nine-year WAL test. The other four matrices can be selected by the manager any time from one and two years after closing and correspond to the same two fixed-rate asset limits and eight-year and seven-year WAL tests. The transaction includes various concentration limits, including the maximum exposure to the three largest (Fitch-defined) industries in the portfolio at 40%. These covenants ensure that the asset portfolio will not be exposed to excessive concentration. Portfolio Management (Neutral): The transaction has an approximately five-year reinvestment period and includes reinvestment criteria similar to those of other European transactions. Fitch's analysis is based on a stressed-case portfolio with the aim of testing the robustness of the transaction structure against its covenants and portfolio guidelines. Cash Flow Modelling (Positive): The WAL used for the transaction's stress portfolio analysis is 12 months less than the WAL test covenant at the issue date to account for the strict reinvestment conditions envisaged by the transaction after its reinvestment period. These conditions include, among others, passing the coverage tests, the Fitch 'CCC' bucket limitation test after reinvestment, as well as a WAL test covenant that gradually steps down before and after the end of the reinvestment period. Fitch believes these conditions reduce the effective risk horizon of the portfolio during the stress period. RATING SENSITIVITIES Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative Rating Action/Downgrade A 25% increase of the mean default rate (RDR) across all ratings and a 25% decrease of the recovery rate (RRR) across all ratings of the identified portfolio would lead to downgrades of one notch for the class D, E and F notes. Based on the identified portfolio, downgrades may occur if the loss expectation is larger than initially assumed, due to unexpectedly high levels of default and portfolio deterioration. Due to the better metrics and shorter life of the identified portfolio than the Fitch-stressed portfolio the class F notes display a rating cushion of one notch, and the class B to E notes display cushions of up to four notches. There is no rating cushion for the class A notes. Should the cushion between the identified portfolio and the Fitch-stressed portfolio be eroded either due to manager trading or negative portfolio credit migration, a 25% increase of the mean RDR across all ratings and a 25% decrease of the RRR across all ratings of the Fitch-stressed portfolio would lead to downgrades of up to two notches for the class A notes and up to four notches for the class B to F notes. Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive Rating Action/Upgrade A 25% reduction of the mean RDR across all ratings and a 25% increase in the RRR across all ratings of the Fitch-stressed portfolio would lead to an upgrade of up to three notches for the rated notes, except for the 'AAAsf' notes, which are at the highest level on Fitch's scale and cannot be upgraded. During the reinvestment period, based on the Fitch-stressed portfolio, upgrades may occur on better-than-expected portfolio credit quality and a shorter remaining WAL test covenant, allowing the notes to withstand larger-than-expected losses for the remaining life of the transaction. After the end of the reinvestment period, upgrades may result from stable portfolio credit quality and deleveraging, leading to higher credit enhancement and excess spread available to cover losses in the remaining portfolio. USE OF THIRD PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G -10 Form ABS Due Diligence-15E was not provided to, or reviewed by, Fitch in relation to this rating action. DATA ADEQUACY The majority of the underlying assets or risk presenting entities have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations and/or European Securities and Markets Authority registered rating agencies. Fitch has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio information or information on the risk presenting entities. Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above, Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies indicates that it is adequately reliable. ESG Considerations Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores for Canyon Euro CLO 2025-2 DAC. In cases where Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores in connection with the credit rating of a transaction, programme, instrument or issuer, Fitch will disclose any ESG factor that is a key rating driver in the key rating drivers section of the relevant rating action commentary. CONTEGO CLO III: Fitch Assigns B-sf Final Rating to Cl. F-RR Notes ------------------------------------------------------------------ Fitch Ratings has assigned Contego CLO III DAC reset notes final ratings, as detailed below. Entity/Debt Rating Prior ----------- ------ ----- Contego CLO III DAC Class A-RR XS3144694455 LT AAAsf New Rating AAA(EXP)sf Class B-RR XS3144694539 LT AAsf New Rating AA(EXP)sf Class C-RR XS3144695007 LT Asf New Rating A(EXP)sf Class D-RR XS3144695189 LT BBB-sf New Rating BBB-(EXP)sf Class E-RR XS3144695775 LT BB-sf New Rating BB-(EXP)sf Class F-RR XS3144696153 LT B-sf New Rating B-(EXP)sf Sub notes 2025 XS3145684943 LT NRsf New Rating NR(EXP)sf Transaction Summary Contego CLO III DAC is a securitisation of mainly senior secured obligations (at least 90%) with a component of senior unsecured, mezzanine, second-lien loans and high-yield bonds. Note proceeds were used to fund a portfolio with a target par of EUR400 million that is actively managed by Five Arrows Managers LLP. The CLO has a 3.1-year reinvestment period and a seven-year weighted average life (WAL) test at closing. KEY RATING DRIVERS Average Portfolio Credit Quality (Neutral): Fitch assesses the average credit quality of obligors to at 'B'/'B-'. The Fitch weighted average rating factor of the identified portfolio is 25.7. High Recovery Expectations (Positive): At least 90% of the portfolio comprises senior secured obligations. Fitch views the recovery prospects for these assets as more favourable than for second-lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets. The Fitch weighted average recovery rate of the identified portfolio is 61.7%. Diversified Portfolio (Positive): The transaction includes two Fitch test matrices at closing, corresponding to a seven-year WAL, a top 10 obligor concentration limit at 20%. Each set of matrices corresponds to fixed-rate limits of 5% and 10%, respectively. The transaction also has various other concentration limits, including a maximum exposure to the three largest Fitch-defined industries in the portfolio at 40%. These covenants ensure that the asset portfolio will not be exposed to excessive concentration. Portfolio Management (Neutral): The transaction has a 3.1-year reinvestment period and includes reinvestment criteria similar to those of other European transactions. Fitch's analysis is based on a stressed-case portfolio with the aim of testing the robustness of the transaction structure against its covenants and portfolio guidelines. Cash Flow Modelling (Positive): The WAL used for the transaction's Fitch-stressed portfolio and matrices analysis is 12 months less than the WAL covenant, to account for structural and reinvestment conditions after the reinvestment period, including passing the overcollateralization tests and Fitch 'CCC' limitation after reinvestment. Fitch believes these conditions would reduce the effective risk horizon of the portfolio during stress periods. RATING SENSITIVITIES Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative Rating Action/Downgrade A 25% increase of the mean default rate (RDR) and a 25% decrease of the recovery rate (RRR) across all ratings of the identified portfolio would lead to downgrades of one notch each for the class B-RR to E-RR notes, to below 'B-sf' for the class F-RR notes, and have no impact on the class A-RR notes. Downgrades, which are based on the identified portfolio, may occur if the loss expectation is larger than assumed, due to unexpectedly high levels of default and portfolio deterioration. The class C-RR notes have a cushion of one notch, and the class B-RR, D-RR, E-RR and F-RR notes each have cushion of two notches, due to the better metrics and shorter life of the identified portfolio than the Fitch-stressed portfolio. The class A-RR notes have no rating cushion. Should the cushion between the identified portfolio and the Fitch-stressed portfolio be eroded due to manager trading or negative portfolio credit migration, a 25% increase of the mean RDR and a 25% decrease of the RRR across all ratings of the Fitch-stressed portfolio would lead to downgrades of up to four notches for the notes. Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive Rating Action/Upgrade A 25% reduction of the mean RDR and a 25% increase in the RRR across all ratings of the Fitch-stressed portfolio would lead to upgrades of up to three notches for all notes, except the 'AAAsf' notes. Upgrades during the reinvestment period, which are based on the Fitch-stressed portfolio, may occur on better-than-expected portfolio credit quality and a shorter remaining WAL test, allowing the notes to withstand larger-than- expected losses for the transaction's remaining life. Upgrades after the end of the reinvestment period may result from stable portfolio credit quality and deleveraging, leading to higher credit enhancement and excess spread available to cover losses in the remaining portfolio. USE OF THIRD PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G -10 Form ABS Due Diligence-15E was not provided to, or reviewed by, Fitch in relation to this rating action. DATA ADEQUACY Fitch has checked the consistency and plausibility of the information it has received about the performance of the asset pool and the transaction. Fitch has not reviewed the results of any third-party assessment of the asset portfolio information or conducted a review of origination files as part of its ongoing monitoring. The majority of the underlying assets or risk-presenting entities have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally Recognised Statistical Rating Organisations and/or European Securities and Markets Authority- registered rating agencies. Fitch has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio information or information on the risk-presenting entities. Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above, Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies indicates that it is adequately reliable. ESG CONSIDERATIONS Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores for Contego CLO III DAC. In cases where Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores in connection with the credit rating of a transaction, programme, instrument or issuer, Fitch will disclose any ESG factor that is a key rating driver in the key rating drivers section of the relevant rating action commentary. Date of Relevant Committee 18 August 2025 ROCKFORD TOWER 2018-1: Fitch Assigns B-sf Rating to Cl. F-RR Bonds ------------------------------------------------------------------ Fitch Ratings has assigned Rockford Tower Europe CLO 2018-1 DAC's reset notes final ratings, as detailed below. Entity/Debt Rating Prior ----------- ------ ----- Rockford Tower Europe CLO 2018-1 DAC A-1-RR XS3147501103 LT AAAsf New Rating A-2-RR XS3147501368 LT AAAsf New Rating A-R XS2779841050 LT PIFsf Paid In Full AAAsf B-1-R XS2779841217 LT PIFsf Paid In Full AAsf B-2-R XS2779841480 LT PIFsf Paid In Full AAsf B-RR XS3147501525 LT AAsf New Rating C-R XS2779841647 LT PIFsf Paid In Full Asf C-RR XS3147501954 LT Asf ,, New Rating D-R XS2779841993 LT PIFsf Paid In Full BBB-sf D-RR XS3147502259 LT BBB-sf New Rating E-R XS2779842298 LT PIFsf Paid In Full BB-sf E-RR XS3147502689 LT BB-sf New Rating F-R XS2779842454 LT PIFsf Paid In Full B-sf F-RR XS3147502846 LT B-sf New Rating Transaction Summary Rockford Tower Europe CLO 2018-1 DAC is a securitisation of mainly senior secured obligations (at least 90%) with a component of corporate rescue loans, senior unsecured, mezzanine, second-lien loans and high-yield bonds. All existing notes, except the subordinated notes, are refinanced. The portfolio is managed by Rockford Tower Capital Management,LLC. The collateralised loan obligation has a three-year reinvestment period and a seven-year weighted average life test (WAL) covenant. KEY RATING DRIVERS Average Portfolio Credit Quality (Neutral): Fitch assesses the average credit quality of obligors at 'B'. The Fitch-calculated weighted average rating factor (WARF) of the identified portfolio is 23.7. High Recovery Expectations (Positive): At least 90% of the portfolio comprises senior secured obligations. Fitch views the recovery prospects for these assets as more favourable than for second-lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets. The Fitch-calculated weighted average recovery rate (WARR) of the identified portfolio is 61%. Diversified Portfolio (Positive): Exposure to the 10 largest obligors is limited to 20%. The transaction also includes various other concentration limits, including a maximum exposure to the three largest Fitch-defined industries in the portfolio at 40%. These covenants ensure that the asset portfolio will not be exposed to excessive concentration. Portfolio Management (Neutral): The transaction has two matrices that are effective at closing, with fixed-rate assets limits of 5% and 12.5%. The matrices correspond to a seven-year WAL test covenant. The transaction has a reinvestment period of three years and includes reinvestment criteria similar to those of other European transactions. Fitch's analysis is based on a stressed-case portfolio with the aim of testing the robustness of the transaction structure against its covenants and portfolio guidelines. Cash Flow Modelling (Positive): The WAL used for the transaction's Fitch-stressed portfolio and matrix analysis is 12 months shorter than the WAL test covenant. This reflects the strict reinvestment criteria after reinvestment period, which includes satisfaction of Fitch 'CCC' limitation and coverage tests, and a WAL test covenant that consistently steps down over time. In Fitch's opinion, these conditions reduce the effective risk horizon of the portfolio during stress periods. RATING SENSITIVITIES Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative Rating Action/Downgrade A 25% increase of the mean default rate (RDR) and a 25% decrease of the recovery rate (RRR) across all ratings of the identified portfolio would lead to downgrades of one notch each for the class B-R-R to E-R-R notes, to below 'B-sf' for the class F-R-R notes and would have no impact on the class A-1-R-R and A-2-R-R notes. Downgrades, which are based on the identified portfolio, may occur if the loss expectation is larger than assumed, due to unexpectedly high levels of default and portfolio deterioration. The class B-R-R, D-R-R , E-R-R and F-R-R notes each have a rating cushion of two notches and the class C-R-R notes have a cushion of one notch, due to the better metrics and shorter life of the identified portfolio than the Fitch-stressed portfolio. The class A notes have no rating cushion. Should the cushion between the identified portfolio and the Fitch-stressed portfolio be eroded due to manager trading or negative portfolio credit migration, a 25% increase of the mean RDR and a 25% decrease of the RRR across all ratings of the Fitch-stressed portfolio would lead to downgrades of up to three notches for the rated notes. Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive Rating Action/Upgrade A 25% reduction of the mean RDR and a 25% increase in the RRR across all ratings of the Fitch-stressed portfolio would lead to upgrades of up to three notches for the notes, except for the 'AAAsf' rated notes. Upgrades during the reinvestment period, which are based on the Fitch-stressed portfolio upgrades, may occur on better-than-expected portfolio credit quality and a shorter remaining WAL test covenant, allowing the notes to withstand larger-than-expected losses for the transaction's remaining life. Upgrades after the end of the reinvestment period may result from stable portfolio credit quality and deleveraging, leading to higher credit enhancement and excess spread available to cover losses in the remaining portfolio. USE OF THIRD PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G -10 Form ABS Due Diligence-15E was not provided to, or reviewed by, Fitch in relation to this rating action. DATA ADEQUACY Fitch has checked the consistency and plausibility of the information it has received about the performance of the asset pool and the transaction. Fitch has not reviewed the results of any third-party assessment of the asset portfolio information or conducted a review of origination files as part of its ongoing monitoring. The majority of the underlying assets or risk-presenting entities have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally Recognised Statistical Rating Organisations and/or European Securities and Markets Authority- registered rating agencies. Fitch has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio information or information on the risk-presenting entities. Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above, Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies indicates that it is adequately reliable. ESG Considerations Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores for Rockford Tower Europe CLO 2018-1 DAC. In cases where Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores in connection with the credit rating of a transaction, programme, instrument or issuer, Fitch will disclose any ESG factor that is a key rating driver in the key rating drivers section of the relevant rating action commentary. ROCKFORD TOWER 2021-1: Moody's Affirms B3 Rating on EUR12MM F Notes ------------------------------------------------------------------- Moody's Ratings has upgraded the ratings on the following notes issued by Rockford Tower Europe CLO 2021-1 DAC: EUR20,000,000 Class B-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2034, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2021 Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf) EUR15,000,000 Class B-2 Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2034, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2021 Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf) EUR30,000,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2034, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2021 Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf) Moody's have also affirmed the ratings on the following notes: EUR248,000,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2034, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2021 Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf) EUR28,000,000 Class D Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2034, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2021 Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf) EUR20,000,000 Class E Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2034, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2021 Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf) EUR12,000,000 Class F Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2034, Affirmed B3 (sf); previously on Apr 23, 2021 Definitive Rating Assigned B3 (sf) Rockford Tower Europe CLO 2021-1 DAC, issued in April 2021, is a collateralised loan obligation (CLO) backed by a portfolio of mostly high-yield senior secured European loans. The portfolio is managed by Rockford Tower Capital Management, L.L.C. ("RTCM"). The transaction's reinvestment period ended in July 2025. RATINGS RATIONALE The rating upgrades on the Class B-1, Class B-2 and Class C notes are primarily a result of the benefit of the transaction having reached the end of the reinvestment period in July 2025. The affirmations on the ratings on the Class A, Class D, Class E and Class F notes are primarily a result of the expected losses on the notes remaining consistent with their current rating levels, after taking into account the CLO's latest portfolio, its relevant structural features and its actual over-collateralisation ratios. 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 Moody's analysis, such as par, weighted average rating factor, diversity score and the weighted average recovery rate, are based on Moody's published methodologies and could differ from the trustee's reported numbers. In Moody's base case, Moody's used the following assumptions: Performing par and principal proceeds balance: EUR403.4 million Defaulted Securities: EUR0 Diversity Score: 61 Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2873 Weighted Average Life (WAL): 4.2 years Weighted Average Spread (WAS) (before accounting for Euribor floors): 3.80% Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 2.86% Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 43.28% 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 expectations 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 Moody's 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 May 2024. Counterparty Exposure: The rating action took into consideration the notes' exposure to relevant counterparties, such as account bank, using the methodology "Structured Finance Counterparty Risks" published in May 2025. 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: 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. 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. In addition to the quantitative factors that Moody's explicitly modelled, qualitative factors are part of the rating committee's considerations. These qualitative factors include the structural protections in the transaction, its recent performance given the market environment, the legal environment, specific documentation features, the collateral manager's track record and the potential for selection bias in the portfolio. All information available to rating committees, including macroeconomic forecasts, input from Moody's other analytical groups, market factors, and judgments regarding the nature and severity of credit stress on the transactions, can influence the final rating decision. =================== K A Z A K H S T A N =================== EURASIAN BANK: Moody's Affirms Ba2 Deposit Rating, Outlook Now Neg. ------------------------------------------------------------------- Moody's Ratings has affirmed Eurasian Bank's long-term local and foreign currency bank deposit ratings at Ba2, Baseline Credit Assessment (BCA) and Adjusted BCA at ba3, long-term local and foreign currency Counterparty Risk Ratings (CRRs) at Ba1, long-term Counterparty Risk Assessment (CR Assessment) at Ba1(cr), short-term local and foreign currency bank deposit ratings at NP, short-term local and foreign currency CRRs at NP and short-term CR Assessment at NP(cr). The outlook on the long-term deposit ratings has been changed to negative from stable. RATINGS RATIONALE The affirmation of Eurasian Bank's ratings and assessments is based on the bank's strong capital and liquidity buffers, solid profitability compared to its rating level and low reliance on market funding. Amidst regulatory changes and increased competition in the car lending markets, a key segment of the bank's business model, asset quality has deteriorated. As of the end of 2024 problem loans, defined as stage 3 and purchased or originated credit-impaired loans (POCI) under international financial reporting standards (IFRS) stood at 15.1% compared to 10.2% a year earlier. Loan loss coverage by reserves has also declined to 77% from 109% as of the same date. To address emerging asset pressures, the bank has slowed down gross lending growth to 2% for the first half of 2025 and stared building reserves. The bank continues to demonstrate solid profitability, which results in growth of its capital buffers. For the first half of 2025, Eurasian Bank reported 2.0% of annualised return on assets under IFRS and 20.2% of regulatory tier-1 capital ratio, well above the regulatory minimum. Strong capital adequacy supports the bank's solvency profile and is sufficient in Moody's opinion to cover potential credit costs, should uncovered asset risks materialise. Liquid assets stood at a very strong 46% of tangible assets as of mid-2025 and were well positioned to cover potential outflows of confidence sensitive deposits. The bank is primarily deposit funded with market funds staying at low 10% of tangible assets as of the same date, posing little risks to the funding profile. Additionally, Eurasian Bank's deposits are exposed to currency risk, as 42% of deposits were denominated in foreign currency as of the end of 2024. Moody's expects funding profile to remain stable over the next 12-18 months, as funding weaknesses are counterbalanced by the vast stock of liquid assets. Eurasian Bank's Ba2 long-term deposit ratings are based on its ba3 BCA and incorporate a one-notch rating uplift, given Moody's assessments of a moderate probability of support from the Government of Kazakhstan. As of June 2025, the bank's assets and retail deposits shares comprised 4.5% of total banking assets in Kazakhstan and 4.6% of retail customer deposits, respectively. RATING OUTLOOK The outlook on the bank's long term deposit ratings is negative. The outlook change to negative from stable reflects Moody's concerns regarding asset quality deterioration as well as uncertainty about the bank's strategy and the evolution of its business model in the next 12-18 months. Moody's expects the bank to change its focus away from the retail segment in the next 12-18 months and focus more on corporate lending, including SME. Moody's negative outlook reflects uncertainty regarding this developing model and the risks associated with the transition. FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS Loan book clean up and building up sufficient reserve buffers to accommodate potential credit losses, coupled with establishment of stable business model could bring us towards revising the outlook to stable or put upward pressure on Eurasian Bank's ratings. Asset quality deterioration and increasing unprovided bad loans or significant deposit outflows that could damage the bank's operating model could trigger a ratings downgrade. PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY The principal methodology used in these ratings was Banks published in November 2024. Eurasian Bank's "Assigned BCA" score of ba3 is set three notches below the "Financial profile" score of baa3 to reflect the bank's provisioning gap, high deposit base dollarization as well as expected trends around asset quality deterioration. =================== L U X E M B O U R G =================== CULLINAN HOLDCO: Moody's Affirms 'Caa1' CFR, Outlook Stable ----------------------------------------------------------- Moody's Ratings affirmed ratings of Cullinan Holdco SCSp (Graanul or the company), namely the Caa1 corporate family rating and the Caa1 rating of the backed senior secured EUR229.7 million outstanding floating rate notes (FRNs) and EUR347.6 million outstanding fixed rate notes (SSNs) maturing October 2029 and issued by Cullinan Holdco SCSp. At the same time Moody's appended a limited default (LD) designation to Probability of Default Rating (PDR), changing it to Caa1-PD/LD from Caa1-PD. The outlook remains stable. The "/LD" designation will be removed after three business days. The appending of the PDR with an "/LD" designation follows the completion of the previously announced amend and extend transaction. As part of the transaction the company extended the maturity of its backed senior secured bonds by three years to October 2029 and its EUR100 million revolving credit facility (not rated) to July 2029. Graanul also redeemed portions of the FRNs (amount outstanding: around EUR347.6 million from previously EUR380 million) and the SSNs (around EUR229.7 million; previously EUR250 million). RATINGS RATIONALE The affirmation of ratings takes into account the successful closing of the amend and extend transaction, which reduces immediate refinancing risks. The affirmation of the notes rating considers the quantum of outstanding bond debt, which represents the bulk of Graanul's liabilities, relative to priority-ranking debt instruments including the vessel financing and the EUR100 million revolving credit facility, currently undrawn. FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS The ratings could be downgraded (1) absent a meaningful recovery of wood pellets prices and restoration of sustainable EBITDA; (2) gross debt/EBITDA above 8.0x; (3) EBITA/interest expense below 1.0x; or (4) deterioration of the company's liquidity, including lack of progress on timely refinancing of the RCF or bonds. For ratings to be upgraded Moody's expects greater visibility and certainty around market dynamics from 2027 onwards, and Graanul's ability to maintain current sales volumes and pricing. The ratings could be upgraded if (1) leverage is sustained below 6.5x gross debt/EBITDA, (2) EBITA margin restored to levels above 15%, (3) EBITA/interest expense above 1.5x, and (4) maintenance of adequate liquidity. All metric references are Moody's-adjusted. PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY The principal methodology used in these ratings was Manufacturing published in September 2021. The net effect of any adjustments applied to rating factor scores or scorecard outputs under the primary methodology(ies), if any, was not material to the ratings addressed in this announcement. COMPANY PROFILE Cullinan Holdco SCSp is a Luxembourg-domiciled intermediate holding company that owns the entire share capital of AS Graanul Invest. Graanul is headquartered in Tallinn/Estonia and is the largest utility-grade wood pellet producer in Europe with 12 production plants in the Baltics region (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania) and the US. The company also owns six combined heat and power plants in Estonia and Latvia, which are biomass-fired and provide the majority of the company's internal heat and power needs, as well as four shipping vessels. In 2024, the company generated around EUR506 million in revenues and around EUR106 million in company-adjusted EBITDA. The company is 80%-owned by funds of private equity sponsor Apollo Global Management, Inc. ===================== N E T H E R L A N D S ===================== OCI NV: Moody's Downgrades CFR to Ba3, Outlook Negative ------------------------------------------------------- Moody's Ratings has downgraded OCI N.V.'s (OCI or the company) long-term corporate family rating to Ba3 from Ba2 and probability of default rating to Ba3-PD from Ba2-PD. Moody's also withdrew the company's $2 billion backed senior unsecured medium term note (MTN) programme. The outlook on OCI is negative. Previously, the ratings were on review for downgrade. This concludes the review for downgrade that was initiated on April 02, 2025. RATINGS RATIONALE The rating action reflects OCI's smaller, less diversified business profile and the balance of creditor and shareholder friendly actions following a series of dispositions. The company has allocated additional capital to shareholder returns without reinvesting into the business, and has yet to determine its strategic direction and go-forward financial policies since disposing most of its core assets. The negative outlook reflects uncertainty around the pace and consistency of improvement in performance at OCI Nitrogen BV (OCIN) and the still to be completed build out and capex of its new clean ammonia plant prior to receiving any deferred consideration. Most recently OCI completed the divestiture of its Methanol operations and retired its $600 million 2033 bonds. OCI intends to pay a $700 million dividend in September 2025 and up to $300 million in dividends in 2026. The combined impact of these actions will leave OCI with a diminished capital capacity to reinvest back into the business and leave it with only one operating asset (OCI Nitrogen BV), which over the last two years has had negative reported EBITDA. Counterbalancing these weaknesses are the expectation that OCI Nitrogen BV has begun to operate with positive EBITDA contribution following the scheduled plant turnarounds in H1 2025 and that the company will be net debt free and only have a modest amount of Moody's adjusted gross debt in the form of leases and some inventory financing estimated at around $275 million in total. Following the bond repayment of $600 million, the $700 million September shareholder distribution, and some cash burn from OCIN, Moody's estimates the company could have around $300-$400 million of cash on hand at the end of fiscal 2025. Concurrently the company needs to spend around another $250 million of capex to complete its Clean Ammonia Project before handing over the facility to Woodside Energy Group Ltd. The company expects to have this completed by around year end, at which time the company would receive its $470 million of deferred consideration. Assuming on time and on budget completion, the cash balance could increase to more than $500 million. Over the next 12-18 months Moody's expects the consolidated OCI N.V. (inclusive of OCIN operations and corporate overhead) could approach $125 million of EBITDA on a run rate basis. Assuming the company reaches this level of profitability and assuming OCI has cash taxes of around $10 million - $20 million, ongoing capex of around $75 million and lease payments of around $10 million OCI could be free cash flow (FCF) positive. LIQUIDITY OCI's liquidity is very good. The company has sizeable cash balances and full availability on its $600 million revolving credit facility (RCF). The company has no term debt outstanding and only some lease and securitization facilities which Moody's estimates at around $275 million in aggregate. Moody's expects these sources to accommodate the upcoming capex needs, capital distributions in 2025 and 2026 and remaining clean ammonia capex. The company also has its 13% stake in Methanex Corporation, which based on market prices is valued at around $350 million. Additionally, the company has up to $362 million of deferred consideration receivable related to its Fertiglobe plc disposal. FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS A rating upgrade is unlikely at this time, given the company's single plant operations and lack of a strategic direction. Factors that could lead to a downgrade of OCI's ratings include: (i) weaker than expected performance at OCI Nitrogen BV which leads to Moody's adjusted debt/EBITDA being above 3.0x, (ii) the company increases gross debt to pursue growth projects, or (iii) if OCI's remaining plant were to experience unplanned outages leading to a deterioration in liquidity. PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY The principal methodology used in these ratings was Chemicals published in October 2023. OCI's Ba3 long-term corporate family rating is three notches above the scorecard indicated rating as of the twelve months ended December 31, 2024. The difference reflects the company's net debt free balance sheet as of August 28, 2025. The historical financials are partly distorted as the bonds which were outstanding as of December 2024 are now repaid and Moody's expects OCIN's operations to improve compared to its performance in 2024. COMPANY PROFILE Headquartered in the Netherlands, OCI N.V. (OCI) was established on January 02, 2013 as a public limited liability company incorporated under Dutch law. The group is a European based producer and distributor of natural gas-based fertilisers and industrial chemicals. =============== P O R T U G A L =============== ELECTRICIDADE DOS ACORES: Moody's Affirms Ba1 CFR, Outlook Stable ----------------------------------------------------------------- Moody's Ratings has affirmed the Ba1 long-term corporate family rating of EDA – Electricidade dos Acores, S.A. (EDA). Concurrently, Moody's have also downgraded the Baseline Credit Assessment (BCA) of EDA to ba2 from ba1. The outlook remains stable. RATINGS RATIONALE The rating affirmation reflects the view that EDA will likely maintain a financial profile commensurate with the current rating over the medium term. Nevertheless, the downgrade of the BCA reflects that EDA's financial metrics have been lower than that required for the previous ba1 BCA, which is expected to continue at least over the next 12-18 months, with prospects beyond that dependent on the outcome of the next regulatory settlement. The downgrade of the BCA also reflects that likely weak financial performance in 2025 could result in financial covenant breaches in that year, unless mitigated. The stable outlook remains warranted as Moody's considers it likely that EDA will be able to stabilize its financial position and maintain a financial profile at least in line with the current rating and BCA. Over the last three years (2022-24), EDA's financial performance has been below Moody's expectations, notably as the company faced increased capital spendings and working capital deterioration. In 2025, Moody's expects that sharp increases in fuel acquisition costs will not be entirely recognized by the Portuguese energy regulator Entidade Reguladora dos Serviços Energéticos (ERSE) into the company's allowable cost base; also, the company will experience lower geothermal output, as the preparation of the upgrade of one of its largest geothermal power plants will temporarily affect that plant's availability. Beyond 2025, the precise speed and quantum of improvement in financial performance will notably depend on the parameters of the upcoming multi-year regulatory period, starting in 2026, including remuneration of EDA's regulatory asset base and ability to have the entirety of EDA's fuel costs recognized by the energy regulator and thus passed through into the company's allowed revenue base. It will also depend on the company's investment pace, and on the successful upsizing of its geothermal fleet. The energy regulator will publish its draft determination for consultation in mid October 2025, and final determination by year end 2025. With regard to potential covenant breaches, Moody's understands that the company is in negotiation with its lender banks. Different loans and commercial paper program facilities oblige EDA to comply with different annually tested maintenance covenants, including net debt/EBITDA, under the company definition, not above 6.5x or not above 7x. As of December 2024, EDA was covenant compliant. An expected improvement in financial performance beyond 2025 suggests that EDA would likely be covenant compliant from 2026 onwards. EDA's BCA and rating continue to reflect as positives: (1) the company's position as the dominant vertically integrated utility in the Autonomous Region of Azores (RAA,Ba1 stable); and (2) the fully regulated nature of the company's activities in the context of a relatively well-established and transparent regulatory framework. However, EDA's credit quality is constrained by: (1) the small size of the company and a large investment plan for 2025-29 to shift its generation mix from thermal to renewables sources; (2) the cost and challenges associated with operating in a small, relatively remote archipelago; (3) the tightened efficiency factors during the 2022-25 regulatory period; and (4) a weak liquidity position. With the RAA holding 50.1% of EDA's share capital, the company falls under Moody's Government-related Issuers methodology published in May 2025. Accordingly, EDA's Ba1 CFR incorporates one notch of uplift from its BCA of ba2 based on Moody's assessments of a strong probability of government support for the company in the event of financial distress and Moody's views of high default dependence between the RAA and EDA. ESG CONSIDERATIONS Financial strategy and risk management is a key consideration under Moody's approach for assessing governance risks under Moody's ESG framework. Given the company's weak liquidity profile in the context of the envisioned investment plan, Moody's have revised EDA's governance Issuer Profile Score (IPS) to G-3 from G-2. The company's ESG Credit Impact Score of CIS-3 remains unchanged, reflecting overall moderate environmental, social and governance risks. LIQUIDITY Given the pressure from the extraordinary fuel costs that is likely to persist throughout 2025 and the ambitious investment plan, Moody's expects EDA to generate negative free cash flow which in turn will likely lead to an increase in debt until year-end 2026. To address its liquidity requirements, the company has access to EUR60.5 million of available short-term credit facilities, of which EUR5.5 million was drawn as of December 2024. EDA will continue to rely on the semiannual renewal of these short-term facilities. EDA has robust banking relationships, as demonstrated by the regular extension of the maturity of its commercial paper programme facilities. While these sources would allow to cover EDA's cash needs over the coming 12 months, the risk of covenant threshold violations on some of EDA's outstanding debt and commercial paper progamme facilities means that EDA's liquidity is currently weak. RATIONALE FOR STABLE OUTLOOK The stable outlook reflects Moody's expectations that EDA will achieve and maintain metrics consistent with the current ratio guidance of Funds from operations (FFO)/debt at least in the low-teen percentages on a sustained basis, and that it will be able to stabilize its financial profile and maintain adequate ongoing liquidity as required. FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS EDA's BCA could be upgraded if the company improves its standalone credit quality, with its FFO/debt at least in the mid-teens percentages on a sustained basis together with an improvement in the company's financial profile and liquidity. A one-notch upgrade of EDA's BCA to ba1 would not result in an upgrade of EDA's rating. A one notch upgrade of the rating of the RAA would not result in itself in an upgrade of EDA's rating. EDA's rating could be downgraded if (1) EDA's credit profile weakened, whether because of a regulatory regime that does not allow the timely and full recovery of higher fuel costs on a sustainable basis, faster than expected capital investment, or high dividend distributions, such that FFO/debt was likely to fall below the low-teens in percentage terms; (2) a change in the company's financial policy appeared to favor shareholders over creditors; (3) EDA's liquidity position significantly deteriorated; or (4) there were to be a downgrade of the rating of the RAA. PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY The methodologies used in these ratings were Regulated Electric and Gas Utilities published in August 2024. EDA's ba2 BCA is three notches below the Regulated Electric and Gas Utilities scorecard-indicated outcome of Baa2. This difference reflects the small size of the company, the execution risk related to its large investment and asset transition plan, the difficulties associated with operating in a small, relatively remote archipelago, and weak liquidity management. =========================== U N I T E D K I N G D O M =========================== CRAFTWOOD INTERIORS: Bailey Ahmad Named as Joint Administrators --------------------------------------------------------------- Craftwood Interiors Limited was placed into administration proceedings in the High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts of England and Wales Insolvency and Companies CHD No 005468 of 2025, and Nicholas Cusack and Kirren Keegan of Bailey Ahmad Ltd T/A BABR, were appointed as joint administrators on Aug. 8, 2025. Previously known as Craftwood Construction Limited, Craftwood Interiors is a furniture manufacturer. Its registered office and principal trading address is at Crow House, Crow Arch Lane, Ringwood, Hampshire, England, BH24 1PD. The joint administrators can be reached at: Nicholas Cusack Kirren Keegan Bailey Ahmad Ltd T/A BABR Sussex Innovation Centre Science Park Square Brighton, East Sussex, BN1 9SB Further details contact: Alexandra Watson-Usher Tel No: 0203 435 6064 Email: alexandra.watson-usher@babr.co.uk JOLLIFFE & CO: Leonard Curtis Named as Joint Administrators ----------------------------------------------------------- Jolliffe & Co LLP was placed into administration proceedings in the High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts in Manchester, Insolvency & Companies List (ChD) Court Number: CR-2025-001162, and Andrew Poxon and Hilary Pascoeof Leonard Curtis, were appointed as joint administrators on Aug. 18, 2025. Jolliffe & Co is a solicitors Firm. Its registered office and principal trading address is at 6 St. John Street, Chester, CH1 1DA. The joint administrators can be reached at: Andrew Poxon Hilary Pascoe Leonard Curtis Riverside House Irwell Street, Manchester M3 5EN Further details contact: The Joint Administrators Tel: 0161 831 9999 Email: recovery@leonardcurtis.co.uk Alternative contact: Sidhra Qadoos MIZEN DEVELOPMENTS: Quantuma Advisory Named as Administrators ------------------------------------------------------------- Mizen Developments Limited was placed into administration proceedings in the High Court of Justice Business and Property Courts of England and Wales, Insolvency & Companies List (ChD) Court Number: CR-2025-005655, and Elias Paourou and Sean Bucknall of Quantuma Advisory Limited, were appointed as administrators on Aug. 18, 2025. Mizen Developments specialized in the letting and operating of own or leased real estate. Its registered office is at No 1 Railshead Road, St Margarets, Isleworth, TW7 7EP and it is in the process of being changed to 3rd Floor, 37 Frederick Place, Brighton, Sussex, BN1 4EA. Its principal trading address is at No 1 Railshead Road, St Margarets, Isleworth, TW7 7EP. The administrators can be reached at: Elias Paourou Sean Bucknall Quantuma Advisory Limited 3rd Floor, 37 Frederick Place Brighton, BN1 4EA Further details contact: The Joel Daly Tel No: 01273 322413 Email: joel.daly@quantuma.com S & S CONSULTING: Quantuma Advisory Named as Administrators ----------------------------------------------------------- S & S Consulting Services (UK) Limited was placed into administration proceedings in the Business and Property Courts of England and Wales, Court Number: CR-2025-005357, and Andrew Watling and Duncan Beat of Quantuma Advisory Limited, were appointed as administrators on Aug. 18, 2025. S & S Consulting Services specialized in business support service. Its registered office is at Onega House, 112 Main Road, Sidcup, DA14 6NE and it is in the process of being changed to Office D, Beresford House, Town Quay, Southampton, SO14 2AQ. Its principal trading address is at Onega House, 112 Main Road, Sidcup, DA14 6NE. The administrators can be reached at: Duncan Beat Andrew Watling Quantuma Advisory Limited Office D, Beresford House Town Quay, Southampton, SO14 2AQ Further details, please contact: Emily Hayward Tel No: 023 80226464 Email: emily.hayward@quantuma.com VALENTINE CONVEYANCERS: Ensors Accountants Named as Administrators ------------------------------------------------------------------ Valentine Conveyancers Limited was placed into administration proceedings in the High Court of Justice Business and Property Court in Manchester Company and Insolvency List CHD Court Number: CR-2025-0052, and Mark Upton and Sukhvinder Bains of Ensors Accountants LLP, were appointed as administrators on Aug. 14, 2024. Valentine Conveyancers, trading as Adept Property Lawyers, is a solicitors firm. Its registered office is at Unit 14 Menta Centre, 21-27 Hollands Road, Haverhill, CB9 8PU. Its principal trading address is at 9 Gainsborough Street, Sudbury, CO10 2EU. The joint administrators can be reached at: Mark Upton Sukhvinder Bains Ensors Accountants LLP Victory House, Vision Park Chivers Way, Histon, Cambridge CB24 9ZR Further details contact: The Joint Administrators Email: info@ensors.co.uk Tel: 01473 220022 Alternative contact: Toby Gould ********* 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 2025. 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 * * *