TCR_Public/160724.mbx          T R O U B L E D   C O M P A N Y   R E P O R T E R

              Sunday, July 24, 2016, Vol. 20, No. 206

                            Headlines

ABACUS 2006-10: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on Class A Notes
ADIRONDACK PARK: S&P Affirms BB- Rating on Class E Notes
APIDOS CLO XXIV: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating on Class D Notes
ARES XXVI: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
ATLAS SENIOR II: S&P Affirms BB Rating on Class E Notes

BANC OF AMERICA 2006-3: Fitch Cuts Rating on Cl. A-M Certs to CCC
BANC OF AMERICA 2007-1: Fitch Lowers Rating on Cl. A-J Certs to C
BENEFIT STREET IX: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class E Notes
CALCULUS TRUST: Moody's Affirms Ca Rating on Series 2006-1 Units
CARLYLE GLOBAL 2013-4: S&P Affirms B Rating on Class F Notes

CENTERLINE TRUST 2007-1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on Cl. A-1 Certs
CHASE MORTGAGE 2016-2: Fitch to Rate Class M-4 Certs 'BBsf'
CHASE MORTGAGE 2016-2: Moody's Assigns B1 Rating on Cl. M-4 Debt
CITIGROUP 2005-EMG: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on Cl. X Certs
COMM MORTGAGE 2006-C7: Fitch Lowers Cl. A-J Debt Rating to 'Csf'

CONNECTICUT AVENUE: Moody's Assigns (P)B1 Rating on Cl. 1M-2 Notes
CPS AUTO 2016-C: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB- Rating on Cl. E Notes
DRYDEN XXVIII: S&P Affirms BB- Rating on Class B-2L Notes
EIG GPF II: Fitch Lowers Class C Notes Rating to 'Dsf'
ETRADE RV 2004-1: Moody's Affirms Caa3(sf) Rating on Class D Debt

FIRST FRANKLIN 2005-FF11: Moody Hikes on Cl. M-1 Debt Rating to Ba2
FREMF MORTGAGE 2012-KF01: Moody's Affirms B1 Rating on Cl. X Debt
GALAXY XXII CLO: S&P Assigns B- Rating on Class F Notes
GS MORTGAGE 2013-GCJ16: Moody's Affirms Ba1 Rating on Cl. E Certs
HILTON USA 2013-HLT: S&P Affirms BB Rating on 3 Tranches

ICG US 2016-1: Moody's Assigns (Prov.)Ba3 Rating to Class D Notes
JFIN CLO 2013: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class D Notes
JP MORGAN 2008-C2: Fitch Affirms 'Csf' Rating on 2 Tranches
JP MORGAN 2010-C2: Fitch Corrects June 23 Ratings Release
JP MORGAN 2010-C2: S&P Affirms B Rating on Class G Certificates

JP MORGAN 2012-C8: Fitch Affirms 'Bsf' Rating on Cl. G Certificate
KINGSWOOD MORTGAGES 2015-1: DBRS Confirms BB Rating on Cl. E Debt
MORGAN STANLEY 2000-PRIN: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on Cl. X Debt
MORGAN STANLEY 2006-HQ9: S&P Lowers Rating on Cl. G Certs to D
MORGAN STANLEY 2006-IQ12: Fitch Affirms D Rating on 11 Tranches

MORGAN STANLEY 2007-TOP27: Fitch Affirms Csf Rating on Cl. D Debt
MORGAN STANLEY 2011-C1: S&P Raises Rating on Cl. L Certs to B
MORGAN STANLEY 2011-C3: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on Cl. G Certs
NEUBERGER BERMAN XVI: S&P Affirms BB- Rating on Class E Notes
OCTAGON INVESTMENT XI: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on Cl. D Notes

ONEMAIN DIRECT 2016-1: Moody's Assigns B2 Rating to Class D Debt
ONEMAIN DIRECT 2016-1: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class C Notes
PARK AVENUE 2016-1: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB- Rating on Cl. D Notes
SEQUOIA MORTGAGE 2016-2: Moody's Gives (P)B1 Rating to Cl. B-4 Debt
SHOPS AT CRYSTALS 2016-CSTL: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Cl. E Certs

SOCIETE GENERALE 2016-C5: Fitch Assigns B- Rating on 2 Tranches
SYMPHONY CLO II: S&P Raises Rating on Class D Notes to 'BB+'
SYMPHONY CLO III: S&P Raises Rating on Class E Notes to 'BB+'
VENTURE XXIII: Moody's Assigns Ba3(sf) Rating to Class E Debt
VOYA CLO 2016-2: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating on Class D Notes

VOYA CLO IV: Moody's Hikes Class D Notes Rating to Ba1(sf)
WACHOVIA BANK 2003-C7: Moody's Hikes Cl. G Debt Rating to Caa1
WACHOVIA BANK 2004-C11: Moody's Raises Rating on Cl. H Cert. to B2
WACHOVIA BANK 2006-C27: S&P Lowers Rating on 2 Tranches to D
WALDORF ASTORIA 2016-BOCA: Fitch Assigns B- Rating on Cl. F Certs

WALDORF ASTORIA 2016-BOCA: S&P Assigns BB- Rating on Cl. E Certs
WEST CLO 2013-1: S&P Lowers Rating on Class D Notes to B+
WESTWOOD CDO II: Moody’s Hikes Class E Debt Rating to Ba2(sf)
WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2013-C12: Fitch Affirms B Rating on Cl. F Certs
[*] Moody's Hikes Ratings on $184.4MM of RMBS Issued 2005-2006

[*] Moody's Raises Ratings on $661.5MM of Subprime RMBS Deals
[*] Moody's Takes Action on $587MM of Alt-A and Option ARM RMBS
[*] S&P Puts Ratings on 22 Tranches on CreditWatch Positive

                            *********

ABACUS 2006-10: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on Class A Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on these notes
issued by Abacus 2006-10, Ltd.:

  Cl. A, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Aug. 20, 2015, Affirmed

   Caa3 (sf)
  Cl. B, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Aug. 20, 2015, Affirmed
   Ca (sf)
  Cl. C, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Aug. 20, 2015, Affirmed
   C (sf)
  Cl. D, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Aug. 20, 2015, Affirmed
   C (sf)

                           RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's has affirmed the ratings on the transaction because its key
transaction metrics are commensurate with the existing ratings.
The rating actions are the result of Moody's on-going surveillance
of commercial real estate collateralized debt obligation (CRE CDO
Synthetic) transactions.

Abacus 2006-10, Ltd. is a static synthetic transaction backed by a
portfolio of credit default swaps on commercial mortgage backed
securities (CMBS) (100% of the reference obligation pool balance)
issued between 2004 and 2005.  As of the June 28, 2016 trustee
report, the aggregate note balance of the reference obligations has
decreased to $1.69 billion from $3.75 billion at issuance.

Moody's has identified the following as key indicators of the
expected loss in CRE CDO transactions: the weighted average rating
factor (WARF), the weighted average life (WAL), the weighted
average recovery rate (WARR), and Moody's asset correlation (MAC).
Moody's typically models these as actual parameters for static
deals and as covenants for managed deals.

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CDO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the reference obligations
it does not rate.  The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF
of 3550, compared to 3563 at last review.  The current ratings on
the Moody's-rated reference obligations and the assessments of the
non-Moody's rated reference obligations follow: Aaa-Aa3 and 16.0%
compared to 11.9% at last review; A1-A3 and 9.2% compare to 5.7% at
last review; Baa1-Baa3 and 9.8% compared to 14.7% at last review;
Ba1-Ba3 and 21.4% compared to 19.4% at last review; B1-B3 and 12.4%
compared to 14.0% at last review; and Caa1-Ca/C and 31.2% compared
to 34.3%.

Moody's modeled a WAL of 2.1 years, compared to 1.4 years at last
review The WAL is based on the look-through extension assumptions
on the loans backing the underlying CMBS reference obligations.

Moody's modeled a variable WARR of 0.0%, same as at last review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 7.4%, compared to 8.4% at last review.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs" published in July 2015.

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

The performance of the notes is subject to uncertainty, because it
is sensitive to the performance of the underlying portfolio, which
in turn depends on economic and credit conditions that are subject
to change.  The servicing decisions of the master and special
servicer and surveillance by the operating advisor with respect to
the collateral interests and oversight of the transaction will also
affect the performance of the rated notes.

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes to any one or more of the
key parameters could have rating implications for some of the rated
notes, although a change in one key parameter assumption could be
offset by a change in one or more of the other key parameter
assumptions.  The rated notes are particularly sensitive to changes
in the ratings and credit assessment of the reference obligations.
Notching down 100% of the reference pool by one notch would result
in an average modeled rating movement on the rated notes of zero
notch downward (e.g., one notch down implies a ratings movement of
Baa3 to Ba1). Notching up 100% of the reference pool by one notch
would result in an average modeled rating movement on the rated
notes of zero to one notch upward (e.g., one notch up implies a
ratings movement of Baa3 to Baa2).

The primary sources of uncertainty in Moody's assumptions are the
extent of growth in the current macroeconomic environment given the
weak recovery and certain commercial real estate property markets.
Commercial real estate property values continue to improve
modestly, along with a rise in investment activity and
stabilization in core property type performance.  Limited new
construction and moderate job growth have aided this improvement.
However, sustained growth will not be possible until investment
increases steadily for a significant period, non-performing
properties are cleared from the pipeline and fears of a euro area
recession abate.


ADIRONDACK PARK: S&P Affirms BB- Rating on Class E Notes
--------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its rating on the class B notes from
Adirondack Park CLO Ltd., a U.S. collateralized loan obligation
(CLO) that closed in March 2013 and is managed by GSO/Blackstone
Debt Funds Management LLC.  In addition, S&P affirmed its ratings
on the class A, C, D, and E notes.

The rating actions follow S&Ps review of the transaction's
performance using data from the June 6, 2016, trustee report.  The
transaction is scheduled to remain in its reinvestment period until
April 2017, and S&P anticipates that the manager will continue to
reinvest principal proceeds in line with the transaction documents.
The upgrade reflects increased credit support available to the
class B notes.  The affirmations reflect S&P's belief that the
available credit support is consistent with the current rating
levels.

Since the September 2013 trustee report, which S&P used for its
effective date analysis, the transaction has benefited from both
seasoning and improvement of the underlying collateral' credit
quality, which were the prime driving factors for the rating
actions.  

Per the June 2016 monthly trustee report, the weighted average life
of the portfolio is 4.48 years, down from 5.32 years as of the
September 2013 trustee report.  Because time horizon weighs heavily
into default probability, a shorter weighted average life
positively affects the collateral pool's creditworthiness of the
collateral pool.  In addition, the number of obligors in the
portfolio has increased during this period, which helped diversify
the portfolio.  Also, the portfolio's credit quality has improved
during this period as the percentage of 'BB-' and higher rated
assets has increased.  These factors have decreased the credit risk
profile, which in turn, provided more cushion to the tranches'
ratings.

However, S&P notes that the transaction has experienced an increase
in both defaults and assets rated 'CCC+' and below since the
September 2013 report.  Specifically, the amount of defaulted
assets has increased to $1.96 million from zero.  The level of
assets rated 'CCC+' and below has increased to $19.48 million from
$0.00 million.

In addition, according to the June 6, 2016, trustee report, the
overcollateralization (O/C) ratios have exhibited mild declines;
for instance, the class A/B and E O/C ratios have declined to
135.82% and 107.69%, respectively, from 136.71% and 108.53%.
However, all are passing and well above their minimum threshold
values.

Although the negative aspects were offset by the overall seasoning
and positive portfolio credit quality migration, any significant
deterioration in these metrics could negatively affect the deal in
the future, especially the junior tranches.  As a result, although
S&P's cash flow analysis pointed to higher ratings for the class C,
D, and E notes, S&P considered the above factors and also other
stress tests to allow for volatility in the underlying portfolio,
given that the transaction is still in its reinvestment period.  

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and S&P will take further rating actions
as it deems necessary.

RATING RAISED
Adirondack Park CLO Ltd.
                Rating
Class       To          From
B           AA+ (sf)    AA (sf)

RATINGS AFFIRMED
Adirondack Park CLO Ltd.

Class       Rating
A           AAA (sf)
C           A (sf)
D           BBB (sf)
E           BB- (sf)


APIDOS CLO XXIV: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating on Class D Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to five
classes of notes to be issued by Apidos CLO XXIV.

Moody's rating action is:

  $248,000,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
   2027, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)
  $50,000,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
   2027, Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)
  $32,000,000 Class B Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due

   2027, Assigned (P)A2 (sf)
  $20,000,000 Class C Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due

   2027, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)
  $18,000,000 Class D Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due

   2027, Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

The Class A-1 Notes, Class A-2 Notes, Class B Notes, Class C Notes
and Class D Notes are referred to herein, collectively, as the
"Rated Notes."

Moody's issues provisional ratings in advance of the final sale of
financial instruments, but these ratings only represent Moody's
preliminary credit opinions.  Upon a conclusive review of a
transaction and associated documentation, Moody's will endeavor to
assign definitive ratings.  A definitive rating, if any, may differ
from a provisional rating.

                          RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's provisional ratings of the Rated Notes address the expected
losses posed to noteholders.  The provisional ratings reflect the
risks due to defaults on the underlying portfolio of assets, the
transaction's legal structure, and the characteristics of the
underlying assets.

Apidos XXIV is a managed cash flow CLO.  The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first lien senior
secured corporate loans.  At least 96% of the portfolio must
consist of senior secured loans and eligible investments (including
cash), and up to 4% of the portfolio may consist of second lien
loans and unsecured loans.  Moody's expects the portfolio to be
approximately 70% ramped as of the closing date.

CVC Credit Partners, LLC will direct the selection, acquisition and
disposition of the assets on behalf of the Issuer and may engage in
trading activity, including discretionary trading, during the
transaction's four and a half year reinvestment period. Thereafter,
the Manager may reinvest unscheduled principal payments and
proceeds from sales of credit risk assets, subject to certain
restrictions.

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer will issue subordinated
notes.

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.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3.2.1
of the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in December 2015.

For modeling purposes, Moody's used these ase-case assumptions:

  Par amount: $400,000,000
  Diversity Score: 65
  Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2788
  Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.85%
  Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.00%
  Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 46.5%
  Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8 years.

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 2015.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

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

Together with the set of modeling assumptions above, Moody's
conducted an additional sensitivity analysis, which was a component
in determining the ratings assigned to the Rated Notes. This
sensitivity analysis includes increased default probability
relative to the base case.

Below is a summary of the impact of an increase in default
probability (expressed in terms of WARF level) on the Rated Notes
(shown in terms of the number of notch difference versus the
current model output, whereby a negative difference corresponds to
higher expected losses), assuming that all other factors are held
equal:

  Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 2788 to 3207)
   Rating Impact in Rating Notches
  Class A-1 Notes: 0
  Class A-2 Notes: -1
  Class B Notes: -2
  Class C Notes: -1
  Class D Notes: 0

  Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2788 to 3625)
  Rating Impact in Rating Notches
  Class A-1 Notes: 0
  Class A-2 Notes: -2
  Class B Notes: -4
  Class C Notes: -2
  Class D Notes: -1


ARES XXVI: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings affirmed its ratings on the class A, B, C, D,
and E notes from Ares XXVI CLO Ltd., a U.S. collateralized loan
obligation (CLO) transaction that closed in March 2013 and is
managed by Ares Management LLC.

The rating actions follow S&P's review of the transaction's
performance using data from the June 2016 trustee report.  The
transaction is scheduled to remain in its reinvestment period until
April 2017, and S&P anticipates that the manager will continue to
reinvest principal proceeds in line with the transaction
documents.

Since the transaction's effective date, the collateral portfolio's
weighted average life has decreased to 5.41 years from 4.63 years.
Because time horizon weighs heavily into default probability, a
shorter weighted average life positively affects the collateral
pool's creditworthiness.  In addition, the number of obligors in
the portfolio has increased during this period, which contributed
to the portfolio's increased diversification.

The transaction has experienced an increase in both defaults and
assets rated 'CCC+' and below since the April 2013 effective date
report.  Specifically, the amount of defaulted assets increased to
$10.21 million (1.16% of the aggregate principal balance) as of
June 2016 from zero as of the April 2013 effective date report. The
level of assets rated 'CCC+' and below increased to $48.73 million
(5.51% of the aggregate principal balance) from zero over the same
period.

The increase in defaulted assets, as well as other factors, has
affected the level of credit support available to all tranches, as
seen by the decline in the overcollateralization (O/C) ratios.  The
June 2016 trustee report indicated these O/C changes compared with
the April 2013 report:

   -- The class A/B O/C decreased to 126.80% from 128.69%.
   -- The class C O/C ratio decreased to 116.75% from 118.50%.
   -- The class D O/C ratio decreased to 110.37% from 112.02%.
   -- The class E O/C ratio decreased to 105.47% from 107.04%.

Even with the decline in credit support, all coverage tests are
currently passing and are above the minimum requirements.

Overall, the increase in defaulted and 'CCC' rated assets has been
largely offset by the decrease in the portfolio's scenario default
rates following the decline in the weighted average life.  However,
any significant deterioration in these metrics could negatively
affect the deal in the future, especially the junior tranches.  As
such, the affirmed ratings reflect S&P's belief that the credit
support available is commensurate with the current rating levels.

Although S&P's cash flow analysis points to higher ratings for the
class B, C, and D notes, its rating actions considered the increase
in the defaults and additional sensitivity runs that considered the
exposure to specific distressed industries and allowed for
volatility in the underlying portfolio because the transaction is
still in its reinvestment period.  

"Our review of this transaction included a cash flow analysis,
based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in the
aforementioned trustee report, to estimate future performance.  In
line with our criteria, our cash flow scenarios applied
forward-looking assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of
defaults, and recoveries upon default, under various interest rate
and macroeconomic scenarios.  In addition, our analysis considered
the transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or ultimate
principal to each of the rated tranches.  The results of the cash
flow analysis demonstrated, in our view, that all of the rated
outstanding classes have adequate credit enhancement available at
the rating levels associated with these rating actions," S&P said.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and will take rating actions as it deem
necessary.

CASH FLOW ANALYSIS

Ares XXVI CLO Ltd.
                        Cash flow    Cash flow
            Previous    implied        cushion   Final
Class       rating      rating(i)      (%)(ii)   rating
A           AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)          6.33   AAA (sf)
B           AA (sf)     AA+ (sf)          4.72   AA (sf)
C           A (sf)      A+ (sf)           2.76   A (sf)
D           BBB (sf)    BBB+ (sf)         1.21   BBB (sf)
E           BB (sf)     BB (sf)           0.27   BB (sf)

(i)The cash flow implied rating considers the actual spread,
coupon, and recovery of the underlying collateral.  
(ii)The cash flow cushion is the excess of the tranche break-even
default rate above the scenario default rate at the assigned rating
for a given class of rated notes using the actual spread, coupon,
and recovery.

RATINGS AFFIRMED
Ares XXVI CLO Ltd.

Class       Rating
A           AAA (sf)
B           AA (sf)
C           A (sf)
D           BBB (sf)
E           BB (sf)


ATLAS SENIOR II: S&P Affirms BB Rating on Class E Notes
-------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its ratings on the class B and C notes
and affirmed its ratings on the class A, D, and E notes from Atlas
Senior Loan Fund II Ltd., a U.S. collateralized loan obligation
(CLO) transaction that closed in November 2012 and is managed by
Crescent Capital Group L.P.

The rating actions follow S&P's review of the transaction's
performance, using data from the May 2016 trustee report.  The
transaction is scheduled to remain in its reinvestment period until
October 2016, and S&P anticipates that the manager will continue to
reinvest principal proceeds in line with the transaction
documents.

The upgrades primarily reflect improved credit quality in the
underlying collateral since S&P's effective date rating
affirmations in February 2013.

Collateral with an S&P Global Ratings' credit rating of 'BB-' or
higher has increased since S&P's previous rating actions in October
2013, which referenced the February 2013 effective date report.
The larger percentage of this higher-rated collateral has caused
the portfolio's weighted average rating to rise to 'B+' from 'B'.

The transaction has also benefited from collateral seasoning, with
the reported weighted average life decreasing to 4.35 years from
5.24 years in February 2013.  Because time horizon factors heavily
into default probability, a shorter weighted average life
positively affects the creditworthiness of the collateral pool.
This seasoning, combined with the improved credit quality, has
decreased the overall credit risk profile, which, in turn, provided
more cushion to the tranche ratings.  In addition, the number of
issuers in the portfolio has increased during this period, and this
diversification has contributed to the improved credit quality.

Although there has been a modest increase in both defaulted assets
and assets rated in the 'CCC' category, these factors are offset by
the decline in the weighted average life and positive credit
migration of the collateral portfolio, both of which have lowered
the credit risk profile.

According to the May 2016 trustee report that S&P used for this
review, the overcollateralization (O/C) ratios for each class have
declined slightly but remained relatively stable since S&P's
October 2013 rating affirmations.

   -- The class A/B O/C ratio decreased to 138.65% from 139.12%.
   -- The class C O/C ratio decreased to 121.43% from 121.84%.
   -- The class D O/C ratio decreased to 114.41% from 114.80%.
   -- The class E O/C ratio decreased to 109.19% from 109.56%.

However, the current coverage test ratios are all passing and well
above their minimum threshold values.

Although S&P's cash flow analysis indicated higher ratings for the
class C, D, and E notes, its rating actions considered the cushion
at the higher ratings and additional sensitivity runs that
reflected the exposure to specific distressed industries and
allowed for volatility in the underlying portfolio because the
transaction is still in its reinvestment period.

The affirmations of the class A, D, and E notes reflect S&P's
belief that the credit support available is commensurate with the
current rating levels.

S&P's review of this transaction included a cash flow analysis,
based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in the
aforementioned trustee report, to estimate future performance.  In
line with S&P's criteria, its cash flow scenarios applied
forward-looking assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of
defaults, and recoveries upon default, under various interest rate
and macroeconomic scenarios.  In addition, S&P's analysis
considered the transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or
ultimate principal to each of the rated tranches.  The results of
the cash flow analysis demonstrated, in S&P's view, that all of the
rated outstanding classes have adequate credit enhancement
available at the rating levels associated with these rating
actions.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and will take rating actions as S&P
deems necessary.

CASH FLOW ANALYSIS

Atlas Senior Loan Fund II Ltd.

                        Cash flow   Cash flow
            Previous    implied       cushion     Final
Class       rating      rating(i)     (%)(ii)     rating
A           AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)        13.04     AAA (sf)
B           AA (sf)     AAA (sf)         3.14     AA+ (sf)
C           A (sf)      AA- (sf)         0.85     A+ (sf)
D           BBB (sf)    BBB+ (sf)        5.30     BBB (sf)
E           BB (sf)     BB+ (sf)         1.28     BB (sf)

(i)The cash flow implied rating considers the actual spread,
coupon, and recovery of the underlying collateral.  (ii)The cash
flow cushion is the excess of the tranche break-even default rate
above the scenario default rate at the assigned rating for a given
class of rated notes using the actual spread, coupon, and
recovery.

RATINGS RAISED

Atlas Senior Loan Fund II Ltd.
                 Rating
Class       To          From
B           AA+ (sf)    AA (sf)
C           A+ (sf)     A (sf)

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Atlas Senior Loan Fund II Ltd.
                
Class       Rating
A           AAA (sf)
D           BBB (sf)
E           BB (sf)


BANC OF AMERICA 2006-3: Fitch Cuts Rating on Cl. A-M Certs to CCC
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded three classes and affirmed 12 classes
Banc of America Commercial Mortgage Inc. (BACM) commercial mortgage
pass-through certificates series 2006-3.  The downgrades reflect
the transfer of two large loans to special servicing that did not
pay in full at maturity as well as the increased likelihood of
additional interest shortfalls.

                       KEY RATING DRIVERS

The pool is concentrated with 12 assets remaining in the pool, of
which nine (75.1%) are in special servicing.  All loans are past
their original maturity dates.  Additionally with only two
performing loans remaining classes A-4 and A-1A remain vulnerable
to interest shortfalls.

Fitch modeled losses of 56.7% of the remaining pool; expected
losses on the original pool balance total 23.2%, including
$216.9 million (11% of the original pool balance) in realized
losses to date.  Fitch has designated 12 loans (100%) as Fitch
Loans of Concern, which includes nine specially serviced assets
(75.1%).

As of the July 2016 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 78.5% to $422 million from
$1.96 billion at issuance.  No loans are defeased.  Interest
shortfalls are currently affecting classes A-J through P.

The largest contributor to expected losses is the
specially-serviced Southern Hills Mall loan (24% of the pool),
which is secured by 573,370 sf of a 796,162-sf regional mall
located in Sioux City, IA, in Woodbury County.  Built in 1980 and
renovated in 2003, the mall is anchored by Sears (122,792 sf) and
JCPenney (100,000 sf), neither of which are part of the collateral.
The mall consists of 363,814 sf of inline space.  The loan
transferred to the special servicer in March 2016 due to imminent
maturity default.  As of March 2016 in-line sales were
approximately $350 per square foot (psf).  The sponsor, WP Glimcher
is cooperating with the special servicer in the foreclosure
process.

The next largest contributor to expected losses is the
specially-serviced Minneapolis Airport Marriott loan (13.8%), which
is secured by 472-room full-service hotel located 11 miles south of
Minneapolis in Bloomington, MN.  The trailing 12 month April 2016
occupancy, ADR and RevPAR were 67%, $114.46 and $77.67
respectively.  RevPAR Index of 80.7 compares to 85.1 in 2015 and
88.7 in 2014.  The special servicer is pursuing foreclosure.

Two performing loans remain in the pool.  The largest of which is
secured by the Rushmore Mall, a 737,725-sf regional mall located in
Rapid City, SD, slightly north of the CBD, and approximately seven
miles from the Ellsworth Airforce Base.  Built in 1978 and
renovated in 1993, the mall is anchored by Sears (124,215 sf) and
JCPenney (89,909 sf).  The mall has 421,948 sf of inline space. The
loan transferred to special servicing in July 2011.  A modification
was completed in October 2014 splitting the loan into a $58 million
A note and a $36 million B note.  The maturity was also extended
until February 2019.  One smaller loan is performing matured and
has been granted a 60 day forbearance to complete refinancing.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Rating Outlooks on classes A-4 and A-1A are Stable.  Fitch
deems full principal recovery on these classes likely but
vulnerability to future interest shortfalls is a concern.  The
remaining classes are distressed and will see further downgrades as
losses are realized.

DUE DILIGENCE USAGE

No third party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating action.

Fitch downgrades these classes and assigned Recovery Estimates
(REs) as indicated:

   -- $30.6 million class A-4 to 'Asf' from 'AAAsf'; Outlook
      Stable;
   -- $16.5 million class A-1A to 'Asf' from 'AAAsf'; Outlook
      Stable;
   -- $196.5 million class A-M to 'CCCsf' from 'BBsf'; RE 90%.

Fitch affirms these classes:

   -- $152.3 million class A-J at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
   -- $26.2 million class B at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class C at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class D at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class E at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class F at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class G at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class H at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

The class A-1, A-2 and A-3 certificates have paid in full.  Fitch
does not rate the class N, O and P certificates.  Fitch previously
withdrew the rating on the interest-only class XW certificates.


BANC OF AMERICA 2007-1: Fitch Lowers Rating on Cl. A-J Certs to C
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded one class and affirmed 18 classes of
commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from Banc of America
Commercial Mortgage Trust (BACM), series 2007-1.

                       KEY RATING DRIVERS

The affirmations reflect sufficient credit enhancement (CE)
relative to Fitch-modeled loss expectations for the pool.  Although
CE has improved since Fitch's last rating action, this was offset
by higher modeled loss expectation on the Skyline Portfolio loan,
which was transferred back to the special servicer in April 2016.
The downgrade to class A-J reflects the deterioration of class CE
relative to Fitch's increase in modeled loss.

Fitch modeled losses of 17.1% of the remaining pool; expected
losses on the original pool balance total 17.1%, including $287.5
million (9.1% of the original pool balance) in realized losses to
date.  Fitch has designated 33 loans (34.3% of the current pool
balance) as Fitch Loans of Concern, which includes two specially
serviced assets (18.8%).

As of the June 2016 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 53.5% to $1.46 billion from
$3.15 billion at issuance.  According to servicer reporting, 14
loans (6.9%) are defeased.  Cumulative interest shortfalls totaling
$40.9 million are currently affecting the A-J class through class
Q.

The largest contributor to Fitch-modeled losses is the Skyline
Portfolio loan (18.6% of pool), which is secured by a portfolio of
eight office buildings totaling approximately 2.6 million square
feet (sf) located in Falls Church, VA.  The loan re-transferred to
the special servicer in April 2016 for imminent default.  Portfolio
performance has not improved since the loan was modified in October
2013 and returned to the master servicer in February 2014.  Overall
portfolio occupancy, which is expected to further decline, is
currently below 50%, compared with 52% in 2014, 54% in 2013 and 97%
at issuance.  The special servicer is moving forward with putting a
receiver in place.

The loan was first transferred to special servicing back in March
2012 when portfolio occupancy was significantly affected as a
result of the Base Realignment and Closure statute.  The buildings
in the portfolio were leased mainly to various GSA tenants and
their related contractors.  From 2011 through 2013, the portfolio
lost one of its largest tenants, the Department of Defense, as well
as its various subcontractors, which occupied in total nearly
one-third of the portfolio square footage.  Additionally, the
properties in the portfolio were initially built to be near a
prospective D.C. metro station, but tenants slowly began to vacate
because the station was not built.  The loan was modified in
October 2013, whereby the total debt was split into a $350 million
A-note and a $328 million B-note (trust portion consists of a $140
million A-note and $131.2 million B-note).  The loan maturity was
extended to February 2022 with a one-year extension option if
certain performance metrics are attained.

The next largest contributor to modeled losses is a loan (1.7% of
pool) secured by a 157,839-sf grocery-anchored retail center
located in Brunswick, ME.  The loan transferred to special
servicing in April 2015 for imminent default, modified into an A
and B note with a four-year extension, and returned to the master
servicer in May 2016.  The center is anchored by a Shaw's
supermarket with lease expiration in 2025; however, the last
reported occupancy was 54%.  The subject property is located less
than two miles from Bowdoin College.

                       RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Stable Outlook on classes A-4 and A-1A reflect sufficient CE,
these classes' seniority, and expected continued paydown.  The
Outlook on classes A-MFX and A-MFL was revised to Negative from
Stable due to the uncertainty surrounding the ultimate resolution
and disposition of the Skyline Portfolio, which is in special
servicing.  Additionally, Fitch will monitor maturities as
approximately 75% of the pool is scheduled to mature or has an
anticipated repayment date (ARD) by year-end 2017.  Downgrades to
the distressed classes will occur as losses are realized.

DUE DILIGENCE USAGE

No third-party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating action.

Fitch downgrades this class:

   -- $259.5 million class A-J to 'Csf' from 'CCsf'; RE 30%.

Fitch has affirmed these classes and revised Rating Outlooks as
indicated:

   -- $588.9 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $218.2 million class A-1A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $214.5 million class A-MFX at 'BBBsf'; Outlook to Negative
      from Stable;
   -- $60 million class A-MFL at 'BBBsf'; Outlook to Negative from

      Stable;
   -- $27.5 million class B at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
   -- $35.4 million class C at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
   -- $19.1 million class D at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 million class E at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 million class F at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 million class G at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 million class H at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 million class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 million class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 million class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 million class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 million class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 million class O at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 million class P at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

Classes A-1, A-2, A-3 and A-AB are paid in full.  Fitch does not
rate the fully depleted class Q.  Fitch previously withdrew the
rating on the interest-only class XW and the $40 million class
A-MFX2.


BENEFIT STREET IX: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Benefit Street Partners
CLO IX Ltd./Benefit Street Partners CLO IX LLC's $370.00 million
fixed- and floating-rate notes.

The note issuance is backed by a revolving pool consisting
primarily of broadly syndicated senior secured loans.

The ratings reflect S&P's assessment of:

   -- The diversified collateral pool, which consists primarily of

      broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior secured term
      loans that are governed by collateral quality tests.

   -- The credit enhancement provided through the subordination of

      cash flows, excess spread, and overcollateralization.

   -- The collateral manager's experienced team, which can affect
      the performance of the rated notes through collateral
      selection, ongoing portfolio management, and trading.  The
      transaction's legal structure, which is expected to be
      bankruptcy remote.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

Benefit Street Partners CLO IX Ltd./Benefit Street Partners CLO IX
LLC

                                                Amount
Class                   Rating                (mil. $)
X                       AAA (sf)                  2.00
A                       AAA (sf)                204.00
A loans                 AAA (sf)                 50.00
AL(i)                   AAA (sf)           Up to 50.00
B-1                     AA (sf)                  33.00
B-2                     AA (sf)                  17.00
C                       A (sf)                   24.00
D                       BBB (sf)                 20.00
E                       BB (sf)                  20.00
Subordinated notes      NR                       34.40

(i)On the closing date, the aggregate outstanding amount of the
class AL notes will be $0.  However, the aggregate outstanding
amount of the class A loans can be converted to class AL notes, at
which point the corresponding amount of converted class A loans
will be canceled.
NR--Not rated.


CALCULUS TRUST: Moody's Affirms Ca Rating on Series 2006-1 Units
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on these trust
units issued by Calculus CMBS Resecuritization Trust:

  Credit Default Swap Class A, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on
   Aug. 20, 2015, Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

  Series 2006-1 Trust Units, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on
   Aug. 20, 2015, Affirmed Ca (sf)

  Series 2006-4 Trust Units, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on
   Aug. 20, 2015, Affirmed Ca (sf)

                         RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's has affirmed the ratings on the transaction because its key
transaction metrics are commensurate with the existing ratings.
While the credit quality of the reference pool has migrated
negatively as evidenced by WARF and WARR, there have been no
protection payments made to date and our forecast of protection
payment frequency and magnitude has remained within the range of
the existing ratings.  The rating actions are the result of Moody's
on-going surveillance of commercial real estate collateralized debt
obligation (CRE CDO Synthetic) transactions.

Calculus CMBS Resecuritization Trust is a static synthetic credit
linked notes transaction backed by a portfolio of credit default
swaps on commercial mortgage backed securities (CMBS) (100% of the
reference obligation pool balance) issued between 2005 and 2006.

Moody's has identified the following as key indicators of the
expected loss in CRE CDO transactions: the weighted average rating
factor (WARF), the weighted average life (WAL), the weighted
average recovery rate (WARR), and Moody's asset correlation (MAC).
Moody's typically models these as actual parameters for static
deals and as covenants for managed deals.

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CDO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the reference obligations
it does not rate.  The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF
of 4358, compared to 1628 at last review.  The current ratings on
the Moody's-rated reference obligations and the assessments of the
non-Moody's rated reference obligations follow: Aaa-Aa3 and 13.7%
compared to 51.9% at last review; A1-A3 and 0.0% compare to 11.8%
at last review; Ba1-Ba3 and 17.5% compared to 9.1% at last review;
B1-B3 and 34.7% compared to 11.4% at last review; and Caa1-Ca/C and
34.1% compared to 15.8%.

Moody's modeled a WAL of 1.0 years, compared to 1.6 years at last
review The WAL is based on the look-through extension assumptions
on the loans backing the underlying CMBS reference obligations.

Moody's modeled a variable WARR of 14.1%, compared to a mean of
24.5% at last review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 15.7%, compared to 9.6% at last review.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating SF CDOs" published in July 2015.

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

The performance of the notes is subject to uncertainty, because it
is sensitive to the performance of the underlying portfolio, which
in turn depends on economic and credit conditions that are subject
to change.  The servicing decisions of the master and special
servicer and surveillance by the operating advisor with respect to
the collateral interests and oversight of the transaction will also
affect the performance of the rated notes.

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes to any one or more of the
key parameters could have rating implications for some of the rated
notes, although a change in one key parameter assumption could be
offset by a change in one or more of the other key parameter
assumptions.  The rated notes are particularly sensitive to changes
in the ratings and credit assessment of the reference obligations.
Notching down 100% of the reference pool by one notch would result
in an average modeled rating movement on the rated notes of zero
notch downward (e.g., one notch down implies a ratings movement of
Baa3 to Ba1).  Notching up 100% of the reference pool by one notch
would result in an average modeled rating movement on the rated
notes of zero to one notch upward (e.g., one notch up implies a
ratings movement of Baa3 to Baa2).

The primary sources of uncertainty in Moody's assumptions are the
extent of growth in the current macroeconomic environment given the
weak recovery and certain commercial real estate property markets.
Commercial real estate property values continue to improve
modestly, along with a rise in investment activity and
stabilization in core property type performance.  Limited new
construction and moderate job growth have aided this improvement.
However, sustained growth will not be possible until investment
increases steadily for a significant period, non-performing
properties are cleared from the pipeline and fears of a euro area
recession abate.


CARLYLE GLOBAL 2013-4: S&P Affirms B Rating on Class F Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the A-2-R and B-2-R
notes from Carlyle Global Market Strategies CLO 2013-4 Ltd., a U.S.
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) transaction managed by Carlyle
Investment Management LLC.  S&P withdrew its ratings on the
original class A-2 and B-2 notes after they were fully redeemed.

On the July 15, 2016, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
replacement notes were used to redeem the original notes as
outlined in the transaction document provisions.  Therefore, S&P is
withdrawing the ratings on the original notes in line with their
full redemption and assigning final ratings to the replacement
notes.  The assigned ratings reflect S&P's opinion that the credit
support available is commensurate with the associated rating
levels.

S&P Global Ratings will continue to review whether, in its view,
the ratings assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit
enhancement available to support them and take rating actions as it
deems necessary.

RATINGS ASSIGNED
Carlyle Global Market Strategies CLO 2013-4 Ltd.

Replacement class    Rating
A-2-R                AAA (sf)
B-2-R                AA (sf)

RATINGS WITHDRAWN
Carlyle Global Market Strategies CLO 2013-4 Ltd.

                           Rating
Original class       To              From
A-2                  NR              AAA (sf)
B-2                  NR              AA (sf)
NR--Not rated.

OTHER OUTSTANDING RATINGS
Carlyle Global Market Strategies CLO 2013-4 Ltd.

Other class          Rating
A-1                  AAA (sf)
B-1                  AA (sf)
C                    A (sf)
D                    BBB (sf)
E                    BB (sf)
F                    B (sf)


CENTERLINE TRUST 2007-1: Moody's Affirms C Rating on Cl. A-1 Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the rating on this
certificate issued by Centerline 2007-1 Resecuritization Trust:

  Cl. A-1, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Sept. 17, 2015, Affirmed

   C (sf)

                         RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's has affirmed the ratings on the transaction because its key
transaction metrics are commensurate with existing ratings. The
affirmation is the result of Moody's on-going surveillance of
commercial real estate collateralized debt obligation (CRE CDO and
ReRemic) transactions.

Centerline 2007-1 Resecuritization Trust is a static cash
transaction backed by a portfolio of: i) CRE CDOs (67.2% of the
current pool balance), and ii) commercial mortgage backed
securities (CMBS) (32.8%).  As of the June 22, 2016 trustee report,
the aggregate certificate balance of the transaction has decreased
to $154.2 million from $985.9 million at issuance, primarily due to
realized losses on the collateral pool.  All prior Moody's rated
class have been withdrawn due to realized losses on the underlying
collateral.

Moody's has identified the following as key indicators of the
expected loss in CRE CDO transactions: the weighted average rating
factor (WARF), the weighted average life (WAL), the weighted
average recovery rate (WARR), and Moody's asset correlation (MAC).
Moody's typically models these as actual parameters for static
deals and as covenants for managed deals.

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CDO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the collateral it does not
rate.  The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF of 9539,
compared to 8816 at last review.  The current ratings on the
Moody's-rated collateral and the assessments of the non-Moody's
rated collateral follow: Aaa-Aa3 (3.5% compared to 2.4% at last
review), Baa1-Baa3 (0.0% compared to 2.4% at last review), (Ba1-Ba3
(0.0% compared to 1.2% at last review), B1-B3 (1.4% compared to
1.2% at last review), and Caa1-Ca/C (95.1% compared to 92.8% at
last review).

Moody's modeled a WAL of 4.3 years, compared to 5.0 years at last
review.  The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
underlying collateral.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 0.0%, same as that at last review.

Moody's modeled a MAC of 99.9%, compared to 0.0% at last review.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Approach
to Rating SF CDOs" published in July 2015.

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

The performance of the certificates is subject to uncertainty,
because it is sensitive to the performance of the underlying
portfolio, which in turn depends on economic and credit conditions
that are subject to change.  The servicing decisions of the master
and special servicer and surveillance by the operating advisor with
respect to the collateral interests and oversight of the
transaction will also affect the performance of the rated
certificates.

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes to any one or more of the
key parameters could have rating implications for some of the rated
certificates, although a change in one key parameter assumption
could be offset by a change in one or more of the other key
parameter assumptions.  The rated certificates are particularly
sensitive to changes in the recovery rates of the underlying
collateral and credit assessments.  However, in light of the
performance indicators noted above, Moody's believes that it is
unlikely that the ratings announced today are sensitive to further
change.

The primary sources of uncertainty in Moody's assumptions are the
extent of growth in the current macroeconomic environment given the
weak recovery and certain commercial real estate property markets.
Commercial real estate property values continue to improve
modestly, along with a rise in investment activity and
stabilization in core property type performance.  Limited new
construction and moderate job growth have aided this improvement.
However, sustained growth will not be possible until investment
increases steadily for a significant period, non-performing
properties are cleared from the pipeline and fears of a euro area
recession abate.


CHASE MORTGAGE 2016-2: Fitch to Rate Class M-4 Certs 'BBsf'
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings expects to rate Chase Mortgage Trust 2016-2 (CMT
2016-2) as follows:

-- $2,248,891,000 class A certificates 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $125,673,000 class M-1 certificates 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $149,485,000 class M-2 certificates 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $50,269,000 class M-3 certificates 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $33,072,000 class M-4 certificates 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable.

Fitch will not be rating the $38,364,323 class B certificates.

This is the second RMBS transaction rated by Fitch in which the
issuer intends to comply with the conditions set forth in the
Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC) Securitization Safe Harbor
Rule (the Rule). The FDIC confirms legal isolation of the
securitized assets from the seller in the case of its insolvency if
the issuer complies with the conditions in the Rule.

The certificates are supported by 8,953 high quality prime jumbo
and agency conforming loans with a total balance of approximately
$2.65 billion as of the cutoff date. Credit enhancement for the
'AAAsf' certificates of 10.25% reflects Fitch's loss expectations
of 7.25% plus additional enhancement needed due to structural
features such as the full pro rata pay structure, the lack of
principal and interest advancing, and the servicing incentive fees
paid from available funds. Fitch believes that many of the Safe
Harbor Rule requirements align the interests of the sponsor and
originator with those of the certificateholders and are credit
positive for the transaction.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Above-Average Originator: Based on its review of JPMorgan Chase
Bank, N.A. (Chase) origination platform for agency and non-agency
loans, Fitch believes that the bank has strong processes and
procedures in place and views its ability to originate agency and
non-agency loans as above average. Fitch reduced its probability of
default by 93 basis points (bps) at the 'AAAsf' stress scenario to
account for the strong operational quality of the loans.

High-Quality Fixed-Rate Mortgages: The transaction includes a mix
of conforming (55% by balance) and non-conforming collateral (45%)
made to prime quality borrowers. All of the loans were originated
either by Chase or by one of its correspondents in accordance with
its relevant guidelines. The collateral consists of up to 30-year
fixed-rate mortgage loans and is seasoned roughly 12 months.

Strong Due Diligence Results: Loan level due diligence was
performed on 100% of the non-conforming loans and a statistical
sample for the agency loans. The diligence sample size and scope
for the agency loans are consistent with those of other
risk-sharing transactions referencing Chase mortgage collateral and
rated by Fitch. All but 44 of the agency loans received an 'A' or
'B' grade, indicating strong underwriting practices and sound
quality control procedures.

Increased Credit Enhancement: The 10.25% initial credit enhancement
for the 'AAAsf' certificates is materially higher than Fitch's
'AAAsf' mortgage pool loss expectation of 7.25%, reflecting
structural features such as the lack of delinquent principal and
interest advances, pro rata principal distribution and the
servicing incentive fees and other expenses paid from available
funds.

No Servicer P&I Advances: While the Rule allows for servicing
advancing up to a maximum of 90 days, this transaction is not
incorporating any advancing of delinquent principal and interest
(P&I). As P&I advances made on behalf of loans that become
delinquent and eventually liquidate reduce liquidation proceeds to
the trust, the loan-level loss severities (LS) are less for this
transaction than for those where the servicers are obligated to
advance P&I. Structural provisions and cash flow priorities,
together with increased subordination, provide for timely payments
of interest to the 'AAAsf' rated classes.

Pro Rata Structure: Unlike prime jumbo securitizations issued post
crisis, this transaction will incorporate a pro rata principal
distribution among all classes starting on the first payment date.
This allows for a larger amount of principal to be distributed to
the subordinate bonds and a faster depletion of credit enhancement
than a standard shifting interest structure. However, the
transaction incorporates various performance triggers that can lock
the subordinate bonds out of principal, and a subordination floor
of 50 bps prevents distributions to the subordinate bonds to
protect against adverse selection risk as the collateral pool pays
down. The initial credit enhancement reflects the probability of
subordinate balance paydowns over time.

Strong Alignment of Interests: Because the Rule requires the
sponsor, Chase, to retain an economic interest of at least 5% of
the credit risk of the securitized assets, Fitch believes the
transaction benefits from a strong alignment of interest in the
credit risk of the underlying collateral. The sponsor intends to
retain a 5% vertical interest in each class of certificates (other
than the class A-R certificates).

Loan Compliance Representation and Warranty: The Rule requires that
the loan documents for an RMBS transaction contain an additional
representation regarding loan underwriting compliance with
supervisory guidance governing the underwriting of residential
mortgages, including the Interagency Guidance on Non-Traditional
Mortgage Products, Oct. 5, 2006, and the Interagency Statement on
Subprime Mortgage Lending, July 10, 2007, and such other or
additional guidance applicable at the time of loan origination,
which, in Fitch's view, provides additional assurances about the
sound quality of the underlying pool.

Rep and Warranty Qualifiers: While the Rule for RMBS requires that
5% of the cash proceeds due to the sponsor be held in a reserve
fund for 12 months for loan repurchases due to breaches of reps and
warranties, which further aligns the interests of the seller with
those of the certificateholders, many of the reps contain
qualifying or conditional language that could result in fewer loan
repurchases. For this reason, Fitch increased the probability of
default for the 'AAAsf' class by 60 bps.

Servicing Framework to Benefit All Classes: The Rule requires that
RMBS loan servicing be conducted in accordance with best practices
for asset management; loss mitigation to commence when a loan
becomes 90 days delinquent; and that incentive fees be paid for
loan restructuring or other loss mitigation activities that
maximize the net present value of the loans. This requirement,
which also mandates that records be kept for subsequent review by
the trustee or an investor representative, is intended to protect
all classes from potentially detrimental activities that benefit
one class of investors at the expense of another. Servicing
incentive fees are paid from available funds.

Potential Expense Volatility: Extraordinary expenses, which include
loan file review costs, arbitration expenses for enforcement of the
reps and additional fees of the transaction reviewer and
calculation agent, will reduce the amount available, but not the
amount owed, to the bondholders. Additionally, certain expenses
related to the breach reviewer are not subject to an annual expense
cap. This construct can result in principal and interest shortfalls
to the bonds starting from the bottom of the capital structure. The
'AAAsf' subordination was increased by 0.80% to account for the
risk of these non-credit events.

RATING SENSITIVITIES
Fitch's analysis incorporates a sensitivity analysis to demonstrate
how the ratings would react to steeper market value declines (MVDs)
than assumed at the MSA level. The implied rating sensitivities are
only an indication of some of the potential outcomes and do not
consider other risk factors that the transaction may become exposed
to or may be considered in the surveillance of the transaction. Two
sets of sensitivity analyses were conducted at the state and
national levels to assess the effect of higher MVDs for the subject
pool.

This defined stress sensitivity analysis demonstrates how the
ratings would react to steeper MVDs at the national level. The
analysis assumes MVDs of 10%, 20% and 30%, in addition to the model
projected base-case 4.7%. The analysis indicates that there is some
potential rating migration with higher MVDs, compared with the
model projection.

Fitch also conducted sensitivities to determine the stresses to
MVDs that would reduce a rating by one full category, to
non-investment grade, and to 'CCCsf'. For example, additional MVD
of 7%, 33% and 54% could potentially lower the 'AAAsf' rated class
one rating category, to non-investment grade, and to 'CCCsf'.

Fitch's stress and rating sensitivity analysis are discussed in its
presale report released today 'Chase Mortgage Trust 2016-2',
available at 'www.fitchratings.com' or by clicking on the link.

DUE DILIGENCE USAGE
Fitch was provided with due diligence information from AMC
Diligence, LLC (AMC) and Opus Capital Markets Consultants (Opus) on
100% of the non-agency loans and a statistical sample of the
conforming balance loans in the collateral pool. Fitch received
certifications indicating that the loan-level due diligence was
conducted in accordance with its published standards for reviewing
loans and in accordance with the independence standards outlined in
its criteria. The diligence results showed minimal findings with
some nonmaterial exceptions or waivers. All such findings were
sufficiently mitigated with compensating factors. Fitch believes
the overall results of the review generally reflected strong
underwriting controls.

CRITERIA APPLICATION

Fitch analyzed the transaction in accordance with its RMBS rating
criteria, as described in its June 2016 report, 'U.S. RMBS Master
Rating Criteria.' This incorporates a review of the originators'
lending platforms, as well as an assessment of the transaction's
R&Ws provided by the originators and arranger, which were found to
be consistent with the ratings assigned to the certificates.

A variation was made to Fitch's 'U.S. RMBS Master Criteria' with
respect to property values used for seasoned loans in the pool. The
criteria require updated valuations such as Broker Price Opinions
(BPOs) to be provided for loans on which the original property
valuation is aged 24 months or more. There were 435 loans in the
subject pool for which the values were seasoned over 24 months;
however, updated values were not provided for these loans. To
account for the risk that the BPOs might result in lower values
than model-projected values based on indexation as Fitch has
observed, the original values were held constant. While this is a
variation to published criteria, the rating impact is neutral.


CHASE MORTGAGE 2016-2: Moody's Assigns B1 Rating on Cl. M-4 Debt
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to five
classes of residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) issued by
Chase Mortgage Trust 2016-2 (Chase 2016-2).  The ratings range from
(P)Aaa (sf) to (P)B1 (sf).

Chase 2016-2 is potentially the second RMBS transaction issued
under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's (FDIC)
securitization safe harbor rule that went into effect Sept. 30,
2010.  Unlike other RMBS transactions that structure the transfer
of mortgage loans to the trust as legal "true sales" to achieve
de-linkage from the effects of a sponsor insolvency, this
transaction has been structured under the securitization safe
harbor rule to mitigate the risk of the FDIC's exercise of its
repudiation power in the unlikely event that the FDIC becomes the
receiver or conservator of JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (JPMCB or
Chase) (LT/ST: Aa2/P-1).  JPMCB will retain 5% of each class of
certificates to comply with FDIC safe harbor provisions,
effectively providing some risk retention and aligning its
incentives with investors incentives in the transaction.  The
certificates are backed by one pool of 8,953 (55.0% conforming and
45.0% non-conforming by collateral balance) prime quality, fixed
rate, first-lien residential mortgage loans, originated by Chase,
who will also act as the servicer for this transaction. U.S. Bank
Trust National Association will serve as the trustee.

Similar to the prior transaction, Chase Mortgage Trust 2016-1
(Chase 2016-1), this transaction incorporates several features
unique to post-crisis RMBS that are credit positive for the
bondholders in the transaction.  Specifically: 1) A pro-rata
payment structure with multiple and more stringent performance
triggers than other post-crisis transactions; these triggers
redirect to the more senior notes cash that would otherwise go to
the junior notes in the event of performance deterioration, 2) lack
of principal and interest (P&I) servicer advancing that will boost
ultimate liquidation recoveries on delinquent loans available for
senior bondholders.  The lack of P&I advancing will also reduce the
unpredictability of cash flows driven by a servicer stop-advance
policies or practices and 3) immediate recognition of modification
losses which will allocate more cash to senior bonds because
written-down junior bonds accrue less interest.  Separately, the
transaction protects against disruption of cash flow to the bonds
and resulting interest shortfalls due to the lack of P&I advancing
by providing for interest payments (including interest shortfalls
if any) and principal payments to be paid from aggregate available
funds.  Moreover, Chase is obligated to make protective advances in
respect of certain taxes, insurance premiums and the cost of the
preservation, restoration and protection of the mortgaged
properties and any enforcement or judicial proceedings, including
foreclosures.

Chase 2016-2 has a number of important structural and collateral
differences compared to Chase 2016-1.  Collateral changes include a
lower percentage of conforming loans (55.0% for Chase 2016-2
compared to 74.2% for Chase 2016-1), higher percentage of loans
originated through the correspondent channel (73.1% for Chase
2016-2 compared to 65.7% for Chase 2016-1) and less seasoning of
the loans (Weighted Average (WA) seasoning of 12 months for Chase
2016-2 compared to 14 months for Chase 2016-1).  Structural changes
include the redefinition of the Class M-1 certificate from a
subordinate certificate to a senior certificate, a decrease in
credit enhancement for the subordinate certificates and an increase
in credit enhancement for the Class A certificate.  Also, there
have been certain changes to the servicer's compensation structure
in the transaction as described in detail in our pre-sale report.

The complete rating actions are:

Issuer: Chase Mortgage Trust 2016-2
  Cl. A, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)
  Cl. M-1, Assigned (P)Aa1 (sf)
  Cl. M-2, Assigned (P)A1 (sf)
  Cl. M-3, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)
  Cl. M-4, Assigned (P)B1 (sf)

                         RATINGS RATIONALE

Summary Credit Analysis and Rating Rationale

Moody's expected cumulative net loss on the collateral pool average
0.50% in a base scenario and reach 5.30% at a stress level
consistent with the Aaa ratings on the senior certificate.

Moody's calculated losses on the pool using our US Moodys
Individual Loan Analysis (MILAN) model.  Loan-level adjustments to
the model results included adjustments to probability of default
for higher and lower borrower debt-to-income ratios (DTIs),
borrowers with multiple mortgaged properties, self-employed
borrowers, and for the default risk of HOA properties in super lien
states.  Moody's final loss estimates also incorporate an
originator adjustment based on our assessment of Chase as a strong
originator of prime jumbo residential mortgage loans and an
adjustment reflecting the third-party review (TPR) scope and
findings.  For the conforming loans, Moody's modeled its severity
estimate using conforming loan-specific severity data published by
Freddie Mac.

Given the unique pro-rata pay structure, servicing fee incentive
structure and the lack of P&I advancing in the transaction, we
modeled the cash flows under a range of loss timing, servicing fee
and stop-advance assumptions to evaluate the impact on the bonds
and the resulting ratings under the different scenarios.  Moody's
final ratings on the bonds incorporate the results under the
different scenarios.

Key Collateral Characteristics

Chase 2016-2 is a securitization of a pool of 8,953 fixed-rate
prime conforming and non-conforming fully-amortizing loans with a
total balance of $2,645,754,323, a WA remaining term to maturity of
347 months, and a WA seasoning of 12 months.  The borrowers in this
transaction have high FICO scores and sizeable equity in their
properties.  The WA current FICO score is 768 and the WA original
combined loan-to-value ratio (CLTV) is 79.0%.  Although the
majority of the loans were originated through a correspondent
lender (73.1%), this is offset by the stronger property types
(57.9% single-family), occupancy (98.8% owner-occupied) and purpose
(74.8% purchase) of the loans.  Moreover, the pool is
geographically diverse with 26.5% of the loans originated in
California, 8.0% in Illinois and 7.5% in New York.  The
characteristics of the loans underlying the pool are comparable to
that of Chase 2016-1 and recent GSE credit risk transfer and prime
deals that we have rated.

All of the mortgage loans in the pool were originated by Chase.
Chase is a strong originator based on our originator assessment for
prime jumbo loans.  Reflecting our assessment of Chase's prime
jumbo underwriting, Moody's reduced its loss expectations by a
relative 5% for the non-conforming portion of the pool.

Third-Party Review and Representations & Warranties (R&W)

AMC Diligence, LLC (AMC) and Opus Capital Markets Consultants LLC
(Opus), independent third-party diligence providers, conducted
reviews for the loans in the pool.  100% of the non-conforming pool
and a 15.9% random sample of the conforming loans in the initial
pool (certain loans were removed before the final securitization)
were reviewed.  All loans were reviewed for credit, compliance,
appraisal and data integrity.  None of the non-conforming loans
reviewed had any significant defects, while 15 of the 815
conforming loans reviewed by AMC and 30 out of 933 reviewed by Opus
received final Moody's overall grades of Cs or Ds.  All but one of
these loans were removed from the pool (the one loan that was not
removed received a C grade for property valuation because the
origination appraisal was too low).  Any data discrepancies
identified were repaired and updated on the loan tape.  Moody's
increased our Aaa loss expectations marginally to reflect the
findings of the conforming loans' due diligence review because only
a sample of the conforming loans was reviewed. Specifically,
Moody's extrapolated the findings from the sample review to the
broader pool that did not benefit from the due diligence review and
then applied adjustments to Aaa loss expectations.

All of the loans were originated prior to October 2015, thus no
loans were subject to the TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure (TRID)
rule, which became effective 3 October 2015.  Moreover, all 1,592
non-conforming loans either adhere to the Ability-To-Repay
(ATR)/Qualified Mortgage (QM) rule or are QM not applicable because
they are investment properties or were originated before the rule
went into effect.  Additionally, because the conforming loans were
underwritten to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac guidelines, they meet QM
standards.

The originators and the sellers have provided clear R&Ws including
an unqualified fraud R&W.  There is a provision for binding
arbitration in the event of dispute between investors and the R&W
provider concerning R&W breaches.  The breach review is objective,
thorough, transparent, consistent and independent, and will be
conducted by Pentalpha Surveillance, LLC who is an independent
third-party with expertise in forensic loan reviews.  The
securities administrator will establish and maintain a repurchase
reserve fund which will be held for 12 months and will be initially
equal at least 5% of the cash proceeds from the securitization.
Given the originator's business practices and the sunset period for
the reserve fund we don't expect this fund to be utilized
materially but it does provide additional support to the R&W
framework.

Servicing Arrangement

Moody's consider the overall servicing arrangement for this pool to
be adequate.  Moody's assess Chase at SQ2 as a primary servicer of
prime residential mortgage loans, indicating an above average
servicing ability.

Servicing compensation for loans serviced by Chase in this
transaction is based on a fee-for-service incentive structure.  The
fee-for-service incentive structure includes an initial base fee of
$20 per loan monthly for all performing loans and increases if the
loans default with monetary incentive fees for curing, modifying,
or liquidating non-performing loans.  By establishing a base
servicing fee for performing loans that increases with the
delinquency of loans, the fee-for-service structure aligns payments
to the servicer with the costs of the servicer.  The
fee-for-service compensation is reasonable and adequate for this
transaction.  It also better aligns the servicer's costs with the
deal's performance.  Class B (NR) is first in line to absorb any
increase in servicing costs above the base servicing costs.

The institutional and reputational strength of the servicer,
alignment of costs with the monetary compensation for more
difficult tasks, and incentive alignment due to risk retention
requirements under FDIC safe harbor collectively mitigate the moral
hazard that the servicing arrangement will unduly influence the
servicers' behavior.  By contrast, in typical RMBS transactions a
servicer can take actions, such as modifications and prolonged work
outs, which increase the value of its mortgage servicing rights.

The Transaction Structure

The transaction follows a simple pro-rata payment structure amongst
the certificates with reverse sequential loss allocation and strong
performance tests.  High initial subordination relative to standard
shifting interest (SI) structures and the presence of strong
performance tests make the pro-rata transaction structure neutral
to SI structures.  Moreover, the transaction allows for all funds
collected (defined as the available distribution amount), including
interest and principal payments, liquidation proceeds, subsequent
recoveries, insurance proceeds and repurchase amounts, to be used
to make interest payments and then principal payments to the senior
bonds and subordinate bonds on a pro-rata basis.  However, any
trust expenses (subject to an annual expense cap of $500K) and
other expenses are deducted from available distribution.  This will
reduce the funds available to pay the certificates.

By itself, the pro-rata structure is weaker than SI structures
since unlike SI structures that feature a blanket lock-out period
during which senior bonds amortize faster, the pro-rata structure
allows for depletion of subordination at the outset resulting in
exposure to the senior bonds to credit deterioration.  However,
this transaction effectively mitigates against this risk through
the multiple and stringent performance tests that divert payments
to the bonds with higher payment priorities in the waterfall upon
performance deterioration.  Also, it is potentially the second
prime transaction in the US (after Chase 2016-1) which recognizes
and incorporates, through certain performance tests, future losses
that may result from loans that are already seriously delinquent.

Performance Tests

  The transaction will allocate 100% of prepayments to the senior
   bonds if the current senior percentage exceeds the senior
   percentage as of the closing date minus 25% of the non-
   performing loan balance, defined as the percentage of loans
   that are more than 90 days delinquent, in foreclosure, subject
   to bankruptcy, or are real-estate owned (REO).  Although not
   strong as the lock-out feature in SI deals, this test is a
   strong mitigant to the pro-rata structure since it allows for
   faster amortization of the senior bonds (and hence percentage
   increase in credit enhancement) in the event of collateral
   under-performance.

  The transaction provides for Class B lock-out amount of
   $13,300,000, which mitigates tail risk by protecting both the
   senior and subordinate bonds from eroding credit enhancement
   over time.

  Additionally, all principal collected will be used to pay down
   the senior certificates if the aggregate class principal amount

   of the subordinate certificates is less than or equal to 0.50%
   of the cut-off date balance, or the aggregate class principle
   balance of the Class M-4 and the Class B certificates is zero,
   or the six months average 60 days or more delinquent (including

   foreclosure, bankruptcy and REO) loans and all modified loans
   within 12 months prior to distribution date equals or exceeds
   25% of current aggregate balance of subordinate certificates,
   or cumulative realized loss amount exceeds 10% of original
   subordinate balance.  The delinquency and cumulative loss tests

   here are stronger than in standard SI deals which set these
   triggers typically at 50% of subordination balance and up to
   40% of the original subordination amount.  The delinquency and
   cumulative loss tests are tighter in Chase 2016-2 than in Chase

   2016-1 given the lower initial subordinate percentage for Chase

   2016-2 (10.25%) compared to Chase 2016-1 (12.25%).  This lower
   initial subordinate percentage is due to the Class M-1
   certificate being redefined as a senior certificate in Chase
   2016-2.

  For each class of subordinate certificates (other than the
   subordinate certificate then outstanding with the highest
   payment priority), if the sum of the subordinate class
   percentage for such class and that of the classes below is less

   than the sum of the original credit support of that class and
   25% of the non-performing loan percentage, then the subordinate

   principal distribution will be zero.  Class M-1 no longer
   benefits from this test since it is now a senior bond, although

   it benefits from the other tests that divert payments to the
   senior certificates.

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

Down
Levels of credit protection that are insufficient to protect
investors against current expectations of loss could drive the
ratings down.  Losses could rise above Moody's original
expectations as a result of a higher number of obligor defaults or
deterioration in the value of the mortgaged property securing an
obligor's promise of payment.  Transaction performance also depends
greatly on the US macro economy and housing market.  Other reasons
for worse-than-expected performance include poor servicing, error
on the part of transaction parties, inadequate transaction
governance and fraud.

Up
Levels of credit protection that are higher than necessary to
protect investors against current expectations of loss could drive
the ratings up.  Losses could decline from Moody's original
expectations as a result of a lower number of obligor defaults or
appreciation in the value of the mortgaged property securing an
obligor's promise of payment.  Transaction performance also depends
greatly on the US macro economy and housing market.

Methodology

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating US Prime RMBS," published in February 2015.


CITIGROUP 2005-EMG: Moody's Affirms Caa3 Rating on Cl. X Certs
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on two classes
in Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-EMG as follows:

Cl. M, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Sep 25, 2015 Downgraded to
Caa3 (sf)

Cl. X, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Sep 25, 2015 Downgraded to
Caa3 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating on Class M was affirmed because the rating is consistent
with Moody's expected loss. Class M has already experienced a 25%
realized loss based on its original certificate balance.

The rating on Class X was affirmed based on the credit performance
(or the weighted average rating factor or WARF) of its referenced
class.

Moody’s said, “We do not anticipate losses from the remaining
collateral in the current environment, the same as at last review.
However, over the remaining life of the transaction, losses may
emerge from macro stresses to the environment and changes in
collateral performance. Our ratings reflect the potential for
future losses under varying levels of stress.”

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

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in
the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the June 22, 2016 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99.9% to $1.0
million from $722 million at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by one mortgage loan.

Four loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in a
realized loss of $44,245 (for an average loss severity of 0.1%).
The certificates have an aggregate realized loss of $460,211 due
primarily to prior interest shortfall reimbursement.

The remaining loan is the 177-179 Forest Avenue Loan ($1.0 million
-- 100% of the pool), which is secured by a 48,192 square foot
single tenant retail property leased to Stop & Shop. The loan is
fully amortizing and the tenant lease expiration is concurrent with
the loan maturity date in 2020. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are
25% and 4.73X, respectively, compared to 27% and 4.53X at the last
review.


COMM MORTGAGE 2006-C7: Fitch Lowers Cl. A-J Debt Rating to 'Csf'
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded one class and affirmed 13 classes of
COMM Mortgage Trust commercial mortgage pass-through certificates
series 2006-C7.

                         KEY RATING DRIVERS

The downgrade reflects an increase in the number of specially
serviced loans (65.4% of the pool), higher loss expectations and a
greater certainty of losses associated with those assets since
Fitch's last rating action.  The pool is highly concentrated with
10 assets remaining, eight (65.4%) of which are in special
servicing.

Fitch modeled losses of 53.5% of the remaining pool; expected
losses on the original pool balance total 13.5%, including $229.3
million (9.4% of the original pool balance) in realized losses to
date.  Fitch has designated the eight specially serviced loans
(65.4%) as Fitch Loans of Concern.  The largest loan (32.6%) and
smallest loan (1.9%) continue to perform and mature in 2018.

As of the July 2016 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 92.3% to $188.7 million from
$2.45 billion at issuance.  No loans are defeased.  Interest
shortfalls are currently affecting classes B through P.

The largest contributor to expected losses is the
specially-serviced Wachovia Tower loan (25.5%), which is secured by
a 377,684 square foot (sf) office property built in 1985 and
located in Baltimore, MD.  The largest tenants: Wells Fargo Bank
(21%), Whiteford, Taylor & Preston LLP (24%), and McGuire, Woods
(8%), have lease expirations in 2022, 2019, and 2017, respectively.


The loan was transferred to special servicing in October 2015 due
to imminent default.  Per the special servicer, the property has
produced negative cash flow in both 2014 and 2015 due to a
reduction in space by several large tenants and a free rent period
from August 2015 to October 2016 for the largest tenant.  Most
recently, the second largest tenant, Whiteford, Taylor & Preston
LLP (50,000 SF), executed a lease extension/relocation, which will
secure them at the property through 2029.  Additionally, a new
tenant signed a 15,000 sf lease, which will increase occupancy by
4% after the new tenant occupies the space later in 2016.  The
special servicer's strategy is to dual track
foreclosure/receivership while continuing loan modification
discussions with the borrower.  The property is 72.6% occupied as
of March 2016 with average rent of $23.48 psf.  Per REIS, as of 1st
Quarter (1Q) 2016, the Baltimore office market had a vacancy rate
of 15.7% with average rent of $24.14 psf.  There is 43% upcoming
rollover in 2016 and 13% in 2017.  The loan matured on May 1, 2016.


The next largest contributor to expected losses is the
specially-serviced Blue Bell loan (11.3%), which is secured by a
123,440 sf office building located in Blue Bell, PA, approximately
15 miles north of Philadelphia.  The largest tenants are Skanska
USA Inc. LLC and Phoenixville Hospital Co LLC with lease
expirations in August 2019 and April 2018, respectively.  The
building is 27% occupied as of May 2016 with an average rent of $24
sf and continues to be marketed for lease.  The decline in
performance was mainly due to a major tenant (33%) vacating in
April 2015.  The tenant paid a termination fee of approximately
$415,000.  Per the special servicer, high vacancies continue to
plague the market with the submarket having a vacancy rate of 28%.
Market rents are $17 sf for office space and $21 for medical office
space.  There have been no new leases signed in over a year.

The third largest contributor to expected losses is the performing
Fiddler's Green Center loan (32.6%), which is secured by two
six-story Class A office buildings totaling 414,693 sf located in
the Denver, CO southeast submarket.  The largest tenants are
Charter Communications (39%), Fidelity Investments (24%) and Arthur
J. Gallagher (6%), with lease expirations in January 2017, March
2023, and June 2016, respectively.  An update on the Arthur J.
Gallagher lease renewal was requested but was not received;
however, the tenant continues to list the property as the address
on their website.  The property was 97.4% occupied as of December
2015 with an average rent of $21 sf.  There is approximately 6%
upcoming rollover in 2016 and 31% in 2017.  Per REIS as of 1Q 2016,
the Denver southeast office submarket vacancy is 19.2% with average
asking rent of $19.58 sf.

                       RATING SENSITIVITIES

The remaining classes are distressed and will see further
downgrades as losses are realized.

                       DUE DILIGENCE USAGE

No third party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating action.


Fitch has downgraded and revised the Recovery Estimate for:

   -- $129.6 million class A-J to 'Csf' from 'CCsf'; RE 65%.

Fitch also affirmed these classes:

   -- $52 million class B at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
   -- $7.1 million class C at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class D at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class E at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class F at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class G at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class H at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class O at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

The class A-1, A-2, A-3, A-AB, A-4, A-1-A and A-M certificates have
paid in full.  Fitch does not rate the class P certificates. Fitch
previously withdrew the rating on the interest-only class X
certificates.


CONNECTICUT AVENUE: Moody's Assigns (P)B1 Rating on Cl. 1M-2 Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to six
classes of notes on CAS 2016-C04, a securitization designed to
provide credit protection to the Federal National Mortgage
Association (Fannie Mae) against the performance of a reference
pool of mortgages totaling approximately $42 billion.  All of the
Notes in the transaction are direct, unsecured obligations of
Fannie Mae, and as such investors are exposed to the credit risk of
Fannie Mae (Aaa Stable).

The complete rating action is:

  $500.9 million of Class 1M-1 notes, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)
  $701.2 million of Class 1M-2 notes, Assigned (P)B1 (sf)

The Class 1M-2 note holders can exchange their notes for these
notes:

  $300.5 million of Class 1M-2A exchangeable notes, Assigned
   (P)Ba2 (sf)
  $400.7 million of Class 1M-2B exchangeable notes, Assigned
   (P)B2 (sf)

The Class 1M-2A note holders can exchange their notes for these
notes:

  $300.5 million of Class 1M-2F exchangeable notes, Assigned
   (P)Ba2 (sf)
  $300.5 million of Class 1M-2I exchangeable notes, Assigned
   (P)Ba2 (sf)

CAS 2016-C04 is the thirteenth transaction in the Connecticut
Avenue Securities series issued by Fannie Mae.  Unlike a typical
RMBS transaction, noteholders are not entitled to receive any cash
from the mortgage loans in the reference pool.  Instead, the timing
and amount of principal and interest that Fannie Mae is obligated
to pay on the Notes is linked to the performance of the mortgage
loans in the reference pool.

CAS 2016-C04's note write-downs are determined by actual realized
losses and modification losses on the loans in the reference pool,
and not tied to pre-set tiered severity schedules.  In addition,
the interest amount paid to the notes can be reduced by the amount
of modification loss incurred on the mortgage loans.  CAS 2016-C04
is also the fifth transaction in the CAS series to have a legal
final maturity of 12.5 years, as compared to 10 years in previous
fixed severity CAS securitizations.

Moody's rating on the transaction is based on both quantitative and
qualitative analyses.  This included a quantitative evaluation of
the credit quality of the reference pool and the impact of the
structural mechanisms on credit enhancement.  In addition, Moody's
made qualitative assessments of counterparty performance.

Moody's base-case expected loss for the reference pool is 1.10% and
is expected to reach 9.45% at a stress level consistent with a Aaa
rating.

Below is a summary description of the transaction and Moody's
rating rationale.

The Notes
The 1M-1 notes are adjustable rate P&I notes with an interest rate
that adjusts relative to LIBOR.

The 1M-2 notes are adjustable rate P&I notes with an interest rate
that adjusts relative to LIBOR.  The holders of the 1M-2 notes can
exchange those notes for an 1M-2A exchangeable note and an 1M-2B
exchangeable note.

Additionally, the holders of the 1M-2A notes can exchange those
notes for the 1M-2F note and the 1M-2I note (together with the 1M-2
note referred as the "RCR Notes").  The 1M-2I exchangeable notes
are fixed rate interest only notes that have a notional balance
that equals the 1M-2A note balance.  The 1M-2F notes are adjustable
rate P&I notes that have a balance that equals the 1M-2A note
balance and an interest rate that adjusts relative to LIBOR.

Fannie Mae will only make principal payments on the notes based on
the scheduled and unscheduled principal payments that are actually
collected on the reference pool mortgages.  Losses on the notes
occur as a result of credit events, and are determined by actual
realized and modification losses on loans in the reference pool,
and not tied to a pre-set loss severity schedule.  Fannie Mae is
obligated to retire the Notes in January 2029 if balances remain
outstanding.

Credit events in CAS 2016-C04 occur when a short sale is settled,
when a mortgage note that is 12 or more months delinquent is sold
prior to foreclosure, when the mortgaged property that secured the
related mortgage note is sold to a third party at a foreclosure
sale, when an REO disposition occurs, or when the related mortgage
note is charged-off.  This differs from previous CAS fixed severity
securitizations, where credit events occur as early as when a
reference obligation is 180 or more days delinquent.
                         RATINGS RATIONALE

Summary Credit Analysis and Rating Rationale

As part of its analysis, Moody's considered historic Fannie Mae
performance and severity data, the eligibility criteria of loans in
the reference pool, and the high credit quality of the underlying
collateral.  The reference pool consists of loans that Fannie Mae
acquired between July 1, 2015, and Oct. 31, 2015, and have no
previous 30-day delinquencies.  The loans in the reference pool are
to strong borrowers, as the weighted average credit scores of 748
indicate. The weighted average CLTV of 76.70% is higher than recent
private label prime jumbo deals, which typically have CLTVs in the
high 60's range, but is similar to the weighted average CLTVs of
other CAS transactions.

Structural Considerations

Moody's took structural features such as the principal payment
waterfall of the notes, a 12.5-year bullet maturity, performance
triggers, as well as the allocation of realized losses and
modification losses into consideration in our cash flow analysis.
The final structure for the transaction reflects consistent credit
enhancement levels available to the notes per the term sheet
provided for the provisional ratings.

For modification losses, Moody's has taken into consideration the
level of rate modifications based on the projected defaults, the
weighted average coupon of the reference pool (4.21%), and compared
that with the available credit enhancement on the notes, the coupon
and the accrued interest amount of the most junior bonds.  The
Class 1B and Class 1B-H reference tranches colletively represent
1.00% of the pool.  The final coupons on the notes will have an
impact on the amount of interest available to absorb modification
losses from the reference pool.

The ratings are linked to Fannie Mae's rating.  As an unsecured
general obligation of Fannie Mae, the rating on the notes will be
capped by the rating of Fannie Mae, which Moody's currently rates
Aaa (stable).

Collateral Analysis

The reference pool consists of 183,335 loans that meet specific
eligibility criteria, which limits the pool to first lien, fixed
rate, fully amortizing loans with an original term of 301-360
months and LTVs that range between 60% and 80% on one to four unit
properties.  Overall, the reference pool is of prime quality.  The
credit positive aspects of the pool include borrower, loan and
geographic diversification, and a high weighted average FICO of
748.  There are no interest-only (IO) loans in the reference pool
and all of the loans are underwritten to full documentation
standards.

Methodology

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating US Prime RMBS," published on February 2015.

While assessing the ratings on this transaction, Moody's did not
deviate from its published methodology.  The severities for this
transaction were estimated using the data on Fannie Mae's actual
loss severities.

Reps and Warranties
Fannie Mae is not providing loan level reps and warranties (RWs)
for this transaction because the notes are a direct obligation of
Fannie Mae.  Fannie Mae commands robust RWs from its
seller/servicers pertaining to all facets of the loan, including
but not limited to compliance with laws, compliance with all
underwriting guidelines, enforceability, good property condition
and appraisal procedures.  To the extent that a lender repurchases
a loan or indemnifies Fannie Mae discovers as a result of an
confirmed underwriting eligibility defect in the reference pool,
prior months' credit events will be reversed.  Moody's expected
credit event rate takes into consideration historic repurchase
rates.

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

Up
Levels of credit protection that are higher than necessary to
protect investors against current expectations of loss could drive
the ratings up.  Losses could decline from Moody's original
expectations as a result of a lower number of obligor defaults or
appreciation in the value of the mortgaged property securing an
obligor's promise of payment.  Transaction performance also depends
greatly on the US macro economy and housing market.

Down
Levels of credit protection that are insufficient to protect
investors against current expectations of loss could drive the
ratings down.  Losses could rise above Moody's original
expectations as a result of a higher number of obligor defaults or
deterioration in the value of the mortgaged property securing an
obligor's promise of payment.  Transaction performance also depends
greatly on the US macro economy and housing market.  Other reasons
for worse-than-expected performance include poor servicing, error
on the part of transaction parties, inadequate transaction
governance and fraud.  As an unsecured general obligation of Fannie
Mae, the ratings on the notes depend on the rating of Fannie Mae,
which Moody's currently rates Aaa.


CPS AUTO 2016-C: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB- Rating on Cl. E Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to CPS Auto
Receivables Trust 2016-C's $318.5 million asset-backed notes.

The note issuance is an asset-backed securities transaction backed
by subprime auto loan receivables.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of July 14,
2016.  Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect:

   -- The availability of approximately 54.75%, 48.33%, 38.60%,
      28.95%, and 23.40%, of credit support for the class A, B, C,

      D, and E notes, respectively, based on stressed cash flow
      scenarios (including excess spread).  These credit support
      levels provide coverage of approximately 3.20x, 2.70x,
      2.10x, 1.55x, and 1.27x S&P's 17.00% expected cumulative net

      loss (CNL) range for the class A, B, C, D, and E notes,
      respectively.

   -- S&P's expectation that, under a moderate stress scenario of
      1.60x its expected net loss level, the preliminary ratings
      on the class A and B notes will not decline by more than one

      rating category during the first year, and the preliminary
      ratings on the class C through E notes will not decline by
      more than two rating categories during the first year, all
      else being equal, which is consistent with S&P's credit
      stability criteria.

   -- The preliminary rated notes' underlying credit enhancement
      in the form of subordination, overcollateralization, a
      reserve account, and excess spread for the class A, B, C, D,

      and E notes.

   -- The timely interest and principal payments made to the
      preliminary rated notes under S&P's stressed cash flow
      modeling scenarios, which S&P believes are appropriate for
      the assigned preliminary ratings.

   -- The transaction's payment and credit enhancement structure,
      which includes a noncurable performance trigger.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

CPS Auto Receivables Trust 2016-C

Class    Rating      Type          Interest     Prelim amt
                                   rate           (mil. $)
A        AAA (sf)    Senior        Fixed            159.25
B        AA (sf)     Subordinate   Fixed             38.18
C        A (sf)      Subordinate   Fixed             50.38
D        BBB- (sf)   Subordinate   Fixed             39.81
E        BB- (sf)    Subordinate   Fixed             30.88


DRYDEN XXVIII: S&P Affirms BB- Rating on Class B-2L Notes
---------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings affirmed its ratings on the class A-1L, A-2L,
A-3L, B-1L, B-2L, and B-3L notes from Dryden XXVIII Senior Loan
Fund, a U.S. collateralized loan obligation (CLO) managed by
Prudential Investment Management Inc.

The rating actions follow S&P's review of the transaction's
performance using data from the May 31, 2016, trustee report.  The
transaction is in its reinvestment period, which is scheduled to
end in August 2017.

Since the transaction's effective date, the trustee-reported
collateral portfolio's weighted average life has decreased to 4.57
years from 5.70 years.  Because time horizon weighs heavily into
default probability, a shorter weighted average life positively
affects the collateral pool's creditworthiness.  In addition, the
number of obligors in the portfolio has increased to 356 from 231
during this period, which contributed to the portfolio's increased
diversification.

Although the amount of assets in the portfolio with an S&P Global
Ratings credit rating of 'CCC+' or below has increased to $19.27
million as of the May 2016 trustee report from $1 million as of the
August 2013 trustee report, which S&P used in its effective date
analysis, there has also been an increase in the collateral rated
'BB–' and higher.  This helped maintain the portfolio's weighted
average rating at the 'B+' level.  There are no defaults in the
portfolio per the May 2016 trustee report.

The portfolio's stable performance is also reflected in the
reported overcollateralization (O/C) ratios, which, as of the May
2016 trustee report, had declined slightly (between 50 to 65 basis
points) from the August 2013 trustee report but remain well above
the minimum requirement.

The affirmed ratings reflect adequate credit support at the current
rating levels.

Although S&P's cash flow results indicated higher ratings for the
class A-2L, A-3L, B-1L, and B-2L notes, and a lower rating for the
class B-3L notes, S&P's analysis considered both the transaction's
stability and additional sensitivity runs that allowed for
volatility in the underlying portfolio given that the transaction
is still in its reinvestment period.

S&P's review of this transaction included a cash flow analysis,
based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in the May 2016
trustee report, to estimate future performance.  In line with S&P's
criteria, its cash flow scenarios applied forward-looking
assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of defaults and
recoveries upon default under various interest rate and
macroeconomic scenarios.  In addition, S&P's analysis considered
the transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or ultimate
principal to each of the rated tranches.  The results of the cash
flow analysis demonstrated, in S&P's view, that all of the rated
outstanding classes have adequate credit enhancement available at
the rating levels associated with these rating actions.

S&P Global Ratings will continue to review whether, in its view,
the ratings assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit
enhancement available to support them and take rating actions as it
deems necessary.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Dryden XXVIII Senior Loan Fund

Class     Rating
A-1L      AAA (sf)
A-2L      AA (sf)
A-3L      A (sf)
B-1L      BBB (sf)
B-2L      BB- (sf)
B-3L      B (sf)


EIG GPF II: Fitch Lowers Class C Notes Rating to 'Dsf'
------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded the ratings for the following classes
of notes issued by EIG's Global Project Fund II (GPFII):

-- Class C floating-rate notes to 'Dsf' from 'Csf';
-- Class D floating-rate notes to 'Dsf' from 'Csf'.

The class B-1 and B-2 fixed-rate notes have paid in full (PIF).
Fitch's downgrade of the class C and D notes follows missed
principal payments on the notes' scheduled maturity dates on June
24, 2016.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Class B Notes PIF: The approximately $67.0 million due in principal
and interest payments, final swap payment, fees and expenses of the
class B notes were paid in full with the following proceeds: (i)
$5.6 million from final payment of Corona Trading Corporation, (ii)
$23.1 million from the sale of Cornhusker Energy Lexington, (iii)
$37.1 from the sale of Kiowa Power Partners, and (iv) $1.4 million
in proceeds from the principal and interest payments from Compania
de Energia Mexicana ("CEM"). The payments from CEM were paid to the
trust on June 30, 2016 and distributed to noteholders on July 15,
2016.

Class C and D Missed Payments: The class C and D note-holders are
expected to begin discussing the management and disposition of the
two remaining portfolio assets: (i) CEM - performing, contracted
hydroelectric power plant in Mexico, maturing in March 2018, and
(ii) Oceanografia - non-performing offshore oilfield services
company in Mexico, currently undergoing through a restructuring
plan and litigation against some responsible parties.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The 'D' rating will be withdrawn within 11 months of July 19, 2016,
the date the ratings release was issued.


ETRADE RV 2004-1: Moody's Affirms Caa3(sf) Rating on Class D Debt
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service upgraded three tranches and affirmed one
tranche issued from E*Trade RV and Marine Trust 2004-1, a
transaction backed by recreational vehicle (RV) and marine
installment sales contracts.

The complete rating actions are as follow:

Issuer: E*Trade RV and Marine Trust 2004-1

Cl. A-5, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Aug 20, 2015 Affirmed
Baa1 (sf)

Cl. B, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Aug 20, 2015 Affirmed Ba2
(sf)

Cl. C, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Aug 20, 2015 Affirmed B2
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Aug 20, 2015 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The upgrades resulted from the build-up of credit enhancement due
to subordination and stable performance of the underlying
collateral over the past several years. The lifetime cumulative net
loss (CNL) expectation was reduced to 10.00% from 11.50%, as the
transaction is performing better than previously anticipated. The
original lifetime cumulative net loss expectation was 2.25% at
closing.

While the build-up of credit enhancement due to the sequential pay
deal structure as well as stable performance supports rating
upgrades for the most senior tranches, cumulative losses on the
underlying collateral have depleted the reserve account and eroded
the credit enhancement available to the securities. The transaction
is currently under-collateralized by approximately $3.3 million or
72% of the unrated Class-E principal balance, which is currently
protecting the remaining tranches from the adverse effects of
under-collateralization. As such, the Caa3 rating of the Class D
notes has been affirmed.

Unlike other vehicle-backed ABS, the impact of the weakened economy
on RV transactions was more severe and long lasting due to the
non-essential nature of the underlying collateral, and the longer
financing terms, which on average range between 170 and 185 months
at closing.

Below are key performance metrics (as of the June 2016 distribution
date) and credit assumptions for the affected transactions. Credit
assumptions include Moody's lifetime CNL expectation, expressed as
a percentage of the original pool balance, and Moody's lifetime
remaining CNL expectation, expressed as a percentage of the current
pool balance. Performance metrics include the pool factor (the
ratio of the current collateral balance to the original collateral
balance at closing); and total credit enhancement, which typically
consists of subordination, overcollateralization, reserve fund and
excess spread per annum.

Issuer: E*Trade RV and Marine Trust 2004-1

Lifetime CNL expectation -- 10.00%; prior expectation (August 2015)
-- 11.50%

Remaining CNL expectation -- 12.32%

Pool factor -- 7.97%

Total credit enhancement (excluding excess spread): Class A --
85.07%, Class B -- 58.44%, Class C -- 33.86%, Class D-- 5.18%.

Class E Balance - $4,540,760

Overcollateralization - $(3,265,744)

Excess spread per annum -- Approximately 1.3%


FIRST FRANKLIN 2005-FF11: Moody Hikes on Cl. M-1 Debt Rating to Ba2
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of 11 tranches
from 6 transactions backed by Subprime RMBS loans.

Complete rating actions are:

Issuer: CSFB Home Equity Asset Trust 2006-2

  Cl. 1-A-1, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Sept. 4, 2015,
   Upgraded to Baa3 (sf)
  Cl. 2-A-4, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Sept. 4, 2015,
   Upgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Issuer: CSFB Home Equity Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2005-5

  Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Sept. 4, 2015,
   Upgraded to Aa2 (sf)
  Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Sept. 4, 2015,
   Upgraded to A1 (sf)
  Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Sept. 4, 2015,
   Upgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Issuer: First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-FF1

  Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Dec. 4, 2014,
   Upgraded to B1 (sf)
  Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on April 6, 2010,
   Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-FF11

  Cl. A-2D, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Sept. 30, 2015,
   Upgraded to Aa3 (sf)
  Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Dec. 4, 2014,
   Upgraded to B1 (sf)

Issuer: First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-FF11

  Cl. I-A-1, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on April 6, 2010,
   Downgraded to B3 (sf)

Issuer: Saxon Asset Securities Trust 2006-1


  Cl. M-1, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Sept. 22, 2015,
   Upgraded to B2 (sf)

                         RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings upgraded are due to the total credit enhancement
available to the bonds.  The rating of Class I-A-1 of First
Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-FF11 was upgraded to B2 from B3
due to change in principal distribution for Group 1 bonds, I-A-1
and I-A-2, to sequential from pro rata in the earlier distribution
periods, as a result of the depletion of subordinate bonds in the
transaction.  The rating actions are a result of the recent
performance of the underlying pools and reflects Moody's updated
loss expectation on these pools.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.

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

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment rate.
The unemployment rate fell to 4.9% in June 2016 from 5.3% in June
2015.  Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of 4.5% to
5.5% for the 2016 year.  Deviations from this central scenario
could lead to rating actions in the sector.

House prices are another key driver of US RMBS performance. Moody's
expects house prices to continue to rise in 2016.  Lower increases
than Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative rating
actions.

Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent
on servicer procedures.  Any change resulting from servicing
transfers or other policy or regulatory change can impact the
performance of these transactions.


FREMF MORTGAGE 2012-KF01: Moody's Affirms B1 Rating on Cl. X Debt
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service upgraded the rating on one class and
affirmed the rating on one class of FREMF Mortgage Trust,
Multifamily Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2012-KF01
as:

  Cl. C, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Sept. 4, 2015,
   Upgraded to Aa3 (sf)

  Cl. X, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on Sept. 4, 2015, Downgraded

   to B1 (sf)

One rating was affirmed for one related class of Freddie Mac
Structured Pass-Through Certificates (SPCs), Series K-F01 as:

  Cl. X, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on Sep 4, 2015 Downgraded to

   B1 (sf)

The Structured Pass-Through Certificates (SPCs) from FHMS KF01
represents a pass-through interest in its associated underlying
CMBS Class. SPC Class X represents a pass-through interest in the
underlying CMBS Class X.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating on the P&I class was upgraded based primarily on an
increase in credit support resulting from loan paydowns and
amortization.  The deal has paid down 56% since Moody's last
review.

The rating on the IO Class (Class X) was affirmed based on the
credit performance (or the weighted average rating factor or WARF)
of its referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 0.5% of the
current balance, compared to 8.5% at Moody's last review.  Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now less than 0.1% of
the original pooled balance, compared to 1.7% at the last review.
Moody's provides a current list of base expected losses for conduit
and fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at:

   http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255

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

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term.  Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in
the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

               METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The methodologies used in these ratings were "Approach to Rating US
and Canadian Conduit/Fusion CMBS" published in December 2014, and
"Moody's Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single
Borrower CMBS" published in October 2015.

                     DESCRIPTION OF MODELS USED

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model, which it
uses for both conduit and fusion transactions.  Credit enhancement
levels for conduit loans are driven by property type, Moody's
actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality grade (which
reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to estimate Moody's
value).  Moody's fuses the conduit results with the results of its
analysis of investment grade structured credit assessed loans and
any conduit loan that represents 10% or greater of the current pool
balance.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure the diversity of loan
sizes, where a higher number represents greater diversity.  Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including the risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances.  The credit neutral Herf score is 40.  The
pool has a Herf of 6, the same as at Moody's last review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model and then reconciles and weights the results from the
conduit and large loan models in formulating a rating
recommendation.  The large loan model derives credit enhancement
levels based on an aggregation of adjusted loan-level proceeds
derived from Moody's loan-level LTV ratios.  Major adjustments to
determining proceeds include leverage, loan structure, property
type and sponsorship.  Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

                         DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the June 27, 2016, distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 91% to $124 million
from $1.37 billion at securitization.  The certificates are
collateralized by eight mortgage loans ranging in size from 3.1% to
27.9% of the pool.  The pool contains no loans with
investment-grade structured credit assessments and no defeased
loans.

No loans have liquidated from the pool and there are no loans in
special servicing.

One loan, constituting 6.6% of the pool, is on the master
servicer's watchlist.  The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package.  As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews the
watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that could
affect performance.

Moody's received full year 2015 operating results for 100% of the
pool.  Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 89%, compared to
101% at Moody's last review.  Moody's conduit component excludes
loans with structured credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans,
and specially serviced and troubled loans.  Moody's net cash flow
(NCF) reflects a weighted average haircut of 8% to the most
recently available net operating income (NOI).  Moody's value
reflects a weighted average capitalization rate of 8.9%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 2.12X and 1.12X,
respectively, compared to 2.23X and 0.96X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service.  Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The top three conduit loans represent 59% of the pool balance.  The
largest loan is the Marquis At Waterview Loan
($34.6 million -- 27.9% of the pool).  The loan is secured by a
528-unit multifamily property in Richardson, Texas, a northern
Dallas suburb.  The property was 91% leased as of December 2015,
the same as of December 2014.  The loan benefits from a 30 year
amortization schedule.  Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 81% and
1.20X, respectively, compared to 83% and 1.18X at the last review.

The second largest loan is the Marquis At Stonegate Loan ($19.6
million -- 15.7% of the pool).  The loan is secured by a 308-unit
multifamily property in Fort Worth, Texas.  The property was 94%
leased as of December 2015, compared to 93% as of December 2014.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 79% and 1.20X, respectively,
compared to 82% and 1.15X at the last review.

The third largest loan is the High View Place Loan ($18.9 million
  -- 15.2% of the pool).  The loan is secured by a 204-unit,
624-bed student housing apartment complex in San Antonio, Texas.
The complex is located just west of the University of Texas at San
Antonio campus.  The property was 96% leased as of December 2015,
compared to 90.5% as of December 2014.  The loan benefits from a 30
year amortization schedule.  Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 104%
and 0.93X, respectively, compared to 128% and 0.76X at the last
review.


GALAXY XXII CLO: S&P Assigns B- Rating on Class F Notes
-------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Galaxy XXII CLO
Ltd./Galaxy XXII CLO LLC's $392.00 million fixed- and floating-rate
notes (including the combination notes).

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation transaction
backed by broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior secured term
loans.

The ratings reflect:

   -- The diversified collateral pool, which consists primarily of

      broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior secured term
      loans that are governed by collateral quality tests.  The
      credit enhancement provided through the subordination of
      cash flows, excess spread, and overcollateralization.

   -- The collateral manager's experienced team, which can affect
      the performance of the rated notes through collateral
      selection, ongoing portfolio management, and trading.  The
      transaction's legal structure, which is expected to be
      bankruptcy remote.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

Galaxy XXII CLO Ltd./Galaxy XXII CLO LLC

Class                   Rating                  Amount
                                              (mil. $)
A-1                     AAA (sf)                223.00
A-2                     AAA (sf)                 33.40
B-1                     AA (sf)                  41.80
B-2                     AA (sf)                   3.00
C-1                     A (sf)                   14.60
C-2                     A (sf)                   13.00
D                       BBB (sf)                 19.20
E-1                     BB- (sf)                 11.50
E-2                     BB- (sf)                  8.50
F                       B- (sf)                   4.00
Subordination notes     NR                       28.00
Combination notes(i)    A-p (sf)                 20.00

(i)Combination note rating only addresses the ultimate repayment of
the notional amount of $20 million by the transaction's legal final
maturity.  
p--Principal only.
NR--Not rated.


GS MORTGAGE 2013-GCJ16: Moody's Affirms Ba1 Rating on Cl. E Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on fifteen
classes in GS Mortgage Securities Trust, Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2013-GCJ16 as:

  Cl. A-1, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug. 6, 2015, Affirmed

   Aaa (sf)
  Cl. A-2, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug. 6, 2015, Affirmed

   Aaa (sf)
  Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug. 6, 2015, Affirmed

   Aaa (sf)
  Cl. A-4, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug. 6, 2015, Affirmed

   Aaa (sf)
  Cl. A-AB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug. 6, 2015,
   Affirmed Aaa (sf)
  Cl. A-S, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug. 6, 2015, Affirmed

   Aaa (sf)
  Cl. B, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Aug. 6, 2015, Affirmed
   Aa3 (sf)
  Cl. C, Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on Aug. 6, 2015, Affirmed
   A3 (sf)
  Cl. D, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Aug. 6, 2015, Affirmed
   Baa3 (sf)
  Cl. E, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on Aug. 6, 2015, Affirmed
   Ba1 (sf)
  Cl. F, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Aug. 6, 2015, Affirmed
   Ba3 (sf)
  Cl. G, Affirmed B3 (sf); previously on Aug. 6, 2015, Affirmed
   B3 (sf)
  Cl. PEZ, Affirmed A1 (sf); previously on Aug. 6, 2015, Affirmed
   A1 (sf)
  Cl. X-A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug. 6, 2015, Affirmed

   Aaa (sf)
  Cl. X-B, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Aug. 6, 2015, Affirmed

   Aa3 (sf)

                        RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings on the P&I classes were affirmed because the
transaction's key metrics, including Moody's loan-to-value (LTV)
ratio, Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and the
transaction's Herfindahl Index (Herf), are within acceptable
ranges.

The transaction contains a group of exchangeable certificates.
Classes A-S, B and C may be exchanged for Class PEZ certificates
and Class PEZ may be exchanged for the Classes A-S, B and C.  The
PEZ certificates will be entitled to receive the sum of interest
and principal distributable on the Classes A-S, B and C
certificates that are exchanged for such PEZ certificates.  The
rating on the PEZ class was affirmed due to the credit performance
(or the weighted average rating factor or WARF) of its exchangeable
classes.

The ratings on the two IO classes were affirmed based on the credit
performance (or the weighted average rating factor or WARF) of the
respective referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 2.0% of the
current balance, compared to 2.5% at Moody's last review.  Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 1.9% of the original
pooled balance, compared to 2.5% at the last review. Moody's
provides a current list of base expected losses for conduit and
fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at:

  http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255

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

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term.  Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in
the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Approach to
Rating US and Canadian Conduit/Fusion CMBS" published in December
2014.

DESCRIPTION OF MODELS USED

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model, which it
uses for both conduit and fusion transactions.  Credit enhancement
levels for conduit loans are driven by property type, Moody's
actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality grade (which
reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to estimate Moody's
value).  Moody's fuses the conduit results with the results of its
analysis of investment grade structured credit assessed loans and
any conduit loan that represents 10% or greater of the current pool
balance.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure the diversity of loan
sizes, where a higher number represents greater diversity.  Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including the risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances.  The credit neutral Herf score is 40.  The
pool has a Herf of 33, compared to 34 at the prior review.

                       DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the July 10, 2016, distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 4% to $1.04 billion
from $1.09 billion at securitization.  The certificates are
collateralized by 76 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 7% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting 47% of
the pool.  One loan, constituting 6% of the pool, has an investment
grade structured credit assessments.  One loan, constituting less
than 1% of the pool, has defeased and is secured by US government
securities.

Nine loans, constituting 16% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist.  The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package.  As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews the
watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that could
affect performance.  There are currently no loans in special
servicing.

Moody's received full year 2014 operating results for 100% of the
pool, and full or partial year 2015 operating results for 91% of
the pool.  Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 95%, compared to
99% at Moody's last review.  Moody's conduit component excludes
loans with structured credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans,
and specially serviced and troubled loans.  Moody's net cash flow
(NCF) reflects a weighted average haircut of 12% to the most
recently available net operating income (NOI).  Moody's value
reflects a weighted average capitalization rate of 9.7%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.52X and 1.13X,
respectively, compared to 1.47X and 1.08X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service.  Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The loan with a structured credit assessment is the Gates at
Manhasset Loan ($57.4 million -- 5.5% of the pool), which is
secured by a 106,000 square foot (SF) open air retail property
located on Northern Boulevard in Manhasset, New York.  The property
was 99% leased as of March 2016 with average rents of approximately
$74 per square foot (PSF).  The property's tenants include Crate &
Barrel as the anchor, and in-line shops include Gap, Urban
Outfitters, Banana Republic and Abercrombie & Fitch. Moody's
structured credit assessment and stressed DSCR are a1 (sca.pd) and
1.31X, respectively.

The top three conduit loans represent 20% of the pool balance.  The
largest loan is the Windsor Court New Orleans Loan ($70.3 million
-- 6.7% of the pool), which is secured by 316-key hotel located in
the central business district (CBD) of New Orleans, Louisiana (less
than one mile from the French Quarter).  According to the May 2015
Smith Travel Research (STR) report, the property has the strongest
revenue per available room (RevPAR) penetration rate amongst its
competitive set.  As of May 2015, the property's trailing twelve
month RevPAR increased by 6% to $225.72, over the prior year.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 99% and 1.20X, respectively,
compared to 101% and 1.18X at last review.

The second largest loan is the Miracle Mile Shops Loan ($70 million
-- 6.7% of the pool), which is secured by a 450,000 SF regional
mall located on the Las Vegas Strip in Nevada.  The loan represents
a pari passu interest in a $580 million first mortgage loan.  The
property is located at the base of the Planet Hollywood Hotel.  The
collateral was 96% leased as of March 2016, compared to 98% at
securitization.  The mall's in-line sales were $848 PSF for the
rolling 12 month period as of February 2016.  Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 89% and 0.88X, respectively, the same as at last
review.

The third largest loan is the Matrix MHC Portfolio Loan
($68.1 million -- 6.5% of the pool), which is secured by 11
manufactured housing communities located in Michigan (10
properties) and Alabama (1 property).  The loan represents a pari
passu interest in a $132 million first mortgage, and is also
encumbered by a $15 million mezzanine loan.  The portfolio contains
seven all-age and four restricted-age manufactured housing
communities.  The portfolio's weighted average occupancy was 67% as
of March 2016, compared to 66% at last review and 70% at
securitization.  Despite the decrease in occupancy, the portfolio
performance has improved due an increase in rental revenue.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 107% and 1.10X, respectively,
compared to 108% and 1.09X at last review.


HILTON USA 2013-HLT: S&P Affirms BB Rating on 3 Tranches
--------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings affirmed its ratings on 13 classes of commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates from Hilton USA Trust 2013-HLT,
a U.S. commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.

The affirmations on the principal- and interest-paying certificate
classes reflect S&P's analysis of the transaction, primarily using
its criteria for rating U.S. and Canadian CMBS transactions.  S&P's
analysis included reviewing the portfolio of 22 full-service and
limited-service hotels, which back the $3.42 billion interest-only
(IO) mortgage loan with both fixed- and floating-rate components.
S&P also reviewed the transaction structure and
liquidity available to the trust.

The affirmations on classes A-FL, B-FL, C-FL, D-FL, E-FL, A-FX,
B-FX, C-FX, D-FX, and E-FX reflect subordination and liquidity that
are consistent with the current ratings.  Although the portfolio's
revenue per available room (RevPAR) and net cash flow (NCF) have
improved since issuance, S&P's analysis also considered the
potential for the portfolio's performance to moderate as lodging
supply throughout the U.S. increases or if economic conditions
weaken.

S&P affirmed its ratings on the class X-FL, X-1FX, and X-2FX IO
certificates based on S&P's criteria for rating IO securities, in
which the ratings on the IO securities would not be higher than the
lowest rated reference class.  The notional balance on class X-FL
references classes A-FL, B-FL, C-FL, D-FL, and E-FL, and the
notional balances on classes X-1FX and X-2FX reference the A-FX
class and a portion of the B-FX class.

S&P's analysis of stand-alone (single-borrower) transactions is
predominantly a recovery-based approach that assumes a loan
default.  Using this approach, S&P's property-level analysis
included a revaluation of the lodging properties that secure the
trust's mortgage loan.  The portfolio is geographically dispersed
as the 22 hotels totaling 18,041 guest rooms are located across 13
states and Puerto Rico (one property totaling 318 rooms in
Washington D.C. was released in January 2016).  However, as of
year-end 2015, the NCF from the three properties in New York and
Hawaii comprised about 45% of the portfolio's total NCF.  While the
NCF for the two Hawaii hotels has increased since 2013, the NCF for
the Hilton New York property has declined by about 27% since 2013.
This decline is likely due to the significant increase in new hotel
supply in New York City over the past several years.  Nevertheless,
S&P's analysis considered the improving servicer-reported NCF for
the portfolio overall, which increased to $468 million in 2015 from
$405 million in 2013. However, S&P also considered the cash flow
variability the portfolio has experienced, including the
portfolio's NCF decline of about 30% in 2009 during the economic
downturn, and S&P factored in the recent deceleration in RevPAR
growth in certain U.S. markets thus far in 2016.  S&P then derived
its sustainable in-place NCF, which it divided by an 8.86% weighted
average capitalization rate to determine S&P's expected-case value.
This yielded an overall S&P Global Ratings' loan-to-value ratio of
78.3% based on the trust balance and an S&P Global Ratings' debt
service coverage (DSC) of 2.20x based on the fixed interest rate
for the fixed-rate mortgage loan component and a stressed rate plus
the spread of 2.65% for the floating-rate component.

According to the July 8, 2016, trustee remittance report, the
mortgage loan has a $3.42 billion trust and whole-loan balance,
down from $3.50 billion at issuance.  The loan has two IO
components: a two-year floating-rate component, with three one-year
extension options, and a five-year fixed-rate component.  The
five-year fixed rate component pays an annual fixed interest rate
of 4.47%.  As of the July 2016 trustee remittance report, the
floating-rate component pays an annual floating interest rate of
LIBOR plus 2.65%.  There is no additional debt.  According to the
transaction documents, the borrowers will pay the special
servicing, work-out, and liquidation fees, as well as costs and
expenses incurred from appraisals and inspections conducted by the
special servicer.  To date, the trust has not incurred any
principal losses.

S&P based its analysis partly on a review of the property's
historical NCF for the years ended Dec. 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013,
which the master servicer provided, to determine S&P's opinion of
the lodging properties' sustainable cash flow.  The master
servicer, Midland Loan Services, reported a consolidated DSC of
3.26x on the trust balance for the trailing 12 months ended
Dec. 31, 2015.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Hilton USA Trust 2013-HLT
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates

Class     Rating
A-FL      AAA (sf)
B-FL      AA- (sf)
C-FL      A- (sf)
D-FL      BBB- (sf)
E-FL      BB (sf)
A-FX      AAA (sf)
B-FX      AA- (sf)
C-FX      A- (sf)
D-FX      BBB- (sf)
E-FX      BB (sf)
X-FL      BB (sf)
X-1FX     AA- (sf)
X-2FX     AA- (sf)


ICG US 2016-1: Moody's Assigns (Prov.)Ba3 Rating to Class D Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service, has assigned provisional ratings to five
classes of notes to be issued by ICG US CLO 2016-1, Ltd. (the
"Issuer" or "ICG US CLO 2016-1").

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$256,000,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2028 (the "Class A-1 Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$51,000,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2028
(the "Class A-2 Notes"), Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

US$18,000,000 Class B Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2028 (the "Class B Notes"), Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

US$26,000,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2028 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

US$17,000,000 Class D Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2028 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

The Class A-1 Notes, the Class A-2 Notes, the Class B Notes, the
Class C Notes and the Class D Notes are referred to herein,
collectively, as the "Rated Notes."

Moody's issues provisional ratings in advance of the final sale of
financial instruments, but these ratings only represent Moody's
preliminary credit opinions. Upon a conclusive review of a
transaction and associated documentation, Moody's will endeavor to
assign definitive ratings. A definitive rating, if any, may differ
from a provisional rating.

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's provisional ratings of the Rated Notes address the expected
losses posed to noteholders. The provisional ratings reflect the
risks due to defaults on the underlying portfolio of assets, the
transaction's legal structure, and the characteristics of the
underlying assets.

Moody's said, "ICG US CLO 2016-1 is a managed cash flow CLO. The
issued notes will be collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated
first lien senior secured corporate loans. At least 90% of the
portfolio must consist of senior secured loans, cash, and eligible
investments, and up to 10% of the portfolio may consist of second
lien loans and unsecured loans. We expect the portfolio to be
approximately [80]% ramped as of the closing date."

ICG Debt Advisors LLC (the "Manager") will direct the selection,
acquisition and disposition of the assets on behalf of the Issuer
and may engage in trading activity, including discretionary
trading, during the transaction's four year reinvestment period.
Thereafter, the Manager may reinvest unscheduled principal payments
and proceeds from sales of credit risk assets, subject to certain
restrictions.

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer will issue subordinated
notes.

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.


JFIN CLO 2013: S&P Affirms 'BB' Rating on Class D Notes
-------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings affirmed its ratings on the class A-1, A-2, B,
C, and D notes from JFIN CLO 2013 Ltd., a U.S. collateralized loan
obligation (CLO) transaction that closed in March 2013 and is
managed by Apex Credit Partners LLC.

The rating actions follow S&P's review of the transaction's
performance using data from the June 2016, trustee report.  The
transaction is scheduled to remain in its reinvestment period until
January 2017, and S&P anticipates that the manager will continue to
reinvest principal proceeds in line with the transaction
documents.

Since the transaction's effective date, the trustee reported
collateral portfolio's weighted average life has decreased to 4.29
years as the June 2016 trustee report from 5.50 years as reported
in August 2013.  Because time horizon weighs heavily into default
probability, a shorter weighted average life positively affects the
collateral pool's creditworthiness.  In addition, the number of
obligors in the portfolio has increased during this period, which
contributed to the portfolio's increased diversification.

The transaction has experienced an increase in both defaults and
assets rated 'CCC+' and below since the August 2013 effective date
report.  Specifically, the amount of defaulted assets increased to
$11.65 million as of June 2016, from $0 as of August 2013.  The
level of assets rated in the 'CCC' range increased to
$34.27 million from $10.02 million over the same period.

The increase in defaulted assets, as well as other factors, has
affected the level of credit support available to all tranches, as
seen by the decline in the overcollateralization (O/C) ratios:

   -- The class A O/C ratio was 139.04%, down from 142.05%.
   -- The class B O/C ratio was 124.86%, down from 127.56%.
   -- The class C O/C ratio was 116.14%, down from 118.65%.
   -- The class D O/C ratio was 108.96%, down from 111.32%.

Even with the decline in credit support, all coverage tests are
currently passing and are above the minimum requirements.

Overall, the increase in 'CCC+' and below rated assets has been
largely offset by the decline in the weighted average life.
However, any significant deterioration in these metrics could
negatively affect the deal in the future, especially the junior
tranches.  As such, the affirmed ratings reflect S&P's belief that
the credit support available is commensurate with the current
rating levels.

Although S&P's cash flow analysis indicates higher ratings for the
class A-2, B, C and D notes, its rating actions consider additional
sensitivity runs that considered the exposure to specific
distressed industries and allowed for volatility in the underlying
portfolio given that the transaction is still in its reinvestment
period.

S&P's review of the transaction relied, in part, upon a criteria
interpretation with respect to its May 2014 criteria, "CDOs:
Mapping A Third Party's Internal Credit Scoring System To Standard
& Poor's Global Rating Scale," which allows S&P to use a limited
number of public ratings from other Nationally Recognized
Statistical Rating Organizations (NRSROs) to assess the credit
quality of assets not rated by S&P Global Ratings.  The criteria
provide specific guidance for the treatment of corporate assets not
rated by S&P Global Ratings, while the interpretation outlines the
treatment of securitized assets.

S&P's review of this transaction included a cash flow analysis,
based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in the
aforementioned trustee report, to estimate future performance.  In
line with S&P's criteria, its cash flow scenarios applied
forward-looking assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of
defaults, and recoveries upon default, under various interest rate
and macroeconomic scenarios.  In addition, S&P's analysis
considered the transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or
ultimate principal to each of the rated tranches.  The results of
the cash flow analysis demonstrated, in S&P's view, that all of the
rated outstanding classes have adequate credit enhancement
available at the rating levels associated with these rating
actions.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and will take rating actions as S&P
deems necessary.

RATINGS AFFIRMED

JFIN CLO 2013 Ltd.
Class         Rating
A-1           AAA (sf)
A-2           AA (sf)
B             A (sf)
C             BBB (sf)
D             BB (sf)


JP MORGAN 2008-C2: Fitch Affirms 'Csf' Rating on 2 Tranches
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded three and affirmed 18 classes of J.P.
Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust series 2008-C2.

                        KEY RATING DRIVERS

The downgrades are largely due to higher expected losses on
specially serviced loans, as recent valuations have resulted in
lower recovery estimates.  The affirmations reflect sufficient
credit enhancement relative to Fitch expected losses and an
increase in pool defeasance.  Fitch modeled losses of 20.2% of the
remaining pool; expected losses on the original pool balance total
26.1%, including $157.1 million (13.5% of the original pool
balance) in realized losses to date.  Fitch has designated 22 loans
(38.3%) as Fitch Loans of Concern, which includes six specially
serviced assets (23.4%).

As of the June 2016 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by approximately 37.6% to $728
million from $1.16 billion at issuance.  Six loans (10%) are
currently defeased.  There are 62 loans remaining of the original
80. Interest shortfalls are currently affecting classes A-M through
T.

The largest contributor to expected losses remains the Westin
Portfolio, the current pool's largest loan (15.2%).  The loan is
secured by two Westin resort hotels: the 487-room Westin La Paloma
in Tucson, AZ, with a 27-hole Jack Nicklaus golf course and spa,
and the 416-room oceanfront Westin Hilton Head, in Hilton Head, SC,
which features a Westin Heavenly Spa, the first 'Heavenly Spa'
opened in the U.S.  Both resorts offer numerous restaurants, pools
and over 100,000 sf of meeting space.  The loan, which transferred
to special servicing soon after securitization (due to a borrower
bankruptcy), fell short of performance expectations as a result of
the recession and the impact it had on the hotels' performance.  In
early 2012, a loan modification was completed which required the
newly formed sponsor, Southwest Value Partners, to timely perform
the property improvement plans (PIP) agreed upon in the
reorganization and approved by Westin.

The sponsor has completed significant renovations on both
properties over the last few years, and the properties appear
attractive and well kept.  The sponsor continues to work on
stabilizing performance and growing room revenue through Westin's
strong reservation system.  The franchise agreement with the Westin
Hilton Head expires on Dec. 31, 2019, and the agreement with Westin
La Paloma expires on Dec. 31, 2028.

Updated valuations for the properties have not been made available,
largely due to the lengthy court proceedings. Additionally, Fitch
modeled a conservative value in its analysis, and will closely
monitor any performance updates including updated valuations as
they become available.

The next contributor to expected losses is a specially serviced
asset (3.3%) secured by a 252,759 sf portfolio of three office-flex
properties in Norcross, GA.  A receiver was appointed in late 2013,
and the asset became real estate owned (REO) in early 2014. The
special servicer continues efforts to stabilize the property with a
focus on leasing up vacant space and repairing deferred maintenance
items.  The subject's market remains weak however, and competition
for tenants is high among landlords.

The next contributor to expected losses is a 331,677 sf real estate
owned asset comprising a 331,677 sf office property located in
Baton Rouge, LA.  The asset, which transferred to special servicing
in September 2015 for monetary default, is reported to be in poor
condition with substantial deferred maintenance, according to the
servicer.  A receiver was appointed in May 2016 and the servicer is
pursuing foreclosure.

                       RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Rating Outlooks for classes A-4, A-4FL, and A-1A remain
Negative based on a lack of updated values for certain specially
serviced loans, as well as the limited progress made on the workout
strategies, which keeps the trust exposed to the volatility that
surrounds specially serviced loan values.  The Outlook for class
A-SB has been revised to Stable as this class is on a payment
schedule that fully repays the note by April of 2017, an
anniversary that occurs before the majority of loans in the pool
reach their 10-year maturity dates.  Monthly principal is expected
to be adequate to repay the class on time.  Dispositions from
previously liquidated loans have eroded credit support to the lower
classes in the trust.  Downgrades to the distressed classes are
possible if expected losses increase or if these classes are
further affected by repeated interest shortfalls.

                      DUE DILIGENCE USAGE

No third party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating action.

Fitch has downgraded these classes:

   -- $333.7 million class A-4 to 'BBB' from 'Asf'; Outlook
      Negative;
   -- $136.4 million class A-4FL to 'BBB' from 'Asf'; Outlook
      Negative;
   -- $52.1 million class A-1A to 'BBB' from 'Asf'; Outlook
      Negative.

Fitch affirms these classes and revises Outlooks as indicated:

   -- $12.6 million class A-SB at 'Asf'; Outlook to Stable from
      Negative;
   -- $116.6 million class A-M at 'CCsf'; RE 45%;
   -- $61.2 million class A-J at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
   -- $14.6 million class B at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
   -- $240,629 million class C at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class D at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class E at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class F at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class G at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class H at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class P at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class Q at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class T at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

Class 'NR' is not rated.


JP MORGAN 2010-C2: Fitch Corrects June 23 Ratings Release
---------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings issued a correction of a release involving J.P.
Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust, commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates, series 2010-C2 (JPMCC 2010-C2)
published on June 23, 2016. It includes additional disclosures on
criteria variations, which was omitted from the original release.

The corrected version of the release, dated July 19, 2016, is as
follows:

Fitch Ratings has affirmed all classes of J.P. Morgan Chase
Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust, commercial mortgage
pass-through certificates, series 2010-C2 (JPMCC 2010-C2).

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The affirmations reflect increasing credit enhancement and pool
concentrations. Fitch modeled losses of 3.2% of the remaining pool;
expected losses based on the original pool balance are 2.4%. The
pool has experienced no realized losses to date. The pool has no
specially serviced, delinquent, or defeased loans since issuance.
Fitch has designated seven loans (28.7% of pool) as Fitch Loans of
Concern (LOC).

There were variances to criteria related to classes B, C, and D
whereby the surveillance criteria indicated rating upgrades were
possible. However, Fitch determined that upgrades were not
warranted due to significant retail concentration and performance
concerns on select loans in the top 15.

The pool has 21 loans remaining, compared to 25 loans at the last
rating action and 30 loans at issuance. With loan payoffs, the
retail concentration has grown to 70% of the pool. Single-tenanted
loans account for 18% of pool. Loan maturities are concentrated in
2017 (24% of pool) and 2020 (76%). Fitch applied additional
stresses to the LOCs in its base case analysis to factor in
concerns over performance and adverse selection as the pool becomes
increasingly concentrated.

As of the June 2016 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been paid down by 23.8% to $838.7 million
from $1.1 billion at issuance. The entire pool reported 2015
financials. Based on financial statements for the remaining loans
in the pool, the overall net operating income (NOI) improved 28%
since issuance and 12% over 2014 reported financials.

The largest loan, Arizona Mills (19.2% of pool), is secured by a
1.25 million square foot (sf) outlet mall located in Tempe, AZ. As
of the March 2016 rent roll, property occupancy has declined to
87.5% from 91.1% at year-end (YE) 2015, 92.8% one year earlier, and
95.8% two years earlier. The recent decline in occupancy since YE
2015 was due to three tenants totaling 4% of net rentable area
(NRA) vacating at their scheduled January 2016 lease expiration.

The prior largest tenant, JC Penney Outlet, closed its store at the
property at the end of 2013. This space has since been re-tenanted
by At Home, a home decor and furniture superstore, which opened in
July 2014. Off Saks Fifth Avenue terminated its lease during first
quarter 2015, which was prior to its scheduled January 2016 lease
expiration. Sports Authority, which had already downsized its space
by half, moved into this former Off Saks Fifth Avenue space;
however, Sports Authority closed its store in May 2015, which was
prior to its scheduled January 2026 lease expiration. In April
2016, Legoland Discovery Center took over this former Sports
Authority space on a 15-year lease, improving occupancy to 90%.

The largest Fitch LOC, Shops at Sunset Place (8.3%), is secured by
the leasehold on a 522,767 sf open-air lifestyle retail center
located in Miami, FL. The loan was assumed in June 2015 by Federal
Realty Investment Trust from a joint venture between Simon Property
Group and Institutional Mall Investors, LLC.

Both property occupancy and NOI have continued to decline and
remain below Fitch's expectations at issuance. As of the March 2016
rent roll, the property was 79.7% occupied, compared to 82.9% at YE
2015, 79.8% at YE 2014, 77.5% at YE 2013, 77.2% at YE 2012, 88.7%
at YE 2011, and 91.5% at YE 2010.

Property NOI for 2015 declined 8.4% from 2014 and is 7.5% below
Fitch's stressed NOI at issuance. In-line sales at the property
have also been declining. For 2015, in-line sales for stores less
than 10,000 sf were $250 per sf (psf) compared to $275 psf in 2014
and $302 psf at issuance. In-line sales for stores greater than
10,000 sf were $184 psf in 2015, $199 psf in 2014, and $218 psf at
issuance. Near-term lease rollover includes 5% in 2016 and 11% in
2017.

The second largest Fitch LOC, Greece Ridge Center (8.2%), is
secured by 1.06 million sf of a 1.61 million sf super-regional mall
located in Greece, NY (Rochester MSA). As of the March
2016 rent roll, the overall mall was 77.9% occupied, compared to
78.9% at YE 2015, 79.3% at YE 2014, 78.3% at YE 2013, and 80.1% at
YE 2012; however, occupancy has declined from nearly 90% in 2010
and 2011. One of the initial non-collateral anchors, Bon Ton,
closed its store at the property in 2012. The NOI in 2015 was
consistent with 2014, down slightly by 0.5%, but is 9.3% below
Fitch's stressed NOI at issuance. Near-term lease rollover includes
4% in 2016 and 9% in 2017. In the most recent sales report provided
to Fitch for this rating action, only about 50% of the collateral
NRA had sales figures reported. For these tenants with reported
sales, the average was approximately $225 psf, which is
significantly below the $331 psf reported at issuance.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Stable Rating Outlooks on classes A-1 through E reflect
increasing credit enhancement and expected continued paydown. The
Negative Rating Outlooks on classes F through H reflect the pool's
retail concentration (70% of pool) and concerns over property
performance, tenancy and/or sales trends. Fitch will continue to
monitor this concentration as well as the performance of the Fitch
LOCs. If performance deteriorates, negative rating actions are
possible.

DUE DILIGENCE USAGE

No third-party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating action.

Fitch has affirmed and revised Rating Outlooks on the following
classes as indicated:

-- $4.1 million class A-1 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $243.1 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $390.5 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- Interest-only class X-A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $37.2 million class B at 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $53.7 million class C at 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $33 million class D at 'BBB+sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $22 million class E at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $16.5 million class F at 'BBsf'; Outlook to Negative from
    Stable;
-- $13.8 million class G at 'Bsf'; Outlook Negative;
-- $2.8 million class H at 'B-sf'; Outlook Negative.

Fitch does not rate the class NR and interest-only class X-B
certificates.


JP MORGAN 2010-C2: S&P Affirms B Rating on Class G Certificates
---------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its ratings on five classes of commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates from J.P. Morgan Chase
Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2010-C2, a U.S. commercial
mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.  In addition, S&P
affirmed its ratings on six other classes from the same
transaction.

S&P's rating actions on the principal- and interest-paying
certificates follow its analysis of the transaction, primarily
using its criteria for rating U.S. and Canadian CMBS transactions,
which included a review of the credit characteristics and
performance of the remaining loans in the pool, the transaction's
structure, and the liquidity available to the trust.

S&P raised its ratings on classes B, C, D, E, and F to reflect its
expectation of the available credit enhancement for these classes,
which S&P believes is greater than its most recent estimate of
necessary credit enhancement for the respective rating levels.  The
upgrades also follow S&P's views regarding the collateral's current
and future performance and reduced trust balance.

The affirmations on the principal- and interest-paying certificates
reflect S&P's expectation that the available credit enhancement for
these classes will be within its estimate of the necessary credit
enhancement required for the current ratings.  The affirmations
also reflect S&P's views regarding the collateral's current and
future performance, the transaction structure, and liquidity
support available to the classes.

While available credit enhancement levels suggest further positive
rating movements on classes B, C, D, E, and F, and positive rating
movements on classes G and H, S&P's analysis also considered the
reported declines in cash flows for some of the top 10 loans
compared to our expectations and potential upcoming tenant
rollovers as well as current liquidity support available for the
classes.

S&P affirmed its 'AAA (sf)' rating on the class X-A interest-only
(IO) certificates based on S&P's criteria for rating IO securities,
in which the ratings on the IO securities would not be higher than
the lowest-rated reference class.  The notional balance on class
X-A references classes A-1, A-2, and A-3.

                       TRANSACTION SUMMARY

As of the June 17, 2016, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool balance was $838.7 million, which is 76.2% of the pool balance
at issuance.  The pool currently includes 21 loans, down from 30
loans at issuance.  Three of these loans ($32.1 million, 3.8%) are
on the master servicer's watchlist and no loans are defeased or
with the special servicer.  The master servicer, Midland Loan
Services, reported financial information for 99.4% of the loans in
the pool, of which 98.1% was partial-or year-end 2015 data, and the
remainder was year-end 2014 data.

S&P calculated a 1.60x S&P Global Ratings weighted average debt
service coverage (DSC) and 62.7% S&P Global Ratings weighted
average loan-to-value (LTV) ratio using a 7.60% S&P Global Ratings
weighted average capitalization rate.  The top 10 loans have an
aggregate outstanding pool trust balance of $725.9 million (86.5%).
Using servicer-reported numbers, S&P calculated an S&P Global
Ratings weighted average DSC and LTV of 1.60x and 62.9%,
respectively, for the top 10 loans in the transaction.  To date,
the transaction has not experienced principal losses.

RATINGS LIST

J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2010-C2
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates trust 2010-C2
                                       Rating
Class            Identifier            To             From
A-1              46635GAA8             AAA (sf)       AAA (sf)
A-2              46635GAC4             AAA (sf)       AAA (sf)
A-3              46635GAE0             AAA (sf)       AAA (sf)
X-A              46635GAG5             AAA (sf)       AAA (sf)
B                46635GAL4             AA+ (sf)       AA (sf)
C                46635GAN0             AA- (sf)       A (sf)
D                46635GAQ3             A (sf)         BBB+ (sf)
E                46635GAS9             BBB+ (sf)      BBB- (sf)
F                46635GAU4             BBB- (sf)      BB (sf)
G                46635GAW0             B (sf)         B (sf)
H                46635GAY6             B- (sf)        B- (sf)


JP MORGAN 2012-C8: Fitch Affirms 'Bsf' Rating on Cl. G Certificate
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 12 classes of J.P. Morgan Chase
Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2012-C8 commercial mortgage
pass-through certificates series 2012-C8 (JPMCC 2012-C8).

                        KEY RATING DRIVERS

The affirmations are the result of stable performance of the
underlying pool since issuance.  As of the June 2016 distribution
date, the pool's aggregate principal balance has been reduced by
8.3% to $1 billion from $1.1 billion at issuance.  The pool has
experienced no realized losses to date.  Fitch has designated three
(8.3%) Fitch Loans of Concern (FLOC), including one specially
serviced loan, due to declining performance as a result of
significant tenant rollover.  No loans are defeased.  Interest
shortfalls are currently affecting the non-rated class.  There were
variances to criteria related to classes B, C, and D whereby the
surveillance criteria indicated rating upgrades were possible.
However, Fitch determined that upgrades were not warranted as there
has been no material change to the pool since issuance and no
significant increase in credit enhancement.

The largest loan (11.8% of the pool) is secured by a 1 million
square foot (sf) interest in a 1.2 million sf regional mall located
in Springfield, MO.  Collateral anchors are JC Penney, Dillard's,
Dillard's Men's & Home, and Macy's, with non-collateral anchor
Sears.  As of year-end (YE) 2015, the servicer-reported collateral
occupancy and debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) was 97.3% and
3.43x, respectively.  Approximately 18.5% of NRA, including Macy's,
is scheduled to expire in 2017.  Fitch will continue to monitor for
leasing status updates especially with regard to the Macy's lease,
as sales continue to be below issuance levels and below Macy's
average.  The loan is sponsored by Simon Property Group, L.P.

The second largest loan (7.9% of the pool) is secured by a 280,299
sf office building located in Seattle, WA.  Per the April 2016 rent
roll, the property is 95% leased, primarily to General Services
Administration (GSA) tenants including the following: Department of
Labor (31.7%; lease expires 2020), Drug Enforcement Agency (26.5%;
lease expires 2022) and Social Security (11.4%; lease expires
2020).  DSCR was a reported 1.34x as of YE 2015.  The loan is
sponsored by Martin Selig.

The specially serviced loan (1.4% of the pool) is secured by a
199,783 sf office building located in downtown Norfolk, VA.  The
loan transferred to specially servicing in January 2016 due to
imminent default.  Twelve tenants vacated the property during 2015,
eight of which left prior to their lease expirations including a
design firm that represented 11.3% of NRA.  The largest tenant to
vacate (16.7% of NRA) left after its Dec. 31, 2014 lease holdover
period expired.  As a result, occupancy declined from 93% at YE
2014 to 66% as of the trailing 12 month period ended March 31,
2016.  The loan is 30 days delinquent and cash managed under a hard
lock box.

The largest FLOC (5.5% of the pool) is fifth largest loan and
secured by three Class B office buildings (569,986 sf) located in
Houston, TX within the energy corridor.  At least 60% of the tenant
base is energy related, and approximately 41.4% in rollover is
scheduled through 2017.  The loan is amortizing on a 30-year
schedule with a current loan per square foot of $100.8.

The other loan of concern (1.4% of the pool) is secured by a
146,538 sf office property located in Orlando, FL.  Occupancy
declined from 86.5% at YE 2013 to 59% at YE 2014, due to one tenant
vacating upon its March 2014 lease expiration.  Occupancy remains
low at 63% as of YE 2015, and the servicer-reported DSCR is 0.99x.


                     RATING SENSITIVITIES

Rating Outlooks on classes A-2 through G are Stable due to overall
stable pool performance.  Future upgrades to senior classes are
possible should loans pay off at their scheduled maturities; 2017
maturities represent 14.6% of the pool.  Fitch does not foresee
negative ratings migration unless a material economic and/or asset
level event changes the transaction's portfolio-level metrics.

DUE DILIGENCE USAGE

No third party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating.

Fitch has affirmed these classes:

   -- $171.8 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $426.1 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $103.6 million class A-SB at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $803.9 million class X-A* at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $102.3 million class A-S** at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $56.8 million class B** at 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $44 million class C** at 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $203.1 million class EC** at 'Asf'; Outlook Stable.
   -- $35.5 million class D at 'BBB+sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $32.7 million class E at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $15.6 million class F at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $17 million class G at 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable.

*Notional amount and interest only.
**Class A-S, class B and class C certificates may be exchanged for
class EC certificates, and class EC certificates may be exchanged
for Class A-S, class B and class C certificates.

Class A-1 was repaid in full.  Fitch does not rate the $36,938,989
class NR certificates or the $238,681,989 interest only class X-B.


KINGSWOOD MORTGAGES 2015-1: DBRS Confirms BB Rating on Cl. E Debt
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS Ratings Limited confirmed the ratings on the notes issued by
Kingswood Mortgages 2015-1 PLC (Kingswood 2015-1) as follows:

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

The confirmations are based on the following analytical
considerations:

-- Portfolio performance, in terms of delinquencies and defaults.

-- Portfolio probability of default (PD) rate, loss given default

    (LGD) and expected loss assumptions for the remaining
    collateral pool.

-- Current credit enhancement (CE) available to the rated notes
    to cover the expected losses at their respective rating
levels.

Kingswood 2015-1, which closed in July 2015, is a securitisation of
a portfolio of German residential mortgage loans originated by
Paratus AMC GmbH (formerly GMAC-RFC Bank GmbH) and initially
securitised into E-MAC DE 2009-1 B.V. L2 B.V., wholly owned by
Macquarie Bank Limited, London Branch, (Macquarie Bank London)
acquired the portfolio in 2014 and sold the portfolio into
Kingswood 2015-1. L2 B.V. acts as the Master Servicer of the
portfolio and delegates the day-to-day servicing of the portfolio
to the Sub-Servicer, Servicing Advisors Deutschland GmbH.

The portfolio is performing within DBRS’s expectations. As of 31
March 2016, loans more than 90 days delinquent as a percentage of
the outstanding collateral pool balance were at 1.30%, and loans
more than 30 days delinquent were at 3.02%. There is currently no
realised loss on the portfolio. DBRS has maintained the base case
PD and LGD assumptions for the remaining collateral pool at 7.76%
and 51.15%, respectively.

The CE available to the rated notes has increased as the
transaction deleverages. The CE increased to 33.26%, 22.58%,
18.48%, 15.50% and 13.8% for Class A, B, C, D and E, respectively,
as of 27 April 2016. The notes are currently amortising
sequentially. The CE to each notes is provided through the
subordinately ranked notes, the Rated Notes Reserve Fund (RNRF)
available amount, and the overcollateralisation. The RNRF is
currently is at its target amount.

Citibank N.A., London Branch is the Account Bank to the
transaction, and its current DBRS private rating meets the Minimum
Institution Rating criteria given the ratings assigned to the Class
A notes, as described in DBRS' "Legal Criteria for European
Structured Finance Transactions" methodology.

Macquarie Bank London is the swap counterparty to the transaction.
The DBRS Equivalent Rating of Macquarie Bank London meets the swap
counterparty rating requirement given the ratings assigned to the
Class A notes, as described in DBRS's "Derivative Criteria for
European Structured Finance Transactions" methodology.



MORGAN STANLEY 2000-PRIN: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on Cl. X Debt
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the rating of one class in
Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Capital I Trust 2000-PRIN as follows:

Cl. X, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Jul 30, 2015 Affirmed Ba3
(sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating of the IO Class X was affirmed based on the credit
performance (or the weighted average rating factor or WARF) of its
referenced classes. The IO class is the only outstanding
Moody's-rated class in this transaction.

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATING:

The rating of an IO class is based on the credit performance of its
referenced classes. An IO class may be upgraded based on a lower
weighted average rating factor or WARF due to an overall
improvement in the credit quality of its reference classes. An IO
class may be downgraded based on a higher WARF due to a decline in
the credit quality of its reference classes, paydowns of higher
quality reference classes or non-payment of interest. Classes that
have paid off through loan paydowns or amortization are not
included in the WARF calculation. Classes that have experienced
losses are grossed up for losses and included in the WARF
calculation, even if Moody's has withdrawn the rating.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the June 23, 2016 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 97.5% to $14.68
million from $597.9 million at securitization. The Certificates are
collateralized by 16 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 24% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting 94% of
the pool.

Two loans, constituting 12% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews the
watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that could
affect performance.

Two loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $0.6 million (for an average loss
severity of 1%). Currently there are no loans in special
servicing.

Moody's received full year 2014 and 2015 operating results for 100%
of the pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 26.5%, the
same as Moody's last review. Moody's conduit component excludes
loans with structured credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans,
and specially serviced and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow
(NCF) reflects a weighted average haircut of 9% to the most
recently available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value
reflects a weighted average capitalization rate of 9.8%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.54X and 9.84X,
respectively, compared to 1.48X and 5.90X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The top three conduit loans represent 56% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the 10900 Research Boulevard Loan ($3.5 million --
24% of the pool), which is secured by an approximately 73,900 SF
portion of an approximately 83,500 SF grocery-anchored retail
center located in Austin, Texas. The property was 100% leased as of
December 2015, the same as last review. Performance has been
stable. The loan is fully amortizing and has amortized by 55% since
securitization. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 33% and 3.21X,
respectively, compared to 37% and 2.81X at the last review.

The second largest loan is the Kroger Center Loan ($2.47 million --
16.8% of the pool), which is secured by an approximately 106,000 SF
retail property located in Greensboro, North Carolina. As of
December 2015, the property was 100% leased , the same as last
review. Performance has been stable. The loan is fully amortizing
and has amortized by 54% since securitization. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 29% and 3.54X, respectively, compared to 32% and
3.16X at the last review.

The third largest loan is the Randall's Austin Loan ($2.2 million
-- 15.2% of the pool), which is secured by an 81,000 SF retail
property located in Austin, Texas. As of December 2015, the
property was 100% leased and performance has been stable. The loan
is fully amortizing and has amortized by 57% since securitization.
Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 30.5% and 3.46X, respectively,
compared to 34% and 3.10X at the last review.


MORGAN STANLEY 2006-HQ9: S&P Lowers Rating on Cl. G Certs to D
--------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings lowered its rating to 'D (sf)' from 'CCC (sf)'
on the class G commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from
Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2006-HQ9, a U.S. commercial
mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.

The downgrade reflects principal losses as detailed in the July
2016 trustee remittance report.

The July 14, 2016, trustee remittance report referenced
$13.1 million in principal losses, which resulted primarily from
the liquidations of the Indianapolis Office Portfolio - Roll-Up
specially serviced asset and the GE Capital FFC Office Building –
B note.  According to the trustee remittance report, the
Indianapolis Office Portfolio - Roll-Up asset liquidated at a loss
severity of 31.1% of its original balance, and the GE Capital FFC
Office Building – B note liquidated at a loss of its entre
balance.  Consequently, class G experienced a 3.9% loss of its
$25.7 million original principal balance, and the remaining losses
were allocated to class N (not rated by S&P Global Ratings).

RATINGS LIST

Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2006-HQ9
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2006-HQ9
                                     Rating
Class             Identifier         To                 From
G                 61750CAS6          D (sf)             CCC (sf)


MORGAN STANLEY 2006-IQ12: Fitch Affirms D Rating on 11 Tranches
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed all classes of Morgan Stanley Capital I
Trust (MSC) commercial mortgage pass-through certificates, series
2006-IQ12.

                       KEY RATING DRIVERS

The affirmations are the result of substantial paydown and stable
collateral performance.  Fitch modeled losses of 8.1% of the
remaining pool; expected losses on the original pool balance total
12.6%, including $269.8 million (9.9% of the original pool balance)
in realized losses to date.  Fitch has designated 27 loans (35.2%)
as Fitch Loans of Concern, which includes five specially serviced
assets (2.3%).  Interest shortfalls are currently affecting classes
A-J through S.

As of the July 2016 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 62.6% to $1.02 billion from
$2.73 billion at issuance.  Per the servicer reporting, 15 loans
(15.1% of the pool) are defeased. 93.6% of the pool matures in
2016, of which 89% matures in the fourth quarter 2016. 20.5% of the
pool is full term interest-only.

The largest loan and largest contributor to expected losses is the
Gateway Center IV loan (5.6%), which is secured by a 331,246 square
foot (sf) office building located in downtown Newark, NJ. The
15-story office tower is part of the Gateway Centre complex, and
located across the street from the Prudential Centre, with close
proximity to Newark Penn Station.  The March 2016 rent roll
reported occupancy at 80%, with McCarter & English as the largest
tenant occupying 180,198-sf (53% of the net rentable area [NRA]).
The YE 2015 net operating income (NOI) debt service coverage ratio
(DSCR) dropped to 1.08x from 1.35x as of YE 2014 due to a drop in
occupancy.  The subject loan had previously transferred to special
servicing in March 2014 for imminent default when the borrower
requested assistance due to expected lease rollover and associated
leasing costs.  The loan had remained current and was returned to
the master servicer in March 2015 with no changes to the loan.

Upcoming lease rollover risks include Prudential (23% NRA) with 75%
of their current leased space expiring in December 2016. According
to the servicer, Prudential has options to extend its lease through
2019; however, extension discussions have not yet begun.
Prudential has several leases in other buildings that are part of
the Gateway Centre complex and has just completed the construction
of a new office tower in Newark which is reportedly expected to
house staff from the Gateway Centre buildings.  The loan matures in
November 2016.

The second largest loan and contributor to expected losses is the
Gateway Office Building loan (5.5%), which is secured by a 251,430
sf office building in Rockville, MD.  Cash flow has declined since
2012 due to a rent reduction on the properties largest tenant,
EMMES Corporation (EMMES), which had extended its lease from May
2013 to May 2033.  EMMES had expanded its space to approximately
97,000 sf (38% NRA) from 89,000 SF (31% NRA), but base rent was
reduced by approximately 18% with 2.75% annual rent steps.
According to the March 2016 rent roll, the property was 88%
occupied.  The servicer-reported year-to-date (YTD) NOI DSCR
increased to 1.35x as of March 2016 from 1.28x as of YE 2015.  The
loan matures in November 2016.

The third largest contributor to expected losses is a specially
serviced asset.  The subject is a 66,000 sf medical office building
located in Landsdowne, VA.  The property was transferred to the
special servicer in February 2013 due to monetary default and has
been real estate owned (REO) since January 2014.  The default was
the result of the largest tenant, Kaiser Foundation Health (19.3%
of NRA) departing upon their lease expiration in January 2013.
Occupancy remains low at just 46% as of September 2016, despite
efforts to market the space.  Fitch will continue to monitor the
loan for leasing updates and any improvement in performance.

                       RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Rating Outlooks on classes A-1A and A-4 remain Stable due to
sufficient credit enhancement and continued paydown.  The Outlook
on classes A-M and A-MFX were revised to Stable from Negative as
credit enhancement remains high.  Should portfolio cash flow
deteriorate materially, downgrades are possible.  Classes A-J and B
are distressed and will see further downgrades as losses are
realized.

                        DUE DILIGENCE USAGE

No third party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating action.

Fitch affirms these classes as indicated:

   -- $282.5 million class A-1A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $189.4 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $173 million class A-M at 'AAAsf'; Outlook to Stable from
      Negative;
   -- $100 million class A-MFX at 'AAAsf'; Outlook to Stable from
      Negative;
   -- $242.3 million class A-J at 'CCsf'; RE 85%;
   -- $17.1 million class B at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
   -- $17 million class C at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class D at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class E at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class F at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class G at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class H at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

The class A-1, A-2, A-NM, A-3 and A-AB certificates have paid in
full.  Fitch does not rate the class O, P, Q and S certificates.
Fitch previously withdrew the ratings on the class A-MFL
certificate and the interest-only class X-1, X-2 and X-W
certificates.


MORGAN STANLEY 2007-TOP27: Fitch Affirms Csf Rating on Cl. D Debt
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 19 classes of Morgan Stanley Capital I
Trust, commercial mortgage pass-through certificates, series
2007-TOP27 (MSCI 2007-TOP27).

                        KEY RATING DRIVERS

The affirmations reflect the relatively stable pool performance and
the sufficient credit enhancement relative to Fitch-modeled loss
expectations.  Fitch modeled losses of 6.2% of the remaining pool;
expected losses on the original pool balance total 9.2%, including
$136 million (4.9% of the original pool balance) in realized losses
to date.  Fitch has designated 32 loans (14.3%) as Fitch Loans of
Concern, which includes one specially serviced asset (1.3%).

As of the July 2016 distribution date there are 171 loans remaining
of the 234 loans and the pool's aggregate principal balance has
been reduced by 31.3% to $1.98 billion from $2.77 billion at
issuance.  Per the servicer reporting, 15 loans (10.1% of the pool)
are defeased.  Interest shortfalls are currently affecting classes
E through P. 87.2% of the pool matures in 2017, of which 85.9%
matures in the second and third quarter 2017. 59.1% of the pool is
full interest-only.

The largest contributor to expected losses is the Parkshore Plaza 1
loan (2.2%), which is secured by a four-building 269,254 square
foot (sf) office complex located in Folsom, CA.  Verizon Wireless,
who occupied three of the buildings which total 191,512 sf (71% of
net rentable area) reduced its space to 59,828 sf when the lease
expired in June 2015.  Occupancy as of March 2016 was 59% and the
year-end 2015 Net Operating Income (NOI) debt service coverage area
(DSCR) was 0.76x.  CommonWealth REIT purchased the buildings in
2011 from a joint venture of McCarthy Cook & Co. and JP Morgan &
Co.  The loan matures in May 2017.

The next largest contributor to expected losses is the
specially-serviced Towne Square Mall asset (1.3% of the pool),
which is a 438,605 sf regional mall located in Owensboro, KY.  The
loan transferred to special servicing in February 2015 due to
imminent payment default and the foreclosure sale was completed in
February 2016 and the property is real estate owned (REO).  The
collateral (357,355 sf) consists of in-line space, and anchors JC
Penney and Sears, with non-collateral anchor Macy's.  Sears vacated
their 122,136 sf space though their lease extends until September
2016. Additionally, with Sears vacating 16 other tenants will have
the option to exercise their co-tenancy clauses.  The occupancy as
of March 2016 was 57% and the DSCR as of September 2015 was 0.79x.


The third largest contributor to expected losses is the Residence
Inn - Herndon loan (1.4%), which is secured by a 168 key extended
stay hotel located in Herndon, VA.  In December 2015 the property
came under new management with Crescent Hotels and Resorts taking
over for Hospitality Partners.  NOI DSCR dropped to 1.26x at
year-end 2015 from 1.56x at year-end 2014 mainly due to an increase
in operating expenses.  The March 2016 NOI DSCR was 0.75x;
occupancy as of March 31, 2016, was 60%.  The loan is current, and
the maturity date is in June 2017.

The transaction also includes a non-pooled trust component secured
by the leased fee of 330 West 34th Street, a 46,412 sf parcel of
land ground leased on a triple-net basis to Vornado Realty Trust
until December 2021.  Vornado has been the only tenant at the
property since 1986 and is currently in its first extension option,
with four options totaling 128 years remaining.  The parcel is
improved with an 18-story, 636,915 sf office building with retail
at street level.

                       RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Rating Outlooks on classes A-4, A-M, A-MFL, and A-1A remain
Stable due to the classes' seniority, increasing credit
enhancement, and continued paydown of the classes.  The Outlook on
class A-J remains Negative due to the potential for higher losses
on Towne Square Mall and Parkshore Plaza 1.  The remaining classes
are distressed and will see further downgrades as losses are
realized.

                      DUE DILIGENCE USAGE

No third-party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating action.

Fitch affirms these classes:

   -- $219.8 million class A-1A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $1 billion class A-4 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $172.3 million class A-M at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $100 million class A-MFL at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $190.6 million class A-J at 'BBsf'; Outlook Negative;
   -- $54.5 million class B at 'CCCsf'; RE 80%.
   -- $30.6 million class C at 'CCsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $30.6 million class D at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
   -- $20.5 million class E at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class F at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class G at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class H at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $0 class O at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
   -- $50.2 million class AW34 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable.

The class A-1, A-2, A-3 and A-AB certificates have paid in full.
Fitch does not rate the class P certificates.  Fitch previously
withdrew the rating on the interest-only class X certificates.



MORGAN STANLEY 2011-C1: S&P Raises Rating on Cl. L Certs to B
-------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its ratings on 10 classes of commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates from Morgan Stanley Capital I
Trust 2011-C1, a U.S. commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS)
transaction.  In addition, S&P affirmed its ratings on three other
classes from the same transaction.

S&P's rating actions on the principal- and interest-paying
certificates follow its analysis of the transaction, primarily
using its criteria for rating U.S. and Canadian CMBS transactions,
which included a review of the credit characteristics and
performance of the remaining loans in the pool, the transaction's
structure, and the liquidity available to the trust.

S&P raised its ratings on classes B, C, D, E, F, G, H, J, K, and L
to reflect its expectation of the available credit enhancement for
these classes, which S&P believes is greater than its most recent
estimate of necessary credit enhancement for the respective rating
levels.  The upgrades also follow S&P's views regarding the current
and future performance of the transaction's collateral and
available liquidity support, as well as the reduced pool trust
balance.

Since the deal closed, it has paid down by approximately 45%.
Classes A-1 and A-2 have been fully paid off, while the class A-3
balance is being paid down with a current balance at 95% of its
original balance.  This has resulted in increased credit
enhancement to the upgraded classes.  Additionally, the transaction
has not experienced any principal losses, and none of the loans are
with the special servicer.

While available credit enhancement levels suggest further positive
rating movements on the upgraded classes, S&P's analysis also
considered the susceptibility to reduced liquidity support from one
of the loans on the master servicer's watchlist, Grace Place &
Goodrich Buildings ($32.0 million, 3.7%).

S&P affirmed its rating on the class X-A interest-only (IO)
certificate based on its criteria for rating IO securities, in
which the rating on the IO security would not be higher than the
lowest rated reference class.  The notional balance on class X-A
references classes A-1, A-2, A-3 and A-4.

                        TRANSACTION SUMMARY

As of the June 17, 2016, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool balance was $858.0 million, which is 55.4% of the pool balance
at issuance.  The pool currently includes 27 loans (reflecting
cros-collateralized loans), down from 37 loans at issuance.  Two of
these assets ($33.3 million, 3.9%) are defeased, and four ($175.5
million, 20.5%) are on the master servicer's watchlist.  The master
servicer, KeyBank Real Estate Capital, reported financial
information for 98.3% of the nondefeased loans in the pool, of
which 10.2% was partial-year 2016 data, 78.1% was year-end 2015
data, and the remainder was year-end 2014 data.

S&P calculated a 1.74x S&P Global Ratings' weighted average debt
service coverage (DSC) and 62.2% S&P Global Ratings' weighted
average loan-to-value (LTV) ratio using a 7.47% S&P Global Ratings'
weighted average capitalization rate.  The DSC, LTV, and
capitalization rate calculations exclude the two defeased loans.
The top 10 nondefeased loans have an aggregate outstanding pool
trust balance of $693.7 million (80.8%). Using servicer-reported
numbers, S&P calculated a S&P Global Ratings' weighted average DSC
and LTV of 1.77x and 61.0%, respectively, for the top 10
nondefeased loans.

                      CREDIT CONSIDERATIONS

As of the June 17, 2016, trustee remittance report, none of the
assets in the pool are with the special servicer, Strategic Asset
Services LLC.

The Grace Place & Goodrich Buildings loan ($32.0 million, 3.7%) is
the largest loan on the master servicer's watchlist.  The loan,
which is scheduled to mature on Feb. 5, 2021, is secured by a fee
simple interest on 531,145-sq.-ft. mixed-use warehouse/distribution
and office property located in Commerce, Calif.  The property is
approximately 80% vacant because of a current redevelopment.  As of
Dec. 31, 2015, reported DSC was 0.35x, and as of May 5, 2016,
occupancy was 20.8%.  This loan has been on the master servicer's
watchlist since 2013 for occupancy and DSC concerns.

RATINGS LIST

Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust 2011-C1
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates
                                       Rating
Class            Identifier            To            From
A-3              617458AE4             AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
A-4              617458AG9             AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
X-A              617458AJ3             AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
B                617458AN4             AAA (sf)      AA+ (sf)
C                617458AQ7             AA+ (sf)      A+ (sf)
D                617458AS3             A+ (sf)       BBB (sf)
E                617458AU8             A (sf)        BBB- (sf)
F                617458AW4             A- (sf)       BB+ (sf)
G                617458AY0             BBB+ (sf)     BB (sf)
H                617458BA1             BBB (sf)      BB- (sf)
J                617458BC7             BB- (sf)      B+ (sf)
K                617458BE3             B+ (sf)       B (sf)
L                617458BG8             B (sf)        B- (sf)


MORGAN STANLEY 2011-C3: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on Cl. G Certs
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on eleven
classes and downgraded one class in Morgan Stanley Capital I Trust
2011-C3, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series
2011-C3 as:

  Cl. A-2, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on June 20, 2015,
   Affirmed Aaa (sf)
  Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on June 20, 2015,
   Affirmed Aaa (sf)
  Cl. A-4, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on June 20, 2015,
   Affirmed Aaa (sf)
  Cl. A-J, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on June 20, 2015,
   Affirmed Aaa (sf)
  Cl. B, Affirmed Aa1 (sf); previously on June 20, 2015, Upgraded
   to Aa1 (sf)
  Cl. C, Affirmed A1 (sf); previously on June 20, 2015, Upgraded
   to A1 (sf)
  Cl. D, Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on June 20, 2015, Upgraded
   to A3 (sf)
  Cl. E, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on June 20, 2015, Affirmed

   Baa3 (sf)
  Cl. F, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on June 20, 2015, Affirmed
   Ba2 (sf)
  Cl. G, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on June 20, 2015, Affirmed
   B2 (sf)
  Cl. X-A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on June 20, 2015,
   Affirmed Aaa (sf)
  Cl. X-B, Downgraded to Ca (sf); previously on June 20, 2015,
   Affirmed Ba3 (sf)

                          RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings on eight P&I classes were affirmed because the
transaction's key metrics, including Moody's loan-to-value (LTV)
ratio, Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and the
transaction's Herfindahl Index (Herf), are within acceptable
ranges.

The ratings on two P&I classes were affirmed because the ratings
are consistent with Moody's expected loss.

The rating on X-A IO class was affirmed based on the credit
performance (or the weighted average rating factor or WARF) of the
referenced classes.

The rating on X-B IO class was downgraded because it is not
receiving interest but may receive prepayment premiums.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 2.2% of the
current balance, compared to 1.7% at Moody's last review.  Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 1.6% of the original
pooled balance, compared to 1.5% at the last review. Moody's
provides a current list of base expected losses for conduit and
fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at:

   http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255

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

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term.  Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in
the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The principal methodologies used in these ratings were "Approach to
Rating US and Canadian Conduit/Fusion CMBS" published in December
2014 and "Moody's Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single
Asset/Single Borrower CMBS published in October 2015.

Please note that on June 30, 2016, Moody's released a "Request for
Comment" in which it has requested market feedback on potential
clarifications to its methodology for rating IO securities called
"Moody's Approach to Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only
Securities," dated Oct. 20, 2015.  If the revised Credit Rating
Methodology is implemented as proposed, we would withdraw the
Credit Rating on Class X-B as this bond has expected future excess
interest payments of zero and the obligation has in effect
matured.

DESCRIPTION OF MODELS USED

Moody's review used the excel-based CMBS Conduit Model, which it
uses for both conduit and fusion transactions.  Credit enhancement
levels for conduit loans are driven by property type, Moody's
actual and stressed DSCR, and Moody's property quality grade (which
reflects the capitalization rate Moody's uses to estimate Moody's
value).  Moody's fuses the conduit results with the results of its
analysis of investment grade structured credit assessed loans and
any conduit loan that represents 10% or greater of the current pool
balance.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure the diversity of loan
sizes, where a higher number represents greater diversity.  Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including the risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances.  The credit neutral Herf score is 40.  The
pool has a Herf of 17, compared to 21 at last review.

When the Herf falls below 20, Moody's uses the excel-based Large
Loan Model and then reconciles and weights the results from the
conduit and large loan models in formulating a rating
recommendation.  The large loan model derives credit enhancement
levels based on an aggregation of adjusted loan-level proceeds
derived from Moody's loan-level LTV ratios.  Major adjustments to
determining proceeds include leverage, loan structure, property
type and sponsorship.  Moody's also further adjusts these
aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits associated with loan
level diversity and other concentrations and correlations.

                         DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the June 17, 2016 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 28% to $1.1 billion
from $1.5 billion at securitization.  The certificates are
collateralized by 51 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 13.4% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting 64% of
the pool.  Two loans, constituting 14.4% of the pool, have
investment-grade structured credit assessments.  Three loans,
constituting 2.4% of the pool, have defeased and are secured by US
government securities.

Ten loans, constituting 18.1% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist.  The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package.  As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews the
watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that could
affect performance.

No loans have been liquidated from the pool, and no loans are
currently in special servicing.

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for two poorly
performing loans, constituting 1.7% of the pool, and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $2.8 million (a 15% expected loss based on a
50% probability default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's received full year 2014 operating results for 97% of the
pool and partial year 2015 financials for 75% of the pool. Moody's
weighted average conduit LTV is 85%, compared to 82%, at Moody's
last review.  Moody's conduit component excludes loans with
structured credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans, and
specially serviced and troubled loans.  Moody's net cash flow (NCF)
reflects a weighted average haircut of 12% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI).  Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.4%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.59X and 1.24X,
respectively, compared to 1.67X and 1.29X, at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service.  Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The largest loan with a structured credit assessment is the Park
City Center Mall ($143.7 million -- 13% of the pool), which is
secured by a 1.2 million square foot (SF) super-regional mall
located in Lancaster, Pennsylvania.  The property is also
encumbered by a $42 million mezzanine loan.  As of March 2016, the
total property was 96% leased with the in-line space 85% leased.
The largest tenants include JC Penney (20% of the net rentable area
(NRA); lease expiration July 2020), Bon Ton (15% of the NRA; lease
expiration of February 2028), and Sears (13% of the NRA; lease
expiration April 2023).  Moody's structured credit assessment and
stressed DSCR are a3 (sca.pd) and 1.46X, respectively.

The other loan with a structured credit assessment is the 420 East
72nd Street Coop Loan ($11.0 million -- 1% of the pool), which is
secured by 20 story co-op building located in the Lenox Hill
neighborhood of Manhattan in New York City.  Moody's structured
credit assessment is aaa (sca.pd), the same as at last review.

The top three conduit loans represent 25% of the pool balance.  The
largest loan is the Belden Village Mall Loan ($100 million -- 9.3%
of the pool), which is secured by a 419,000 SF regional mall
located 25 miles north of Akron in Canton, Ohio.  The loan was
previously known as the Westfield Belden Village Loan until
Starwood purchased a majority interest in several Westfield
properties in 2013.  The non-collateral anchors are Dillard's and
Sears.  As of December 2015, the total property was 99% leased with
the in-line space 100% leased compared to 99% and 96%,
respectively, at last review.  Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are
82% and 1.19X, respectively, compared to 79% and 1.24X, at the last
review.

The second largest loan is the Oxmoor Center Loan ($88 million --
8% of the pool), which is secured by a 941,000 SF super-regional
mall in Louisville, Kentucky.  The center is anchored by Macy's,
Sears, Von Maur, and Dick's Sporting Goods.  As of March 2016, the
total property was 98% leased with the in-line space 94% leased,
the same as at last review.  Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 84%
and 1.15X, respectively, compared to 88% and 1.11X at the last
review.

The third largest loan is the One BriarLake Plaza Loan ($79 million
-- 7% of the pool), which is secured by a Class A office building
located in Houston, Texas.  The property is also encumbered by a
$15 million mezzanine loan.  The property includes a seven story
parking garage and the building is LEED gold certified and has
received an Energy Star Award.  The loan sponsor is Behringer
Harvard REIT I, Inc.  As of March 2016, the property was 89% leased
compared to 96% at last review.  Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are
68% and 1.51X, respectively, compared to 65% and 1.58X at the last
review.


NEUBERGER BERMAN XVI: S&P Affirms BB- Rating on Class E Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A-1-R, A-2-R,
B-2-R, and C-2-R notes from Neuberger Berman CLO XVI Ltd., which is
a U.S. collateralized loan obligation (CLO) transaction managed by
Neuberger Berman Fixed Income LLC.  S&P withdrew its ratings on the
transaction's class A-1, A-2, B-2, and C-2 notes after they were
fully redeemed.  At the same time, we affirmed the ratings on the
transaction's class B-1, C-1, D, E, and F notes, which were not
included in the refinancing.

On the July 15, 2016, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
replacement notes issuances were used to redeem the original notes,
as outlined in the transaction document provisions. Therefore, S&P
withdrew the ratings on the transaction's original notes in line
with their full redemption and assigned ratings to the
transaction's replacement notes.  The ratings reflect S&P's opinion
that the credit support available is commensurate with the
associated rating levels.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and S&P will take rating actions as it
deems necessary.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

Neuberger Berman CLO XVI Ltd.
Replacement class         Rating
A-1-R                     AAA (sf)
A-2-R                     AAA (sf)
B-2-R                     AA (sf)
C-2-R (deferrable)        A (sf)

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Neuberger Berman CLO XVI Ltd.
Original class            Rating
B-1                       AA (sf)
C-1 (deferrable)          A (sf)
D (deferrable)            BBB- (sf)
E (deferrable)            BB- (sf)
F (deferrable)            B (sf)

RATINGS WITHDRAWN

Neuberger Berman CLO XVI Ltd.
Original class                Rating
                          To          From
A-1                       NR          AAA (sf)
A-2                       NR          AAA (sf)
B-2                       NR          AA (sf)
C-2 (deferrable)          NR          A (sf)

NR--Not rated.


OCTAGON INVESTMENT XI: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on Cl. D Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the following
notes issued by Octagon Investment Partners XI, Ltd:

US$31,000,000 Class B Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
Due 2021, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on September 29, 2015
Upgraded to Aa3 (sf)

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

US$344,500,000 Class A-1A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
2021 (current outstanding balance of $93,793,825), Affirmed Aaa
(sf); previously on September 29, 2015 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

US$37,500,000 and EUR 0 Class A-1B Redenominatable Senior Secured
Floating Rate Notes Due 2021 (current outstanding balance of
$10,364,885), Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on September 29, 2015
Affirmed Aaa (sf)

US$22,000,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
2021, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on September 29, 2015 Upgraded
to Aaa (sf)

US$19,000,000 Class C Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2021, Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on September 29, 2015 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

US$16,000,000 Class D Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2021, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on September 29, 2015 Affirmed
Ba3 (sf)

Octagon Investment Partners XI, Ltd., issued in July 26, 2007, is a
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) backed primarily by a
portfolio of senior secured loans, with some exposures to bonds.
The transaction's reinvestment period ended on August 25, 2014.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating actions are primarily a result of deleveraging of the
senior notes and an increase in the transaction's
over-collateralization (OC) ratios since September 2015. The Class
A-1 notes have been paid down collectively by approximately 52.0%
or $112.8 million in aggregate since then. Based on the trustee's
June 2016 report, the OC ratios for the Class A, Class B, and Class
C notes are reported at 162.56%, 130.49%, and 116.42%,
respectively, versus September 2015 levels of 137.17%, 121.41%, and
113.43%, respectively.

Notwithstanding the benefit of deleveraging, the Class D OC has
decreased since September 2015. According to the trustee's June
2016 report, the Class D OC is reported at 106.72% vs. 107.48% in
September 2015. The decrease is due to defaults in collateral as
well as losses stemming from credit risk sales.


ONEMAIN DIRECT 2016-1: Moody's Assigns B2 Rating to Class D Debt
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned definitive ratings to the
notes issued by OneMain Direct Auto Receivables Trust 2016-1 (ODART
2016-1). This is the inaugural direct auto loan transaction for
Springleaf Finance Corporation (SFC; B3 Stable). The notes are
backed by a pool of automobile loan contracts originated by
regional subsidiaries of SFC, who is also the servicer and
administrator for the transaction.

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: OneMain Direct Auto Receivables Trust 2016-1

$603,120,000, 2.04%, Class A, Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

$45,610,000, 2.76%, Class B, Definitive Rating Assigned Baa2 (sf)

$51,270,000, 4.58%, Class C, Definitive Rating Assigned Ba1 (sf)

$53,900,000, 7.00%, Class D, Definitive Rating Assigned B2 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings are based on the quality of the underlying collateral
and its expected performance, the strength of the capital
structure, and the experience and expertise of SFC as the
servicer.

The definitive rating for the Class C notes, Ba1 (sf), is one notch
higher than its provisional rating, (P)Ba2 (sf). This difference is
a result of the transaction closing with a lower weighted average
cost of funds (WAC) than Moody's modeled when the provisional
ratings were assigned. The WAC assumptions, as well as other
structural features, were provided by the issuer.

Moody's median cumulative net loss expectation for the pool is
7.0%. Moody's based its cumulative net loss expectation on an
analysis of the credit quality of the underlying collateral; the
historical performance of similar collateral, including
securitization performance and managed portfolio performance; the
ability of SFC to perform the servicing functions; and current
expectations for the macroeconomic environment during the life of
the transaction.

At closing, the Class A notes, Class B notes, Class C notes and
Class D notes benefit from 21.00%, 14.95%, 8.15% and 1.00% of hard
credit enhancement, respectively. Hard credit enhancement for the
notes consists of a combination of overcollateralization, a
non-declining reserve account, and subordination, except for the
Class D notes, which do not benefit from subordination. The notes
will also benefit from excess spread.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Auto Loan- and Lease-Backed ABS" published in
December 2015. Please see the Ratings Methodologies page on
www.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.

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

Up

Moody's could upgrade the notes if levels of credit enhancement are
higher than necessary to protect investors against current
expectations of portfolio losses. Losses could decline from Moody's
original expectations as a result of a lower number of obligor
defaults or appreciation in the value of the vehicles securing an
obligor's promise of payment. Portfolio losses also depend greatly
on the US job market and the market for used vehicles. Other
reasons for better-than-expected performance include changes to
servicing practices that enhance collections or refinancing
opportunities that result in prepayments.

Down

Moody's could downgrade the notes if levels of credit enhancement
are insufficient to protect investors against current expectations
of portfolio losses. Losses could rise above Moody's original
expectations as a result of a higher number of obligor defaults or
deterioration in the value of the vehicles securing an obligor's
promise of payment. Portfolio losses also depend greatly on the US
job market and the market for used vehicles. Other reasons for
worse-than-expected performance include poor servicing, error on
the part of transaction parties, inadequate transaction governance
and fraud.


ONEMAIN DIRECT 2016-1: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Class C Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to OneMain Direct Auto
Receivables Trust 2016-1's $700 million automobile
receivables-backed notes series 2016-1.

The note issuance is an asset-backed securities (ABS) transaction
backed by subprime auto loan receivables.

The ratings reflect:

   -- The availability of approximately 27.02%, 21.76%, and 15.90%

      credit support for the class A, B, and C notes,
      respectively, based on stressed cash flow scenarios
      (including excess spread), which provides coverage of more
      than 3.0x, 2.25x, and 1.75x our 8.25%-8.75% expected
      cumulative net loss.

   -- The timely interest and principal payments made to the rated

      notes by the assumed legal final maturity dates under
      stressed cash flow modeling scenarios that S&P believes are
      appropriate for the assigned ratings.

   -- S&P's expectation that under a moderate ('BBB') stress
      scenario, all else being equal, its ratings on the class A,
      B, and C notes would remain within two rating categories of
      S&P's 'A (sf)', 'BBB (sf)', and 'BB (sf)' ratings,
      respectively, during the first year.  These potential rating

      movements are consistent with S&P's credit stability
      criteria, which outline the outer bound of credit
      deterioration as a two-category downgrade within the first
      year for 'A (sf)', 'BBB (sf)', and 'BB (sf)' rated
      securities under moderate stress conditions.

   -- S&P's views regarding the collateral characteristics of the
      overall subprime automobile loan pool securitized in this
      transaction.

   -- The unique nature of the auto loans (where the vehicle is
      refinanced after its initial purchase) caused S&P to apply
      its consumer receivables ABS criteria rather than S&P's auto

      loan ABS criteria.

   -- The transaction's payment and legal structures.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

OneMain Direct Auto Receivables Trust 2016-1

Class    Rating       Amount (mil. $)
A        A+ (sf)              603.120
B        BBB+ (sf)             45.610
C        BB (sf)               51.270
D        NR                    53.900

NR--Not rated.


PARK AVENUE 2016-1: S&P Assigns Prelim. BB- Rating on Cl. D Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Park Avenue
Institutional Advisers CLO Ltd. 2016-1/Park Avenue Institutional
Advisers CLO LLC 2016-1's $340.30 million floating-rate notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation transaction
backed by a revolving pool consisting primarily of broadly
syndicated senior secured loans.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of July 20,
2016.  Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect:

   -- The diversified collateral pool, which consists primarily of

      broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior secured term
      loans that are governed by collateral quality tests.  The
      credit enhancement provided through the subordination of
      cash flows, excess spread, and overcollateralization.

   -- The collateral manager's experienced team, which can affect
      the performance of the rated notes through collateral
      selection, ongoing portfolio management, and trading.  The
      transaction's legal structure, which is expected to be
      bankruptcy remote.

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

Park Avenue Institutional Advisers CLO Ltd. 2016-1/Park Avenue
Institutional Advisers CLO LLC 2016-1

Class                             Rating             Amount
                                                   (mil. $)
A-1                               AAA (sf)           234.90
A-2                               AA (sf)             39.60
B (deferrable)                    A (sf)              32.30
C (deferrable)                    BBB- (sf)           21.70
D (deferrable)                    BB- (sf)            11.80
Subordinated notes (deferrable)   NR                  40.65

NR--Not rated.


SEQUOIA MORTGAGE 2016-2: Moody's Gives (P)B1 Rating to Cl. B-4 Debt
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to the
classes of residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) issued by
Sequoia Mortgage Trust (SEMT) 2016-2. The certificates are backed
by one pool of prime quality, first-lien mortgage loans. The assets
of the trust consist of 485 fully amortizing, fixed rate mortgage
loans, substantially all of which have an original term to maturity
of 30 years. The borrowers in the pool have high FICO scores,
significant equity in their properties and liquid cash reserves.

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2016-2

Cl. A-1, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-4, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-5, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-6, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-7, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-8, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-9, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-10, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-11, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-12, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-13, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-14, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-15, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-16, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-17, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-18, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-19, Assigned (P) Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-20, Assigned (P) Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-21, Assigned (P) Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-22, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-23, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-24, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO1, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO2, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO3, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO4, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO5, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO6, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO7, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO8, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO9, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO10, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO11, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO12, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO13, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO14, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO15, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO16, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO17, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO18, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO19, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO20, Assigned (P) Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-IO21, Assigned (P) Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-IO22, Assigned (P) Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-IO23, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO24, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-IO25, Assigned (P) Aaa (sf)

Cl. B-1, Assigned (P) A1 (sf)

Cl. B-2, Assigned (P) Baa1 (sf)

Cl. B-3, Assigned (P) Ba1 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Assigned (P) B1 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

Summary Credit Analysis

Moody's expected cumulative net loss on the aggregate pool is 0.40%
in a base scenario and reaches 4.30% at a stress level consistent
with the Aaa ratings.

Moody's said, "The Aaa MILAN CE, inclusive of concentration
adjustments, for this pool is 4.25%. Loan-level adjustments
included: adjustments to borrower probability of default for higher
and lower borrower DTIs, borrowers with multiple mortgaged
properties, self-employed borrowers, and for the default risk of
HOA properties in super lien states. The adjustment to our Aaa
stress loss above the model output also includes adjustments
related to aggregator and originators assessments. The MILAN model
is based on stressed trajectories of HPA, unemployment rates and
interest rates, at a monthly frequency over a ten year period. The
model combines loan-level characteristics with economic drivers to
determine the probability of default for each loan, and hence for a
portfolio as a whole. Severity is also calculated on a loan-level
basis. The pool loss level is then adjusted for borrower, zip code,
and MSA level concentrations."

Collateral Description

The SEMT 2016-2 transaction is a securitization of 485 first lien
residential mortgage loans, with an aggregate unpaid principal
balance of $348,537,443. There are 118 originators in the
transaction including New Penn Financial, LLC representing 16.8% of
the outstanding principal balance of the loans, Quicken Loans, Inc.
representing 7.5% of the outstanding principal balance of the
loans, PrimeLending, a PlainsCapital Company representing 5.0% of
the outstanding principal balance of the mortgage loans. The
remaining originators each account for less than 5.0% of the
principal balance of the loans in the pool. The loan-level review
encompassed credit underwriting, property value and regulatory
compliance. In addition, Redwood has agreed to backstop the rep and
warranty repurchase obligation of all originators other than First
Republic Bank.

The loans were all aggregated by Redwood Residential Acquisition
Corporation (Redwood), which Moody's has assessed as an Above
Average aggregator of prime jumbo residential mortgages. There have
been no losses on Redwood-aggregated transactions that closed in
2010 and later, and delinquencies to date have also been very low.

Structural considerations

Moody's said, "Similar to recent rated Sequoia transactions, in
this transaction, Redwood is adding a feature prohibiting the
servicer, or securities administrator, from advancing principal and
interest to loans that are 120 days or more delinquent. These loans
on which principal and interest advances are not made are called
the Stop Advance Mortgage Loans ("SAML"). The balance of the SAML
will be removed from the principal and interest distribution
amounts calculations. We view the SAML concept as something that
strengthens the integrity of senior and subordination relationships
in the structure. Yet, in certain scenarios the SAML concept, as
implemented in this transaction, can lead to a reduction in
interest payment to certain tranches even when more subordinated
tranches are outstanding. The senior/subordination relationship
between tranches is strengthened as the removal SAML in the
calculation of the senior percentage amount, directs more principal
to the senior bonds and less to the subordinate bonds. Further,
this feature limits the amount of servicer advances that could
increase the loss severity on the liquidated loans and preserves
the subordination amount for the most senior bonds. On the other
hand, this feature can cause a reduction in the interest
distribution amount paid to the bonds; and if that were to happen
such a reduction in interest payment is unlikely to be recovered.
The final ratings on the bonds, which are expected loss ratings,
take into consideration our expected losses on the collateral and
the potential reduction in interest distributions to the bonds.
Furthermore, the likelihood that in particular the subordinate
tranches could potentially permanently lose some interest as a
result of this feature was considered."

Tail Risk & Subordination Floor

The transaction cash flows follow a shifting interest structure
that allows subordinated bonds to receive principal payments under
certain defined scenarios. Because a shifting interest structure
allows subordinated bonds to pay down over time as the loan pool
shrinks, senior bonds are exposed to increased performance
volatility, known as tail risk. The transaction provides for a
subordination floor of 1.50% of the closing pool balance, which
mitigates tail risk by protecting the senior bonds from eroding
credit enhancement over time.

Third-party Review and Reps & Warranties

Third party due diligence firms verified the accuracy of the
loan-level information the sponsor provided us.

One TPR firm reviewed 100% of the mortgage loans for credit,
property valuation, compliance and data integrity. Two other TPR
firms reviewed a sample of mortgage loans for property valuation
and data integrity. The custodian reviewed the mortgage files and
did not find any exceptions.

The third party review found that the majority of reviewed loans
were compliant with Redwood's underwriting guidelines and had no
valuation or regulatory defects. Most of the loans that were not
compliant with Redwood's underwriting guidelines had strong
compensating factors.

Moody's said, "Although the TPR report identified
compliance-related exceptions, including exceptions related to the
TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure (TRID) rule, we did not believe
these to be material because either the sponsor or originator
corrected the errors or the errors are of a type that would not
likely lead to damages or losses for the RMBS trust."

The originators and the seller have provided unambiguous
representations and warranties (R&Ws) including an unqualified
fraud R&W. There is provision for binding arbitration in the event
of dispute between investors and the R&W provider concerning R&W
breaches.

Trustee & Master Servicer

The transaction trustee is Wilmington Trust, National Association.
The paying agent and cash management functions will be performed by
Citibank, N.A. and the custodian functions will be performed by
Wells Fargo, N.A., rather than the trustee. In addition,
CitiMortgage, as Master Servicer, is responsible for servicer
oversight, and termination of servicers and for the appointment of
successor servicers. In addition, CitiMortgage is committed to act
as successor if no other successor servicer can be found.

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

Down

Levels of credit protection that are insufficient to protect
investors against current expectations of loss could drive the
ratings down. Losses could rise above Moody's original expectations
as a result of a higher number of obligor defaults or deterioration
in the value of the mortgaged property securing an obligor's
promise of payment. Transaction performance also depends greatly on
the US macro economy and housing market. Other reasons for
worse-than-expected performance include poor servicing, error on
the part of transaction parties, inadequate transaction governance
and fraud.

Up

Levels of credit protection that are higher than necessary to
protect investors against current expectations of loss could drive
the ratings up. Losses could decline from Moody's original
expectations as a result of a lower number of obligor defaults or
appreciation in the value of the mortgaged property securing an
obligor's promise of payment. Transaction performance also depends
greatly on the US macro economy and housing market.


SHOPS AT CRYSTALS 2016-CSTL: S&P Assigns BB Rating on Cl. E Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Shops at Crystals Trust
2016-CSTL's $300.0 million commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates.

The certificate issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed securities
transaction backed by a $300.0 million trust mortgage loan, which
is part of a whole mortgage loan totaling $550.0 million, secured
by a first lien on the borrower's fee interest in the Shops at
Crystals, a 262,327-sq.-ft. luxury shopping center located in Las
Vegas.  The $550.0 million whole loan is split into a $300.0
million trust balance and $250.0 million of non-trust companion
loans, of which $210.9 million is pari passu to the class A
certificates, and $39.1 million is pari passu to the class B
certificates.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of the collateral's historical and
projected performance, the sponsor's and manager's experience, the
trustee-provided liquidity, the loan's terms, and the transaction's
structure.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

Shops at Crystals Trust 2016-CSTL

Class       Rating(i)             Amount($)
A           AAA (sf)            112,000,000
X-A         AAA (sf)        112,000,000(ii)
X-B         AA- (sf)         20,700,000(ii)
B           AA- (sf)             20,700,000
C           A- (sf)              50,700,000
D           BBB- (sf)            63,800,000
E           BB (sf)              52,800,000

(i)The certificates will be issued to qualified institutional
buyers according to Rule 144A of the Securities Act of 1933.
(ii)Notional balance.  The notional amount of the class X-A
certificates will be reduced by the aggregate amount of principal
distributions and realized losses allocated to the class A
certificates, and the notional amount of the class X-B certificates
will be reduced by the aggregate amount of principal distributions
and realized losses allocated to the class B certificates.


SOCIETE GENERALE 2016-C5: Fitch Assigns B- Rating on 2 Tranches
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned these ratings and Rating Outlooks to
Societe Generale Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust, Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2016-C5.

   -- $30,047,000 class A-1 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $92,155,000 class A-2 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $165,000,000 class A-3 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $188,922,000 class A-4 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $39,644,000 class A-SB 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $50,656,000 class A-M 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $566,424,000b class X-A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $35,919,000b class X-B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $33,157,000b class X-C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $35,919,000 class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $33,157,000 class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $39,603,000ab class X-D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $19,342,000ab class X-E 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $8,289,000ab class X-F 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $39,603,000a class D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $19,342,000a class E 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $8,289,000a class F 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable.

  (a) Privately placed and pursuant to Rule 144A.
  (b) Notional amount and interest-only.

Fitch does not rate the $34,077,980ab interest-only class X-G or
the $34,077,980a Class G.  The classes above reflect the final
ratings and deal structure.

The SG Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2016-C5 transaction
closed on July 19, 2016.

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership interest in the
trust, primary assets of which are 47 loans secured by 138
commercial properties having an aggregate principal balance of
approximately $736.8 million as of the cutoff date.  The loans were
contributed to the trust by Societe Generale, Cantor Commercial
Real Estate Lending, L.P., Natixis Real Estate Capital LLC, Benefit
Street Partners CRE Finance LLC, and Silverpeak Real Estate Finance
LLC.

Fitch reviewed a comprehensive sample of the transaction's
collateral including site inspections on 71.4% of the properties by
balance, cash flow analysis of 80.6%, and asset summary reviews on
80.6% of the pool.

                       KEY RATING DRIVERS

Fitch Leverage: The pool's leverage statistics are in line with
other recent Fitch-rated, fixed-rate multiborrower transactions.
The pool's Fitch debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) of 1.15x is
slightly below the year-to-date (YTD) 2016 average of 1.17x and
full-year 2015 average of 1.18x.  The pool's Fitch loan to value
(LTV) of 107.7% is in line with the YTD 2016 average of 107.5% and
below the full-year 2015 average of 109.3%.

High Hotel Concentration: Approximately 20.9% of the pool by
balance, including one of the top 10 loans (4.7%), consists of a
hotel property, which is higher than the YTD 2016 average of 15.9%
and the 2015 average of 17.0%; hotels have the highest probability
of default in Fitch's multiborrower CMBS model.

Less Concentrated Pool: The largest 10 loans in the transaction
compose 43.4% of the pool by balance.  Compared to other
Fitch-rated U.S. multiborrower deals, the concentration in this
transaction is lower than the YTD 2016 and full-year 2015 average
concentrations of 55.4% and 49.3%, respectively.  The pool's
concentration results in a loan concentration index (LCI) of 308,
which is lower than the 2015 average of 367.

                        RATING SENSITIVITIES

For this transaction, Fitch's net cash flow (NCF) was 14.1% below
the most recent year's net operating income (NOI; for properties
for which a full-year NOI was provided, excluding properties that
were stabilizing during this period).  Unanticipated further
declines in property-level NCF could result in higher defaults and
loss severities on defaulted loans and in potential rating actions
on the certificates.

Fitch evaluated the sensitivity of the ratings assigned to SGCMS
2016-C5 certificates and found that the transaction displays
average sensitivity to further declines in NCF.  In a scenario in
which NCF declined a further 20% from Fitch's NCF, a downgrade of
the junior 'AAAsf' certificates to 'BBB+sf' could result.  In a
more severe scenario, in which NCF declined a further 30% from
Fitch's NCF, a downgrade of the junior 'AAAsf' certificates to
'BBB-sf' could result.


SYMPHONY CLO II: S&P Raises Rating on Class D Notes to 'BB+'
------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its ratings on the class A-3, B, C, and D
notes from Symphony CLO II Ltd. and removed them from CreditWatch
with positive implications, where S&P placed them on May 25, 2016.
At the same time, S&P affirmed its 'AAA (sf)' ratings on the class
A-1, A-2a, and A-2b notes from the same transaction.

The rating actions follow S&P's review of the transaction's
performance using data from the June 8, 2016, trustee report.

The upgrades reflect the transaction's $72.33 million in collective
paydowns to the class A-1 and A-2a notes since S&P's June 2014
rating actions.  These paydowns resulted in improved
overcollateralization (O/C) ratios since S&P's previous rating
actions, which referenced the the May 15, 2014, trustee report:

   -- The class A O/C ratio improved to 136.40% from 126.40%.
   -- The class B O/C ratio improved to 124.20% from 117.70%.
   -- The class C O/C ratio improved to 116.40% from 111.90%.
   -- The class D O/C ratio improved to 110.50% from 107.40%.

The upgrades reflect improved credit support at the prior rating
levels; the affirmations reflect S&P's view that the credit support
available is commensurate with the current rating levels.

Although S&P's cash flow analysis indicated higher ratings for the
class C and D notes, its rating actions considered the increase in
both defaults and assets rated in the 'CCC' category.  

S&P's review of this transaction included a cash flow analysis,
based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in the
aforementioned trustee report, to estimate future performance.  In
line with S&P's criteria, our cash flow scenarios applied
forward-looking assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of
defaults, and recoveries upon default, under various interest rate
and macroeconomic scenarios.  In addition, S&P's analysis
considered the transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or
ultimate principal to each of the rated tranches.  The results of
the cash flow analysis demonstrated, in S&P's view, that all of the
rated outstanding classes have adequate credit enhancement
available at the rating levels associated with these rating
actions.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them and will take rating actions as S&P deems
necessary.

CASH FLOW AND SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS

Symphony CLO II Ltd.

                               Cash flow
          Previous             implied     Cash flow     Final
Class     rating               rating(i)   cushion (%)  (ii)   
rating
A-1       AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)    31.60        AAA (sf)
A-2a      AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)    34.12        AAA (sf)
A-2b      AAA (sf)             AAA (sf)    31.60        AAA (sf)
A-3       AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos   AAA (sf)    10.83        AAA (sf)
B         A+ (sf)/Watch Pos    AA+ (sf)    8.40         AA+ (sf)
C         BBB (sf)/Watch Pos   A+ (sf)     6.21         A- (sf)
D         BB (sf)/Watch Pos    BBB+ (sf)   2.48         BB+ (sf)

(i)The cash flow implied rating considers the actual spread,
coupon, and recovery of the underlying collateral.  
(ii)The cash flow cushion is the excess of the tranche break-even
default rate above the scenario default rate at the assigned rating
for a given class of rated notes using the actual spread, coupon,
and recovery.

             RECOVERY RATE AND CORRELATION SENSITIVITY

In addition to S&P's base-case analysis, it generated additional
scenarios in which it made negative adjustments of 10% to the
current collateral pool's recovery rates relative to each tranche's
weighted average recovery rate.  S&P also generated other scenarios
by adjusting the intra- and inter-industry correlations to assess
the current portfolio's sensitivity to different correlation
assumptions, assuming the correlation scenarios outlined below.

Correlation
Scenario                Within industry (%)     Between industries
(%)
Below base case               15.0                        5.0
Base case equals rating       20.0                        7.5
Above base case               25.0                       10.0

                     Recovery   Correlation   Correlation
         Cash flow   decrease   increase      decrease
         implied     implied    implied       implied    Final
Class    rating      rating     rating        rating       rating
A-1      AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)
A-2a     AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)
A-2b     AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)
A-3      AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)
B        AA+ (sf)    AA+ (sf)   AA+ (sf)      AAA (sf)   AA+ (sf)
C        A+ (sf)     A+ (sf)    A+ (sf)       AA (sf)    A- (sf)
D        BBB+ (sf)   BBB- (sf)  BBB+ (sf)     BBB+ (sf)  BB+ (sf)

                      DEFAULT BIASING SENSITIVITY

To assess whether the current portfolio has sufficient diversity,
S&P biased defaults on the assets in the current collateral pool
with the highest spread and lowest base-case recoveries.

                           Spread       Recovery
              Cash flow   compression   compression
              implied     implied       implied       Final
Class         rating      rating        rating        rating
A-1           AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
A-2a          AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
A-2b          AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
A-3           AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
B             AA+ (sf)    AA+ (sf)      AA- (sf)      AA+ (sf)
C             A+ (sf)     A+ (sf)       BBB- (sf)     A- (sf)
D             BBB+ (sf)   BBB+ (sf)     B+ (sf)       BB+ (sf)

RATINGS RAISED AND REMOVED FROM CREDITWATCH POSITIVE

Symphony CLO II Ltd.
                   Rating
Class         To           From
A-3           AAA (sf)     AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
B             AA+ (sf)     A+ (sf)/Watch Pos
C             A- (sf)      BBB (sf)/Watch Pos
D             BB+ (sf)     BB (sf)/Watch Pos

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Symphony CLO II Ltd.
Class         Rating
A-1           AAA (sf)
A-2a          AAA (sf)
A-2b          AAA (sf)


SYMPHONY CLO III: S&P Raises Rating on Class E Notes to 'BB+'
-------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its ratings on the class B, C, D, and E
notes from Symphony CLO III Ltd. and removed them from CreditWatch
with positive implications, where S&P placed them on May 25, 2016.
At the same time, we affirmed our 'AAA (sf)' ratings on the class
A-1a, A-1b, A-2a, and A-2b notes from the same transaction.

The rating actions follow S&P's review of the transaction's
performance using data from the June 3, 2016, trustee report.

The upgrades reflect the transaction's $144.81 million in
collective paydowns to the class A-1a and A-2a notes since S&P's
July 2014 rating actions.  These notes now stand at 42.0% and 47.1%
of their initial balances, respectively.  The paydowns resulted in
improved overcollateralization (O/C) ratios since S&P's previous
rating actions, which referenced the July 2, 2014, trustee report:

   -- The class A/B O/C ratio increased to 147.20% from 126.10%.
   -- The class C O/C ratio increased to 129.89% from 117.66%.
   -- The class D O/C ratio increased to 118.72% from 111.69%.

The upgrades reflect improved credit support at the prior rating
levels; the affirmations reflect S&P's view that the credit support
available is commensurate with the current rating levels.

The ratings on the class C, D, and E notes are constrained at
'AA+ (sf)', 'BBB+ (sf)', and 'BB+ (sf)', respectively, by the
application of the largest obligor default test, a supplemental
stress test included as part of S&P's corporate collateralized debt
obligation criteria.

"Our review of this transaction included a cash flow analysis,
based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in the
aforementioned trustee report, to estimate future performance.  In
line with our criteria, our cash flow scenarios applied
forward-looking assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of
defaults, and recoveries upon default, under various interest rate
and macroeconomic scenarios.  In addition, our analysis considered
the transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or ultimate
principal to each of the rated tranches.  The results of the cash
flow analysis demonstrated, in our view, that all of the rated
outstanding classes have adequate credit enhancement available at
the rating levels associated with these rating actions," S&P said.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them and will take rating actions as S&P deems
necessary.

CASH FLOW ANALYSIS

Symphony CLO III Ltd.

                                Cash flow
         Previous               implied    Cash flow   Final
Class    rating                 rating(i)  cushion (%) (ii)   
rating
A-1a     AAA (sf)               AAA (sf)   23.78    AAA (sf)
A-1b     AAA (sf)               AAA (sf)   23.78    AAA (sf)
A-2a     AAA (sf)               AAA (sf)   23.78    AAA (sf)
A-2b     AAA (sf)               AAA (sf)   23.78    AAA (sf)
B        AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos     AAA (sf)   23.78    AAA (sf)
C        A+ (sf)/Watch Pos      AA+ (sf)   21.07    AA+ (sf)
D        BBB- (sf)/Watch Pos    BBB+ (sf)  23.82    BBB+ (sf)
E        BB (sf)/Watch Pos      BB+ (sf)   14.64    BB+ (sf)

(i)The cash flow implied rating considers the actual spread,
coupon, and recovery of the underlying collateral.  
(ii)The cash flow cushion is the excess of the tranche break-even
default rate above the scenario default rate at the assigned rating
for a given class of rated notes using the actual spread, coupon,
and recovery.

               RECOVERY RATE AND CORRELATION SENSITIVITY

In addition to S&P's base-case analysis, S&P generated additional
scenarios in which it made negative adjustments of 10% to the
current collateral pool's recovery rates relative to each tranche's
weighted average recovery rate.  S&P also generated other scenarios
by adjusting the intra- and inter-industry correlations to assess
the current portfolio's sensitivity to different correlation
assumptions, assuming the correlation scenarios outlined below.

Correlation
Scenario                Within industry (%)     Between industries
(%)
Below base case              15.0                        5.0
Base case equals rating      20.0                        7.5
Above base case              25.0                       10.0

                      Recovery   Correlation  Correlation
          Cash flow   decrease   increase     decrease
          implied     implied    implied      implied    Final
Class     rating      rating     rating       rating     rating
A-1a      AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)
A-1b      AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)
A-2a      AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)
A-2b      AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)
B         AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)
C         AA+ (sf)    AAA (sf)   AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)   AA+ (sf)
D         BBB+ (sf)   AA- (sf)   AA+ (sf)     AA+ (sf)   BBB+ (sf)
E         BB+ (sf)    BBB- (sf)  BBB+ (sf)    A- (sf)    BB+ (sf)

                     DEFAULT BIASING SENSITIVITY

To assess whether the current portfolio has sufficient diversity,
S&P biased defaults on the assets in the current collateral pool
with the highest spread and lowest base-case recoveries.

                           Spread       Recovery
              Cash flow   compression   compression
              implied     implied       implied       Final
Class         rating      rating        rating        rating
A-1a          AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
A-1b          AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
A-2a          AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
A-2b          AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
B             AAA (sf)    AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)      AAA (sf)
C             AA+ (sf)    AAA (sf)      AA+ (sf)      AA+ (sf)
D             BBB+ (sf)   A+ (sf)       A+ (sf)       BBB+ (sf)
E             BB+ (sf)    BB (sf)       BB (sf)       BB+ (sf)

RATINGS RAISED AND REMOVED FROM CREDITWATCH POSITIVE

Symphony CLO III Ltd.
                    Rating
Class         To            From
B             AAA (sf)      AA+ (sf)/Watch Pos
C             AA+ (sf)      A+ (sf)/Watch Pos
D             BBB+ (sf)     BBB- (sf)/Watch Pos
E             BB+ (sf       BB (sf)/Watch Pos

RATINGS AFFIRMED

Symphony CLO III Ltd.
Class         Rating
A-1a          AAA (sf)
A-1b          AAA (sf)
A-2a          AAA (sf)
A-2b          AAA (sf)


VENTURE XXIII: Moody's Assigns Ba3(sf) Rating to Class E Debt
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service, has assigned ratings to six classes of
notes issued by Venture XXIII CLO, Limited (the "Issuer" or
"Venture XXIII").

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$2,500,000 Class X Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2028
(the "Class X Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$256,000,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2028
(the "Class A Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$48,000,000 Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2028
(the "Class B Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$21,500,000 Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2028 (the "Class C Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned A2
(sf)

US$22,500,000 Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2028 (the "Class D Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned
Baa3 (sf)

US$20,000,000 Class E Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2028 (the "Class E Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3
(sf)

The Class X Notes, the Class A Notes, the Class B Notes, the Class
C Notes, the Class D Notes and the Class E Notes are referred to
herein, collectively, as the "Rated Notes."

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's ratings of the Rated Notes address the expected losses
posed to noteholders. The ratings reflect the risks due to defaults
on the underlying portfolio of assets, the transaction's legal
structure, and the characteristics of the underlying assets.

Venture XXIII CLO, Limited is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued
notes will be collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first
lien senior secured corporate loans. At least 90% of the portfolio
must consist of senior secured loans, cash, and eligible
investments, and up to 10% of the portfolio may consist of second
lien loans and unsecured loans. The portfolio is approximately 90%
ramped as of the closing date.

MJX Asset Management LLC (the "Manager"), will direct the
selection, acquisition and disposition of the assets on behalf of
the Issuer and may engage in trading activity, including
discretionary trading, during the transaction's four year
reinvestment period. Thereafter, the Manager may reinvest
unscheduled principal payments and proceeds from sales of credit
risk assets, subject to certain restrictions.

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer will issue subordinated
notes. 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.


VOYA CLO 2016-2: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating on Class D Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to five classes of
notes issued by Voya CLO 2016-2, Ltd.

Moody's rating action is:

  $259,000,000 Class A-1 Floating Rate Notes due 2028, Assigned
   Aaa (sf)
  $45,900,000 Class A-2 Floating Rate Notes due 2028, Assigned
   Aa2 (sf)
  $25,600,000 Class B Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2028,
   Assigned A2 (sf)
  $21,200,000 Class C Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2028,
   Assigned Baa3 (sf)
  $16,400,000 Class D Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2028,
   Assigned Ba3 (sf)

The Class A-1 Notes, the Class A-2 Notes, the Class B Notes, the
Class C Notes, and the Class D Notes are referred to herein,
collectively, as the "Rated Notes."

                         RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's ratings of the Rated Notes address the expected losses
posed to noteholders.  The ratings reflect the risks due to
defaults on the underlying portfolio of assets, the transaction's
legal structure, and the characteristics of the underlying assets.

Voya 2016-2 is a managed cash flow CLO.  The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first lien senior
secured corporate loans.  At least 90% of the portfolio must
consist of senior secured loans and eligible investments
representing principal proceeds, and up to 10% of the portfolio may
consist of second lien loans and unsecured loans.  The portfolio is
approximately 80% ramped as of the closing date.

Voya Alternative Asset Management LLC (the "Manager") will direct
the selection, acquisition and disposition of the assets on behalf
of the Issuer and may engage in trading activity, including
discretionary trading, during the transaction's five year
reinvestment period.  Thereafter, the Manager may reinvest
unscheduled principal payments and proceeds from sales of credit
risk assets, subject to certain restrictions.

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer issued subordinated
notes and combination securities.

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.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3.2.1
of the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in December 2015.

For modeling purposes, Moody's used these base-case assumptions:

Par amount: $400,000,000
Diversity Score: 70
Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2770
Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.85%
Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.50%
Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.0%
Weighted Average Life (WAL): 9.0 years.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:
The prinicpal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
December 2015.

Factors That Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

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

Together with the set of modeling assumptions above, Moody's
conducted an additional sensitivity analysis, which was a component
in determining the ratings assigned to the Rated Notes. This
sensitivity analysis includes increased default probability
relative to the base case.

Below is a summary of the impact of an increase in default
probability (expressed in terms of WARF level) on the Rated Notes
(shown in terms of the number of notch difference versus the
current model output, whereby a negative difference corresponds to
higher expected losses), assuming that all other factors are held
equal:

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 2770 to 3186)
Rating Impact in Rating Notches
Class A-1 Notes: 0
Class A-2 Notes: -1
Class B Notes: -2
Class C Notes: -1
Class D Notes: -0

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2770 to 3601)
Rating Impact in Rating Notches
Class A-1 Notes: -1
Class A-2 Notes: -3
Class B Notes: -4
Class C Notes: -2
Class D Notes: -1


VOYA CLO IV: Moody's Hikes Class D Notes Rating to Ba1(sf)
----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the following
notes issued by Voya CLO IV, Ltd.:

US$26,000,000 Class B Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due June 14,
2022, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on September 28, 2015
Upgraded to Aa3 (sf)

US$22,000,000 Class C Floating Rate Notes Due June 14, 2022,
Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on September 28, 2015 Upgraded to
Baa2 (sf)

US$12,000,000 Class D Floating Rate Notes Due June 14, 2022,
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on September 28, 2015 Upgraded to
Ba2 (sf)

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

US$380,000,000 Class A-1 Floating Rate Notes Due June 14, 2022
(current outstanding balance of $190,845,385.56), Affirmed Aaa
(sf); previously on September 28, 2015 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

US$21,000,000 Class A-2 Floating Rate Notes Due June 14, 2022,
Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on September 28, 2015 Upgraded to Aaa
(sf)

Voya CLO IV, Ltd., issued in June 2007, is a collateralized loan
obligation (CLO) backed primarily by a portfolio of senior secured
loans. The transaction's reinvestment period ended in July 2014.

RATINGS RATIONALE

These rating actions are primarily a result of deleveraging of the
senior notes and an increase in the transaction's
over-collateralization (OC) ratios since September 28, 2015. The
Class A-1 notes have been paid down by approximately 28% or $73.2
million since September 2015. Based on the trustee's June 2016
report, the OC ratios for the Class A, Class B, Class C, and Class
D notes are reported at 140.5%, 125.1%, 114.5% and 109.5%,
respectively, versus September 2015 levels of 130.0%, 119.2%,
111.3% and 107.4%, respectively.

Nevertheless, the credit quality of the portfolio has deteriorated
since September 2015. Based on the trustee's June 2016 report, the
weighted average rating factor is currently 2538 compared to 2381
on September 2015.


WACHOVIA BANK 2003-C7: Moody's Hikes Cl. G Debt Rating to Caa1
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on two classes
and upgraded the ratings on two classes in Wachovia Bank Commercial
Mortgage Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
Series 2003-C7 as follows:

Cl. F, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Jul 31, 2015 Upgraded to
A1 (sf)

Cl. G, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Jul 31, 2015 Affirmed
Caa2 (sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Jul 31, 2015 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. X-C, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on Jul 31, 2015 Downgraded to
Ca (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings on two P&I classes were upgraded based primarily on an
increase in credit support resulting from loan paydowns and
amortization. The deal has paid down 8% since Moody's last review.

The rating on one P&I class was affirmed due to losses.

The rating on the IO Class (Class X-C) was affirmed based on the
credit performance (or the weighted average rating factor or WARF)
of the referenced classes. The IO Class has an uncertainty of
future interest payments based on the fact that all of its
references classes have an interest rate equal to the weighted
average coupon of the pool.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 0.4% of the
current balance, compared to 0.9% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 6.6% of the original
pooled balance, the same as at last review.

Moody’s said, “We do not anticipate losses from the remaining
collateral in the current environment. However, over the remaining
life of the transaction, losses may emerge from macro stresses to
the environment and changes in collateral performance. Our ratings
reflect the potential for future losses under varying levels of
stress.”

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

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in
the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the June 15, 2016 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 98% to $24 million
from $1 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by fourteen mortgage loans ranging in size from less
than 2% to 33% of the pool, with the top ten loans constituting 95%
of the pool. Two loans, constituting 4% of the pool, have defeased
and are secured by US government securities.

One loan, constituting 33% of the pool, is on the master servicer's
watchlist. The watchlist includes loans that meet certain portfolio
review guidelines established as part of the CRE Finance Council
(CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of Moody's ongoing
monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews the watchlist to
assess which loans have material issues that could affect
performance.

Six loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $66.5 million (for an average loss
severity of 71%). No loans are currently in special servicing.

Moody's received full year 2014 and full year 2015 operating
results for 100% of the pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV
is 61%, the same as at Moody's last review. Moody's conduit
component excludes loans with structured credit assessments,
defeased and CTL loans, and specially serviced and troubled loans.
Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a weighted average haircut of
23% to the most recently available net operating income (NOI).
Moody's value reflects a weighted average capitalization rate of
9.1%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.18X and 1.82X,
respectively, compared to 1.23X and 1.77X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The top three conduit loans represent 60% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Plaza de Laredo Loan ($7.9 million -- 33% of
the pool), which is secured by a retail property located in Laredo,
Texas, approximately 2.5 hours south of San Antonio near the border
of Mexico. The top three tenants are Home Depot, Academy Sports &
Outdoors, and Office Depot. As of December 2015, the property was
99% leased, compared to 100% at last review. The loan has amortized
30% since securitization and is scheduled to mature in October
2023. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 65% and 1.55X,
respectively, compared to 67% and 1.49X at the last review.

The second largest loan is the Brewster Hall Loan ($3.4 million --
14% of the pool), which is secured by a 41-unit student housing
property near the campus of Eastern Washington University
approximately 20 miles SW of Spokane, Washington. Performance has
remained stable and has benefited from 23% amortization since
securitization. The property was 100% leased as of March 2016, the
same as at last review. The loan has an anticipated repayment date
of July 2018. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 86% and 1.1X,
respectively, compared to 90% and 1.06X at the last review.

The third largest loan is the Clearwater and Ocala, Florida Loan
(formerly known as the Florida Eckerd Portfolio Loan) ($2.9 million
-- 12% of the pool), which was originally secured by two
cross-collateralized and cross-defaulted single-tenant Eckerd
stores in Clearwater and Ocala, Florida. The property in Clearwater
is now a Main Street Thrift Shop and the property in Ocala is a
Dollar Tree. Performance has remained stable and the loan has
benefited from 49% of amortization since securitization. The loan
is scheduled to mature in September 2023. Moody's LTV and stressed
DSCR are 57% and 1.72X, respectively, compared to 62% and 1.56X at
the last review.


WACHOVIA BANK 2004-C11: Moody's Raises Rating on Cl. H Cert. to B2
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on five classes,
affirmed the ratings on three classes and downgraded the ratings on
one class in Wachovia Bank Commercial Mortgage Trust, Commercial
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2004-C11 as:

  Cl. D Certificate, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Nov. 13,
   2015, Affirmed Aa2 (sf)
  Cl. E Certificate, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Nov. 13,
   2015, Affirmed A1 (sf)
  Cl. F Certificate, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Nov. 13,
   2015, Affirmed Baa1 (sf)
  Cl. G Certificate, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Nov. 13,

   2015, Affirmed Ba1 (sf)
  Cl. H Certificate, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Nov. 13,
   2015, Affirmed B3 (sf)
  Cl. J Certificate, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Nov. 13,
   2015, Affirmed Caa3 (sf)
  Cl. K Certificate, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Nov. 13, 2015,

   Affirmed C (sf)
  Cl. L Certificate, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Nov. 13, 2015,

   Affirmed C (sf)
  Cl. X-C Certificate, Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on
   Nov. 13, 2015, Affirmed B1 (sf)

                         RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings on five P&I classes, Classes D through H, were upgraded
based primarily on an increase in credit support resulting from
loan paydowns and amortization.  The deal has paid down 51% since
Moody's last review.

The ratings on the remaining three P&I classes were affirmed
because the ratings are consistent with Moody's expected loss.

The rating on the IO Class (Class XC) was downgraded due to the
decline in the credit performance of its reference classes
resulting from principal paydowns of higher quality reference
classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 5.4% of the
current balance, compared to 0.8% at Moody's last review.  Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 2.5% of the original
pooled balance, compared to 2.1% at the last review. Moody's
provides a current list of base expected losses for conduit and
fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at:

   http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255

FACTORS THAT WOULD LEAD TO A UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS:

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term.  Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected.

Factors that could lead to an upgrade of the ratings include a
significant amount of loan paydowns or amortization, an increase in
the pool's share of defeasance or an improvement in pool
performance.

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
decline in the performance of the pool, loan concentration, an
increase in realized and expected losses from specially serviced
and troubled loans or interest shortfalls.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single Borrower
CMBS" published in October 2015.

DESCRIPTION OF MODELS USED

Moody's analysis used the excel-based Large Loan Model.  The large
loan model derives credit enhancement levels based on an
aggregation of adjusted loan-level proceeds derived from Moody's
loan-level LTV ratios.  Major adjustments to determining proceeds
include leverage, loan structure and property type.  Moody's also
further adjusts these aggregated proceeds for any pooling benefits
associated with loan level diversity and other concentrations and
correlations.

                         DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the June 17, 2016, distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 91% to $94 million
from $1.04 billion at securitization.  The certificates are
collateralized by three mortgage loans.  One loan, constituting 17%
of the pool, has an investment-grade structured credit
assessments.

One loan, constituting 71% of the pool, is on the master servicer's
watchlist.  The watchlist includes loans that meet certain
portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE Finance
Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package.  As part of Moody's
ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews the
watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that could
affect performance.

Five loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $22 million (for an average loss
severity of 56%).

Moody's received full year 2015 operating results for 100% of the
pool.

The loan with an investment grade structured credit assessment is
the University Mall Loan ($16 million -- 17% of the pool), which is
secured by a 653,600 SF mall located in Tuscaloosa, Alabama. The
property is located three miles southeast of downtown Tuscaloosa
and two miles south of the University of Alabama. Anchor tenants
include JC Penney and Belk.  As of March 2015, total mall and
inline occupancy was 91% and 75%, respectively, compared with 95%
and 85% in September 2014.  The decline of inline occupancy was due
to tenants vacating in late 2014 and early 2015.  Moody's
structured credit assessment and stressed DSCR are a1 (sca.pd) and
1.58X, respectively, compared to a1 (sca.pd) and 1.63X at last
review.

The two remaining loans represent 83% of the pool balance.  The
largest loan is the Four Seasons Town Centre Loan ($67 million --
71% of the pool), which is secured by a 928,400 SF mall in
Greensboro, North Carolina.  The loan's Sponsor is General Growth
Properties (GGP).  Anchors include JC Penney, Dillard's and a
former Belk space that is currently vacant.  Dillard's is not
included as part of the collateral for this loan.  As of March
2016, total mall and inline occupancy was 72% and 75%,
respectively, compared to 73% and 80% in June 2015.  The loan's
maturity date was extended 3.5 years to June 2017 as part of the
restructuring of the loan as part of GGP's bankruptcy plan. Moody's
LTV and stressed DSCR are 67% and 1.57X, respectively, compared to
71% and 1.49X at the last review.

The other remaining loan is the Sports Authority Corporate
Headquarters Loan ($11 million -- 12% of the pool), which is
secured by a 210,200 SF office building located in Englewood,
Colorado.  The property is fully leased to Sports Authority with a
lease expiration date in July 2018.  However, Sports Authority
recently filed bankruptcy and announced they plan to vacate the
entire space.  As a result of the tenancy risk, Moody's has
identified this as a troubled loan.


WACHOVIA BANK 2006-C27: S&P Lowers Rating on 2 Tranches to D
------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its rating on the class A-M commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates from Wachovia Bank Commercial
Mortgage Trust's series 2006-C27, a U.S. commercial mortgage-backed
securities (CMBS) transaction, to 'AA+ (sf)'.  In addition, S&P
lowered its ratings to 'D (sf)' on classes C and D, and affirmed
its ratings on four other classes from the same transaction.

S&P's rating actions on the principal- and interest-paying
certificates follow its analysis of the transaction, primarily
using its criteria for rating U.S. and Canadian CMBS transactions,
which included a review of the credit characteristics and
performance of the remaining assets in the pool, the transaction's
structure, and the liquidity available to the trust.

S&P raised its rating on class A-M to 'AA+ (sf)' to reflect its
expectation of the available credit enhancement for this class,
which S&P believes is greater than its most recent estimate of
necessary credit enhancement for the rating level.  The upgrade
also follows S&P's views regarding the collateral's current and
future performance and available liquidity support.  The upgrade
also reflects a reduction in the trust balance.

The downgrades on classes C and D to 'D (sf)' reflect S&P's view
that accumulated interest shortfalls, which have been outstanding
for three months on these classes, will remain outstanding for the
foreseeable future.

According to the June 17, 2016, trustee remittance report, the
current monthly interest shortfalls totaled $1,038,201 and resulted
primarily from:

   -- Appraisal subordinate entitlement reduction amounts totaling

      $503,675;

   -- Interest not advanced due to nonrecoverability
      determinations totaling $265,504;

   -- Interest on advances totaling $91,474; and

   -- Special servicing fees totaling $84,651.

The current interest shortfalls affected classes subordinate to and
including class B.

The affirmations on the principal- and interest-paying certificates
reflect S&P's expectation that the available credit enhancement for
these classes will be within its estimate of the necessary credit
enhancement required for the current ratings.  The affirmations
also reflect S&P's views regarding the collateral's current and
future performance, the transaction structure, and liquidity
support available to the classes.

While available credit enhancement levels suggest further positive
rating movements on classes A-M and A-J, S&P's analysis also
considered the classes' susceptibility to reduced liquidity support
from the 22 (includes the Holiday Inn Express Southington, CT loan,
which transferred after the release of the June 17, 2016, trustee
remittance report) specially serviced assets ($420.8 million,
44.1%), and the magnitude of performing loans (28 loans; $520.3
million, 54.6%) maturing or that have an anticipated repayment date
in third-quarter 2016.

S&P affirmed its 'AAA (sf)' rating on the class X-C interest-only
(IO) certificates based on S&P's criteria for rating IO
securities.

                        TRANSACTION SUMMARY

As of the June 17, 2016, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool balance was $953.6 million, which is 31.0% of the pool balance
at issuance.  The pool currently includes 36 loans and 15 real
estate-owned (REO) assets, down from 154 loans at issuance.
Twenty-two of these assets are with the special servicer and 28
($520.3 million, 54.3%) are on the master servicer's watchlist. The
master servicer, Wells Fargo Bank N.A., reported financial
information for 87.0% of the loans in the pool, of which 83.1% was
partial or year-end 2015 data, 2.0% was partial year 2016 data, and
the remainder was year-end 2014 data.

S&P calculated a 1.12x S&P Global Ratings weighted average debt
service coverage (DSC) and 83.2% S&P Global Ratings weighted
average loan-to-value (LTV) ratio using a 7.52% S&P Global Ratings
weighted average capitalization rate.  The DSC, LTV, and
capitalization rate calculations exclude 20 ($333.8 million, 35.0%)
of the 22 specially serviced assets, one subordinate B hope note
($7.0 million, 0.7%), and six loans that the master servicer
informed S&P paid off after the June 17, 2016, trustee remittance
report.  The top 10 assets have an aggregate outstanding pool trust
balance of $556.6 million (58.4%).  Using servicer-reported
numbers, S&P calculated an S&P Global Ratings weighted average DSC
and LTV of 1.02x and 84.1%, respectively, for five of the top 10
loans.  The S&P Global Ratings weighted average DSC and LTV for the
top 10 loans includes the recently modified BlueLinx Holdings Pool
loan, and excludes specially serviced assets and the two paid-off
loans.

To date, the transaction has experienced $129.6 million in
principal losses, or 4.2% of the original pool trust balance.  S&P
expects losses to reach approximately 9.3% of the original pool
trust balance in the near term, based on losses incurred to date
and additional losses S&P expects upon the eventual resolution of
20 of the 22 specially serviced assets.

                       CREDIT CONSIDERATIONS

Twenty-two assets in the pool were with the special servicer, LNR
Partners LLC (LNR).  Details of the four largest specially serviced
assets, all of which are top 10 assets, are:

   -- The Glendale Center REO asset ($125.0 million, 13.1%) is the

      largest asset in the pool and has a total reported exposure
      of $134.5 million.  The property is a 389,758-sq.-ft. office

      building in Glendale, Calif.  The loan was transferred to
      the special servicer on Oct. 13, 2011, because of imminent
      default and became REO on Aug. 3, 2012.  LNR indicated they
      have entered into five new leases and renewal leases
      comprising 301,474-sq.-ft (77% of the gross leasable area)
      since the asset became REO; however the property is
      currently not listed for sale.  The reported DSC as of year-
      end 2015 and occupancy as of year-end 2014 were 0.68x and
      77.0%, respectively.

   -- An appraisal reduction amount (ARA) of $53.1 million is in
      effect against this asset.  S&P expects a moderate loss upon

      its eventual resolution.

   -- The Bluelinx Holdings Pool loan ($79.7 million, 8.4%) is the

      third-largest loan in the pool and has a total reported
      exposure of $79.7 million.  The loan is currently secured by

      48 industrial-distribution properties located throughout the

      U.S. and 100% leased to BlueLinx Holdings Inc. under a
      master lease.  Since origination, nine properties have been
      released, resulting in the paydown of the outstanding loan
      principal balance.  The loan was transferred to the special
      servicer on June 10, 2011, because of imminent default, and
      was recently modified.  As part of the loan modification,
      the BlueLinx master lease has been extended to June 2026 and

      the loan's maturity date has been extended to July 2019
      subject to annual principal paydown requirements.  S&P's
      analysis considered this recent modification and potential
      loan workout as well as market data and conditions in order
      to assess our sustainable cash flow and valuation.

   -- The National Bank Plaza REO asset ($33.1 million, 3.5%) is
      the sixth-largest asset in the pool and has a total reported

      exposure of $37.3 million.  The property is a 248,863-sq.-
      ft. office building in Phoenix, Ariz.  The loan was
      transferred to the special servicer on May 3, 2011, because
      of imminent default and became REO on Oct. 5, 2012.  LNR
      indicated that the asset is not marketed for sale.  The
      reported DSC and occupancy as of year-end 2015 were 0.54x
      and 75.0%, respectively.  An ARA of $12.7 million is in
      effect against this asset.  S&P expects a moderate loss upon

      this asset's eventual resolution.

   -- The Regency Park Shopping Center REO asset ($23.8 million,
      2.5%) is the seventh-largest asset in the pool and has a
      total reported exposure of $29.8 million.  The property is a

      201,974-sq.-ft. retail property in Overland Park, Kan.  The
      loan transferred to the special servicer on Oct. 31, 2011,
      because of imminent default and became REO on Jan. 18, 2013.

      LNR indicated that the asset is not marketed for sale.  The
      reported DSC and occupancy as of year-end 2015 were 0.40x
      and 69.0%, respectively.  An ARA of $15.0 million is in
      effect against this asset.  S&P expects a significant loss
      upon its eventual resolution.

The 17 remaining assets with the special servicer have each
individual balances that represent less than 2.0% of the total pool
trust balance.  S&P estimated losses for 20 of the 22 specially
serviced assets arriving at a weighted average loss severity of
44.8%.

With respect to the specially serviced assets noted above, a
minimal loss is less than 25%, a moderate loss is 26%-59%, and a
significant loss is 60% or greater.

RATINGS LIST

Wachovia Bank Commercial Mortgage Trust
Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2006-C27
                                   Rating
Class             Identifier       To                  From
A-1A              92977QAE8        AAA (sf)            AAA (sf)
A-M               92977QAG3        AA+ (sf)            A- (sf)
A-J               92977QAH1        B+ (sf)             B+ (sf)
B                 92977QAJ7        CCC (sf)            CCC (sf)
C                 92977QAK4        D (sf)              CCC- (sf)
D                 92977QAL2        D (sf)              CCC- (sf)
XC                92977QAN8        AAA (sf)            AAA (sf)


WALDORF ASTORIA 2016-BOCA: Fitch Assigns B- Rating on Cl. F Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings assigns ratings and Rating Outlooks to Waldorf
Astoria Boca Raton Trust 2016-BOCA commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates series 2016-BOCA as:

   -- $145,100,000 class A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $275,000,000a class X-CP 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $275,000,000a class X-NCP 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $50,500,000 class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $37,400,000 class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $42,000,000 class D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $80,000,000 class E 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $75,000,000 class F 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable.

(a) Notional amount and interest-only.

The certificates represent the beneficial interest in a trust that
holds a two-year, floating-rate, interest-only $430 million
mortgage loan secured by the fee and leasehold interests in the
1,047-room Waldorf Astoria Boca Raton Resort & Club.  The loan is
sponsored by the Blackstone Group, L.P. (Blackstone).  The loan was
co-originated by JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association (rated
'A+'/'F1+'/Stable Outlook) and Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company
(rated 'A'/'F1'/Stable Outlook).

                        KEY RATING DRIVERS

High Leverage on Full Debt Stack: The total debt package includes
mezzanine financing in the amount of $285 million that is not
included in the trust.  Fitch's stressed debt service coverage
ratio (DSCR) and loan to value (LTV) for the full debt stack are
0.66x and 165.5%, respectively.  Fitch's DSCR and LTV for the trust
component of the debt are 1.10x and 99.5%.

Asset Quality: Fitch assigned the Waldorf Astoria Boca Raton Resort
and Club a property quality grade of A-'.  The collateral has both
lakefront (Lake Boca Raton) and oceanfront (Atlantic Ocean) land.
Property amenities include: a full-service spa, three fitness
centers, 30 tennis courts, 16 food and beverage (F&B) outlets, two
18-hole golf courses, seven swimming pools including a FlowRider
wave simulator, a 32-slip marina and approximately 200,000 square
feet of indoor and outdoor meeting space.

Significant Capital Invested by Sponsor: The sponsor acquired the
property in 2004 and has invested $274.2 million ($261,886/key)
since acquisition.  Completed renovations include: complete room
renovations at the Cloister, the Tower, and the Bungalows;
construction of the Boca Beach Club; upgrades to the Yacht Club
rooms; lobby modernization; F&B outlet improvements; and updating
the meeting facilities.

Non-traditional Hotel Income: For the trailing 12-month (TTM)
period ended April 2016, approximately $64.1 million of non-room
and non-F&B revenue was generated by the property, representing
29.6% of the property's total revenues.  Ancillary revenue sources
include golf, spa, tennis, beach, marina and club fees.

                      RATING SENSITIVITIES

Fitch found that the 'AAAsf' class could withstand an approximate
72.8% decrease to the most recent actual net cash flow (NCF) prior
to experiencing $1 of loss to the 'AAAsf' rated class.  Fitch
performed several stress scenarios in which the Fitch NCF was
stressed.  Fitch determined that a 63.2% reduction in its implied
NCF would cause the notes to break even at a 1x debt service
coverage ratio (DSCR), based on the actual debt service.

Fitch evaluated the sensitivity of the ratings for class A and
found that a 21% decline in Fitch's implied NCF would result in a
one-category downgrade, while a 47% decline would result in a
downgrade to below investment grade.


WALDORF ASTORIA 2016-BOCA: S&P Assigns BB- Rating on Cl. E Certs
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Waldorf Astoria Boca
Raton Trust 2016-BOCA's $430.0 million commercial mortgage
pass-through certificates series 2016-BOCA.

The note issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed securities
transaction backed by one two-year, floating-rate commercial
mortgage loan totaling $430.0 million with three, one-year
extension options.  The mortgage loan is secured by a
first-priority mortgage on the Waldorf Astoria Boca Raton Resort &
Club in Boca Raton, Fla. including the borrower's fee simple and
leasehold interest in the property, all furniture, fixtures,
equipment and personal property used to operate the property and
owned by the borrower/operating lessee, and the operating lessee's
interest in and under the operating lease and the leasehold
estate.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of the collateral's historical and
projected performance, the sponsors' and manager's experience, the
trustee-provided liquidity, the loan's terms, and the transaction's
structure.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

Waldorf Astoria Boca Raton Trust 2016-BOCA

Class       Rating(i)           Amount ($)
A           AAA (sf)           145,100,000
X-CP        BBB- (sf)      275,000,000(ii)
X-NCP       BBB- (sf)      275,000,000(ii)
B           AA- (sf)            50,500,000
C           A- (sf)             37,400,000
D           BBB- (sf)           42,000,000
E           BB- (sf)            80,000,000
F           B- (sf)             75,000,000

(i)The issuer will issue the certificates to qualified
institutional buyers in line with Rule 144A of the Securities Act
of 1933.  
(ii)Notional balance.  The notional amount of the class X-CP and
X-NCP certificates will be reduced by the aggregate amount of
principal distributions and realized losses allocated to the class
A, B, C, and D certificates.


WEST CLO 2013-1: S&P Lowers Rating on Class D Notes to B+
---------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings lowered its rating on the class D notes from
West CLO 2013-1 Ltd., a U.S. collateralized loan obligation (CLO)
managed by Allianz Global Investors that closed in November 2013.
At the same time, S&P removed this rating from CreditWatch
negative, where it placed it on May 25, 2016.  In addition, S&P
affirmed its ratings on the class A-1A, A-1B, A-2A, A-2B, B, and C
notes from the same transaction.

The rating actions follow S&P's review of the transaction's
performance using data from the June 24, 2016, trustee report.  The
transaction is scheduled to remain in its reinvestment period until
November 2017.

Since S&P's effective date rating affirmations in March 2014, the
transaction has experienced par loss and credit deterioration in
the underlying collateral portfolio.  The reported
overcollateralization (O/C) ratios for each of the rated notes have
decreased due to the aforementioned par loss, as well as a haircut
on the amount of 'CCC' rated assets.  As of the June 2016 report
from the 2014 effective date report:

   -- The class A O/C ratio decreased to 127.03% from 132.02% in
      March 2014.
   -- The class B O/C ratio decreased to 116.44% from 121.01%.
   -- The class C O/C ratio decreased to 109.66% from 113.97%.
   -- The class D O/C ratio decreased to 104.25% from 108.34%.
   -- The interest diversion ratio decreased to 104.25% from
      108.34%.

The class D O/C test and interest diversion test were failing by
0.05% and 1.05%, respectively, as of the June report.  If the class
D O/C ratio is still failing on the determination date for the
August payment date, the transaction will begin to delever in an
amount necessary to cure the failure by using interest proceeds to
pay down the senior class A-1A and A-1B notes.  If the interest
diversion test is still failing, the transaction will divert excess
interest proceeds to purchase additional collateral in an amount
equal to the lesser of the amount necessary to cause this test to
pass and 50% of the total excess interest.

An above-average exposure to the distressed energy sector has
contributed to the drop in O/C and the increase in 'CCC' rated and
defaulted assets, currently at 8.21% and 6.51% of the aggregate
principal balance, respectively. Nearly all of the deal's currently
defaulted assets and a significant proportion of the 'CCC' rated
assets operate primarily in the energy sector.  The overall
decrease in credit quality has also dropped the weighted average
rating to 'B' from 'B+'.

The transaction has benefited from the collateral's seasoning, as
the reported weighted average life decreased to 4.30 years from
5.24 years, and general improvement in the underlying portfolio's
assumed S&P Global Ratings recovery rates.  This has helped to
partially mitigate the other negative credit-related factors
mentioned.

Although the cash flow analysis points to an affirmation at the
current rating level for the class D notes, the downgrade reflects
S&P's belief that the underlying portfolio's credit deterioration
has diminished the tranche's ability to sustain further losses.

The affirmations of the ratings assigned to the other classes of
notes reflect S&P's belief that the credit support available is
commensurate with the current rating levels.

S&P will continue to review whether, in its view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and S&P will take further rating actions
as it deems necessary.

RATING LOWERED AND REMOVED FROM CREDITWATCH
West CLO 2013-1 Ltd.

                Rating
Class       To          From
D           B+ (sf)     BB (sf)/Watch Neg

RATINGS AFFIRMED
West CLO 2013-1 Ltd.

Class       Rating
A-1A        AAA (sf)
A-1B        AAA (sf)
A-2A        AA (sf)
A-2B        AA (sf)
B           A (sf)
C           BBB (sf)


WESTWOOD CDO II: Moody’s Hikes Class E Debt Rating to Ba2(sf)
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on the following
notes issued by Westwood CDO II, Ltd.:

US$19,250,000 Class C Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due April 25,
2022, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on October 7, 2015 Upgraded
to Aa2 (sf)

US$17,500,000 Class D Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due April 25,
2022, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on October 7, 2015 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

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

US$237,825,000 Class A-1 Floating Rate Notes due April 25, 2022
(current outstanding balance of $88,899,140), Affirmed Aaa (sf);
previously on October 7, 2015 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

US$26,425,000 Class A-2 Floating Rate Notes due April 25, 2022,
Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on October 7, 2015 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

US$8,750,000 Class B Floating Rate Notes due April 25, 2022,
Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on October 7, 2015 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

US$14,000,000 Class E Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due April 25,
2022 (current outstanding balance of $13,366,433.27), Affirmed Ba2
(sf); previously on October 7, 2015 Affirmed Ba2 (sf)

Westwood CDO II, Ltd., issued in April 2007, is a collateralized
loan obligation (CLO) backed primarily by a portfolio of senior
secured loans and CLO tranches. The transaction's reinvestment
period ended in April 2014.


WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2013-C12: Fitch Affirms B Rating on Cl. F Certs
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 15 classes of WFRBS Commercial Mortgage
Trust (WFRBS) commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series
2013-C12.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The affirmations reflect the transaction's overall stable
performance since issuance.  Seventeen loans (11.8%) are on the
servicer's watchlist, of which eight (8.3%) are for declines in
occupancy, four (2.0%) for lease rollover concerns and two (1.2%)
for lack of borrower reporting.  Fitch has designated five loans
(4.3%) as Fitch Loans of Concern, which includes one specially
serviced asset (2.4%).  There is also a notable single-tenant
exposure within the transaction.  Four of the top 15 loans
representing 16.1% of the pool are secured by properties 100%
leased to a single tenant.

Fitch modeled losses of 3.5% of the remaining pool, which is within
100 basis points of the base case losses at issuance.  The pool has
experienced no realized losses to date.  As of the June 2016
distribution date, the pool's aggregate principal balance has been
reduced by 4.9% to $1.17 billion from $1.23 billion at issuance.
Per the servicer reporting, four loans (13% of the pool) are
defeased.  Interest shortfalls are currently affecting class G.

The specially-serviced loan (2.4% of the pool) is secured by a
665-unit (1,074-bed) student housing complex in Newark, DE, roughly
40 miles southwest of Philadelphia.  The property is located one
mile from the University of Delaware campus.  The loan transferred
in April 2016 due to an imminent default letter received from the
borrower, which stated that the property's net cash flow is not
sufficient to cover debt service.  After acquiring the subject in
2008, the borrower repositioned the property from traditional
multifamily to student housing and constructed a $6 million student
center with a basketball court, swimming pool, business center and
theater room.  The special servicer reports that a pre-negotiation
letter has been executed and dialogue with the borrower has
commenced.  As of June 2015, occupancy was reported to be 71% while
the debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) was reported to be 1.64x.

The largest loan in the pool is the Grand Beach Hotel loan (10.5%
of the pool), which is secured by a 424-room, 20-story,
full-service oceanfront hotel located in Miami Beach, Florida.
Amenities at the property include a fitness center, three pools,
full-service restaurant, meeting facilities, a business center, and
valet parking including 560 spaces.  As of year-end (YE) 2015, the
DSCR was reported to be 2.14x compared to 2.13x at issuance.
According to the May 2016 STR report, the trailing 12-month (TTM)
occupancy was reported to be 67%, which ranks second to last in the
property's competitive set.  Occupancy has been trending downward
since 2013 when the TTM occupancy was reported to be 83%. ADR and
RevPar, however, have remained in the middle of the competitive set
for the last two years.

The second largest loan in the pool is the RHP Portfolio II loan
(9.7% of the pool).  The loan is collateralized by 18 manufactured
housing communities comprising 2,967 home pads with nine properties
in Colorado (1,814 pads), six in Wyoming (737 pads), two in
Illinois (351 pads), and one in Arizona (65 pads).  As of YE 2015,
the occupancy and DSCR was reported to be 94% and 1.83x
respectively, which compares favorably to 86% and 1.47x at
issuance.

                    RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Rating Outlook for class B has been revised to Positive to
reflect the defeased collateral and increased credit enhancement.
An upgrade may be warranted if additional loans are defeased, the
transaction continues to pay down and further clarity on the
resolution of the specially serviced loan can be obtained.  The
Outlooks for classes A-1 through A3-FL remain Stable due to overall
stable collateral performance.  Fitch does not foresee positive or
negative ratings migration for these classes unless a material
economic or asset level event changes the underlying transaction's
portfolio-level metrics.

DUE DILIGENCE USAGE

No third-party due diligence was provided or reviewed in relation
to this rating action.

Fitch affirms this class and revises the Outlook as indicated:

   -- $75.4 million class B at 'AA-sf'; Outlook to Positive from
      Stable.

Fitch affirms these classes:

   -- $4.1 million class A-1 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $143 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $165 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $298.2 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $102 million class A-SB at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $90 million class A-3FL at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $90 million class A-3FX at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $120.1 million class A-S at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $922.3 million class X-A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $126.2 million class X-B at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $50.8 million class C at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $41.6 million class D at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $27.7 million class E at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
   -- $16.9 million class F at 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable.

Fitch does not rate the class X-C or G certificates.


[*] Moody's Hikes Ratings on $184.4MM of RMBS Issued 2005-2006
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service, on July 19, 2016, upgraded the ratings
of five tranches from four transactions, backed by Alt-A and Option
ARM RMBS loans, issued by multiple issuers.

Complete rating actions are:

Issuer: GSR Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-OA1
  Cl. 2-A-1, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Dec. 31, 2013,
   Downgraded to B1 (sf)

Issuer: HarborView Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-2
  Cl. X, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Dec. 5, 2010,
   Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)
  Cl. 2-A-1A, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Dec. 5, 2010,
   Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: IndyMac INDX Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-AR12
  Cl. A-1, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Dec. 1, 2010,
   Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: Nomura Asset Acceptance Corporation, Alternative Loan
Trust, Series 2005-AR6
  Cl. II-A-1, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on July 12, 2010,
   Downgraded to B1 (sf)

                        RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating actions are a result of the recent performance of the
underlying pools and reflect Moody's updated loss expectation on
the pools.  The rating upgrades are a result of the improving
performance of the related pools and an increase in credit
enhancement available to the bonds.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.

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

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment rate.
The unemployment rate fell to 4.9% in June 2016 from 5.3% in June
2015.  Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of 4.5% to
5.5% for the 2016 year.  Deviations from this central scenario
could lead to rating actions in the sector.

House prices are another key driver of US RMBS performance. Moody's
expects house prices to continue to rise in 2016.  Lower increases
than Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative rating
actions.

Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent
on servicer procedures.  Any change resulting from servicing
transfers or other policy or regulatory change can impact the
performance of these transactions.


[*] Moody's Raises Ratings on $661.5MM of Subprime RMBS Deals
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service, on July 19, 2016, upgraded the ratings
of 17 tranches, from 8 transactions issued by various issuers
backed by Subprime mortgage loans.

Complete rating actions are:

Issuer: First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-FF3
  Cl. A-1, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Sept. 2, 2015,
   Upgraded to A3 (sf)

Issuer: Fremont Home Loan Trust 2005-D
  Cl. 1-A-1, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Sept. 2, 2015,
   Upgraded to A1 (sf)
  Cl. 2-A-4, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Sept. 2, 2015,
   Upgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Issuer: GE-WMC Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series
2005-2
  Cl. A-1, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Sept. 1, 2015,
   Upgraded to A3 (sf)
  Cl. A-2c, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Sept. 1, 2015,
   Upgraded to B1 (sf)
  Cl. A-2d, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Sept. 1, 2015,
   Upgraded to B3 (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp. 2006-HE2
  Cl. A-1, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Sept. 1, 2015,
   Upgraded to B1 (sf)
  Cl. A-4, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Sept. 1, 2015,
   Upgraded to Caa2 (sf)
  Cl. A-5, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Jan. 20, 2015,
   Upgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Trust 2006-CH1
  Cl. A-1, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Sept. 1, 2015,
   Upgraded to A3 (sf)
  Cl. A-4, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Sept. 1, 2015,
   Upgraded to A1 (sf)
  Cl. A-5, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Sept. 1, 2015,
   Upgraded to A3 (sf)

Issuer: Popular ABS Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2006-C
  Cl. A-4, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Aug. 31, 2015,
   Upgraded to A3 (sf)

Issuer: Soundview Home Loan Trust 2006-OPT3
  Cl. I-A-1, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Aug. 31, 2015,
   Upgraded to Baa3 (sf)
  Cl. II-A-3, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Aug. 31, 2015,
   Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)
  Cl. II-A-4, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Aug. 31, 2015,
   Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Issuer: Structured Asset Investment Loan Trust 2005-8
  Cl. M1, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Sept. 2, 2015,
   Upgraded to Caa3 (sf)

                         RATINGS RATIONALE

The upgrades are a result of stable or improving performance of the
related pools and/or total credit enhancement available to the
bonds.  The actions reflect the recent performance of the
underlying pools and Moody's updated loss expectations on the
pools.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.

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

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment rate.
The unemployment rate fell to 4.9% in June 2016 from 5.3% in June
2015.  Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of 4.5% to
5.5% for the 2016 year.  Deviations from this central scenario
could lead to rating actions in the sector.  House prices are
another key driver of US RMBS performance.  Moody's expects house
prices to continue to rise in 2016.  Lower increases than Moody's
expects or decreases could lead to negative rating actions.
Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent
on servicer procedures.  Any change resulting from servicing
transfers or other policy or regulatory change can impact the
performance of these transactions.


[*] Moody's Takes Action on $587MM of Alt-A and Option ARM RMBS
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service, on July 18, 2016, upgraded the ratings
of 29 tranches and downgraded the rating of one tranche from seven
transactions, backed by Alt-A and Option ARM RMBS loans, issued by
multiple issuers.

Complete rating actions are:

Issuer: Bear Stearns ALT-A Trust 2004-12

  Cl. I-A-1, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Sept. 24, 2015,
   Upgraded to A3 (sf)
  Cl. I-A-2, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Sept. 24, 2015,
   Upgraded to Baa2 (sf)
  Cl. I-A-3, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Oct. 18, 2013,
   Upgraded to A3 (sf)
  Cl. I-A-4, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Oct. 18, 2013,
   Upgraded to Baa1 (sf)
  Cl. I-M-1, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Sept. 24, 2015,
   Upgraded to Caa1 (sf)
  Cl. II-A-3, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Feb. 27, 2013,
   Affirmed B1 (sf)
  Cl. II-A-4, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Feb. 27, 2013,
   Downgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: Bear Stearns ALT-A Trust 2004-2

  Cl. II-A-1, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on April 17, 2012,
   Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)
  Cl. II-A-2, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on April 17, 2012,
   Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)
  Cl. II-A-3, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on April 17, 2012,
   Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)
  Cl. V-A-1, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on April 17, 2012,
   Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Issuer: MASTR Adjustable Rate Mortgages Trust 2007-1

  Cl. I-2A1, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on June 14, 2013,

   Confirmed at Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: Sequoia Mortgage Trust 4

  Cl. A, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Mar 17, 2011,
   Downgraded to A2 (sf)
  Underlying Rating: Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on March 17,

   2011, Downgraded to A2 (sf)
  Financial Guarantor: Ambac Assurance Corporation (Segregated
   Account - Unrated)

Issuer: Structured Adjustable Rate Mortgage Loan Trust 2004-14

  Cl. 1-A, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Issuer: Structured Adjustable Rate Mortgage Loan Trust 2004-4

  Cl. 2A, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)
  Cl. 3-A1, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)
  Cl. 3-A2, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)
  Cl. 3-A3, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)
  Cl. 3-A4, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)
  Cl. 3-A5, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)
  Cl. 4-A, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)
  Cl. 5-A, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Issuer: Structured Adjustable Rate Mortgage Loan Trust 2004-5

  Cl. 1-A, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Ba1 (sf)
  Cl. 2-A, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)
  Cl. 3-A2, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)
  Cl. 3-A3, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)
  Cl. 3-A4, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)
  Cl. 3-A5, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)
  Cl. 4-A, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)
  Cl. 5-A, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on July 6, 2012,
   Downgraded to Ba1 (sf)

                         RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating actions are a result of the recent performance of the
underlying pools and reflect Moody's updated loss expectation on
the pools.  The rating upgrades are a result of the improving
performance of the related pools and/or an increase in credit
enhancement available to the bonds.  The rating downgrade is due to
the erosion of enhancement available to the bonds and realignment
with other seniors that are currently at the same level in
waterfall.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in November 2013.

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

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment rate.
The unemployment rate fell to 4.9% in June 2016 from 5.3% in June
2015.  Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of 4.5% to
5.5% for the 2016 year.  Deviations from this central scenario
could lead to rating actions in the sector.

House prices are another key driver of US RMBS performance. Moody's
expects house prices to continue to rise in 2016. Lower increases
than Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative rating
actions.

Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent
on servicer procedures.  Any change resulting from servicing
transfers or other policy or regulatory change can impact the
performance of these transactions.


[*] S&P Puts Ratings on 22 Tranches on CreditWatch Positive
-----------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings Services placed its ratings on 22 tranches from
nine U.S. collateralized loan obligation (CLO) transactions on
CreditWatch with positive implications.  The CreditWatch placements
follow S&P's surveillance review of U.S. cash flow collateralized
debt obligation (CDO) transactions.  The affected tranches had an
original issuance amount of $714.3 Million.

The CreditWatch positive placements resulted from enhanced
overcollateralization due to pay downs to the senior tranches among
these CLO transactions.  All of the transactions have exited their
reinvestment periods.

The table below reflects the year of issuance for the nine
transactions whose ratings were placed on CreditWatch.

Year of issuance    No. of tranches
2005                              2
2006                              3
2007                             17

S&P expects to resolve the CreditWatch placements within 90 days
after it completes a comprehensive cash flow analysis and committee
review for each of the affected transactions.  S&P will continues
to monitor the collateralized debt obligation (CDO) transactions
S&P rates and take rating actions, including CreditWatch
placements, as S&P deems appropriate.

A list of the Affected Ratings is available at:

                  http://bit.ly/29LJ3Hq


                            *********

Monday's edition of the TCR delivers a list of indicative prices
for bond issues that reportedly trade well below par.  Prices are
obtained by TCR editors from a variety of outside sources during
the prior week we think are reliable.  Those sources may not,
however, be complete or accurate.  The Monday Bond Pricing table
is compiled on the Friday prior to publication.  Prices reported
are not intended to reflect actual trades.  Prices for actual
trades are probably different.  Our objective is to share
information, not make markets in publicly traded securities.
Nothing in the TCR constitutes an offer or solicitation to buy or
sell any security of any kind.  It is likely that some entity
affiliated with a TCR editor holds some position in the issuers
public debt and equity securities about which we report.

Each Tuesday edition of the TCR contains a list of companies with
insolvent balance sheets whose shares trade higher than $3 per
share in public markets.  At first glance, this list may look like
the definitive compilation of stocks that are ideal to sell short.
Don't be fooled.  Assets, for example, reported at historical cost
net of depreciation may understate the true value of a firm's
assets.  A company may establish reserves on its balance sheet for
liabilities that may never materialize.  The prices at which
equity securities trade in public market are determined by more
than a balance sheet solvency test.

On Thursdays, the TCR delivers a list of recently filed
Chapter 11 cases involving less than $1,000,000 in assets and
liabilities delivered to nation's bankruptcy courts.  The list
includes links to freely downloadable images of these small-dollar
petitions in Acrobat PDF format.

Each Friday's edition of the TCR includes a review about a book of
interest to troubled company professionals.  All titles are
available at your local bookstore or through Amazon.com.  Go to
http://www.bankrupt.com/books/to order any title today.

Monthly Operating Reports are summarized in every Saturday edition
of the TCR.

The Sunday TCR delivers securitization rating news from the week
then-ending.

                            *********

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 is a daily newsletter co-published
by Bankruptcy Creditors Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.  
Jhonas Dampog, Marites Claro, Joy Agravante, Rousel Elaine
Tumanda, Valerie Udtuhan, Howard C. Tolentino, Carmel Paderog,
Meriam Fernandez, Joel Anthony G. Lopez, Cecil R. Villacampa,
Sheryl Joy P. Olano, Psyche A. Castillon, Ivy B. Magdadaro, Carlo
Fernandez, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and Peter A. Chapman,
Editors.

Copyright 2016.  All rights reserved.  ISSN: 1520-9474.

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 subscription rate is $975 for 6 months 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 $25 each.  For subscription information, contact Peter A.
Chapman at 215-945-7000 or Nina Novak at 202-362-8552.

                   *** End of Transmission ***