TCR_Public/171217.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, December 17, 2017, Vol. 21, No. 350

                            Headlines

ADAMS OUTDOOR 2-14-1: Fitch Affirms 'BBsf' Rating on Class C Debt
ARES XLVI: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba3 Rating to Class E Notes
BARINGS CLO 2013-I: S&P Gives Prelim B-(sf) Rating on Cl. FR Notes
BEAR STEARNS 2004-AC2: Moody's Lowers Ratings on 4 Tranches to B1
BEAR STEARNS 2007-PWR18: Fitch Cuts Rating on 2 Tranches to Csf

BLUEMOUNTAIN FUJI III: S&P Gives Prelim BB- Rating on Class E Notes
BX TRUST 2017-CQHP: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating to Class F Certs
CARLYLE GLOBAL 2013-2: S&P Assigns BB-(sf) Rating on Cl. E-R Notes
CARLYLE GLOBAL 2013-3: S&P Assigns B-(sf) Rating on Cl. E-R Notes
CBAM 2017-4: Moody's Assigns Ba3(sf) Rating to Class E Notes

CBAM 2017-4: Moody's Assigns Ba3(sf) Rating to Class E Notes
CHASE MORTGAGE 2016-2: Moody's Assigns Ba2 Rating to Cl. M-4 Debt
CIFC FUNDING 2012-II-R: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Cl. D Notes
COMM 2014-CCRE16: Fitch Affirms Bsf Rating on Class F Certs
CONN'S RECEIVABLES 2017-B: Fitch to Rate Class C Notes 'B-sf(EXP)'

CSMC TRUST 2017-PFHP: S&P Assigns Prelim B- Rating on D Certs
CWHEQ REVOLVING 2006-RES: Moody's Hikes Rating on 2 Tranches to B2
EATON VANCE 2015-1: Moody's Assigns (P)B3 Rating to Cl. F-R Notes
FREMF MORTGAGE 2012-KF01: Moody's Affirms B1 Rating on Cl. X Certs
FREMF MORTGAGE 2013-KF02: Moody's Affirms Ba2 Rating to Cl. X Certs

GOLDMAN SACHS 2012-GC6: Fitch Affirms 'Bsf' Rating on Cl. F Certs
GOLUB CAPITAL 23: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Class E-R Notes
IMSCI 2015-6: Fitch Affirms 'Bsf' Rating on Class G Certs
IVY HILL IX: Fitch Assigns 'BB-sf' Rating to Class E-R Notes
JAMESTOWN CLO VII: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Class D-R Notes

JP MORGAN 2003-ML1: Fitch Affirms D Rating on Class N Certs
JP MORGAN 2004-C1: Fitch Affirms D Rating on Class P Certs
JP MORGAN 2014-FL5: S&P Affirms B- Rating on Class RH Notes
JPMORGAN CHASE 2004-PNC1: S&P Affirms B(sf) Rating on Cl. F Certs
KVK CLO 2013-1: S&P Gives Prelim BB-(sf) Rating on Class E-R Notes

LEAF RECEIVABLES 2017-1: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on E-2 Notes
MARYLAND TRUST 2006-1: Moody's Cuts Series A Certs Rating to Ba3
MERRILL LYNCH 2008-C1: Fitch Affirms 'Dsf' Rating on Class M Certs
MIDOCEAN CREDIT II: S&P Assigns Prelim B-(sf) Rating on F-R Notes
OCP CLO 2015-10: S&P Affirms B(sf) Rating on Class E Notes

SAXON ASSET 2007-4: Moody's Hikes Rating on Class A-2 Debt to B2
SLM STUDENT 2012-1: Fitch Corrects November 7 Release
SOVEREIGN COMMERCIAL 2007-C1: Fitch Affirms CCC Rating on E Certs
SPRITE LTD 2017-1: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class C Notes
STACR 2015-DNA2: Moody's Hikes Class MA Notes Rating to Ba1

STEWART PARK: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba3 Rating to Cl. E-R Notes
TCF AUTO 2015-2: Moody's Affirms Ba2 Rating on Class D Notes
TIAA CHURCHILL II: S&P Assigns B- Rating on Class F Notes
US CAPITAL IV: Moody's Raises Class A-1 Notes Rating to Ba3
VENTURE CLO XXX: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Class E Notes

WACHOVIA BANK 2006-C29: Moody's Hikes Class B Certs Rating to B2
WASHINGTON MUTUAL 2007-SL3: Moody's Hikes Cl. G Certs Rating to B2
WELLS FARGO 2016-C37: Fitch Affirms 'B-sf' Rating on Cl. G Certs
WELLS FARGO 2017-C42: Fitch to Rate Class F Certificates 'B-sf'
[*] Moody's Hikes $431.9MM of Subprime RMBS Issued 2000-2006

[*] S&P Takes Various Actions on 40 Classes From 15 US RMBS Deals
[*] S&P Takes Various Actions on 89 Classes From 21 US RMBS Deals

                            *********

ADAMS OUTDOOR 2-14-1: Fitch Affirms 'BBsf' Rating on Class C Debt
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed four classes of Adams Outdoor
Advertising Limited Partnership (LP) Secured Billboard Revenue
Notes Series 2014-1.  

The transaction represents a securitization in the form of notes
backed by 11,466 available outdoor advertising faces and other
advertising displays. The ratings reflect a structured finance
analysis of the cash flows from advertising structures, not an
assessment of the corporate default risk of the ultimate parent,
Adams Outdoor Advertising (AOA). The transaction was structured
with an upsize provision that allows classes A-1, B and C to
increase to their maximum class amount indicated at issuance based
on various factors including cash flow growth. AOA elected to
upsize the transaction to the maximum class amount in 2015.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Continued Cash Flow Growth/Fitch Leverage: Fitch's net cash flow
(NCF) for the pool is $63.7 million as of November 2017, implying a
Fitch stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) of 1.59x. The
debt multiple relative to Fitch's NCF is 6.9x, which equates to a
debt yield of 14.5%.

High Barriers to Entry: AOA faces limited competition in its market
as result of the billboard permitting process and significant
federal, state and local regulations that limit supply and prohibit
new billboards.

Scheduled Amortization: Principal will be payable to the 2014-1
class A-1 note to the extent funds are available equal to 21.1% of
the 2014-1 class A-1 note over the seven years prior to the
anticipated repayment date (ARD). Additionally, the 2014-1 class
A-X note will fully amortize prior to the ARD. Total amortization
on the entire trust is scheduled to be approximately 20.0%.

Notes Not Secured by Mortgages: The security interest is perfected
by a pledge of the membership interests of the issuer and its
subsidiaries and the filing of financing statements under the
Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). The issuer filed UCCs on the permits
and the advertising contracts. The security interest in the equity
of the issuer provides the noteholders with the ability to
foreclose on the issuer in an event of default. The lack of
mortgages is mitigated in this transaction as the value of
billboard assets is heavily dependent on non-mortgageable permits
and licenses, which have been secured by UCC filings.

Issuance of Additional Notes: In addition to the upsize provision,
AOA has the ability to issue additional notes in the future.
However, additional issuance is subject to the following
conditions, among others: if additional billboard assets are being
contributed to the trust, the pro forma interest-only (IO) DSCR
after such issuance is not less than the IO DSCR before issuance
and ratings confirmation is obtained; and if no additional
billboard assets are being contributed to the trust, the pro forma
IO DSCR after such issuance is not less than 2.25x. As Fitch
monitors the transaction, the possibility of upgrades may be
limited due to the provision that allows additional notes.

There was a variance from Fitch's 'CMBS Large Loan Rating Criteria'
related to the stressed refinance constant and rating specific DSCR
parameters. The constant used is outside Fitch's published
refinance constant range for 'Other' property types; however, the
constant utilized reflects AOA's dominant industry position in its
respective markets, barriers to entry and experienced management.
The DSCR attachment points used to determine the class sizes were
derived from Fitch's large loan criteria, reflecting retail
attachment points with an adjustment for nonmortgage collateral.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Rating Outlook for all classes remains Stable. Fitch does not
foresee positive or negative ratings migration until a material
economic or asset-level event changes the transaction's
portfolio-level metrics. Upgrades may be limited due to the
provision allowing the issuance of additional notes.

Fitch has affirmed the following ratings:

-- $314.8 million class A-1 at 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $13.4 million class A-X at 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $60 million class B at 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $50 million class C at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable.


ARES XLVI: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba3 Rating to Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to eight
classes of notes to be issued by Ares XLVI CLO Ltd.

Moody's rating action is:

US$5,000,000 Class X Senior Floating Rate Notes due 2030 (the
"Class X Notes") Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$339,000,000 Class A-1 Senior Floating Rate Notes due 2030 (the
"Class A-1 Notes") Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$57,000,000 Class A-2 Senior Floating Rate Notes due 2030 (the
"Class A-2 Notes") Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$39,000,000 Class B-1 Senior Floating Rate Notes due 2030 (the
"Class B-1 Notes") Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

US$12,000,000 Class B-2 Senior Fixed Rate Notes due 2030 (the
"Class B-2 Notes") Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

US$39,000,000 Class C Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (the "Class C Notes") Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

US$38,500,000 Class D Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (the "Class D Notes") Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

US$30,500,000 Class E Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (the "Class E Notes") Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

The Class X Notes, the Class A-1 Notes, the Class A-2 Notes, the
Class B-1 Notes, the Class B-2 Notes, the Class C Notes, the Class
D Notes, and the Class E Notes are referred to herein 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.

Ares XLVI CLO is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first lien senior
secured corporate loans. At least 96.0% of the portfolio must
consist of senior secured loans, and up to 4.0% of the portfolio
may consist of collateral obligations that are not senior secured
loans. Moody's expect the portfolio to be approximately 65% ramped
as of the closing date.

Ares CLO 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 will issue one class of
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 August 2017.

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

Par amount: $600,000,000

Diversity Score: 60

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2926

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.30%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 6.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.5%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 9 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
August 2017.

Factors That Would Lead to 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 2926 to 3365)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A-1 Notes: 0

Class A-2 Notes: -1

Class B-1 Notes: -2

Class B-2 Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2926 to 3804)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A-1 Notes: 0

Class A-2 Notes: -3

Class B-1 Notes: -3

Class B-2 Notes: -3

Class C Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1


BARINGS CLO 2013-I: S&P Gives Prelim B-(sf) Rating on Cl. FR Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to the class
AR, BR, CR, DR, ER, and FR replacement notes from Barings CLO Ltd.
2013-I/Barings CLO 2013-I LLC, a collateralized loan obligation
(CLO) originally issued in 2013 that is managed by Barings LLC, a
member of MassMutual Financial Group (MassMutual). The replacement
notes will be issued via a proposed supplemental indenture.

The preliminary ratings reflect S&P's opinion that the credit
support available is commensurate with the associated rating
levels. All replacement classes, except class FR, are expected to
be issued at a lower spread than the original notes.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Dec. 7,
2017. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

On the Dec. 20, 2017, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
issuance of the replacement notes are expected to redeem the
original notes. S&P said, "At that time, we anticipate withdrawing
the ratings on the original notes and assigning ratings to the
replacement notes. However, if the refinancing doesn't occur, we
may affirm the ratings on the original notes and withdraw our
preliminary ratings on the replacement notes."

The replacement notes are being issued via a proposed supplemental
indenture, which, in addition to outlining the terms of the
replacement notes, will also:

-- The stated maturity, reinvestment period, and non-call period
end date will be extended by 4.75, 2.75, and 3.25 years,
respectively.

-- Updated S&P Global Ratings industry categories, recoveries, and
country groupings for recovery purposes will be used.

-- The manager has an option to use a formula-based Standard &
Poor's CDO Monitor and a deemed rating agency confirmation process
on the refinancing effective date.

-- 92.91% of the underlying collateral obligations have credit
ratings assigned by S&P Global Ratings.

-- 98.24% of the underlying collateral obligations have recovery
ratings issued by S&P Global Ratings.

S&P said, "Our review of this transaction included a cash flow
analysis, based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in
the 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 or ultimate principal,
or both, to each of the rated tranches.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and we will take further rating actions
as we deem necessary."

PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

  Barings CLO Ltd. 2013-I/Barings CLO 2013-I LLC
  Replacement class         Rating      Amount (mil. $)
  AR                        AAA (sf)             362.50
  BR                        AA (sf)               49.90
  CR                        A (sf)                35.00
  DR                        BBB- (sf)             36.50
  ER                        BB- (sf)              22.00
  FR                        B- (sf)                7.80
  Subordinated notes        NR                    67.46

  NR--Not rated.


BEAR STEARNS 2004-AC2: Moody's Lowers Ratings on 4 Tranches to B1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded the ratings of six bonds,
and confirmed the rating of one bond from Bear Stearns Asset-Backed
Securities I Trust 2004-AC2. The action resolves the review of one
interest-only (IO) bond Class I-X which was among those placed on
review on 15 August 2017 in connection with a correction of errors
in Moody's earlier analysis of certain RMBS IO bonds.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset-Backed Securities I Trust 2004-AC2

Cl. I-A2, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Apr 17, 2012
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. I-A3, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Apr 17, 2012
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. I-A4, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Apr 17, 2012
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. I-PO, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Apr 17, 2012
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. II-A, Downgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Apr 17, 2012
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. I-X, Confirmed at B3 (sf); previously on Aug 15, 2017 B3 (sf)
Placed Under Review Direction Uncertain

Cl. II-PO, Downgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Apr 17, 2012
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating actions reflect the recent performance of the underlying
pools and Moody's updated loss expectation on the pools. The rating
downgrades are due to the weaker performance of the underlying
collateral and the erosion of enhancement available to the bonds.

The action resolves the review of Class I-X which was placed on
watch in connection with data input errors in prior analyses. In
prior rating actions, incorrect data inputs were used in the
analysis for Class I-X. Following the linkage reassessment and
performance review of the transaction, the rating on Class I-X has
been confirmed.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in January 2017.

Additionally, the methodology used in rating Bear Stearns
Asset-Backed Securities I Trust 2004-AC2 Cl. I-X was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only (IO)
Securities" published in June 2017.

Factors that can 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 4.1% in October 2017 from 4.8% in
October 2016. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of
4.5% to 5.5% for the 2017 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 2017. 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.

An IO bond may be upgraded or downgraded, within the constraints
and provisions of the IO methodology, based on lower or higher
realized and expected loss due to an overall improvement or decline
in the credit quality of the reference bonds and/or pools.


BEAR STEARNS 2007-PWR18: Fitch Cuts Rating on 2 Tranches to Csf
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded two distressed classes and affirmed
remaining classes of Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities
Trust series 2007-PWR18.  

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Specially Serviced Loans and High Expected Losses: Five loans
totaling $84 million or 36% of the pool are specially serviced. The
downgrades of classes C and D are due to higher certainty of losses
from the specially serviced loans. Although the senior classes
benefit from high and increasing credit enhancement due to
amortization and loan payoffs and dispositions since Fitch's last
rating action, credit enhancement is expected to erode as defaulted
loans are disposed. In addition, most of the non-specially serviced
loans mature in December 2017 and more defaults are possible. The
affirmations of AJ and A-JA reflect the continued risk of credit
enhancement erosion.

As of the November 2017 distribution date, the transaction has paid
down 91% since issuance, to $233.7 million from $2.5 billion.
Interest shortfalls totaling $9.6 million are currently affecting
classes B through S.

Concentrated Pool: The pool is highly concentrated with only 19
loans remaining. Due to the concentrated nature of the pool, Fitch
performed a sensitivity analysis which grouped the remaining loans
based on loan structural features, collateral quality and
performance which ranked them by their perceived likelihood of
repayment. This includes defeased loans, fully amortizing loans,
balloon loans, and Fitch loans of concern. The ratings reflect this
sensitivity analysis.

Largest Loan is Specially Serviced: The largest loan in the
transaction, The Marriot Houston Westchase ($72.3 million, 31% of
the pool) is in special servicing having transferred in July 2017
due to potential maturity default. The loan matured Nov. 1, 2017.
The property, located in west Houston, had been underperforming
prior to the transfer. The servicer reported net-operating income
(NOI) DSCR as of trailing 12 month (TTM) March 2017 was 0.71x and
occupancy was 60%. The borrower had stated that the
underperformance was due to local market conditions. Per the
servicer, the property did not have any major damage as a result of
Hurricane Harvey.

Maturity Schedule: All but two of the remaining loans mature by
early December 2017, including the specially serviced loans,
totaling 87% of the pool. The largest loan matured November 2017
and is in special servicing. Two loans totaling 13% mature in
2018.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Future upgrades are unlikely given the transaction concentration,
including the high number of specially serviced loans and high
expected losses. Downgrades are possible if expected losses
increase and/or additional loans transfer to special servicing.

Fitch has downgraded the following classes:

-- $25 million class C to 'Csf' from 'CCsf'; RE0%;
-- $18.8 million class D to 'Csf' from 'CCsf'; RE0%.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

-- $149.4 million class A-J at 'CCCsf'; RE80%;
-- $8.0 million class A-JA at 'CCCsf'; RE80%;
-- $25 million class B at' CCsf'; RE0%;
-- $7.4 million class E at 'Dsf'; RE0%.


BLUEMOUNTAIN FUJI III: S&P Gives Prelim BB- Rating on Class E Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to BlueMountain
Fuji U.S. CLO III Ltd.'s $407.8 million broadly syndicated
collateralized loan obligation (CLO).

The note issuance is CLO transaction backed primarily by broadly
syndicated speculative-grade senior secured term loans.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Dec. 4,
2017. 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

  BlueMountain Fuji U.S. CLO III Ltd./BlueMountain Fuji U.S. CLO  

  III LLC
  Class                   Rating      Interest           Amount
                                      rate             (mil. $)
  A-1                     AAA (sf)    3ML+1.07           240.00
  A-2                     NR          3ML+1.20            28.00
  B                       AA (sf)     3ML+1.40            32.00
  C                       A (sf)      3ML+1.70            30.00
  D                       BBB- (sf)   3ML+2.55            22.00
  E                       BB- (sf)    3ML+5.55            16.00
  Subordinated notes      NR          N/A                 39.80

  NR--Not rated.
  N/A--Not available.
  3ML--Three-month LIBOR


BX TRUST 2017-CQHP: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating to Class F Certs
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned definitive ratings to seven
classes of CMBS securities, issued by BX Trust 2017-CQHP,
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2017-CQHP:

Cl. A, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. B, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. C, Definitive Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

Cl. D, Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Cl. E, Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. F, Definitive Rating Assigned B3 (sf)

Cl. X-CP*, Definitive Rating Assigned Baa2 (sf)

* Reflects interest-only classes

**NOTE: Moody's previously assigned a provisional rating to Class
X-EXT described in the provisional press release, dated November
15, 2017. Per the "Moody's Approach to Rating Structured Finance
Interest-Only (IO) Securities" published in June 2017, Moody's has
withdrawn the Class X-EXT provisional rating and will not assign
this certificate a definitive rating given that the deal may be
paid off prior to Class X-EXT receiving scheduled payments.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The Certificates are collateralized by a single loan backed by a
first lien commercial mortgage related to four Club Quarters hotels
(the "Portfolio"). The ratings are based on the collateral and the
structure of the transaction.

The Portfolio is comprised of four Club Quarters Hotels, totaling
1,228 rooms, and includes the 346 room Club Quarters San Francisco,
the 429 room Club Quarters Chicago Central Loop, the 178 room Club
Quarters Boston, and the 275 room Club Quarters Philadelphia.

Each of the properties benefits from a city-center location near
numerous business and leisure demand drivers. Club Quarters San
Francisco is located across the street from the Embarcadero Center
and is a short walk away from Market Street, Chinatown, and
numerous parks, shops and restaurants. Club Quarters Boston is
located in the heart of the financial district, steps from many
corporate headquarters and tourist attractions. Club Quarters
Chicago Central Loop benefits from its proximity to Chicago's major
business and cultural destinations such as the Chicago Board of
Trade, Chicago Mercantile Exchange, and Willis Tower. Club Quarters
Philadelphia is located across the street from the Shops at Liberty
Place and is within walking distance to City Hall, Love Park, and
Rittenhouse Square.

The properties benefit from their affiliation with Club Quarters
which that has 17 city-center locations in major markets in the
U.S. and London. The company, which has existed since 1995, drives
corporate negotiated rate business through memberships with
corporate clients that commit to a minimum number of room nights at
a property annually. Club Quarters' membership is comprised of
numerous Fortune 100 companies, global banks, insurance companies,
technology, consulting, law firms, non-profit organizations and
universities. On weekends when corporate travel demand generally
decreases, the prime locations of the Club Quarters' properties
attract non-members and leisure travelers.

Moody's approach to rating this transaction involved the
application of both Moody's Large Loan and Single Asset/Single
Borrower CMBS methodology and Moody's IO Rating methodology. The
rating approach for securities backed by a single loan compares the
credit risk inherent in the underlying collateral with the credit
protection offered by the structure. The structure's credit
enhancement is quantified by the maximum deterioration in property
value that the securities are able to withstand under various
stress scenarios without causing an increase in the expected loss
for various rating levels. In assigning single borrower ratings,
Moody's also consider a range of qualitative issues as well as the
transaction's structural and legal aspects.

The credit risk of commercial real estate loans is determined
primarily by two factors: 1) the probability of default, which is
largely driven by the DSCR, and 2) and the severity of loss in the
event of default, which is largely driven by the LTV of the
underlying loan.

The Whole Loan first mortgage balance of $273,700,000 represents a
Moody's LTV of 121.0%. The Moody's Whole Loan First Mortgage Actual
DSCR is 2.77X and Moody's Whole Loan First Mortgage Stressed DSCR
is 1.00X.

Moody's also grades properties on a scale of 0 to 5 (best to worst)
and considers those grades when assessing the likelihood of debt
payment. The factors considered include property age, quality of
construction, location, market, and tenancy. The Portfolio's
weighted average property quality grade is 2.48.

Notable strengths of the transaction include: property locations,
strong operating performance and net cash flow margins, established
core business plan, strong sponsorship and invested cash equity.

Notable credit challenges of the transaction include: concentration
of a four property portfolio with a common business plan, property
type volatility, dependence on business travel, subordinate debt,
and the lack of loan amortization.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single Borrower
CMBS" published in July 2017.

Additionally, the methodology used in rating Class X-CP was
"Moody's Approach to Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only (IO)
Securities" published in June 2017.

Moody's approach for single borrower and large loan multi-borrower
transactions evaluates credit enhancement levels based on an
aggregation of adjusted loan level proceeds derived from Moody's
Moody's loan level LTV ratios. Major adjustments to determining
proceeds include leverage, loan structure, and property type. These
aggregated proceeds are then further adjusted for any pooling
benefits associated with loan level diversity, other concentrations
and correlations.

Moody's analysis considers the following inputs to calculate the
proposed IO rating based on the published methodology: original and
current bond ratings and credit estimates; original and current
bond balances grossed up for losses for all bonds the IO(s)
reference(s) within the transaction; and IO type corresponding to
an IO type as defined in the published methodology.

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: If Moody's value of the collateral
used in determining the initial rating were decreased by 5.0%,
13.8%, and 22.0%, the model-indicated rating for the currently
rated Aaa (sf) class would be Aa1 (sf), Aa3 (sf), and A1 (sf),
respectively. Parameter Sensitivities are not intended to measure
how the rating of the security might migrate over time; rather they
are designed to provide a quantitative calculation of how the
initial rating might change if key input parameters used in the
initial rating process differed. The analysis assumes that the deal
has not aged. Parameter Sensitivities only reflect the ratings
impact of each scenario from a quantitative/model-indicated
standpoint. Qualitative factors are also taken into consideration
in the ratings process, so the actual ratings that would be
assigned in each case could vary from the information presented in
the Parameter Sensitivity analysis.

These ratings: (a) are based solely on information in the public
domain and/or information communicated to Moody's by the issuer at
the date it was prepared and such information has not been
independently verified by Moody's; (b) must be construed solely as
a statement of opinion and not a statement of fact or an offer,
invitation, inducement or recommendation to purchase, sell or hold
any securities or otherwise act in relation to the issuer or any
other entity or in connection with any other matter. Moody's does
not guarantee or make any representation or warranty as to the
correctness of any information, rating or communication relating to
the issuer. Moody's shall not be liable in contract, tort,
statutory duty or otherwise to the issuer or any other third party
for any loss, injury or cost caused to the issuer or any other
third party, in whole or in part, including by any negligence (but
excluding fraud, dishonesty and/or willful misconduct or any other
type of liability that by law cannot be excluded) on the part of,
or any contingency beyond the control of Moody's, or any of its
employees or agents, including any losses arising from or in
connection with the procurement, compilation, analysis,
interpretation, communication, dissemination, or delivery of any
information or rating relating to the issuer.

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 may
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously anticipated. Factors that may cause an
upgrade of the ratings include significant loan pay downs or
amortization, an increase in the pool's share of defeasance or
overall improved pool performance. Factors that may cause a
downgrade of the ratings include a decline in overall performance
and Property income, increased expected losses from a specially
serviced and troubled loan or interest shortfalls.

Moody's ratings address only the credit risks associated with the
transaction. Other non-credit risks have not been addressed and may
have a significant effect on yield to investors.

The ratings do not represent any assessment of (i) the likelihood
or frequency of prepayment on the mortgage loans, (ii) the
allocation of net aggregate prepayment interest shortfalls, (iii)
whether or to what extent prepayment premiums might be received, or
(iv) in the case of any class of interest-only certificates, the
likelihood that the holders thereof might not fully recover their
investment in the event of a rapid rate of prepayment of the
mortgage loans.


CARLYLE GLOBAL 2013-2: S&P Assigns BB-(sf) Rating on Cl. E-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A-R, B-R, C-R,
D-R, and E-R replacement notes and the new class Y-R notes from
Carlyle Global Market Strategies CLO 2013-2 Ltd., a collateralized
loan obligation (CLO) originally issued in 2013 that is managed by
Carlyle Investment Management LLC. The replacement notes are being
issued via a supplemental indenture.

On the Dec. 7, 2017, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
issuance of the replacement notes were used to redeem the original
notes, therefore, S&P is withdrawing the ratings on the original
class A-1, B, C-1, C-2, D, E, and F notes and assigning final
ratings to the replacement notes.

S&P said, "To note, since our effective date ratings affirmations
on the original transaction, the original class X notes have paid
down in full, and the original class A-2 delayed draw notes were
converted in full to the class A-1 notes. Further, the original
class P securities are not being refinanced. The class P securities
consist of the $1,235,800 subordinated notes and the $5,000,000
face value of zero-coupon U.S. Treasury securities due February
2025. We affirmed our original rating on the class P securities on
the Dec. 7, 2017, refinancing date.

"Our review of this transaction included a cash flow analysis,
based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in the 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 or ultimate principal, or both, to each of the
rated tranches.

"The ratings reflect our opinion that the credit support available
is commensurate with the associated rating levels.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and we will take further rating actions
as we deem necessary."

  RATINGS ASSIGNED

  Carlyle Global Market Strategies CLO 2013-2 Ltd./Carlyle Global
  Market Strategies CLO 2013-2 LLC

  Class                Rating          Amount (mil. $)
  Y-R                  AAA (sf)                   8.00
  A-R                  AAA (sf)                 342.50
  B-R                  AA (sf)                   74.25
  C-R (deferrable)     A (sf)                    33.00
  D-R (deferrable)     BBB- (sf)                 30.00
  E-R (deferrable)     BB- (sf)                  26.25

  RATING AFFIRMED

  Carlyle Global Market Strategies CLO 2013-2 Ltd./Carlyle Global  

  Market Strategies CLO 2013-2 LLC
  
  Class                Rating          
  P                    AA+p (sf)

  RATINGS WITHDRAWN

  Carlyle Global Market Strategies CLO 2013-2 Ltd./Carlyle Global  

  Market Strategies CLO 2013-2 LLC

  Class                   Rating
                     To           From
  A-1                NR           AAA (sf)
  B                  NR           AA+ (sf)
  C-1 (deferrable)   NR           A+ (sf)
  C-2 (deferrable)   NR           A+ (sf)
  D (deferrable)     NR           BBB (sf)
  E (deferrable)     NR           BB (sf)   
  F (deferrable)     NR           B (sf)  


CARLYLE GLOBAL 2013-3: S&P Assigns B-(sf) Rating on Cl. E-R Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A-1A-R, A-2-R,
B-R, C-R, D-R, and E-R replacement notes from Carlyle Global Market
Strategies CLO 2013-3 Ltd., a collateralized loan obligation (CLO)
originally issued in 2013 that is managed by Carlyle CLO Management
LLC. S&P withdrew its ratings on the original class A-1A, A-1B,
A-2A, A-2B, B, C, D, and E notes following payment in full on the
Dec. 6, 2017, refinancing date.

On the Dec. 6, 2017, refinancing date, proceeds from the
replacement note issuances were used to redeem the original notes
as outlined in the transaction document provisions. Therefore, S&P
withdrew its ratings on the original notes in line with their full
redemption, and we assigned ratings to the replacement notes.

S&P said, "Our review of this transaction included a cash flow
analysis, based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in
the 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 or ultimate principal,
or both, to each of the rated tranches.

"The assigned ratings reflect our opinion that the credit support
available is commensurate with the associated rating levels.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and we will take rating actions as we
deem necessary."

  RATINGS ASSIGNED

  Carlyle Global Market Strategies CLO 2013-3 Ltd.
  Replacement class         Rating      Amount (mil. $)
  A-1A-R                    AAA (sf)             297.50
  A-1B-R                    NR                    21.50
  A-2-R                     AA (sf)               62.50
  B-R (deferrable)          A (sf)                30.00
  C-R (deferrable)          BBB- (sf)             30.00
  D-R (deferrable)          BB- (sf)              18.50
  E-R (deferrable)          B- (sf)                9.00

  RATINGS WITHDRAWN

  Carlyle Global Market Strategies CLO 2013-3 Ltd.
                            Rating
  Original class       To           From
  A-1A                 NR           AAA (sf)
  A-1B                 NR           AAA (sf)
  A-2A                 NR           AA (sf)
  A-2B                 NR           AA (sf)
  B                    NR           A (sf)
  C                    NR           BBB (sf)
  D                    NR           BB (sf)
  E                    NR           B (sf)

  NR--Not rated.


CBAM 2017-4: Moody's Assigns Ba3(sf) Rating to Class E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service announced that it has assigned the
following rating to a class of notes issued by CBAM 2017-4 (Secured
Note) LLC:

US$286,350,000 Class A Secured Notes due 2031 (the "Class A Secured
Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf) with respect to the ultimate cash
receipt of the Class A Secured Note Balance (as defined in the
transaction's indenture).

The Class A Secured Notes are composed of the following components
that were issued by CBAM 2017-4, Ltd. (the "CLO Issuer") on
December 6, 2017:

US$57,500,000 Class B-2 Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the "Class
B-2 Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$52,250,000 Class C Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the
"Class C Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$ 61,750,000 Class D Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the
"Class D Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$42,750,000 Class E Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the
"Class E Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

US$74,100,000 Subordinated Notes (the "Subordinated Notes")

The Class B-2 Notes, Class C Notes, the Class D Notes, the Class E
Notes, and the Subordinated Notes are referred to herein,
collectively as the "CLO Notes". The Secured Note Issuer was
created solely to issue secured notes.

The secured notes' structure includes several notable features. The
Class A Secured Notes promise the repayment of Class A Secured Note
Balance and do not bear a stated rate of interest. Moody's rating
of the Class A Secured Notes does not address any other payments or
additional amounts that a holder of the Class A Secured Notes may
receive pursuant to the underlying documents. In addition to the
Class A Secured Notes, the Secured Notes Issuer issued Class B
Secured Notes. Any proceeds from the CLO Notes will be first
applied to the payment of principal of the Class A Secured Notes
until its principal is reduced to zero and second, distributed to
the Class B Secured Notes. While the Class A Secured Notes are
outstanding, the CLO Notes will not be refinanced.

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's rating of the Class A Secured Notes addresses the expected
loss posed to noteholders. The rating reflects the risks due to
defaults on the CLO Issuer's underlying portfolio of assets, the
transaction's legal structure, and the characteristics of the CLO
Issuer's underlying assets.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3.2.1,
Section 3.4 and Appendix 14 ("Approach to Rating Instruments that
Are Backed by CLO Secured Debt Tranches and Equity, and CLO
Instruments with non-Standard Promises") of the "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" rating
methodology published in August 2017.

For modeling purposes, Moody's used the following base-case
assumptions for the CLO Issuer's portfolio:

Par amount: $1,000,000,000

Diversity Score: 55

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2828

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.47%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.5%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 9 years.

The CLO Issuer is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes of the
CLO Issuer are collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated first
lien senior secured corporate loans. At least 90% of the portfolio
must consist of senior secured loans (including participation
interests with respect to senior secured loans), and up to 10% of
the portfolio may consist of second lien loans or senior unsecured
loans.

CBAM CLO Management LLC (the "CLO Manager") directs the selection,
acquisition and disposition of the assets on behalf of the CLO
Issuer and may engage in trading activity, including discretionary
trading, during the CLO Issuer's five year reinvestment period.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
August 2017.

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

The performance of the Class A Secured Notes is subject to
uncertainty. The performance of the Class A Secured Notes is
sensitive to the performance of the CLO Notes and the CLO Issuer's
portfolio, which in turn depend on economic and credit conditions
that may change. The CLO Manager's investment decisions and
management of the CLO Issuer will also affect the performance of
the Class A Secured Notes.

The rating on the Class A Secured Notes, which combines cash flows
from the CLO Notes, is subject to a higher degree of volatility
than the rated notes of the CLO Issuer, primarily due to the
uncertainty of cash flows from the Subordinated Notes. Moody's
applied haircuts to the cash flows from the Subordinated Notes
based on the target rating of the Class A Secured Notes. Actual
distributions from the Subordinated Notes that differ significantly
from Moody's assumptions can lead to a faster (or slower) speed of
reduction in the Class A Secured Note Balance, thereby resulting in
better (or worse) ratings performance than previously expected.

Together with the set of modeling assumptions above, Moody's
conducted an additional sensitivity analysis, which was a component
in determining the rating assigned to the Class A Secured Notes.
This sensitivity analysis includes increased default probability
relative to the base case default probability assumption for the
CLO Issuer's portfolio.

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

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 15% (from 2828 to 3253)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Secured Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2828 to 3677)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Secured Notes: -2


CBAM 2017-4: Moody's Assigns Ba3(sf) Rating to Class E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to seven classes of
notes issued by CBAM 2017-4, Ltd.

Moody's rating action is:

US$10,000,000 Class X Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the "Class X
Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$640,000,000 Class A Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the "Class A
Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$54,473,684 Class B-1 Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the "Class
B-1 Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$60,526,316 Class B-2 Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the "Class
B-2 Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$55,000,000 Class C Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the
"Class C Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$65,000,000 Class D Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the
"Class D Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$45,000,000 Class E Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the
"Class E Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

The Class X Notes, Class A Notes, the Class B-1 Notes, the Class
B-2 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.

CBAM 2017-4 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 (including participation interests with
respect to senior secured loans), and up to 10% of the portfolio
may consist of second lien loans or senior unsecured loans. Moody's
expects the portfolio to be at least 90% ramped as of the closing
date.

CBAM CLO 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 one class of
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 August 2017.

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

Par amount: $1,000,000,000

Diversity Score: 55

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2828

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.47%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.5%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 9 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
August 2017.

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 2828 to 3253)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A Notes: -1

Class B-1 Notes: -2

Class B-2 Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: 0

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2828 to 3677)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A Notes: -1

Class B-1 Notes: -4

Class B-2 Notes: -4

Class C Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1


CHASE MORTGAGE 2016-2: Moody's Assigns Ba2 Rating to Cl. M-4 Debt
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of four tranches
($288.8 million) issued by Chase Mortgage Trust 2016-2. Chase
Mortgage Trust 2016-2 (CMT 2016-2) is an RMBS transaction issued
under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's (FDIC)
securitization safe harbor rule. The collateral consists of prime
quality, fixed rate, first-lien residential mortgage loans (55%
conforming loans and 45% non-conforming loans), originated by
JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., who is also the servicer for this
transaction.

The complete rating actions are:

Issuer: Chase Mortgage Trust 2016-2

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 28, 2016
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Jul 28, 2016
Definitive Rating Assigned A1 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jul 28, 2016
Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 28, 2016
Definitive Rating Assigned B1 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating upgrades are primarily due to a decrease in Moody's
projected pool losses (see link below) on the underlying pool and
reflect the recent strong performance of the pool with minimal
serious delinquencies till date. Moreover, high voluntary
prepayment rates since issuance, combined with stringent
performance triggers in the transaction have contributed to slight
increases in percentage credit enhancement levels for the upgraded
bonds. Given the unique pro-rata pay structure of this deal,
servicing fee structure and the lack of principal & interest (P&I)
advancing in the transaction, Moody's ratings reflect the cash
flows under a range of loss timing, servicing fee and stop-advance
assumptions.

The transaction incorporates: 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 and 3) immediate recognition of modification losses
which will allocate more cash to senior bonds because written-down
junior bonds accrue less interest. Moreover, 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.

The bonds have benefited from sustained prepayment rates and better
than expected performance. The November 2017 remittance data shows
a three month average conditional prepayment rate (CPR) of 10.5%.
The percentage of loans that are 60-plus days delinquent has been
very low, at about 5 bps of the current balance as of the November
2017 remittance report with no realized loss to date. Credit
enhancement levels have remained generally stable, owing to
pro-rata payment nature of the transaction and strong underlying
performance that has prevented any triggers to be breached.

Our updated loss expectations on the pools incorporate, amongst
other factors, Moody's assessment of the representations and
warranties frameworks of the transactions, the due diligence
findings of the third party review received at the time of
issuance, and the strength of the transaction's originators and
servicers.

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

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.

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.


CIFC FUNDING 2012-II-R: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Cl. D Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to five classes of
notes issued by CIFC Funding 2012-II-R, Ltd. (the "Issuer" or "CIFC
Funding 2012-II-R").

Moody's rating action is:

US$340,000,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2028 (the "Class A-1 Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$46,000,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2028
(the "Class A-2 Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$28,000,000 Class B Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2028 (the "Class B Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$30,000,000 Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2028 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$24,500,000 Class D Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2028 (the "Class D Notes"), 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.

CIFC Funding 2012-II-R 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, and up to
10% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans and unsecured
loans. Moody's expect the portfolio to be approximately 80% ramped
as of the closing date.

CIFC VS 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 two 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 August 2017.

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

Par amount: $500,000,000

Diversity Score: 70

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2950

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.50%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 6.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 6.5 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
August 2017.

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 2950 to 3393)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: 0

Class A-2 Notes: -2

Class B Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -1

Class D Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2950 to 3835)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: -1

Class A-2 Notes: -3

Class B Notes: -3

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1


COMM 2014-CCRE16: Fitch Affirms Bsf Rating on Class F Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 15 classes of Deutsche Bank Securities,
Inc.'s COMM 2014-CCRE16 commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates. The Rating Outlook for one class has been revised to
Negative from Stable.  

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Stable Performance: Although Fitch has identified two loans of
concern in the Top 15, the pool's overall performance is considered
stable since issuance.

High Fitch Leverage: The pool's Fitch issuance DSCR and LTV of
1.13x and 108.5%, respectively, are worse than the 2013 and 2012
averages of 1.29x and 101.6%, and 1.24x and 97.2%, respectively.

Traditional Property Type Mix: The pool contains a traditional mix
of property types, with the largest property type being office at
31.5%, followed by retail at 21.5%, lodging at 15%, mixed-use at
14.5% and multifamily at 13.2%. No other property type accounts for
more than 3.3% of the pool.

Limited Amortization: The pool is scheduled to amortize by 12.6%
prior to maturity. Loans representing 14.5% of the pool are
interest-only for the full term. Loans representing an additional
42.6% of the pool were structured with partial interest-only
periods. Of these, five loans (15.5% of the pool) are still in
their interest-only period, while the remaining loans have already
begun amortizing.

Loan in Special Servicing: There is one loan in special servicing,
which represents 0.6% of the pool. The collateral is a portfolio of
three limited-service hotels and the loan was transferred for
default following the termination of the franchise agreements
without lender consent. The workout strategy is foreclosure.

Hurricane and Wildfire Exposure: There is limited exposure to
properties in areas affected by hurricanes or wildfires.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Rating Outlook on class F has been revised to Negative from
Stable. This change reflects an additional sensitivity stress on a
Fitch loan of concern, West Ridge Mall and Plaza (5% of the pool),
which resulted in a high expected loss. The underlying property is
located in a secondary market and has reported declining sales
since issuance. Additionally, a number of leases are scheduled to
expire in the next 12 months. Outlooks on all other classes remain
Stable. Fitch would consider downgrading class F should any loans
of concern default or underlying properties continue to
underperform.

Fitch has affirmed the following ratings:

-- $16.3 million class A-1 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $144.9 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $74.2 million class A-SB at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $190 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $281.4 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $74.5 million class A-M at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $780.3 million* class X-A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $58.5 million class B at 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $160.9 million* class X-B at 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $47.9 million class C at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $0 class PEZ at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $54.5 million class D at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $25.3 million class E at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $25.3 million* class X-C at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $10.6 million class F at 'Bsf'; Outlook revised to Negative
    from Stable.

*Notional amount and interest only

Fitch does not rate the class G or X-D certificates.


CONN'S RECEIVABLES 2017-B: Fitch to Rate Class C Notes 'B-sf(EXP)'
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings expects to assigns the following ratings to Conn's
Receivables Funding 2017-B, LLC (Conn's 2017-B), which consists of
notes backed by retail loans originated and serviced by Conn
Appliances, Inc. (Conn's):

-- $361,400,000 class A notes 'BBBsf(EXP)'; Outlook Stable;
-- $132,180,000 class B notes 'BBsf(EXP)'; Outlook Stable;
-- $78,640,000 class C notes 'B-sf(EXP)'; Outlook Stable;
-- class R notes 'NR'.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Collateral Quality: The pool characteristics are largely consistent
with previous transactions. The weighted average (WA) Fair Isaac
Corp. (FICO) score is 607, and a weighted average borrower rate has
increased to 28.52%.

Fitch's base case default rate for the 2017-B pool is 25.25% and a
2.2x stress is applied at the 'BBBsf' level, reflecting the high
absolute value of the historical defaults, along with the
variability of default performance in recent years and the high
geographic concentration. Although the default assumption is higher
than past Conn's transactions due to worsening performance, this is
partially mitigated by a slightly better pool mix than past deals,
a marginally longer time on book and stable WA FICO.

Rating Cap at 'BBBsf': Due to higher loan defaults in recent years,
management changes at Conn's, high concentration of receivables
from Texas and Conn's credit risk profile, Fitch placed a rating
cap on this transaction at the 'BBBsf' category.

Dependence on Trust Triggers: The trust depends on the three trust
performance triggers to ensure the payments due on the notes are
paid during times of degrading collateral performance. This is most
apparent for the class C notes where, in back-loaded default
scenarios, excess cash is released before the triggers go in
effect.

Credit Enhancement: The expected initial hard credit enhancement
(CE) for class A, B and C is 47.5%, 27.75% and 16% respectively.
The trust must build to an overcollateralization target of 35%
before any excess cash can be released. This target remains at the
same level as Conn's 2017-A after being reduced from 40% in Conn's
2016-B. This lowering of the target OC is mitigated by the higher
trust APR than past deals due to Conn's direct loan program.

Servicing Capabilities: Conn Appliances, Inc. has a long track
record as an originator, underwriter, and servicer. The credit risk
profile of the entity is mitigated by the backup servicing provided
by Systems & Services Technologies, Inc. (SST), who has committed
to servicing transition period of 30 days.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Unanticipated increases in the frequency of defaults or chargeoffs
on customer accounts could produce loss levels higher than the base
case and would likely result in declines of CE and remaining loss
coverage levels available to the investments. Decreased CE may make
certain ratings on the investments susceptible to potential
negative rating actions, depending on the extent of the decline in
coverage.

Fitch conducts sensitivity analysis by increasing a transaction's
initial base case chargeoff assumption by 10%, 25%, and 50%, and
examining the rating implications. The 10%, 25%, and 50% increase
of the base case chargeoffs are intended to provide an indication
of the rating sensitivity of the notes to unexpected deterioration
of a transaction's performance.

During the sensitivity analysis, Fitch examines the magnitude of
the multiplier compression by projecting the expected cash flows
and loss coverage levels over the life of investments under higher
than the initial base case chargeoff assumptions. Fitch models cash
flows with the revised chargeoff estimates while holding constant
all other modeling assumptions.

Rating sensitivity to increased charge-off rate:
-- Class A, B and C current ratings (Base Case: 25.25%): 'BBBsf',

    'BBsf', 'B-sf':
-- Increase base case by 10% for class A, B and C: 'BBB-sf',
    'BBsf', 'CCCsf';
-- Increase base case by 25% for class A, B and C: 'BB+sf',
    'B+sf', '--Increase base case by 50% for class A, B and C:
    'BBsf', 'B-sf', '


CSMC TRUST 2017-PFHP: S&P Assigns Prelim B- Rating on D Certs
-------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to CSMC Trust
2017-PFHP's $240.0 million commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates.

The certificate issuance is a commercial mortgage-backed securities
transaction backed by one two-year floating-rate commercial
mortgage loan totaling $240.0 million, with three, one-year
extension options, secured by cross-collateralized and
cross-defaulted mortgages on the fee simple interests in 20
limited-service, select-service, full-service, and extended-stay
hotels.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Dec. 4,
2017. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary 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.

  PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED
  CSMC Trust 2017-PFHP

  Class       Rating(i)          Amount ($)
  A           AAA (sf)           61,500,000
  X-CP        AAA (sf)           25,500,000(ii)
  X-EXT       AAA (sf)           25,500,000(ii)
  B           AA- (sf)           21,400,000
  C           A- (sf)            15,900,000
  D           BBB- (sf)          21,100,000
  E           BB- (sf)           33,100,000
  F           B- (sf)            29,400,000
  G           NR                 45,500,000
  HRR         NR                 12,100,000

(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 class X-CP and X-NCP certificates'
notional amounts will be reduced by the aggregate amount of
principal distributions and realized losses allocated to certain
portions of the class A certificates.
NR--Not rated.


CWHEQ REVOLVING 2006-RES: Moody's Hikes Rating on 2 Tranches to B2
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of 20 tranches
issued by CWHEQ Revolving Home Equity Loan Resecuritization Trust
2006-RES. The resecuritization is backed by various RMBS, backed by
second-lien home equity lines of credit (HELOCs).

Complete rating actions are:

Issuer: CWHEQ Revolving Home Equity Loan Resecuritization Trust
2006-RES

Cl. 04M-1a, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2016
Upgraded to B3 (sf)

Cl. 04M-1b, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2016
Upgraded to B3 (sf)

Cl. 04R-1a, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 11, 2013
Affirmed Ca (sf)

Cl. 04R-1b, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 11, 2013
Affirmed Ca (sf)

Cl. 04D-1a, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2016
Upgraded to B3 (sf)

Cl. 04D-1b, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2016
Upgraded to B3 (sf)

Cl. 04E-1a, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Feb 11, 2013
Affirmed Caa2 (sf)

Cl. 04E-1b, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Feb 11, 2013
Affirmed Caa2 (sf)

Cl. 04F-1a, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Feb 11, 2013
Affirmed Caa2 (sf)

Cl. 04F-1b, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Feb 11, 2013
Affirmed Caa2 (sf)

Cl. 05G-1a, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 11, 2013
Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

Cl. 05G-1b, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 11, 2013
Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

Cl. 05H-1a, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 11, 2013
Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

Cl. 05H-1b, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 11, 2013
Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

Cl. 04K-1a, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 11, 2013
Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

Cl. 04K-1b, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 11, 2013
Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

Cl. 04L-1a, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Feb 22, 2017
Upgraded to B3 (sf)

Cl. 04L-1b, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Feb 22, 2017
Upgraded to B3 (sf)

Cl. 04N-1a, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 11, 2013
Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

Cl. 04N-1b, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 11, 2013
Affirmed Caa3 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating upgrades are the result of Moody's upgrades on the
underlying transactions tranches. The credit enhancement available
to the underlying certificates has built-up due to faster paydown
of the bonds due to excess cash flow available in the related
underlying transactions.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Resecuritizations" published in February 2014.

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 4.1% in November 2017 from 4.6% in
November 2016. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of
4.5% to 5.5% for the 2017 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 2017. 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.


EATON VANCE 2015-1: Moody's Assigns (P)B3 Rating to Cl. F-R Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned the following provisional
ratings to the following notes (the "Refinancing Notes") to be
issued by Eaton Vance CLO 2015-1, Ltd.:

US$2,000,000 Class X Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2030
(the "Class X Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$246,000,000 Class A-1-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
2030 (the "Class A-1-R Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$22,500,000 Class A-2-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
2030 (the "Class A-2-R Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$29,000,000 Class B-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2030
(the "Class B-R Notes"), Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

US$30,500,000 Class C-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due 2030 (the "Class C-R Notes"), Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

US$24,400,000 Class D-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due 2030 (the "Class D-R Notes"), Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

US$16,600,000 Class E-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2030 (the "Class E-R Notes"), Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

US$8,000,000 Class F-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2030 (the "Class F-R Notes"), Assigned (P)B3 (sf)

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.

The Issuer is a managed cash flow collateralized loan obligation
(CLO). The issued notes are collateralized primarily by a portfolio
of senior secured, broadly syndicated corporate loans.

Eaton Vance Management (the "Manager") manages the CLO. It directs
the selection, acquisition, and disposition of collateral on behalf
of the Issuer.

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's provisional ratings on the Refinancing 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.

The Issuer intends to issue the Refinancing Notes on December 21,
2017 (the "Refinancing Date") in connection with the refinancing of
all classes of the secured notes (the "Refinanced Original Notes")
previously issued on October 29, 2015 (the "Original Closing
Date"). On the Refinancing Date, the Issuer used proceeds from the
issuance of the Refinancing Notes to redeem in full the Refinanced
Original Notes.

In addition to the issuance of the Refinancing Notes, a variety of
other changes to transaction features will occur in connection with
the refinancing. These include: extension of the reinvestment
period; extensions of the stated maturity and non-call period;
changes to certain collateral quality tests; and changes to the
overcollateralization test levels.

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 August 2017.

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers. For modeling
purposes, Moody's used the following base-case assumptions:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: $401,150,000

Defaulted par: $0

Diversity Score: 75

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2950

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.20%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.75%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 9 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
August 2017.

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

The performance of the Refinancing Notes is subject to uncertainty.
The performance of the Refinancing 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 Refinancing 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 Refinancing 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 Refinancing
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 2950 to 3393)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A-1-R Notes: 0

Class A-2-R Notes: -1

Class B-R Notes: -2

Class C-R Notes: -2

Class D-R Notes: -1

Class E-R Notes: -1

Class F-R Notes: -2

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2950 to 3835)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A-1-R Notes: -1

Class A-2-R Notes: -3

Class B-R Notes: -4

Class C-R Notes: -4

Class D-R Notes: -2

Class E-R Notes: -2

Class F-R Notes: -5


FREMF MORTGAGE 2012-KF01: Moody's Affirms B1 Rating on Cl. X Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has corrected the ratings on one
interest-only class of Structured Pass-Through Certificates ("SPC
Class X") issued by Freddie Mac Structured Pass-Through
Certificates (SPCs), Series K-F01 (the "SPC Trust") and affirmed
the rating on one interest-only class of related CMBS securities
("REMIC Class X"), issued by FREMF 2012-KF01 Mortgage Trust,
Multifamily Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2012-KF01
(the "REMIC Trust").

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: FREMF 2012-KF01 Mortgage Trust

Cl. X*, Affirmed B1 (sf); previously on May 19, 2017 Affirmed B1
(sf)

Issuer: Freddie Mac Structured Pass-Through Certificates (SPCs),
Series K-F01

Cl. X*, Assigned Guaranteed Rating B1 (sf); Underlying Rating
Affirmed B1 (sf); Underlying Rating previously on May 19, 2017
Affirmed B1 (sf)

* Reflects interest-only classes.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating action results from the correction of an error in
Moody's prior analysis of SPC Class X, in which Moody's did not
take into account guarantees provided by the Federal Home Loan
Mortgage Corp. ("Freddie Mac") for the benefit of this SPC Class.

SPC Class X issued by the SPC Trust represents a pass-through
interest in REMIC Class X issued by the REMIC Trust. At
securitization there were four principal and interest classes,
Classes A, B, C and D, issued by the REMIC Trust (the "P&I REMIC
Classes"); due to paydowns and amortization, the only P&I REMIC
Class that remains outstanding is Class D, which is not rated by
Moody's. An additional SPC Class, Class A, was also issued by the
SPC Trust and has been paid down in full. The two trusts are
interrelated given that the aggregate certificate amount as of the
November 2017 remittance statement of $27,524,715 is comprised of
$27,524,715 in P&I REMIC Classes, and the $27,524,715 notional
amount of the Class X SPC references the remaining balance of the
REMIC Trust.

The interest-only REMIC Class X is the only outstanding class in
the REMIC Trust that is rated by Moody's. The notional balance of
REMIC Class X references the P&I REMIC Classes in the REMIC Trust,
which are collateralized by a pool of two remaining floating rate
loans. REMIC Class X was acquired and guaranteed by Freddie Mac and
subsequently deposited into the SPC Trust to back SPC Class X that
was offered to investors. As a result, any guarantee payments made
by Freddie Mac on the REMIC Class X will be passed through to the
holders of the corresponding SPC Class X. Freddie Mac also
guarantees the SPC Class X itself. Moody's rates Freddie Mac's
senior unsecured debt Aaa.

In the prior rating actions on SPC Class X, Moody's did not take
into account the benefit, if any, of the guarantees that Freddie
Mac provides on this class. Instead, Moody's assigned one rating to
SPC Class X, which reflected the certificate's credit quality
absent the Freddie Mac guarantees (the "Underlying Rating").
Today's action corrects this by assigning a new rating to SPC Class
X, which incorporates the benefit, if any, of the Freddie Mac
guarantees (the "Guaranteed Rating"). Moody's will now maintain two
ratings on SPC Class X, a Guaranteed Rating and an Underlying
Rating.

Moody's has also announced similar actions in three other
transactions involving SPC Classes with Underlying Ratings that
were below Aaa (sf). The related REMIC Trusts on these transactions
are FREMF 2013-KF02 Mortgage Trust, FREMF 2017-K67 Mortgage Trust
and FREMF 2017-K68 Mortgage Trust.

Moody's is also reviewing its ratings on 19 additional transactions
involving REMIC and SPC Trusts with SPC Classes guaranteed by
Freddie Mac, in order to assign a Guaranteed Rating on each such
SPC Class and update disclosures and web pages as discussed. The
SPC Classes involved in these transactions currently carry ratings
of Aaa (sf), which reflect the certificates' credit quality absent
the Freddie Mac guarantees. For the SPC Classes in these
transactions, Moody's currently anticipate that the Guaranteed
Rating will be the same as the current Underlying Ratings.

* FREMF 2011-K703 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2011-K704 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2012-K705 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2012-K706 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2012-K707 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2013-K24 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2013-K25 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2013-K30 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2013-K31 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2013-K33 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2014-K36 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2014-K503 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2014-K714 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2014-K715 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2014-K716 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2015-K42 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2015-K718 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2015-K720 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2015-K721 Mortgage Trust

In this rating action, the REMIC Class X was affirmed based on the
credit quality of its referenced classes.

Under the transaction documents, Freddie Mac guarantees timely
payment of interest on REMIC Class X and SPC Class X. However,
Moody's notes that the Freddie Mac guarantees on the interest-only
SPC Class X do not provide additional enhancement. Freddie Mac's
guarantee does not cover any loss of yield on this interest-only
class following a reduction of notional amount due to a reduction
of the principal balance of the P&I REMIC Classes. Therefore, the
Guaranteed Rating and the Underlying Rating on SPC Class X reflect
only the class' underlying credit risk without credit for the
guarantees.

Given the repack nature of the structure, SPC note holders are
exposed to the credit risk of the underlying SPC assets, namely,
the rated REMIC Class X. The SPC Trust contains a separate
pass-through pool, designated as Pass-Through Pool X, which holds
the corresponding rated REMIC Class X. All cash flows received by
REMIC Class X are applied to make pass-through payments to the
corresponding SPC Class X. Repayment of the rated SPC Class X
depends primarily on the performance of the rated REMIC Class X, as
well as any payments made by Freddie Mac pursuant to its
guarantees.

In assigning the Guaranteed Rating on SPC Class X, Moody's
considered the repack nature of the structure, the credit quality
of the underlying collateral, and, other than with respect to the
Underlying Ratings, the guarantees that Freddie Mac provides for
the benefit of this SPC Class.

The Underlying Rating on SPC Class X was affirmed based on the
underlying credit risk of the related REMIC Class X without credit
for the guarantee provided by Freddie Mac.

DEAL PERFORMANCE:

As of the November 2017 remittance statement, the REMIC Classes
certificate balance has decreased by 98% to $27.5 million from
$1.37 billion at securitization.

One loan, constituting 29% 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.

No loans have been liquidated from the pool with a loss to the
trust and there are no loans in special servicing.

Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 79%, compared to 80% at
Moody's last review. Moody's conduit component excludes loans with
structured credit assessments, defeased and cooperative loans, and
specially serviced and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF)
reflects a weighted average haircut of 19.4% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 8.75%. Moody's actual and
stressed conduit DSCRs are 3.06X and 1.27X, respectively, compared
to 2.59X and 1.22X 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 8.75% stress rate the agency
applied to the loan balance.

Methodologies Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodologies used in rating REMIC Class X were
"Moody's Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single
Borrower CMBS" published in July 2017 and "Moody's Approach to
Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only (IO) Securities" published
in June 2017.

The principal methodologies used in rating SPC Class X Guaranteed
Rating, were "Rating Transactions Based on the Credit Substitution
Approach: Letter of Credit-backed, Insured and Guaranteed Debts"
published in May 2017, "Moody's Approach to Rating Repackaged
Securities" published in June 2015 and "Moody's Approach to Rating
Structured Finance Interest-Only (IO) Securities" published in June
2017.

The principal methodologies used in rating SPC Class X Underlying
Rating were "Moody's Approach to Rating Repackaged Securities"
published in June 2015 and "Moody's Approach to Rating Structured
Finance Interest-Only (IO) Securities" published in June 2017.

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

An IO class may be subject to ratings upgrades if there is an
improvement in the credit quality of its referenced classes,
subject to the limits and provisions of the updated IO
methodology.

An IO class may be subject to ratings downgrades if there is (i) a
decline in the credit quality of the reference classes and/or (ii)
paydowns of higher quality reference classes, subject to the limits
and provisions of the updated IO methodology.


FREMF MORTGAGE 2013-KF02: Moody's Affirms Ba2 Rating to Cl. X Certs
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has corrected the ratings on four classes
of Structured Pass-Through Certificates ("the SPC Classes") issued
by Freddie Mac Structured Pass-Through Certificates (SPCs), Series
K-F02 (the "SPC Trust"), and affirmed the ratings on five classes
of related CMBS securities (the "REMIC Classes"), issued by FREMF
2013-KF02 Mortgage Trust, Multifamily Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2013-KF02 (the "REMIC Trust").

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: FREMF 2013-KF02 Mortgage Trust

Cl. A-1, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-2, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded to
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded to
Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Baa1 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded to
Baa1 (sf)

Cl. X*, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Jun 9, 2017 Upgraded to
Ba2 (sf)

Issuer: Freddie Mac Structured Pass-Through Certificates (SPCs),
Series K-F02

Cl. A-1, Assigned Guaranteed Rating Aaa (sf); Underlying Rating
Affirmed Aaa (sf); Underlying Rating previously on May 18, 2017
Affirmed Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2, Assigned Guaranteed Rating Aaa (sf); Underlying Rating
Affirmed Aaa (sf); Underlying Rating previously on May 18, 2017
Upgraded to Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3, Assigned Guaranteed Rating Aaa (sf); Underlying Rating
Affirmed Aa3 (sf); Underlying Rating previously on May 18, 2017
Upgraded to Aa3 (sf)

Cl. X*, Assigned Guaranteed Rating Ba2 (sf); Underlying Rating
Affirmed Ba2 (sf); Underlying Rating previously on Jun 9, 2017
Upgraded to Ba2 (sf)

* Reflects interest-only classes.

RATINGS RATIONALE

Today's rating action results from the correction of an error in
Moody's prior analysis of the SPC Classes, in which Moody's did not
take into account guarantees provided by the Federal Home Loan
Mortgage Corp. ("Freddie Mac") for the benefit of the SPC Classes.

The SPC Classes are associated with the REMIC Classes issued by the
REMIC Trust. Each of the SPC Classes represents a pass-through
interest in an associated REMIC Class issued by the REMIC Trust.
Class A-1 SPC represents a pass-through interest in REMIC Class
A-1, Class A-2 SPC represents a pass-through interest in REMIC
Class A-2, Class A-3 SPC represents a pass-through interest in
REMIC Class A-3, Class X SPC represents a pass-through interest in
REMIC Class X. The two trusts are interrelated given that the
aggregate certificate amount as of the November 2017 remittance
statement of $113,913,983, comprised of $67,831,555 in offered SPCs
and $46,082,428 in offered REMIC Classes, equal the underlying
mortgage loan pool balance of $113,913,983.

The five rated REMIC Classes are collateralized by a pool of five
floating rate loans. Of these five classes, one REMIC Classes
(Class B) was offered to investors, while the remaining four
classes (Classes A-1, A-2, A-3 and X or the "Underlying Guaranteed
Classes") were acquired and guaranteed by Freddie Mac and
subsequently deposited into the SPC Trust to back the SPCs that
were offered to investors. As a result, any guarantee payments made
by Freddie Mac on the Underlying Guaranteed Classes will be passed
through to the holders of the corresponding SPC Classes. Freddie
Mac also guarantees the SPC Classes themselves. Moody's rates
Freddie Mac's senior unsecured debt Aaa.

In the prior rating action on the SPC Classes, Moody's did not take
into account the benefit, if any, of the guarantees that Freddie
Mac provides for these classes. Instead, Moody's assigned one
rating to each SPC Class, which reflected the certificate's credit
quality absent the Freddie Mac guarantees (the "Underlying
Rating"). Today's action corrects this by assigning a new Rating to
each of the SPC Classes, which incorporates the benefit, if any, of
the Freddie Mac guarantees (the "Guaranteed Rating"). Moody's will
now maintain two ratings on each SPC Class, a Guaranteed Rating and
an Underlying Rating.

In connection with the prior rating action on the REMIC Classes and
the SPC Classes, information about the ratings was displayed on a
single web page on Moody's website, moodys.com, associated with the
REMIC Trust. As part of today's action a separate web page has been
created on moodys.com for the SPC Trust. The Guaranteed Ratings and
the Underlying Ratings on the SPC Classes will now be displayed on
the SPC Trust web page, along with the rating history for the
Underlying Ratings. The rating history of the Underlying Rating on
each SPC Class will match the rating history of the related REMIC
Class as shown on moodys.com. Moody's will also update certain
identifier and disclosure items related to both the REMIC Classes
and the SPC Classes.

Moody's has also announced similar actions in three other
transactions involving SPC Classes with Underlying Ratings that
were below Aaa (sf). The related REMIC Trusts on these transactions
are FREMF 2012-KF01 Mortgage Trust, FREMF 2017-K67 Mortgage Trust
and FREMF 2017-K68 Mortgage Trust.

Moody's is also reviewing its ratings on 19 additional transactions
involving REMIC and SPC Trusts with SPC Classes guaranteed by
Freddie Mac, in order to assign a Guaranteed Rating on each such
SPC Class and update disclosures and web pages as discussed above.
The SPC Classes involved in these transactions currently carry
ratings of Aaa (sf), which reflect the certificates' credit quality
absent the Freddie Mac guarantees. For the SPC Classes in these
transactions, Moody's currently anticipate that the Guaranteed
Ratings will be the same as the current Underlying Ratings.

* FREMF 2011-K703 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2011-K704 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2012-K705 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2012-K706 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2012-K707 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2013-K24 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2013-K25 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2013-K30 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2013-K31 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2013-K33 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2014-K36 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2014-K503 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2014-K714 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2014-K715 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2014-K716 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2015-K42 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2015-K718 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2015-K720 Mortgage Trust

* FREMF 2015-K721 Mortgage Trust

In the rating action on the five REMIC Classes Moody's applied its
CMBS ratings methodology, which combines both commercial real
estate and structured finance analysis. Based on commercial real
estate analysis, Moody's determines the credit quality of each
mortgage loan and calculates an expected loss on a loan specific
basis. In structured finance, the credit enhancement for each
certificate typically depends on the expected frequency, severity,
and timing of future losses. Moody's also considers a range of
qualitative issues as well as the transaction's structural and
legal aspects.

The credit risk of loans is determined primarily by two factors: 1)
Moody's assessment of the probability of default, which is largely
driven by each loan's DSCR, and 2) Moody's assessment of the
severity of loss upon a default, which is largely driven by each
loan's LTV ratio.

The principal and interest (P&I) REMIC 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 interest-only (IO) REMIC Class were affirmed based on the
credit quality of their referenced classes.

Under the transaction documents, Freddie Mac guarantees payments on
the Underlying Guaranteed Classes and the SPC Classes, including
(a) timely payment of interest, (b) payment of related principal on
the distribution date following the maturity date of each balloon
mortgage loan to the extent such principal would have been
distributed to Classes A-1, A-2 and A-3, (c) realized losses and
other fees/expenses allocated to Classes A-1, A-2 and A-3, and (d)
ultimate payment of principal by the final distribution date for
Classes A-1, A-2 and A-3.

Moody's believes that the Freddie Mac guarantees that enhance SPC
Classes A-1, A-2, and A-3 support complete credit substitution
given the strong incentives for Freddie Mac to fulfill its
guarantee obligations under this transaction. The failure to
fulfill its guarantee obligations under this transaction would have
negative credit implications for Freddie Mac. As a result, the
Guaranteed Ratings on the SPC Classes are the higher of the support
provider's financial strength rating (Aaa, senior unsecured), or
the Underlying Rating of the SPC Classes absent Freddie Mac's
guarantees.

Moody's notes that the Freddie Mac guarantees on the interest-only
SPC Class X does not provide additional enhancement. Freddie Mac's
guarantee does not cover any loss of yield on these interest-only
classes following a reduction of notional amount due to a reduction
of the principal balance of the REMIC Underlying Guaranteed
Classes. Therefore, SPC Class X Guaranteed Rating and Underlying
Rating reflect only the class' underlying credit risk without
credit for the guarantees.

Given the repack nature of the structure, SPC note holders are
exposed to the credit risk of the underlying SPC assets, namely,
the rated REMIC Underlying Guaranteed Classes. The SPC Trust
contains separate pass-through pools, each designated as
Pass-Through Pool A-1, A-2, A-3 and X, and each holds a
corresponding rated REMIC Underlying Guaranteed Class, including
REMIC Classes A-1, A-2, A-3, and X, respectively. All cash flows
received by each of the Underlying Guaranteed Classes is applied to
make pass-through payments to the corresponding SPC Class.
Repayment of the rated SPC Classes depends primarily on the
performance of the rated REMIC Underlying Guaranteed Certificates,
as well as any payments made by Freddie Mac pursuant to its
guarantees.

In assigning the Guaranteed Ratings on the four SPC Classes,
Moody's considered the repack nature of the structure, the credit
quality of the underlying collateral, and other than with respect
to the Underlying Ratings, the guarantees that Freddie Mac provides
for the benefit of the SPCs.

The Underlying Ratings on the SPC Classes were affirmed based on
the underlying credit risk of the related REMIC Underlying
Guaranteed Classes without credit for the guarantee provided by
Freddie Mac.

DEAL PERFORMANCE:

As of the November 2017 remittance statement, the REMIC Classes
certificate balance has decreased by 93% to $114 million from $1.54
billion at securitization.

One loan, constituting 22% 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.

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

Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 107%, compared to 109% at
Moody's last review. Moody's conduit component excludes loans with
structured credit assessments, defeased and cooperative loans, and
specially serviced and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF)
reflects a weighted average haircut of 11.6% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 8.4%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.31X and 0.86X,
respectively, compared to 1.35X and 0.85X 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
8.75% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

Methodologies Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in rating REMIC Class A-1, REMIC
Class A-2, REMIC Class A-3 and REMIC Class B was "Moody's Approach
to Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single Borrower CMBS"
published in July 2017. The principal methodologies used in rating
REMIC Class X were "Moody's Approach to Rating Large Loan and
Single Asset/Single Borrower CMBS" published in July 2017, and
"Moody's Approach to Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only (IO)
Securities" published in June 2017.

The principal methodologies used in rating SPC Class A-1 Guaranteed
Rating, SPC Class A-2 Guaranteed Rating, and SPC Class A-3
Guaranteed Rating were "Rating Transactions Based on the Credit
Substitution Approach: Letter of Credit-backed, Insured and
Guaranteed Debts" published in May 2017, and "Moody's Approach to
Rating Repackaged Securities" published in June 2015. The principal
methodologies used in rating SPC Class X Guaranteed Rating were
"Rating Transactions Based on the Credit Substitution Approach:
Letter of Credit-backed, Insured and Guaranteed Debts" published in
May 2017, "Moody's Approach to Rating Repackaged Securities"
published in June 2015, and "Moody's Approach to Rating Structured
Finance Interest-Only (IO) Securities" published in June 2017.

The principal methodology used in rating SPC Class A-1 Underlying
Rating, SPC Class A-2 Underlying Rating, and SPC Class A-3
Underlying Rating was "Moody's Approach to Rating Repackaged
Securities" published in June 2015. The principal methodologies
used in rating SPC Class X Underlying Rating were "Moody's Approach
to Rating Repackaged Securities" published in June 2015 and
"Moody's Approach to Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only (IO)
Securities" published in June 2017.

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 may
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously anticipated. Factors that may cause an
upgrade of the ratings include significant loan paydowns or
amortization, an increase in the pool's share of defeasance or
overall improved pool performance. Factors that may cause a
downgrade of the ratings include a decline in the overall
performance of the pool, loan concentration, increased expected
losses from specially serviced and troubled loans or interest
shortfalls.

With respect to certain SPC Classes, and in particular Class A-3,
key to Moody's assumption in reaching the certificates' Guaranteed
Ratings are the Freddie Mac guarantees. With the exception of the
interest-only SPC Class X, the Guaranteed Ratings of the SPC
Classes may be sensitive to any change in Freddie Mac's rating,
since Moody's Guaranteed Ratings on the SPC Classes are the higher
of Freddie Mac's financial strength rating as the guarantee
provider and the SPC Classes' Underlying Rating.


GOLDMAN SACHS 2012-GC6: Fitch Affirms 'Bsf' Rating on Cl. F Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed nine classes of Goldman Sachs Mortgage
Company's GS Mortgage Securities Trust, commercial mortgage
pass-through certificates, series 2012-GC6 (GSMS 2012-GC6).  

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Relatively Stable Performance: The majority of the remaining pool
continues to exhibit relatively stable performance since issuance.
As of the November 2017 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has paid down by 14.4% to $988 million from $1.15
billion at issuance. Nine loans (7.1% of pool) have been defeased.

Fitch Loans of Concern: Fitch has designated nine loans (17.3% of
pool) as Fitch Loans of Concern (FLOCs), which includes four of the
top 15 loans (13.9%) and one specially serviced loan (0.8%).

The third largest loan, SunTrust International Center (5.8%), is
secured by an office property in Miami, FL, which has experienced
an occupancy decline since issuance. Although there has been recent
positive leasing momentum, current occupancy remains below 70%
compared to 83% at issuance. The seventh largest loan, Audubon
Crossing and Audubon Commons (4.3%), which is secured by a retail
property in Audubon, NJ, and the 11th largest loan, Chase Tower
(1.9%), which is secured by an office property in Charlestown, WV,
both reported low year-end (YE) 2016 net operating income (NOI)
debt service coverage ratios (DSCRs) of 1.04x and 1.10x,
respectively, due to a drop in occupancy stemming from tenants
vacating. The 13th largest loan, Great Northern Corporate Center
(1.8%), is secured by an office property in North Olmstead, OH
where occupancy is expected to decline in 2018 as the third largest
tenant is not renewing its lease and the fifth largest tenant will
downsize its space.

The four other non-specially serviced FLOCs (2.7%) outside of the
top 15 were flagged for low DSCR, declining occupancy, lease
rollover concerns or significant hurricane damage.

Specially Serviced Loan: The Towers of Coral Springs loan (0.8% of
pool), which is secured by a 77,338 sf office property located in
Coral Springs, FL, was transferred to special servicing in August
2017 for imminent default. Occupancy as of September 2017 has
declined to 59.7% from 81% at issuance. The servicer-reported YE
2016 NOI DSCR was 1.14x. The property is located in the Coral
Springs submarket of Fort Lauderdale, which reported a high vacancy
of 22.4% as of the third-quarter 2017, according to Reis. The
property's vacancies are being listed, but there has been no
further leasing progress at this time. Communication between the
borrower and the special servicer remains ongoing.

Property Type Concentrations: Loans secured by retail properties
represent 41% of the pool, including the largest loan, Meadowood
Mall (11.6%), a regional mall located in Reno, NV with exposure to
Macy's, Sears, JC Penney and Dick's Sporting Goods as anchor
tenants. Loans backed by hotel properties represent 15% of the
pool, including two within the top 15 (9.9%). Other property type
concentrations include office (16.8%), manufactured housing
communities (13.6%) and multifamily (9.2%).

Pool Concentrations: The top 10 and 15 loans account for 56.9% and
65.8% of the current outstanding pool balance, respectively.
Several of the largest loans within the pool are backed by
properties located in secondary markets. Locations such Reno, NV,
Rochester, NY, Audubon, NJ, Lancaster, PA and North Olmsted, OH are
all represented by top 15 loans.

Hurricane Exposure: Exposure to Hurricane Irma consists of two
loans (1.6% of pool). According to the master servicer's
significant insurance event (SIE) reporting, the Coconut Grove
Courtyard by Marriott (1.3%), a hotel property in Miami, FL,
sustained significant damage and is completely shut down. The
borrower is waiting for payment from the insurance company to begin
repairs. The Edgewood Square Shopping Center (0.3%), a retail
property in Jacksonville, FL, did sustain damage, but no additional
detail on the extent of the damage was provided.

Exposure to Hurricane Harvey consists of four loans (5.8%). The
latest SIE reporting had no updates on Hotel Zaza (4.5%), a hotel
property in Houston, TX; Amazing Spaces - The Woodlands (0.6%), a
retail property in Shenandoah, TX and Millside Office (0.4%), an
office property in The Woodlands, TX. The Meyerland Center (0.3%),
an office property in Houston, TX, is up and running with all
systems operational, according to the latest servicer update.

Limited Upcoming Maturities: Loan maturities are concentrated in
2021 (89.7% of pool) and the remainder in 2022 (10.3%).

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Negative Rating Outlook on class F reflects potential downgrade
concerns given the high concentration of FLOCs (17.3% of pool),
including a specially serviced loan, a property with significant
hurricane damage, as well as underperforming loans in the top 15.
Additionally, the transaction's retail concentration is high at
41%. Downgrades are possible if additional loans default and/or
performance of these loans continues to decline. The Stable Rating
Outlooks on classes A-3 through E reflect the increased credit
enhancement from paydowns and defeasance. Due to the FLOCs and pool
concentrations, future upgrades are unlikely, but possible with
additional paydown or defeasance and stable to improved
performance.

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

-- $568.3 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $73.2 million class A-AB at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $119.8 million class A-S at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- Interest-only class X-A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $63.5 million class B at 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $44.7 million class C at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $49.1 million class D at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $21.6 million class E at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $11.5 million class F at 'Bsf'; Outlook to Negative from
    Stable.

The class A-1 and A-2 certificates have paid in full. Fitch does
not rate the class G and X-B certificates.


GOLUB CAPITAL 23: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Class E-R Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned the following ratings to the
following notes (the "Refinancing Notes") issued by Golub Capital
Partners CLO 23(B)-R, Ltd.:

US$384,000,000 Class A-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
2031 (the "Class A-R Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$ 66,500,000 Class B-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
2031 (the "Class B-R Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$ 38,750,000 Class C-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2031 (the "Class C-R Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

US$ 38,000,000 Class D-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2031 (the "Class D-R Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$ 24,750,000 Class E-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2031 (the "Class E-R Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

The Issuer is a managed cash flow collateralized loan obligation
(CLO). The issued notes are collateralized primarily by a portfolio
of senior secured, broadly syndicated corporate loans.

OPAL BSL LLC (the "Manager") will manage the CLO. It will direct
the selection, acquisition, and disposition of collateral on behalf
of the Issuer.

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's ratings on the 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.

The Issuer has issued the Refinancing Notes on December 7, 2017
(the " Refinancing Date") in connection with the refinancing of all
of the secured notes and subordinated notes (the "Refinanced
Original Notes") previously issued on May 28, 2015 (the "Original
Closing Date"). On the Refinancing Date, the Issuer used proceeds
from the issuance of the Refinancing Notes and subordinated notes
to redeem in full the Refinanced Original Notes.

In addition to the issuance of the Refinancing Notes and
subordinated notes, a variety of other changes to transaction
features will occur in connection with the refinancing. These
include: extensions of the reinvestment period, non-call period and
the notes' stated maturity; changes to certain collateral quality
tests; changes to the overcollateralization test levels; and
changes to certain concentration limits.

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 August 2017.

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers. For modeling
purposes, Moody's used the following base-case assumptions:

Portfolio par: $599,601,337

Defaulted par: $797,324

Diversity Score: 62

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2950

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.65%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.50%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 9 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
August 2017.

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

The performance of the Refinancing Notes is subject to uncertainty.
The performance of the Refinancing 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 Refinancing 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 Refinancing 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 Refinancing
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 2950 to 3393)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-R Notes: 0

Class B-R Notes: -2

Class C-R Notes: -2

Class D-R Notes: -1

Class E-R Notes: 0

Percentage Change in WARF - increase of 30% (from 2950 to 3835)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-R Notes: -1

Class B-R Notes: -3

Class C-R Notes: -4

Class D-R Notes: -2

Class E-R Notes: -1


IMSCI 2015-6: Fitch Affirms 'Bsf' Rating on Class G Certs
---------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed all classes of Institutional Mortgage
Securities Canada Inc.'s (IMSCI) commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates, series 2015-6. All currencies are denominated in
Canadian dollars (CAD).

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Stable Performance: Overall pool performance remains stable and
generally in line with Fitch's expectations at issuance, with no
material changes to pool metrics. As of the November 2017
distribution date, the pool's aggregate principal balance has paid
down by 7.2% to $302.1 million from $325.4 million at issuance.

Fitch Loans of Concern: Fitch has designated one loan, Comfort Inn
& Suites Airdrie (3.7% of pool), as a Fitch Loan of Concern. The
loan, which is secured by a 103-room limited service hotel located
in Airdrie, AB, has been on the servicer's watchlist since February
2017 due to a low net cash flow debt service coverage ratio of
0.74x at year-end 2016. The property has been negatively impacted
by weakness in the overall energy sector and the impact of lower
oil prices. Both cash flow and occupancy have declined
significantly between 2015 and 2016 and since issuance. The loan
remains current and has full recourse to the borrower.

Canadian Loan Attributes: The ratings reflect strong Canadian
commercial real estate loan performance, including a low
delinquency rate and low historical losses of less than 0.1%, as
well as positive loan attributes such as short amortization
schedules, recourse to the borrower and additional guarantors. Of
the remaining pool, 63.5% features full or partial recourse to the
borrowers and/or sponsors.

Significant Amortization: The pool has a weighted average
amortization term of 25.6 years, which represents faster
amortization than U.S. conduit loans. There are no partial or full
interest-only loans. The pool's scheduled maturity balance
represents a paydown of 23.1% of the November 2017 balance and
28.6% of the balance at issuance.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Rating Outlooks for all classes remain Stable due to overall stable
performance of the pool since issuance. Fitch does not foresee
positive of negative ratings migration until a material economic or
asset-level event changes the transaction's overall portfolio-level
metrics.

Fitch has affirmed the following ratings:

-- $185.6 million class A-1 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $73.8 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $7.3 million class B at 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $8.9 million class C at 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $9.4 million class D at 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $4.1 million class E at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $3.7 million class F at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $3.3 million class G at 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable.

Fitch does not rate the interest-only class X or the $6.1 million
non-offered class H.


IVY HILL IX: Fitch Assigns 'BB-sf' Rating to Class E-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned the following ratings and Rating
Outlooks to Ivy Hill Middle Market Credit Fund IX, Ltd./LLC:

-- $1,750,000 class X-R Notes 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $175,300,000 class A-R Notes 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $54,900,000 class B-R Notes 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $30,100,000 class C-R Notes 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $16,100,000 class D-R Notes 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $17,300,000 class E-R Notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable.

Fitch does not rate the subordinated notes.

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Ivy Hill Middle Market Credit Fund IX, Ltd. (the issuer) and Ivy
Hill Middle Market Credit Fund IX, LLC (the co-issuer) comprise a
middle-market (MM) collateralized loan obligation (CLO) that will
be managed by Ivy Hill Asset Management, L.P. and originally closed
in October 2014. Fitch Ratings did not rate any of the CLO's notes
at that time. The CLO's original secured notes will be refinanced
in whole in December 2017 (the refinancing date) from the proceeds
of the issuance of new secured notes and additional subordinated
notes.

The new secured notes and existing and new subordinated notes will
provide financing on a portfolio of approximately $323,880,691
million of primarily first-lien senior-secured MM loans. After the
refinancing date, the CLO will have an approximately four-year
reinvestment period and two-year noncall period.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Sufficient Credit Enhancement: Credit enhancement (CE) available to
the notes, in addition to excess spread, is sufficient to protect
against portfolio default and recovery rate projections in the
respective rating stress scenarios. The degree of CE available to
the class A-R notes is above the average CE of notes at the same
rating level in Fitch-rated MM CLO issuances year-to-date, while
the degree of CE available to the class B-R, C-R, D-R and E-R notes
is below the respective averages. Cash flow modeling results are in
line with other Fitch-rated MM CLO notes. Class X-R notes are
expected to be paid in full from the application of interest
proceeds on the third payment date.

'B/B-' Asset Quality: Fitch expects the credit quality of the
underlying obligors to primarily fall in the 'B' to 'B-' range.
Fitch's base case analysis centered on a portfolio with a weighted
average rating factor of 40, in accordance with the initial
expected matrix point. The analysis on such a portfolio indicated
that each class of rated notes is projected to be sufficiently
robust against default rates, in line with its applicable rating
stress.

Strong Recovery Expectations: The transaction documents require a
minimum of 95% of the portfolio to be invested in senior-secured
loans, cash, and eligible investments while portfolio management is
governed in part by a Fitch weighted average recovery rate (WARR)
test. In its base case analysis of the rated notes, Fitch adjusted
the WARR of the portfolio to reach the base case trigger of 73% and
further reduced recovery assumptions for higher rating stress
scenarios.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Fitch evaluated the structure's sensitivity to the potential
variability of key model assumptions, including decreases in
recovery rates and increases in default rates or correlation. Fitch
expects the class X-R, A-R, and B-R notes to remain investment
grade and class C-R, D-R, and E-R notes to remain within two rating
categories of their assigned ratings, even under the most extreme
sensitivity scenarios. Results under these sensitivity scenarios
were 'AAAsf' for the class X-R notes and ranged from 'AA-sf' to
'AAAsf' for the class A-R notes, 'BBB+sf' to 'AAsf' for the class
B-R notes, 'BB+sf' to 'BBB+sf' for the class C-R notes, 'Bsf' to
'BBBsf' for the class D-R notes and CCCsf; to BB+sf; for the class
E-R notes.


JAMESTOWN CLO VII: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Class D-R Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned the following ratings to the
following notes (the "Refinancing Notes") issued by Jamestown CLO
VII, Ltd. (the "Issuer"):

US$ 322,500,000 Class A-1-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2027 (the "Class A-1-R Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$ 60,000,000 Class A-2-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2027 (the "Class A-2-R Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$ 22,000,000 Class B-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2027 (the "Class B-R Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$ 29,000,000 Class C-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2027 (the "Class C-R Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$ 26,500,000 Class D-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2027 (the "Class D-R Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

The Issuer is a managed cash flow collateralized loan obligation
(CLO). The issued notes are collateralized primarily by a portfolio
of senior secured, broadly syndicated corporate loans.

Investcorp Credit Management US LLC (the "Manager") manages the
CLO. It directs the selection, acquisition, and disposition of
collateral on behalf of the Issuer.

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's ratings on the Refinancing Notes address the expected loss
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.

The Issuer has issued the Refinancing Notes on December 5, 2017
(the "Refinancing Date") in connection with the refinancing of
certain classes of notes (the "Refinanced Original Notes")
previously issued on the Original Closing Date. On the Refinancing
Date, the Issuer used the proceeds from the issuance of the
Refinancing Notes to redeem in full the Refinanced Original Notes.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
August 2017.

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

The performance of each class of the Issuer's notes is subject to
uncertainty relating to certain factors and circumstances, and this
uncertainty could lead Moody's to change its ratings:

1) Macroeconomic uncertainty: CLO performance is subject to
uncertainty about credit conditions in the general economy.

2) Collateral Manager: Performance can also be affected positively
or negatively by a) the Manager's investment strategy and behavior
and b) differences in the legal interpretation of CLO documentation
by the Manager or other transaction parties owing to embedded
ambiguities.

3) Collateral credit risk: Investing in collateral of better credit
quality, or better than Moody's expected credit performance of the
assets collateralizing the transaction can lead to positive CLO
performance. Conversely, a negative shift in the credit quality or
performance of the collateral can have adverse consequences for CLO
performance.

4) Deleveraging: During the amortization period, the pace of
deleveraging from unscheduled principal proceeds is an important
source of uncertainty. Deleveraging of the CLO could accelerate
owing to high prepayment levels in the loan market and/or
collateral sales by the Manager, which could have a significant
impact on the ratings. Note repayments that are faster than Moody's
current expectations will usually have a positive impact on CLO
notes, beginning with those notes having the highest payment
priority.

5) Recovery of defaulted assets: Fluctuations in the market value
of defaulted assets could result in volatility in the deal's
overcollateralization levels. Further, the timing of recovery
realization and whether the Manager decides to work out or sell
defaulted assets create additional uncertainty. Realization of
recoveries that are either materially higher or lower than assumed
in Moody's analysis would impact the CLO positively or negatively,
respectively.

6) Weighted average life: The notes' ratings can be sensitive to
the weighted average life assumption of the portfolio, which could
lengthen owing to any decision by the Manager to reinvest into new
issue loans or loans with longer maturities, or participate in
amend-to-extend offerings. Life extension can increase the default
risk horizon and assumed cumulative default probability of CLO
collateral.

7) Weighted Average Spread (WAS): CLO performance can be sensitive
to WAS, which is a key factor driving the amount of excess spread
available as credit enhancement when a deal fails its
over-collateralization or interest coverage tests. A decrease in
excess spread, including as a result of losing the net interest
benefit of LIBOR floors, or because market conditions make it
difficult for the deal to source assets of appropriate credit
quality in order to maintain its WAS target, would reduce the
effective credit enhancement available for the notes.

Together with the set of modeling assumptions described below,
Moody's conducted additional sensitivity analyses, which were
considered in determining the ratings assigned to the rated notes.
In particular, in addition to the base case analysis, Moody's
conducted sensitivity analyses to test the impact of a number of
default probabilities on the rated notes relative to the base case
modeling results. Below is a summary of the impact of different
default probabilities, expressed in terms of WARF level, on the
rated notes (shown in terms of the number of notches difference
versus the base case model output, where a positive difference
corresponds to a lower expected loss):

Moody's Assumed WARF - 20% (2560)

Class A-1-R: 0

Class A-2-R: +1

Class B-R: +4

Class C-R: +3

Class D-R: +1

Class E: +1

Moody's Assumed WARF + 20% (3840)

Class A-1-R: 0

Class A-2-R: -3

Class B-R: -2

Class C-R: -2

Class D-R: -1

Class E: -3

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis:

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations."

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score, weighted average
recovery rate, and weighted average spread, are based on its
published methodology and could differ from the trustee's reported
numbers. For modeling purposes, Moody's used the following
base-case assumptions

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: $499,413,776

Defaulted par: $1,954,082

Diversity Score: 68

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3200 (corresponding to a
weighted average default probability of 25.93%)

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.56%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.89%

Moody's incorporates the default and recovery properties of the
collateral pool in cash flow model analysis where they are subject
to stresses as a function of the target rating on each CLO
liability reviewed. Moody's derives the default probability from
the credit quality of the collateral pool and Moody's expectation
of the remaining life of the collateral pool. The average recovery
rate for future defaults is based primarily on the seniority of the
assets in the collateral pool. In each case, historical and market
performance and the collateral manager's latitude for trading the
collateral are also factors.


JP MORGAN 2003-ML1: Fitch Affirms D Rating on Class N Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed five classes of J. P. Morgan Chase
Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp., commercial mortgage
pass-through certificates, series 2003-ML1 (JPMCC 2003-ML1).  

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Although credit enhancement has improved since Fitch's last rating
action from one loan payoff and amortization, the affirmation
reflects the concentration of the remaining pool. As of the
November 2017 distribution date, the transaction has been reduced
by 97% since issuance to $28.2 million from $929.8 million.

Pool Concentration: The pool is highly concentrated with 11 loans
remaining. The largest asset (34.3% of pool) is real-estate owned
(REO). Retail concentration comprises 63.6% of the pool. Due to the
concentrated nature of the pool, Fitch performed a sensitivity
analysis that grouped the remaining loans based on loan structural
features, collateral quality and performance, which ranked them by
their perceived likelihood of repayment. The ratings and Outlook
reflect this sensitivity analysis.

Defeasance & Fully Amortizing Loans: Five loans (26.3% of pool)
have defeased. Four of these defeased loans (18.7%) mature in 2018
and one (7.6%) in 2020. Four additional non-defeased loans (17.6%)
are fully amortizing.

REO Asset: The High Ridge Center asset (34.3% of pool) is a 264,560
square foot community shopping center in Racine, WI. The loan was
transferred to special servicing in December 2012 due to the
borrower's request for loan modification stemming from cash flow
issues. The asset became REO in February 2015. As of the September
2017 rent roll, the asset was 42% occupied by only one tenant, Home
Depot. According to the special servicer, Home Depot recently
exercised its five-year renewal through April 2024. The special
servicer indicated there are no disposition plants at this time;
however, they are exploring the possibility of separating the Home
Depot from the rest of the property in order to sell separately.

Loan Maturities: Excluding the REO asset, 40.5% of the pool matures
in 2018, 1.4% in 2019, 7.6% in 2020, 10.1% in 2022, and 6.2% in
2023.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Rating Outlooks on classes J and K are Stable due to overall
stable collateral performance and expected continued paydown. The
class J is covered by defeased collateral and class K is covered by
fully amortizing loans. The Negative Outlook on class L reflects
the uncertainty surrounding the payoff of the second largest loan,
which has an upcoming January 2018 maturity and where the property
has experienced a decline in occupancy. A downgrade may be possible
should the loan not refinance and transfer to special servicing
and/or losses on the REO asset exceed Fitch's expectations. Future
upgrades are not likely due to pool concentration.

USE OF THIRD-PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G-10

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

Fitch has affirmed the following classes as indicated:

-- $5.9 million class J at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $5.8 million class K at 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $5.8 million class L at 'BBsf'; Outlook Negative;
-- $7.0 million class M at 'Csf'; RE 50%;
-- $3.7 million class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

The class A-1, A-2, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, and X-2 certificates have
paid in full. Fitch previously withdrew the ratings on the
interest-only class X-1 certificate. Fitch does not rate the NR
class.


JP MORGAN 2004-C1: Fitch Affirms D Rating on Class P Certs
----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed four classes of J. P. Morgan Chase
Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp., commercial mortgage
pass-through certificates series 2004-C1 (JPMCC 2004-C1).  

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Although credit enhancement has improved since Fitch's last rating
action from one loan payoff and scheduled amortization, the
affirmation reflects the concentration of the remaining pool. As of
the November 2017 distribution date, the transaction has been
reduced by 98.8% since issuance to $12.3 million from $1.04 billion
at issuance.

Pool Concentration: The pool is highly concentrated with only 11
loans remaining. Retail properties comprise 61.3% of the pool. The
four non-defeased loans (45.2% of pool) are all located in
secondary and tertiary markets. Due to the concentrated nature of
the pool, Fitch performed a sensitivity analysis that grouped the
remaining loans based on loan structural features, collateral
quality and performance and ranked them by their perceived
likelihood of repayment. This includes defeased loans, fully
amortizing loans, and Fitch loans of concern. The ratings and
Outlooks reflect this sensitivity analysis.

Defeasance & Fully Amortizing Loans: Seven loans (54.8%) have
defeased. Three of these defeased loans (5.1%) mature in 2018,
while one (2.1%) matures in 2019, two (21%) mature in 2023, and one
(26.6%) matures in 2028. Three additional non-defeased loans
(22.1%) are fully amortizing.

Fitch Loans of Concern: Fitch has designated the remaining four
non-defeased loans (45.2% of pool) as Fitch Loans of Concern. Fitch
requested leasing updates from the servicer on these four
properties, particularly on the upcoming rollover, but it was not
provided.

The Centennial Valley II Apartments loan (23%) is secured by a
139-unit multifamily property located in Conway, AR. The
servicer-reported net operating income debt service coverage ratio
was 1.20x at year-end 2016 and has been low mainly due to a
decrease in scheduled base rents and an increase in utilities and
repairs and maintenance expenses. The Eureka Office loan (11.5%) is
secured by a 35,946 square foot (sf) mixed-use property located in
Eureka, CA. The property's three largest tenants totaling 88% of
the net rentable area (NRA) roll during 2018, including the largest
tenant, County of Humboldt, which occupies 79% of the NRA and has a
lease expiring in September 2018. The Bay Park Shopping Center loan
(7.9%) is secured by a 21,999 sf retail property located in La
Marque, TX. Although occupancy was 100% as of September 2017,
upcoming lease rollover consists of 33.5% of the NRA in 2018. The
Pointe South Shopping Center loan (2.7%) is secured by a 53,804 sf
retail property in Randleman, NC. Upcoming rollover in 2018
includes the largest tenant, Food Lion (56% of NRA; lease expiry in
October 2018) and the second largest tenant, Dollar General (13.9%;
January 2018).

Maturity Schedule: The maturity schedule includes four loans
(28.1%) in 2018, two loans (4.8%) in 2019, one loan (7.9%) in 2021,
three loans (32.5%) in 2023 and one loan (26.6%) in 2028.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Stable Rating Outlooks reflect overall stable collateral
performance and expected continued paydown. The Positive Rating
Outlook on class M, which is largely covered by defeasance,
reflects the possibility of a future upgrade as additional paydown
occurs or with improved pool performance. An upgrade of class N is
possible with further paydowns and/or positive leasing progress on
the four remaining non-defeased properties. A downgrade is also
possible should these non-defeased loans default or performance of
these loans decline significantly.

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

-- $1.7 million class L at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $5.2 million class M at 'Asf'; Outlook to Positive from
    Stable;
-- $2.6 million class N at 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $2.6 million class P at 'Dsf'; RE 100%.

The class A-1, A-2, A-3, A-1A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, J, K and X-2
certificates have paid in full. Fitch previously withdrew the
ratings on the interest-only class X-1 certificate. Fitch does not
rate class NR.


JP MORGAN 2014-FL5: S&P Affirms B- Rating on Class RH Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its ratings on three classes of
commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from J.P. Morgan
Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2014-FL5, 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 said, "For the pooled classes, our expectation of credit
enhancement was more or less in line with the raised or affirmed
rating levels. The upgrades on the pooled classes also reflect the
significantly reduced pool trust balance.

"The raised rating on the class DFW raked certificates reflects our
analysis of the Westin DFW loan. The class derives 100% of its cash
flows from the subordinate nonpooled portion of the loan.

"The affirmed rating on the class RH raked certificates reflects
our analysis of the Roosevelt Hotel loan. The class derives 100% of
its cash flows from the subordinate nonpooled portion of the loan.

"The affirmed rating on the class X-EXT interest-only (IO)
certificates is based on our criteria for rating IO securities, in
which the ratings on the IO securities would not be higher than
that of the lowest-rated reference class. The notional balance on
class X-EXT references classes A, B, C, and D.

This is a large-loan transaction backed by three floating-rate IO
mortgage loans. S&P's property-level analysis included a
re-evaluation of the three remaining loans in the pool, each of
which is secured by a hotel property. As of the Nov. 15, 2017,
trustee remittance report, the trust consisted of three
floating-rate loans indexed to one-month LIBOR (1.239%) with an
aggregate pooled trust balance of $176.0 million and an aggregate
trust balance of $218.5 million down from 10 loans with an
aggregate pooled trust balance of $516.7 million and an aggregate
trust balance of $671.3 million. The pooled trust has not incurred
any losses to date. Details on the three remaining loans are as
follows:

-- The Roosevelt Hotel loan is the largest loan remaining in the
pool. The loan has a whole loan balance of $140.0 million that
consists of a $110.7 million senior pooled trust component (62.9%
of the pooled trust balance) and a $29.3 million subordinate
nonpooled trust component that supports the class RH raked
certificates. The loan pays interest at LIBOR plus a gross margin
(2.01% on the pooled trust and 3.86% on the nonpooled trust) and
initially matured on May 9, 2016. The loan currently matures on May
9, 2018, and has one 12-month extension option remaining. In
addition, the mortgage borrower may obtain mezzanine debt up to
$20.0 million, provided certain terms and conditions are satisfied.
According to the master servicer, no mezzanine debt is currently
outstanding. The loan is secured by an unflagged 1,015-key
full-service hotel in Midtown Manhattan. Our analysis considered
the hotel's reported performance (2012 through the trailing 12
months ended Sept. 30, 2017), particularly the reported revenue per
available room (RevPAR), which has declined in the past few years
due primarily to excess supply and competition in the New York City
hotel market and higher operating expenses, according to the master
servicer. The master servicer, Wells Fargo Bank N.A. (Wells Fargo),
reported a 1.37x debt service coverage (DSC) and $186.80 RevPAR as
of year-end 2016 down from 2.06x and $191.64, respectively, as of
year-end 2015. S&P's expected-case value, using an 8.75% S&P Global
Ratings capitalization rate, and considering land value and prime
location, yielded an S&P Global Ratings loan-to-value (LTV) ratio
on the pool trust balance and trust balance of 90.9% and 114.9%,
respectively.

-- The Westin DFW loan is the second-largest loan in the pool. The
loan has a whole loan balance of $86.0 million that is divided into
a $44.3 million senior pooled component that makes up 25.2% of the
pooled trust balance, a $13.2 million subordinate nonpooled
component that supports the class DFW raked certificates, and a
$28.5 million nontrust subordinate B note. The mortgage loan is
secured by a Westin-flag, 506-room full-service hotel in Irving,
Texas. The loan pays interest at LIBOR plus a gross margin (3.40%
on the pooled trust and 4.11% on the nonpooled trust) and initially
matured on April 9, 2016. The loan currently matures on April 9,
2018, and has one 12-month extension option remaining. Our analysis
considered the hotel's reported performance (2012 through the
trailing 12 months ended Sept. 30, 2017), specifically the reported
RevPAR, which has increased in the past few years, as well as
steady operating expenses. Wells Fargo reported a 4.26x DSC and
$99.09 RevPAR for the trailing 12 months ended Sept. 30, 2017.
S&P's expected-case value, using a 9.00% S&P Global Ratings
capitalization rate yielded an S&P Global Ratings LTV ratio on the
pool trust balance and trust balance of 52.8% and 68.6%,
respectively.

-- The Crowne Plaza Chicago O'Hare loan, the smallest loan
remaining in the pool, has a trust and whole loan balance of $21.0
million (11.9%). In addition, the equity interest in the mortgage
borrower secures mezzanine debt totaling $14.0 million. The
mortgage loan is secured by a Crowne Plaza-flag, 503-room
full-service hotel in Rosemont, Ill. The loan pays interest at
LIBOR plus a 2.92% gross margin and initially matured on April
9, 2016. The loan currently matures on April 9, 2018, and has one
12-month extension option remaining. Our analysis considered the
hotel's reported performance (2012 through the trailing 12 months
ended July 31, 2017), in particular, the reported RevPAR, which has
generally increased in the past few years; however, it has been
offset by higher operating expenses. Wells Fargo reported a 4.30x
DSC and $87.04 RevPAR for the trailing 12 months ended June 30,
2017. S&P's expected-case value, using a 9.25% S&P Global Ratings
capitalization rate yielded a 67.3% S&P Global Ratings LTV ratio on
the trust balance.

RATINGS LIST

  J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2014-FL5
  Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2014-FL5
                                        Rating                     
             
  Class          Identifier        To                  From        
       
  X-EXT          46642YAE2         BB- (sf)            BB- (sf)    
     
  B              46642YAG7         AAA (sf)            AA- (sf)    
     
  C              46642YAJ1         AA- (sf)            BBB+ (sf)   
     
  D              46642YAL6         BB- (sf)            BB- (sf)    
     
  RH             46642YAQ5         B- (sf)             B- (sf)     
     
  DFW            46642YBC5         BB (sf)             BB- (sf)    



JPMORGAN CHASE 2004-PNC1: S&P Affirms B(sf) Rating on Cl. F Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its rating on the class D commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates from JPMorgan Chase Commercial
Mortgage Securities Corp.'s series 2004-PNC1, 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 said, "For the upgrade and affirmations, our expectation of
credit enhancement was in line with the raised or affirmed rating
levels. In addition, the upgrade reflects the reduction in the
trust balance.

"While available credit enhancement levels suggest positive rating
movements on classes E and F, our analysis also considered the
bonds' susceptibility to reduced liquidity support from the
specially serviced Tri County Crossing loan ($9.6 million, 15.1%),
as well as the largest nondefeased loan in the pool, the Employers
Reinsurance Corp. I loan ($32.9 million, 51.5%)."

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

As of the Nov. 13, 2017, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool balance was $63.8 million, which is 5.8% of the pool balance
at issuance. The pool currently includes 11 loans, down from 100
loans at issuance. One of these loans is with the special servicer,
two loans ($4.8 million, 7.5%) are defeased, and no loans are
reported on the master servicer's watchlist.

Excluding the specially serviced and two defeased loans, S&P
calculated a 1.04x S&P Global Ratings weighted average debt service
coverage (DSC) and 95.7% S&P Global Ratings weighted average
loan-to-value ratio using an 8.19% S&P Global Ratings weighted
average capitalization rate for the remaining nine performing
loans.

To date, the transaction has experienced $51.6 million in principal
losses, or 4.7% of the original pool trust balance. S&P expect
losses to reach approximately 5.2% of the original pool trust
balance in the near term, based on losses incurred to date and
additional losses it expects upon the eventual resolution of the
specially serviced loan.

CREDIT CONSIDERATIONS

As of the Nov. 13, 2017, trustee remittance report, the Tri County
Crossing loan was the sole specially serviced loan. The loan has a
total reported exposure of $11.0 million and is secured by a
146,279-sq.-ft. retail property in Springdale, Ohio. The loan was
transferred to the special servicer on Aug. 16, 2016, because of
imminent monetary default. According to the special servicer,
foreclosure proceedings are currently in progress for the loan. The
reported DSC was 0.41x as of year-end 2016, and reported occupancy
was 57.1% as of April 2017. An appraisal reduction amount of $2.9
million is in effect against this loan. S&P expects a moderate loss
(26%-59% of the loan's current balance) upon this loan's eventual
resolution.

In addition, S&P has some credit concerns with the Employers
Reinsurance Corp. I loan, the largest loan in the pool. The loan,
which has a reported current payment status, is secured by a
320,198-sq.-ft. office property in Overland Park, Kan. The building
serves as the headquarters of, and is 100% leased by, Swiss Re
Management, whose lease is scheduled to expire in December 2018.
Recent news reports indicate that the firm is planning to move its
headquarters in the near future, which could adversely affect
property occupancy and loan performance. The loan has an
anticipated repayment date in May 2019 and a reported DSC of 1.97x
as of year-end 2016.

RATINGS LIST

  JPMorgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp.
  Commercial mortgage pass through certificates series 2004-PNC 1
                                       Rating                      
            
  Class        Identifier        To               From             

  D            46625M5M7         AA (sf)          A (sf)           

  E            46625M5N5         BBB (sf)         BBB (sf)         

  F            46625M5R6         B (sf)           B (sf)           

  G            46625M5S4         CCC- (sf)        CCC- (sf)  


KVK CLO 2013-1: S&P Gives Prelim BB-(sf) Rating on Class E-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to the class
A-R, B-R, C-R, D-R, and E-R replacement notes and new class X notes
from KVK CLO 2013-1 Ltd./KVK CLO 2013-1 LLC, a collateralized loan
obligation (CLO) originally issued in 2013 that is managed by
Kramer Van Kirk Credit Strategies L.P. (see list). The replacement
notes will be issued via a proposed supplemental indenture.

The preliminary ratings reflect S&P's opinion that the credit
support available is commensurate with the associated rating
levels.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Dec. 6,
2017. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

On the Dec. 13, 2017, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
issuance of the replacement notes are expected to redeem the
original notes. S&P said, "At that time, we anticipate withdrawing
the ratings on the original notes and assigning ratings to the
replacement notes. However, if the refinancing doesn't occur, we
may affirm the ratings on the original notes and withdraw our
preliminary ratings on the replacement notes."

The replacement notes are being issued via a proposed supplemental
indenture, which, in addition to outlining the terms of the
replacement notes, will also:

-- Issue the class A-R, B-R, C-R, and D-R notes at lower spreads
than the original notes.

-- Issue the class E-R notes at a floating spread that is higher
than the original notes.

-- Issue new class X notes Extend the reinvestment period by 2.75
years.

Partially recapitalize the transaction and decrease the total
issuance amount to $495.61 million from $570.00 million.

S&P said, "Our review of this transaction included a cash flow
analysis, based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in
the trustee report, to estimate future performance (see table). 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 or ultimate
principal, or both, to each of the rated tranches.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and we will take further rating actions
as we deem necessary."

  PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

  KVK CLO 2013-1 Ltd./KVK CLO 2013-1 LLC Replacement
  class                     Rating      Amount (mil. $)
  X                         AAA (sf)               3.00
  A-R                       AAA (sf)             295.00
  B-R                       AA (sf)               50.70
  C-R (deferrable)          A (sf)                29.70
  D-R (deferrable)          BBB- (sf)             26.80
  E-R (deferrable)          BB- (sf)              17.50


LEAF RECEIVABLES 2017-1: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on E-2 Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded four securities and affirmed
four securities from the LEAF Receivables Funding 12, LLC, Series
2017-1 transaction. The transaction is a securitization of
small-ticket equipment leases serviced by LEAF Commercial Capital,
Inc.

Complete rating actions are as follow:

Issuer: LEAF Receivables Funding 12, LLC, Series 2017-1

Class A-2 Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 25, 2017
Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Class A-3 Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 25, 2017
Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Class A-4 Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 25, 2017
Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Class B Notes, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 25, 2017
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

Class C Notes, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on May 25, 2017
Definitive Rating Assigned A1 (sf)

Class D Notes, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on May 25, 2017
Definitive Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

Class E-1 Notes, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on May 25, 2017
Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Class E-2 Notes, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on May 25, 2017
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The actions were prompted mainly by a build-up of credit
enhancement due to the sequential payment structure of the
transaction and non-declining reserve account. The lifetime
cumulative net loss (CNL) expectations for the transaction was
unchanged at 3.0%.

Below are key performance metrics (as of the November 2017
distribution date) and credit assumptions for the affected
transaction. Credit assumptions include Moody's expected lifetime
CNL expectation, which is expressed as a percentage of the original
pool balance; and Moody's remaining net loss expectation and
Moody's Aaa level, both expressed as a percentage of the current
pool balance. The Aaa level is the level of credit enhancement that
would be consistent with a Aaa (sf) rating for the given asset
pool. Performance metrics include pool factor (the ratio of the
current collateral balance to the original collateral balance at
closing); total hard credit enhancement (expressed as a percentage
of the outstanding collateral pool balance) which typically
consists of subordination, overcollateralization, reserve fund as
applicable.

Issuer - LEAF Receivables Funding 12, LLC, Series 2017-1

Lifetime CNL expectation -- 3.0%; Prior expectation (May 2017) --
3.0%

Remaining net loss expectation -- 3.5%

Aaa level -- 23.0%

Pool factor -- 81.3%

Total Hard credit enhancement -- Class A Notes 34.0%, Class B Notes
27.5%, Class C Notes 21.0%, Class D Notes 16.6%, Class E-1 Notes
10.2%, Class E-2 Notes 4.9%

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating ABS Backed by Equipment Leases and Loans"
published in December 2015.

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

Up

Levels of credit protection that are greater than necessary to
protect investors against expectations of future loss could lead to
an upgrade of the rating. Moody's expectations of future loss may
be better than its original expectations because of lower frequency
of default by the underlying obligors. Performance of the US macro
economy and the equipment markets are primary drivers of
performance. Other reasons for better performance than Moody's
expected include changes in servicing practices to maximize
collections on the leases.

Down

Levels of credit protection that are insufficient to protect
investors against expectations of future loss could lead to a
downgrade of the ratings. Moody's expectations of future loss may
be worse than its original expectations because of higher frequency
of default by the underlying obligors. Performance of the US macro
economy and the equipment markets are primary drivers of
performance. Other reasons for worse performance than Moody's
expected include poor servicing, error on the part of transaction
parties, lack of transactional governance and fraud.


MARYLAND TRUST 2006-1: Moody's Cuts Series A Certs Rating to Ba3
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has downgraded and placed on review for
possible downgrade the Series A Investor Certificates
(certificates) from Maryland Trust 2006-1, a securitization of a
small pool of insurance policies (primarily life insurance
policies, single premium life annuities and supplemental
policies).

The complete rating action is:

Issuer: Maryland Trust 2006-1

Ser. A, Downgraded to Ba3 (sf) and Remains On Review for Possible
Downgrade; previously on Aug 23, 2017 Downgraded to Ba1 (sf) and
Remained On Review for Possible Downgrade

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's took negative rating action on Maryland Trust 2006-1
because the portfolio of underlying life policies in aggregate is
likely to have continued elevated insurance premiums in order to
keep the life policies in force, based on recent premium payment
amounts reported in trustee reports and a schedule of planned
premium payments provided by the trustee. Although Moody's has
received indication from the trustee that the transaction may be
restructured, based on the current structure of the transaction,
the continued elevated insurance premiums will result in a
shortfall in Series A Additional Monthly Income Distribution for
the certificate holders in early 2018. The shortfall will in turn
be accrued and added to the certificate balance, thereby causing a
potential principal loss to investors.

Per the Trust Agreement, the certificate holders are entitled to
both the Series A Base Monthly Income Distribution and the Series A
Additional Monthly Income Distribution. Life insurance premium
payments are paid before the Series A Additional Monthly Income
Distribution, which will help the transaction pay for higher life
insurance premium payments in order to keep the policies in force,
but may in turn cause shortfalls in the Series A Additional Monthly
Income Distribution. The transaction has a Liquidity Reserve
Account that can be used to pay for shortfalls of certain items in
the priority of payments and is currently being used to make timely
Series A Additional Monthly Income Distribution payments to the
certificates. If the Liquidity Reserve Account is depleted, which
is likely to occur in February 2018 based on recent transaction
payment trends and the schedule of planned premium payments
provided by the trustee, the annuity payment to the trust will not
be sufficient to cover for both the increased life insurance
premiums and the Series A Additional Monthly Income Distribution
resulting in an interest shortfall on the certificates. Any
shortfall in Series A Additional Monthly Income Distribution to
investors would be accrued and added to the certificate balance,
thereby causing a potential principal loss to investors for the
accrued amounts.

Further, to the extent that the annuity payments are insufficient
to pay for the increase in insurance premiums, funds in the Premium
Reserve Account will be available to cover such an increase.
However, should the Premium Reserve Account not be sufficient to
absorb such an increase in premiums, the corresponding life policy
may lapse later due to failure to pay the full amount of the
premiums required to keep the policy in force. The likelihood of
policy lapses depends on the longevity of the insured, and the
amount of annuity income and life insurance policy account balances
available to cover costs. Life insurance policy lapses would result
in further losses to the certificates.

During the review period, Moody's will continue to monitor
transaction performance while requesting more recent annual policy
statements as available and update the analysis accordingly.

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Approach
to Monitoring Life Insurance ABS" published in January 2015.

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

Change in mortality or lapse risk as well as change in the
insurance financial strength ratings of the life insurance,
annuity, annuity guaranty, or gap policy providers.


MERRILL LYNCH 2008-C1: Fitch Affirms 'Dsf' Rating on Class M Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded four classes and affirmed 16 classes
of Merrill Lynch Mortgage Trust (MLMT) series 2008-C1, commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates.  

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The downgrades reflect a greater certainty of expected losses on
the specially serviced assets since Fitch's last rating action.
Fitch modeled losses of 28.7% of the remaining pool; expected
losses on the original pool balance total 10.4%, including $36.6
million (3.9% of the original pool balance) in realized losses to
date. Fitch has designated 11 loans (49%) as Fitch Loans of
Concern, seven (34%) of which are specially serviced including the
largest three loans in the transaction.

As of the November 2017 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 77.3% to $214.9 million from
$948.8 million at issuance. There are four (5.3%) defeased loans.
Interest shortfalls are currently affecting classes K through T.

High Fitch LOC/Specially serviced loans: Eleven loans (49%) are
considered Fitch Loans of Concern of which seven are specially
serviced (33.6%) and include the top three loans (25%) in the
transaction, one of which is REO. This compares to three loans
(4.7%) at Fitch's last rating action.

Increasing Pool Concentration/Adverse Selection: The transaction is
becoming increasingly concentrated with 30 of the original 92 loans
remaining in the transaction. The largest 10 loans in the
transaction represent 59% of the pool balance. Additionally, retail
properties located in tertiary markets comprise 39% of the pool.

Defeasance: Four loans representing 5.3% of the pool are defeased,
of which three loans (3.6%) totaling $7.8 million have loan
maturities in 2018 and one (1.7%) in 2023.

Maturity Concentration: Thirteen loans 40% mature in December 2017,
of which nine loans (30%) are performing and four loans (10%) are
in special servicing. Fourteen loans (43%) mature between January
and March 2018, of which two loans (11.7%) are in special
servicing. One loan (1.7%) matures in January 2023, and one loan
(0.9%) matures in January 2027.

Hurricane Harvey Exposure: The largest loan (11%) which is in
special servicing is located in Houston TX. Per the significant
insurance event report provided by the master servicer, the
properties sustained minor damage and no claims have been filed.

Amortization Type: Five loans (25.2% of the pool) are
interest-only, and two loans (2.6% of the pool) are fully
amortizing. Twelve loans (29% of the pool) are performing balloon
loans. Eleven loans (43% of the pool) are partial IO.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Negative Rating Outlooks for classes AM through E reflect
uncertainty regarding timing of payoffs given the significant
number of loans that mature in the next three months, as well as
the ultimate recoveries on the specially serviced assets. Should
additional loans default at maturity and transfer to special
servicing or losses from the specially serviced assets are greater
than expected downgrades are possible. Given the concentrations,
upgrades are unlikely unless there is significant paydown and
better than expected recoveries.

USE OF THIRD-PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G-10

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

Fitch has downgraded the following ratings:

-- $9.5 million class F to 'CCCsf' from 'Bsf'; assigned RE 0%;
-- $9.5 million class G to 'CCsf' from 'CCCsf'; RE revised to 0%;
-- $10.7 million class H to 'CCsf' from 'CCCsf'; RE 0%;
-- $11.9 million class J to 'Csf' from 'CCsf'; RE 0%.

Fitch has also affirmed the following ratings:

-- $64.7 million class AM at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Negative;
-- $5 million class AM-A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Negative;
-- $41.8 million class AJ at 'Asf'; Outlook Negative;
-- $3.7 million class AJ-A at 'Asf'; Outlook Negative;
-- $2.2 million class AJ-AF at 'Asf'; Outlook Negative;
-- $10.7 million class B at 'Asf'; Outlook Negative;
-- $11.9 million class C at 'BBBsf'; Outlook Negative;
-- $8.3 million class D at 'BBBsf'; Outlook Negative;
-- $8.3 million class E at 'BBsf'; Outlook Negative;
-- $10.7 million class K at 'Csf'; RE 0%.
-- $8.3 million class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $1.3 million 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 S at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

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


MIDOCEAN CREDIT II: S&P Assigns Prelim B-(sf) Rating on F-R Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to the class
A-R, B-R, C-R, D-R, E-R, and F-R replacement notes from MidOcean
Credit CLO II, a collateralized loan obligation (CLO) originally
issued in 2014 that is managed by MidOcean Credit Fund Management
L.P. The replacement notes will be issued via a proposed
supplemental indenture.

The preliminary ratings reflect S&P's opinion that the credit
support available is commensurate with the associated rating
levels.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of Dec. 6,
2017. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

On the Dec. 20, 2017, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
issuance of the replacement notes are expected to redeem the
original notes. At that time, S&P anticipates withdrawing the
ratings on the original notes and assigning ratings to the
replacement notes. However, if the refinancing doesn't occur, S&P
may affirm the ratings on the original notes and withdraw its
preliminary ratings on the replacement notes.

The replacement notes are being issued via a proposed supplemental
indenture, which, in addition to outlining the terms of the
replacement notes, will also:

-- Issue replacement class A-R, B-R, C-R, and D-R notes at a lower
spread than the original notes.

-- Issue the class E-R and F-R notes at a higher spread than the
original notes.

-- Extend the stated maturity five years, the reinvestment period
by four years, and the non-call period by four years.

-- Amend the overcollateralization ratio thresholds, minimum
weighted average spread covenant, and minimum weighted average
recovery rate covenant.

S&P said, "Our review of this transaction included a cash flow
analysis, based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in
the 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 or ultimate principal,
or both, to each of the rated tranches.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and we will take further rating actions
as we deem necessary."

  PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED

  MidOcean Credit CLO II/MidOcean Credit CLO LLC
  Replacement class         Rating      Amount (mil. $)
  A-R                       AAA (sf)            240.000
  B-R                       AA (sf)              60.000
  C-R                       A (sf)               29.000
  D-R                       BBB- (sf)            23.000
  E-R                       BB- (sf)             15.000
  F-R                       B- (sf)               5.000
  Income notes              NR                   42.750

  NR--Not rated.


OCP CLO 2015-10: S&P Affirms B(sf) Rating on Class E Notes
----------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the new class A-1-R,
A-2a-R, A-2b-R, B-R, C-R, and D-R notes from OCP CLO 2015-10 Ltd.,
a U.S. collateralized loan obligation (CLO) transaction managed by
Onex Credit Partners LLC. S&P said, "We withdrew our ratings on the
original class A-1, A-2A, A-2B, B, C, and D notes from this
transaction after they were fully redeemed. We also affirmed our
rating on the class E note."

The new notes are being issued via a supplemental indenture. On the
Dec. 6, 2017, refinancing date, the proceeds from the new note
issuances were used to redeem the original notes as outlined in the
transaction document provisions. S&P said, "Therefore, we are
withdrawing the ratings on the original notes in line with their
full redemption, and assigning final ratings to the new notes. The
class E note is not affected by the changes in the supplemental
indenture. We affirmed our rating on the E note."

S&P said, "Our review of this transaction included a cash flow
analysis, based on the portfolio and transaction as reflected in
the 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 or ultimate principal,
or both, to each of the rated tranches.

"The assigned ratings reflect our opinion that the credit support
available is commensurate with the associated rating levels.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them. We will take rating actions as we deem
necessary."

  RATINGS ASSIGNED

  OCP CLO 2015-10 Ltd.
  New class            Rating         Amount (mil. $)
  A-1-R                AAA (sf)                315.00
  A-2a-R               AA (sf)                  38.00
  A-2b-R               AA (sf)                  27.00
  B-R                  A (sf)                   32.00
  C-R                  BBB (sf)                 25.00
  D-R                  BB (sf)                  23.00

  RATING AFFIRMED

  OCP CLO 2015-10 Ltd.
  Class                      Rating
  E                          B (sf)

  RATINGS WITHDRAWN

  OCP CLO 2015-10 Ltd.
                           Rating
  Original class       To              From
  A-1                  NR              AAA (sf)
  A-2A                 NR              AA (sf)
  A-2B                 NR              AA (sf)
  B                    NR              A (sf)
  C                    NR              BBB (sf)
  D                    NR              BB (sf)

  OUTSTANDING CLASS

  OCP CLO 2015-10 Ltd.
  Class                      Rating
  Subordinate notes          NR

  NR--Not rated.


SAXON ASSET 2007-4: Moody's Hikes Rating on Class A-2 Debt to B2
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the rating of two tranches
from Saxon Asset Securities Trust 2007-4.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Saxon Asset Securities Trust 2007-4

Cl. A-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Aug 15, 2016 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. A-2, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Aug 28, 2015 Upgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The actions reflect the recent performance of the underlying pools
and Moody's updated loss expectations on the pools. The upgrades
are primarily due to the total credit enhancement available to the
bonds and a reduction in serious delinquencies to approximately 22%
from approximately 27% over the last 12 months.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in January 2017.

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 4.1% in October 2017 from 4.8% in
October 2016. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of
4.5% to 5.5% for the 2017 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 2017. 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.


SLM STUDENT 2012-1: Fitch Corrects November 7 Release
-----------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings issued a correction of a release on SLM Student Loan
Trust 2012-1 published Nov. 7, 2017. It removes the reference to an
overcollateralization discrepancy, which was found to have been
previously rectified.

The revised release is as follows:

Fitch Ratings has downgraded SLM Student Loan Trust 2012-1 (SLM
2012-1) as follows:

-- Class A-3 to 'BBsf' from 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- Class B to 'BBsf' from 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable.

The downgrade is mainly driven by the extension of weighted average
remaining terms compared to last year. With 101% total parity, the
final payoff of the bonds will be closely tied with the last paying
loans of the trust. Extension of the terms further acerbate the
tail-end maturity risk, causing the class A-3 notes to miss their
legal final maturity date under Fitch's 'B' cases. This technical
default of class A notes would result in interest payments being
diverted away from class B, which would cause that note to default
as well. As the notes fail Fitch's 'Bsf' cash flow scenarios
marginally in maturity, meaning the model indicated that notes are
paid shortly after their maturity date without principal or
interest shortfall and they have a long time horizon to maturity,
Fitch leaves the notes at 'BBsf', as a slight change in the future
economic environment could result in full repayment of bonds by
maturity dates.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

U.S. Sovereign Risk: The trust collateral comprises 100% Federal
Family Education Loan Program (FFELP) loans, with guaranties
provided by eligible guarantors and reinsurance provided by the
U.S. Department of Education (ED) for at least 97% of principal and
accrued interest. The U.S. sovereign rating is currently
'AAA'/Outlook Stable.

Collateral Performance: Fitch assumes a base case default rate of
20.75% and a 62.25% default rate under the 'AAA' credit stress
scenario. The base case default assumption of 20.75% implies a
constant default rate of 4.0% (assuming a weighted average life of
5.2 years) consistent with a sustainable constant default rate
utilized in the maturity stresses. Fitch applies the standard
default timing curve in its credit stress cash flow analysis. The
claim reject rate is assumed to be 0.5% in the base case and 3.0%
in the 'AAA' case. The TTM levels of deferment, forbearance,
income-based repayment (prior to adjustment) and constant
prepayment rate (voluntary and involuntary) are 9.7%, 15.8%, 18.5%,
and 12.5%, respectively, and are used as the starting point in cash
flow modelling. Subsequent declines or increases are modelled as
per criteria. The borrower benefit is assumed to be approximately
0.04%, based on information provided by the sponsor.

Basis and Interest Rate Risk: Basis risk for this transaction
arises from any rate and reset frequency mismatch between interest
rate indices for SAP and the securities. As of October 2017, all of
the trust student loans are indexed to one-month LIBOR and notes
are indexed to three-month LIBOR. Fitch applies its standard basis
and interest rate stresses to this transaction as per criteria.

Payment Structure: Credit enhancement (CE) is provided by excess
spread and, for the class A notes, subordination. As of September
2017, Fitch calculated senior parity ratio (including the reserve)
was 108.2% (7.6% CE) and total reported parity was 101.0% (1.0%
CE), respectively. Liquidity support is provided by a reserve sized
at the greater of 0.25% of the pool balance or $764,728, currently
equal to $875,946.65. The trust will continue to release cash as
long as the specified overcollateralization amount of the greater
of 1.00% of adjusted pool balance or $2,000,000 is maintained.

Maturity Risk: Fitch's student loan ABS cash flow model indicates
that the class A-3 notes do not pay off before their maturity date
in the 'BB' stress cases of Fitch's modelling scenarios. If the
breach of the class A-3 maturity date triggers an event of default,
interest payments will be diverted away from the class B notes,
causing them to fail the 'BB' stress cases as well.
Operational Capabilities: Day-to-day servicing is provided by
Navient Solutions, LLC. (formerly known as Sallie Mae, Inc.). Fitch
believes Navient to be an acceptable servicer, due to its extensive
track record as the largest servicer of FFELP loans.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

'AAAsf' rated tranches of most FFELP securitizations will likely
move in tandem with the U.S. sovereign rating, given the strong
linkage to the U.S. sovereign by nature of the reinsurance and SAP
provided by ED. Sovereign risks are not addressed in Fitch's
sensitivity analysis.

Fitch conducted a CE sensitivity analysis by stressing both the
related lifetime default rate and basis spread assumptions. In
addition, Fitch conducted a maturity sensitivity analysis by
running different assumptions for the IBR usage and prepayment
rate. The results below should only be considered as one potential
model-implied outcome, as the transaction is exposed to multiple
risk factors that are all dynamic variables.

Credit Stress Rating Sensitivity
-- Default increase 25%: class A 'CCCsf', class B 'CCCsf';
-- Default increase 50%: class A 'CCCsf', class B 'CCCsf';
-- Basis Spread increase 0.25%: class A 'CCCsf', class B 'CCCsf';
-- Basis Spread increase 0.5%: class A 'CCCsf', class B 'CCCsf'.

Maturity Stress Rating Sensitivity
-- CPR decrease 50%: class A 'CCCsf', class B 'CCCsf';
-- CPR increase 100%: class A 'AAAsf', class B 'AAAsf'';
-- IBR Usage decrease 50%: class A 'Bsf', class B 'BBsf';
-- IBR Usage increase 100%: class A 'CCCsf', class B 'CCCsf'.

It is important to note that the stresses are intended to provide
an indication of the rating sensitivity of the notes to unexpected
deterioration in trust performance. Rating sensitivity should not
be used as an indicator of future rating performance.


SOVEREIGN COMMERCIAL 2007-C1: Fitch Affirms CCC Rating on E Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings upgrades one class and affirms remaining classes of
Sovereign Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust commercial mortgage
pass-through certificates series 2007-C1.  

KEY RATING DRIVERS

High Credit Enhancement to Class D: Class D has high credit
enhancement due to loan payoffs and amortization.

As of the November 2017 distribution date, the transaction has paid
down 98% since issuance, to $20.1 million from $1.0 billion.
Interest shortfalls total $1 million and impact classes F through
N.

High Percentage of Fitch Loans of Concern and Lack of Reporting:
Although class E benefits from high credit enhancement, there are a
high percentage of Fitch loans of concern, including two loans in
special servicing (61% of the pool) and most of the remaining loans
without recently reported financial or occupancy information.
Although many of the properties are located in stronger markets,
Fitch made conservative performance assumptions given the lack of
reporting.

Concentrated Pool: The pool is highly concentrated with only 15
loans remaining. Due to the concentrated nature of the pool, Fitch
performed a sensitivity analysis which grouped the remaining loans
based on loan structural features, collateral quality and
performance which ranked them by their perceived likelihood of
repayment. This includes fully amortizing loans, balloon loans, and
Fitch loans of concern including the two specially serviced loans.
The ratings reflect this sensitivity analysis.

Largest Loan is Specially Serviced: The largest asset is 6805
Perimeter Drive (52.4%), a real estate owned (REO) office property
located in Dublin (Columbus), OH. The property transferred to
special servicing due to vacancy after the single tenant left the
property in March 2016. The third largest loan in the pool (8.6%)
is the second specially serviced loan and is collateralized by a
multifamily property in Brooklyn, NY. The loan transferred to
special servicing due to maturity default and the special servicer
completed required environmental remediation after the borrower
filed for bankruptcy. The special servicer is working to sell the
property.

Maturity Schedule: Of the non-specially serviced loans, 28% mature
in 2018; 5.7% mature in 2019 and 4.3% mature in 2020. The second
largest specially serviced loan has a maturity date in December
2017. The largest former loan is REO.

Non-tradition Loan Structures: The loans securitized in this
transaction do not have characteristics consistent with typical
CMBS loans. The loans in this trust lack up-front or ongoing
escrows, special purpose entity (SPE) provisions, and standard
nonrecourse carveouts. The ratings take this weaker structure into
account.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Stable Outlook on class D reflects that no further rating
changes are expected. Downgrades to the distressed classes are
possible if expected losses increase and/or additional loans
transfer to special servicing. Future upgrades are not likely given
the concentrated nature of the pool and underlying collateral
quality.

Fitch has upgraded the following class:

-- $691,345 class D to 'BBBsf' from 'BBsf; Outlook Stable.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

-- $10.1 million class E at 'CCCsf'; RE 100%
-- $7.6 million class F at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $1.7 million 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, A1-A, A-2, A-J, B and C certificates have paid
in full. Fitch does not rate the class N certificates. Fitch
previously withdrew the rating on the interest-only class X
certificates.


SPRITE LTD 2017-1: S&P Assigns 'BB' Rating on Class C Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Sprite 2017-1
Ltd./Sprite 2017-1 US LLC's $585 million fixed-rate series A, B,
and C notes.

The note issuance is an asset-backed securities (ABS) transaction
backed by the 21 aircraft and the related leases, and shares or
beneficial interests in entities that directly and indirectly
receive aircraft portfolio lease rental and residual cash flows,
among others.

The ratings reflect:

-- The likelihood of timely interest on Sprite 2017-1's series A
notes (excluding step-up interest) on each payment date, the timely
interest on the series B notes (excluding step-up interest) when
the series A notes are no longer outstanding on each payment date,
and the ultimate interest and principal payment on the A, B, and C
notes on or prior to the legal final maturity at the respective
rating stress.

-- The 66.07% loan-to-value (LTV) ratio (based on S&P Global
Ratings' adjusted lower of the mean and median [LMM] of the
half-life base value and the half-life market value on the A notes;
the 78.79% LTV on the B notes; and the 84.57% LTV on the C notes.

-- The portfolio comprises 18 narrow-body passenger planes (eight
A320 family and 10 B737-800s), and three wide-body passenger planes
(one A330-300 and two B777-300ERs). The 21 assets have a weighted
average age of approximately 8.9 years and a remaining average
lease term of approximately 3.8 years. Of the 21 assets, 0.0% by
value is out-of-production.

-- Many of the lessees (68% by LMM) are in emerging markets, where
the commercial aviation market is growing.

-- The initial weighted average lease term is 3.8 years, which is
similar to many other rated aircraft ABS transactions.

-- The A and B notes follow a 13-year amortization profile for the
first seven years and a four-year amortization profile thereafter,
and the C notes follow a seven-year amortization profile.

-- If a rapid or early amortization event has occurred and is
continuing, the A, B, and C notes will be paid up to their full
outstanding principal balances.

-- The end-of-lease payment will be paid to the A, B, and C notes
according to a percentage equal to each then-current LTV ratio.

-- There is a revolving credit facility, which is sized as nine
months' interest on the series A and B notes.

-- The maintenance analysis provided by Alton Aviation Consultancy
LLC (Alton) at closing. After closing, World Star will perform the
maintenance analysis, which will be confirmed for reasonableness
and achievability by Alton.

-- The maintenance reserve account, which is required to keep a
balance to meet the higher of $1 million and the sum of the
forward-looking maintenance expenses. The excess maintenance over
the required maintenance amount will be transferred to the payment
waterfall.

-- The senior indemnification (capped at $10 million) is modelled
to occur in the first 12 months.

-- The junior indemnification (uncapped) is subordinated to the
rated series' principal payment.

-- The servicer's in-house aircraft assets and aviation finance
team's experience in managing mid- to late-life aircraft assets.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

  Sprite 2017-1 Ltd./Sprite 2017-1 US LLC

  Series      Rating          Amount
                             (mil. $)
  A           A (sf)             457
  B           BBB (sf)            88
  C           BB (sf)             40


STACR 2015-DNA2: Moody's Hikes Class MA Notes Rating to Ba1
-----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of eight
tranches from one Agency Risk Transfer transaction - Structured
Agency Credit Risk (STACR) Debt Notes, Series 2015-DNA2 issued in
2015. The notes are direct, unsecured obligations of Freddie Mac
and are not guaranteed by nor are they obligations of the United
States Government.

The complete rating actions are:

Issuer: Structured Agency Credit Risk (STACR) Debt Notes, Series
2015-DNA2

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2016 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2I, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2016 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2F, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2016 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2016 Upgraded
to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-3F, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2016
Upgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-3I, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2016
Upgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-12, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2016 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. MA, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2016 Upgraded to
Ba1 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating upgrades are primarily due to an increase in credit
enhancement available to the bonds and a decrease in Moody's
projected pool losses. The actions reflect the recent strong
performance of the underlying pools with minimal serious
delinquencies till date. Moreover, high voluntary prepayment rates
since issuance have contributed to large increases in percentage
credit enhancement levels for the upgraded bonds.

Structured Agency Credit Risk (STACR) 2015-DNA2 is a transaction
that provides credit protection against the performance of a
"reference pool" of mortgages guaranteed by Freddie. Unlike a
typical RMBS transaction, note holders are not entitled to receive
any cash from the mortgage loans in the reference pools. Instead,
the timing and amount of principal and interest that Freddie Mac is
obligated to pay on the Notes is linked to the performance of the
mortgage loans in the reference pool. Principal payments to the
notes relate only to actual principal received from the reference
pool with pro-rata payments between senior and subordinate bonds,
provided some performance triggers are met, and sequential among
subordinate bonds.

The bonds have benefited from sustained prepayment rates and better
than expected performance. The October 2017 remittance data shows a
three month average conditional prepayment rate (CPR) of 13.9%. The
percentage of loans that are 60-plus days delinquent has been very
low, at about 20 bps of the original balance as of the October 2017
remittance report. Additionally, net losses are approximately
0.0027% of the original pool balance. Class M-2, as the senior-most
subordinate class following the payment in full of Class M-1, also
benefits from the sequential allocation of payments among the
subordinate bonds. As a result, the credit enhancement available to
Class M-2 increased to 4.07% in October 2017 from 2.50% at issuance
and credit enhancement available to Class M-3 has increased to
2.44% in October 2017 from 1.50% at issuance.

Our updated loss expectations on the pool incorporate, amongst
other factors, Moody's assessment of the representations and
warranties frameworks of the transaction, the due diligence
findings of the third party review received at the time of
issuance, and the strength of the transaction's originators and
servicers.

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

Additionally, the methodology used in rating Structured Agency
Credit Risk (STACR) Debt Notes, Series 2015-DNA2 Cl. M-2I and Cl.
M-3I was "Moody's Approach to Rating Structured Finance
Interest-Only (IO) Securities" published in June 2017.

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.

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.


STEWART PARK: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba3 Rating to Cl. E-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned the following provisional
ratings to the following notes (the "Refinancing Notes") to be
issued by Stewart Park CLO, Ltd. (the "Issuer"):

US$7,500,000 Class X Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2030
(the "Class X Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$454,125,000 Class A-1-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (the "Class A-1-R Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$47,000,000 Class A-2-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (the "Class A-2-R Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$54,000,000 Class B-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2030
(the "Class B-R Notes"), Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

US$57,250,000 Class C-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (the "Class C-R Notes"), Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

US$44,500,000 Class D-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (the "Class D-R Notes"), Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

US$33,000,000 Class E-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (the "Class E-R Notes"), Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

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.

The Issuer is a managed cash flow collateralized loan obligation
(CLO). The issued notes are collateralized primarily by a portfolio
of senior secured, broadly syndicated corporate loans.

GSO / Blackstone Debt Funds Management LLC (the "Manager") will
manage the CLO. It will direct the selection, acquisition, and
disposition of collateral on behalf of the Issuer.

RATINGS RATIONALE

Moody's provisional ratings on the 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.

The Issuer intends to issue the Refinancing Notes on January 16,
2018 (the " Refinancing Date") in connection with the refinancing
of all of the secured notes (the "Refinanced Original Notes")
previously issued on May 7, 2015 (the "Original Closing Date"). On
the Refinancing Date, the Issuer will use proceeds from the
issuance of the Refinancing Notes, to redeem in full the Refinanced
Original Notes.

In addition to the issuance of the Refinancing Notes and additional
subordinated notes, a variety of other changes to transaction
features will occur in connection with the refinancing. These
include: extensions of the reinvestment period, non-call period and
the notes' stated maturity; changes to certain collateral quality
tests; changes to the overcollateralization test levels; and
changes to comply with the Volcker Rule.

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 August 2017.

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and weighted
average recovery rate, are based on its published methodology and
could differ from the trustee's reported numbers. For modeling
purposes, Moody's used the following base-case assumptions:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: $746,616,025

Defaulted par: $6,767,951

Diversity Score: 75

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2932

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.45%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.5%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 9 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
August 2017.

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

The performance of the Refinancing Notes is subject to uncertainty.
The performance of the Refinancing 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 Refinancing 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 Refinancing 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 Refinancing
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 2932 to 3372)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A-1-R Notes: 0

Class A-2-R Notes: -1

Class B-R Notes: -1

Class C-R Notes: -2

Class D-R Notes: -1

Class E-R Notes: 0

Percentage Change in WARF - increase of 30% (from 2932 to 3812)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A-1-R Notes: -1

Class A-2-R Notes: -3

Class B-R Notes: -3

Class C-R Notes: -4

Class D-R Notes: -2

Class E-R Notes: -1


TCF AUTO 2015-2: Moody's Affirms Ba2 Rating on Class D Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded seven securities and
affirmed the ratings of fourteen additional securities issued from
five TCF Auto Receivables Owner Trust transactions between 2014 and
2016. The transactions are sponsored and serviced by Gateway One
Lending and Finance LLC.

Complete rating actions are as follow:

Issuer: TCF Auto Receivables Owner Trust 2014-1

Cl. A-4 notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 30, 2017
Affirmed Aaa (sf)

Cl. B notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 30, 2017 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. C notes, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on May 30, 2017
Upgraded to Aa3 (sf)

Issuer: TCF Auto Receivables Owner Trust 2015-1

Class A-3 Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 30, 2017
Affirmed Aaa (sf)

Class A-4 Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 30, 2017
Affirmed Aaa (sf)

Class B Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 30, 2017
Affirmed Aaa (sf)

Class C Notes, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 30, 2017
Upgraded to Aa1 (sf)

Class D Notes, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on May 30, 2017
Downgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Issuer: TCF Auto Receivables Owner Trust 2015-2

Class A-3 Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 30, 2017
Affirmed Aaa (sf)

Class A-4 Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 30, 2017
Affirmed Aaa (sf)

Class B Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 30, 2017
Upgraded to Aaa (sf)

Class C Notes, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on May 30, 2017
Upgraded to A1 (sf)

Class D Notes, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on May 30, 2017
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Issuer: TCF Auto Receivables Owner Trust 2016-1

Class A-2 Asset-Backed Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May
30, 2017 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

Class A-3 Asset-Backed Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May
30, 2017 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

Class A-4 Asset-Backed Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May
30, 2017 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

Class B Asset-Backed Notes, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on May
30, 2017 Upgraded to Aa3 (sf)

Class C Asset-Backed Notes, Affirmed Baa2 (sf); previously on May
30, 2017 Downgraded to Baa2 (sf)

Issuer: TCF Auto Receivables Owner Trust 2016-PT1

Class A Asset-Backed Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May
30, 2017 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

Class B Asset-Backed Notes, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on May
30, 2017 Affirmed Aa3 (sf)

Class C Asset-Backed Notes, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on May
30, 2017 Downgraded to Baa1 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The upgrades and rating affirmations resulted from the buildup of
credit enhancement owing to the sequential pay structures in
addition to non-declining overcollateralization and reserve
accounts that offset the increase in expected lifetime CNLs for the
transactions.

The lifetime cumulative net loss (CNL) expectation was increased to
5.50% from 5.00% for the 2015-2 transaction as a result of
continued weaker than expected performance of the underlying loans.
The CNL expectations remained unchanged for the remaining four
transactions issued between 2014 and 2016 and range between 3.50%
and 5.00%. All outstanding transactions are at their respective OC
floors.

On Monday, November 27, 2017, TCF Financial Corporation issued a
press release regarding their decision to discontinue all indirect
auto loan originations, effective December 1, 2017. TCF will
continue to service auto loans in remaining securitizations.

In December 2016, Moody's learned that the servicer does not
include additional servicer expenses in its reporting of net loss,
which would reduce liquidation proceeds for defaulted receivables
and therefore increase losses. These expenses were included in
analysis when determining the updated CNLs for all transactions.

Below are key performance metrics (as of the November 2017
distribution date) and credit assumptions for the affected
transactions. Credit assumptions include Moody's expected lifetime
CNL, expressed as a percentage of the original pool balance, as
well as Moody's Aaa levels expressed as a percentage of the current
pool balance. The Aaa level is the level of credit enhancement that
would be consistent with a Aaa (sf) rating for the given asset
pool. Performance metrics include the pool factor, which is the
ratio of the current collateral balance to the original collateral
balance at closing; total credit enhancement, which typically
consists of subordination, overcollateralization, reserve fund; and
Excess Spread per annum.

Issuer: TCF Auto Receivables Owner Trust 2014-1

Lifetime CNL expectation -- 3.50%; prior expectation (May 2017) --
3.50%

Aaa (sf) level - 12.00%

Pool factor -- 14.49%

Total Hard credit enhancement - Class A 68.70%, Class B 36.25%,
Class C 8.63%

Excess Spread per annum -- Approximately 3.6%

Issuer: TCF Auto Receivables Owner Trust 2015-1

Lifetime CNL expectation -- 5.00%; prior expectation (May 2017) --
5.00%

Aaa (sf) level - 14.00%

Pool factor -- 31.86%

Total Hard credit enhancement - Class A 36.88%, Class B 22.76%,
Class C 13.34%, Class D 3.92%

Excess Spread per annum -- Approximately 4.9%

Issuer: TCF Auto Receivables Owner Trust 2015-2

Lifetime CNL expectation -- 5.50%; prior expectation (May 2017) --
5.00%

Aaa (sf) level - 15.00%

Pool factor -- 41.31%

Total Hard credit enhancement - Class A 29.65%, Class B 19.13%,
Class C 11.14%, Class D 3.27%

Excess Spread per annum -- Approximately 4.5%

Issuer: TCF Auto Receivables Owner Trust 2016-1

Lifetime CNL expectation -- 5.00%; prior expectation (May 2017) --
5.00%

Aaa (sf) level - 16.50%

Pool factor -- 63.23%

Total Hard credit enhancement - Class A 17.80%, Class B 12.50%,
Class C 7.20%, Class D 1.98%

Excess Spread per annum -- Approximately 4.8%

Issuer: TCF Auto Receivables Owner Trust 2016-PT1

Lifetime CNL expectation -- 5.00%; prior expectation (May 2017) --
5.00%

Aaa (sf) level - 16.50%

Pool factor -- 70.72%

Total Hard credit enhancement - Class A 16.83%, Class B 12.09%,
Class C 8.06%, Class D 2.69%

Excess Spread per annum -- Approximately 4.8%

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Auto Loan- and Lease-Backed ABS" published in
October 2016.

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

Up

Levels of credit protection that are greater than necessary to
protect investors against current expectations of loss could lead
to an upgrade of the rating. Moody's current expectations of loss
may be better than its original expectations because of lower
frequency of default by the underlying obligors or appreciation in
the value of the vehicles that secure the obligor's promise of
payment. The US job market and the market for used vehicle are
primary drivers of performance. Other reasons for better
performance than Moody's expected include changes in servicing
practices to maximize collections on the loans or refinancing
opportunities that result in a prepayment of the loan.

Down

Levels of credit protection that are insufficient to protect
investors against current expectations of loss could lead to a
downgrade of the ratings. Moody's current expectations of loss may
be worse than its original expectations because of higher frequency
of default by the underlying obligors of the loans or a
deterioration in the value of the vehicles that secure the
obligor's promise of payment. The US job market and the market for
used vehicle are primary drivers of performance. Other reasons for
worse performance than Moody's expected include poor servicing,
error on the part of transaction parties, lack of transactional
governance and fraud.


TIAA CHURCHILL II: S&P Assigns B- Rating on Class F Notes
---------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to TIAA Churchill Middle
Market CLO II Ltd./TIAA Churchill Middle Market CLO II LLC's
$307.30 million floating-rate notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation transaction
backed primarily by middle-market speculative-grade senior-secured
term loans that are governed by collateral quality tests.

The ratings reflect:

-- The diversified collateral pool, which consists primarily of
middle-market 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

  TIAA Churchill Middle Market CLO II Ltd./TIAA Churchill Middle  
  Market CLO II LLC

  Class                Rating          Amount
                                     (mil. $)
  A                    AAA (sf)       189.100
  B                    AA (sf)         33.500
  C (deferrable)       A (sf)          27.900
  D (deferrable)       BBB- (sf)       21.900
  E (deferrable)       BB- (sf)        19.050
  F (deferrable)       B- (sf)         15.850
  Subordinated notes   NR              32.965

  NR--Not rated.


US CAPITAL IV: Moody's Raises Class A-1 Notes Rating to Ba3
-----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the rating on the following
notes issued by U.S. Capital Funding IV, LTD.:

US$200,000,000 Class A-1 Notes (current balance of $144,110,622),
Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on May 19, 2010 Downgraded to B2
(sf)

US Capital Funding IV, LTD., issued in December 2005, is a
collateralized debt obligation (CDO) backed mainly by a portfolio
of bank trust preferred securities (TruPS).

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating action is primarily a result of the deleveraging of the
Class A-1 notes and an increase in the transaction's Class A
over-collateralization (OC) ratios since December 2016.

The Class A-1 notes have paid down by approximately 5.5% or $8.4
million since December 2016, using principal proceeds from the
redemption of the underlying assets and the diversion of excess
interest proceeds. Based on Moody's calculations, the Class A-1 OC
ratio has improved to 118.59%, from December 2016 levels of
112.15%. The Class A-1 notes will continue to benefit from the
diversion of excess interest.

The action also reflects the consideration that an Event of Default
(EoD) is continuing for the transaction. On September 9, 2009, the
transaction declared an EoD because of missed interest payment on
the Class B-1 and Class B-2 Notes, according to Section 5.1(a) of
the indenture. Moody's notes that the majority of noteholders has
not elected to accelerate cash flows at this time.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Approach
to Rating TruPS CDOs," published in October 2016.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Rating:

This transaction is subject to a number of factors and
circumstances that could lead to either an upgrade or downgrade of
the rating, as described below:

1) Macroeconomic uncertainty: TruPS CDOs performance could be
negatively affected by uncertainty about credit conditions in the
general economy. Moody's has a stable outlook on the US banking
sector.

2) Portfolio credit risk: Credit performance of the assets
collateralizing the transaction that is better than Moody's current
expectations could have a positive impact on the transaction's
performance. Conversely, asset credit performance weaker than
Moody's current expectations could have adverse consequences on the
transaction's performance.

3) Deleveraging: One source of uncertainty in this transaction is
whether deleveraging from unscheduled principal proceeds and excess
interest proceeds will continue and at what pace. Note repayments
that are faster than Moody's current expectations could have a
positive impact on the notes' ratings, beginning with the notes
with the highest payment priority.

4) Exposure to non-publicly rated assets: The deal contains a large
number of securities whose default probability Moody's assesses
through credit scores derived using RiskCalc(TM) or credit
estimates. Because these are not public ratings, they are subject
to additional uncertainties.

In addition to the base case analysis, Moody's also conducted
sensitivity analyses to test the impact of a number of default
probabilities on the rated notes relative to the base case modeling
results, which may be different from the current public ratings of
the notes. Below is a summary of the impact of different default
probabilities (expressed in terms of WARF) on all of the rated
notes (by the difference in the number of notches versus the
current model output, for which a positive difference corresponds
to lower expected loss):

Assuming a two-notch upgrade to assets with below-investment grade
ratings or rating estimates (WARF of 512)

Class A-1: +1

Class A-2: +2

Class B-1: 0

Class B-2: 0

Series A Combination Certificates: 0

Assuming a two-notch downgrade to assets with below-investment
grade ratings or rating estimates (WARF of 1146)

Class A-1: 0

Class A-2: -2

Class B-1: 0

Class B-2: 0

Series A Combination Certificates: 0

Loss and Cash Flow Analysis:

Moody's applied a Monte Carlo simulation framework in Moody's
CDROM(TM) to model the loss distribution for TruPS CDOs. The
simulated defaults and recoveries for each of the Monte Carlo
scenarios defined the reference pool's loss distribution. Moody's
then used the loss distribution as an input in its CDOEdge(TM) cash
flow model. CDROM(TM) is available on www.moodys.com under Products
and Solutions -- Analytical models, upon receipt of a signed free
license agreement.

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, and weighted average recovery rate,
are based on its methodology and could differ from the trustee's
reported numbers. In its base case, Moody's analyzed the underlying
collateral pool as having a performing par of $170.9 million,
defaulted and deferring par of $96.1 million, a weighted average
default probability of 8.36% (implying a WARF of 750), and a
weighted average recovery rate upon default of 10%.

In addition to the quantitative factors Moody's explicitly models,
qualitative factors are part of rating committee considerations.
Moody's considers the structural protections in the transaction,
the risk of an event of default, recent deal performance under
current market conditions, the legal environment and specific
documentation features. All information available to rating
committees, including macroeconomic forecasts, inputs from other
Moody's analytical groups, market factors, and judgments regarding
the nature and severity of credit stress on the transactions, can
influence the final rating decision.

The portfolio of this CDO contains mainly TruPS issued by small to
medium sized U.S. community banks that Moody's does not rate
publicly. To evaluate the credit quality of bank TruPS that do not
have public ratings, Moody's uses RiskCalc(TM), an econometric
model developed by Moody's Analytics, to derive credit scores.
Moody's evaluation of the credit risk of most of the bank obligors
in the pool relies on the latest FDIC financial data.


VENTURE CLO XXX: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Class E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to six classes of
notes issued by Venture XXX CLO, Limited.

Moody's rating action is:

US$434,000,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class A-1 Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$35,000,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2031
(the "Class A-2 Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$62,000,000 Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2031
(the "Class B Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$43,500,000 Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class C Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned A2
(sf)

US$38,000,000 Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class D Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned
Baa3 (sf)

US$31,500,000 Class E Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2031 (the "Class E Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3
(sf)

The Class A-1 Notes, the Class A-2 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 XXX is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated senior secured
corporate loans. At least 90.0% of the portfolio must consist of
senior secured loans and eligible investments, and up to 10.0% of
the portfolio may consist of second-lien loans and unsecured loans.
The portfolio is over 94% ramped as of the closing date.

MJX Venture Management II 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 one class of
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 August 2017.

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

Par amount: $700,000,000

Diversity Score: 75

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2769

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.60%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 6.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 45.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 9.1 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
August 2017.

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 2769 to 3184)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: 0

Class A-2 Notes: -1

Class B Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -3

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: 0

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2769 to 3600)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: -1

Class A-2 Notes: -3

Class B Notes: -4

Class C Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1


WACHOVIA BANK 2006-C29: Moody's Hikes Class B Certs Rating to B2
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on two classes
and affirmed the ratings on three classes in Wachovia Bank
Commercial Mortgage Trust Pass-Through Certificates, Series
2006-C29 as follows:

Cl. B, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Dec 9, 2016 Affirmed Caa1
(sf)

Cl. C, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Dec 9, 2016 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Dec 9, 2016 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Dec 9, 2016 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. IO, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Jun 9, 2017 Downgraded to C
(sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating 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 79% since Moody's last
review.

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

The rating on one IO class was affirmed based on the credit quality
of the referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 37.0% of the
current pooled balance, compared to 43.1% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 8.4% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 10.9% 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 July 2017 and
"Moody's Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single Asset/Single
Borrower CMBS" published in July 2017.

Additionally, the methodology used in rating Cl. IO was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Structured Finance Interest-Only (IO)
Securities" published in June 2017.

Moody's analysis incorporated a loss and recovery approach in
rating the P&I classes in this deal since 63% of the pool is in
special servicing. In this approach, Moody's determines a
probability of default for each specially serviced and troubled
loan that it expects will generate a loss and estimates a loss
given default based on a review of broker's opinions of value (if
available), other information from the special servicer, available
market data and Moody's internal data. The loss given default for
each loan also takes into consideration repayment of servicer
advances to date, estimated future advances and closing costs.
Translating the probability of default and loss given default into
an expected loss estimate, Moody's then applies the aggregate loss
from specially serviced to the most junior class(es) and the
recovery as a pay down of principal to the most senior class(es).

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the November 17, 2017 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 96% to $125 million
from $3.37 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 12 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 23% of the pool. One loan, constituting 3% of the pool, has
defeased and is secured by US government securities.

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 seven, compared to a Herf of 13 at Moody's last
review.

Thirty loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in or
contributing to an aggregate realized loss of $237.6 million (for
an average loss severity of 46.6%). Nine loans, constituting 65% of
the pool, are currently in special servicing. The largest specially
serviced loan is the Boulder Crossing Shopping Center Loan ($21.0
million -- 17.3% of the pool), which is secured by a grocery
anchored retail center located in Las Vegas, Nevada, about seven
miles east of the Las Vegas strip. The property was 80% leased as
of January 2017. The loan became REO in October 2017.

The second largest specially serviced loan is the Chestnut Run Loan
($16.6 million -- 13.6% of the pool), which is secured by an office
property located in Wilmington, Delaware about five miles from the
city center. The property was constructed in 2002. The loan
transferred to speceial servicing in June 2013 and has been REO
since March 2017.

The third largest specially serviced loan is the PNC Bank Plaza
Loan ($10.2 million -- 8.4% of the pool), which is secured by a
high-rise office building located in downtown Lexington, Kentucky.
The largest tenant, BB&T, has a lease expiration through 2031. A
receivership order was entered in May 2017.

The remaining six specially serviced loans are secured by a mix of
property types. Moody's estimates an aggregate $43.4 million loss
for the specially serviced loans (55% expected loss on average).

Moody's received full year 2016 operating results for 100% of the
pool, and full or partial year 2017 operating results for 27% of
the pool (excluding specially serviced and defeased loans). Moody's
weighted average conduit LTV is 115%, compared to 118% 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 16% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.37X and 0.89X,
respectively, compared to 1.26X and 0.91X 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 two conduit loans represent 32% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Barry Woods Crossings Shopping Center Loan
($28.1 million -- 23.1% of the pool), which is secured by a movie
theater anchored retail center located in Kansas City, Missouri.
The property is located near a Wal-Mart, Target and other retail
centers in close proximity. The property was 100% leased as of June
2017, up from 93% leased as of August 2016. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 120% and 0.84X, respectively, compared to 121%
and 0.83X at the last review.

The second largest loan is the 100 Carillon Parkway Loan ($10.2
million -- 8.4% of the pool), which is secured by an office
property located in Saint Petersburg, Florida roughly 14 miles from
downtown Tampa, Florida. The property was 99% leased as of June
2017. The loan passed its ARD in November 2016 and the final
maturity date is in 2036. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 101%
and 1.04X, respectively, compared to 116% and 0.91X at the last
review.


WASHINGTON MUTUAL 2007-SL3: Moody's Hikes Cl. G Certs Rating to B2
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings on five classes
and affirmed the ratings on three classes in Washington Mutual
Commercial Mortgage Trust Pass-Through Certificates, Series
2007-SL3 as follows:

Cl. C, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 15, 2016 Upgraded to
A1 (sf)

Cl. D, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Dec 15, 2016 Affirmed
Baa2 (sf)

Cl. E, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Dec 15, 2016 Affirmed
Ba2 (sf)

Cl. F, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Dec 15, 2016 Affirmed B2
(sf)

Cl. G, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Dec 15, 2016 Affirmed B3
(sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Dec 15, 2016 Affirmed Caa2
(sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Dec 15, 2016 Affirmed Caa3
(sf)

Cl. K, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Dec 15, 2016 Affirmed C (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings on five P&I Classes (C, D, E, F & G) were upgraded due
to an increase in credit support resulting from loan paydowns and
amortization. The deal has paid down 60.9% since Moody's last
review and over 85% of the pool is fully amortizing.

The ratings three P&I Classes (H, J & K) were affirmed due to
Moody's expected loss.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 7.3% of the
current balance, compared to 5.4% at Moody's last review. Moody's
base expected loss plus realized losses is now 4.2% of the original
pooled balance, compared to 4.6% at securitization. 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 July 2017.


DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the November 24, 2017 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 92.7% to $93.9
million from $1.28 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 136 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 5% of the pool, with the top ten loans (excluding defeasance)
constituting 24.5% of the pool.

Thirty-seven loans, constituting 29.9% 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.

One hundred and seven loans have been liquidated from the pool,
resulting in an aggregate realized loss of $46.8 million (for an
average loss severity of 30.8%). Four loans, constituting 4% of the
pool, are currently in special servicing. Moody's estimates an
aggregate $1.5 million loss for the specially serviced loans (40%
expected loss on average).

Moody's has assumed a high default probability for twenty-seven
poorly performing loans, constituting 20.6% of the pool, and has
estimated an aggregate loss of $3.87 million (a 20% expected loss
based on a 50% probability default) from these troubled loans.

Moody's received full year 2017 operating results for 74.4% of the
pool. Moody's weighted average conduit LTV is 85.7%, compared to
85.6% at last review. Moody's conduit component excludes loans with
structured credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans, and
specially serviced and troubled loans. Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.5%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.76X and 1.31X,
respectively, compared to 1.47X and 1.32X 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.


WELLS FARGO 2016-C37: Fitch Affirms 'B-sf' Rating on Cl. G Certs
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings affirmed 18 classes of Wells Fargo Commercial
Mortgage Trust (WFCM) 2016-C37 commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates.  

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Stable Performance: The overall pool performance remains stable
from issuance. There are no delinquent or specially serviced loans.
As of the November 2017 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
balance has been reduced by 0.7% to $745.3 million, from $750.5
million at issuance.

Diverse by Loan Size: The largest 10 loans comprise 45.3% of the
pool, which is better than the 2016 average of 54.8% for other
Fitch-rated multiborrower deals. The largest loan in the pool is
Hilton Hawaiian Village at 7.0% of the pool.

Above-Average Amortization: The pool is scheduled to amortize by
12.2% of the initial pool balance prior to maturity, which is above
the 2016 conduit average of 10.2%. Six loans (25.8% of the pool)
are full-term, interest-only, and 18 loans (30.3%) are partial
interest-only. The remaining 39 loans (44.0% of the pool) are
amortizing balloon or ARD loans with initial terms of five to 10
years.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Rating Outlooks on all classes remain Stable. Fitch does not
foresee positive or negative ratings migration until a material
economic or asset-level event changes the transaction's overall
portfolio-level metrics.

Fitch has affirmed the following ratings:

-- $30.3 million class A-1 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $105.7 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $28.4 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $120 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $188.1 million class A-5 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $47.6 million class A-SB at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $58.2 million class A-S at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- Interest-only class X-A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- Interest-only class X-B at 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $38.5 million class B at 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $34.7 million class C at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- Interest-only class X-D at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- Interest-only class X-EF at 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- Interest-only class X-G at 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $37.5 million class D at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $10.3 million class E at 'BB+sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $7.5 million class F at 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $8.4 million class G at 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable.

Fitch does not rate the $7.5 million class H, $22.5 million class J
and the interest-only classes X-H and X-J.


WELLS FARGO 2017-C42: Fitch to Rate Class F Certificates 'B-sf'
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has issued a presale report on Wells Fargo Commercial
Mortgage Trust 2017-C42 commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates.

Fitch expects to rate the transaction and assign Rating Outlooks as
follows:

-- $13,377,000 class A-1 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $12,320,000 class A-2 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $27,697,000 class A-SB 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $205,000,000 class A-3 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $229,780,000 class A-4 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $7,125,000 class A-BP 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $488,174,000a class X-A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $7,125,000a class X-BP 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $166,750,000a class X-B 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $40,686,000 class A-S 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $39,801,000 class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $36,263,000 class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $40,685,000ab class X-D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $20,343,000ab class X-E 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $7,960,000ab class X-F 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $40,685,000b class D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $20,343,000b class E 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $7,960,000b class F 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable.

The following classes are not expected to be rated:

-- $26,534,190b class G.
-- $37,240,588.98bc class RR Interest.

(a) Notional amount and interest only.
(b) Privately placed and pursuant to Rule 144A.
(c) Vertical credit risk retention interest representing at least
5% of the estimated fair value of all classes of regular
certificates issued by the issuing entity as of the closing date.,

The expected ratings are based on information provided by the
issuer as of Dec. 6, 2017.

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership interest in the
trust, primary assets of which are 37 loans secured by 66
commercial properties having an aggregate principal balance of
$744,811,779 as of the cut-off date. The loans were contributed to
the trust by Barclays Bank PLC, Starwood Mortgage Funding II LLC,
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, and Rialto Mortgage
Finance, LLC.

Fitch reviewed a comprehensive sample of the transaction's
collateral, including site inspections on 85.3% of the properties
by balance, cash flow analysis of 93.5%, and asset summary reviews
on 100% of the pool.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Higher Fitch Leverage: The transaction has lower Fitch coverage and
higher Fitch leverage relative to other recent Fitch-rated
multiborrower transactions. The pool's Fitch debt service coverage
ratio (DSCR) of 1.20x is below the year-to-date (YTD) 2017 average
of 1.26x and in line with the 2016 average of 1.21x. The pool's
Fitch loan to value (LTV) of 107.8% is higher than the YTD 2017 and
2016 averages of 101.3% and 105.2%, respectively.

Above-Average Pool Concentration: The pool is more concentrated
relative to other recent Fitch-rated multiborrower transactions.
The top 10 loans total 58.7% of the pool, compared to the YTD 2017
average of 52.7% and the 2016 average of 54.8%. Additionally, the
loan concentration index (LCI) is 476, which also exceeds the YTD
2017 and 2016 averages of 394 and 422, respectively, for this
transaction.

Investment-Grade Credit Opinion Loan: The fifth largest loan,
Moffett Towers II - Building 2 (5.4% of the pool), has a credit
opinion of 'BBB-sf*' on a stand-alone basis. The loan has a Fitch
DSCR of 1.26x and Fitch LTV of 70.4%. Net of this loan, the pool's
Fitch DSCR and LTV are 1.20x and 109.9%, respectively.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

For this transaction, Fitch's net cash flow (NCF) was 17% 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 WFCM
2017-C42 certificates and found that the transaction displays
average sensitivities 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 'Asf' 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.


[*] Moody's Hikes $431.9MM of Subprime RMBS Issued 2000-2006
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded ratings of 36 tranches from
12 transactions backed by Subprime mortgage loans, issued by
multiple issuers.

Complete rating actions are:

Issuer: Ameriquest Mortgage Securities Inc., Series 2002-AR1

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Feb 10, 2016 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

Issuer: Asset Backed Securities Corporation Home Equity Loan Trust
2004-HE7

Cl. M2, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Feb 10, 2016 Upgraded to
B2 (sf)

Issuer: Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp. Series
2004-6

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Mar 15, 2011 Downgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Dec 29, 2016 Upgraded
to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Dec 29, 2016 Upgraded
to Ba2 (sf)

Issuer: CWABS, Inc. Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2004-6

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Dec 21, 2016 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Dec 21, 2016 Upgraded
to B2 (sf)

Cl. M-5, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Dec 21, 2016 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. M-6, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Dec 21, 2016
Confirmed at Ca (sf)

Cl. M-7, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Dec 21, 2016
Confirmed at Ca (sf)

Cl. 1-A-1, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Dec 21, 2016
Confirmed at A1 (sf)

Cl. 1-A-2, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Dec 21, 2016
Confirmed at Baa1 (sf)

Cl. 2-A-3, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Dec 21, 2016
Confirmed at Aa3 (sf)

Cl. 2-A-4, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Dec 21, 2016
Confirmed at Aa3 (sf)

Cl. 2-A-5, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Dec 21, 2016
Confirmed at Aa3 (sf)

Issuer: DLJ ABS Trust Series 2000-7

Cl. A-1, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Dec 21, 2016 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Underlying Rating: Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Dec 21,
2016 Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Financial Guarantor: MBIA Insurance Corporation (Affirmed at Caa1,
Outlook Developing on Dec 02, 2016)

Cl. A-3, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jan 19, 2016
Downgraded to B3 (sf)

Underlying Rating: Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2011
Downgraded to B3 (sf)

Financial Guarantor: MBIA Insurance Corporation (Affirmed at Caa1,
Outlook Developing on Dec 02, 2016)

Cl. A-4, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2011 Downgraded
to B3 (sf)

Class M-1, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2011
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2011 Downgraded
to C (sf)

Issuer: Fieldstone Mortgage Investment Trust, 2005-3

Cl. M1, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2016 Upgraded
to Ca (sf)

Issuer: First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust 2002-FF1

Cl. I-A-2, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Dec 29, 2016 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Dec 29, 2016 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp. 2005-FRE1

Cl. AI, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2016 Upgraded
to Aa2 (sf)

Cl. AII-F-3, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Feb 10, 2015
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. AII-F-4, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Feb 10, 2015
Upgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. AII-V-2, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2016
Upgraded to Aa3 (sf)

Cl. AII-V-3, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2016
Upgraded to A2 (sf)

Issuer: NovaStar Mortgage Funding Trust, Series 2004-2

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 21, 2016 Upgraded
to Aa1 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Mar 10, 2011 Downgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Mar 10, 2011 Downgraded
to B3 (sf)

Issuer: RAMP Series 2003-RS2 Trust

Cl. A-II, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Feb 10, 2016
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Issuer: RAMP Series 2004-RS4 Trust

Cl. M-II-1, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 29, 2016
Upgraded to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. M-II-2, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Mar 30, 2011
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: RAMP Series 2006-NC2 Trust

Cl. A-2, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Dec 29, 2016 Upgraded
to Aa3 (sf)

Cl. A-3, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Dec 29, 2016 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating actions reflect the recent performance of the underlying
pools and Moody's updated loss expectations on those pools. The
rating upgrades are primarily due to improvement of credit
enhancement available to the bonds.

The upgrades on classes M-II-1 and M-II-2 of RAMP Series 2004-RS4
are also due to the projected amount received for ResCap Settlement
in October 2017 and the strong shared overcollateralization for
both structures in the deal. The upgrades on classes M1 and M2 of
Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Securities Corp. Series 2004-6
also reflect a correction to Moody's prior analysis. In prior
rating actions, the interest recoupment mechanism for the mezzanine
bonds was incorrectly deemed to be weak, which resulted in their
ratings being capped. This error has now been corrected, and action
reflects the strong interest recoupment mechanism available to
these bonds.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in January 2017.

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

Ratings in the US RMBS sector remain exposed to macroeconomic
uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment rate. The
unemployment rate fell to 4.2% in September 2017 from 4.9% in
September 2016. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of
4.5% to 5.5% for the 2017 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 2017. 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 Takes Various Actions on 40 Classes From 15 US RMBS Deals
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings completed its review of 40 classes from 15 U.S.
residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) transactions issued
between 1998 and 2007. All of these transactions are backed by
subprime collateral. The review yielded five upgrades, four
downgrades, 24 affirmations, and seven discontinuances.

S&P said, "We raised the rating on class M-2 from First Franklin
Mortgage Loan Trust Series 2005-FF6 to 'AA (sf)' from 'BBB- (sf)'
because credit support increased to 63.4% in October 2017 from
47.8% in May 2015. Further, it is the highest priority class
remaining after class M-1 paid down in August 2017. We also raised
the rating on class M-3 to 'BB+ (sf)' from 'B- (sf)' because credit
support increased to 38.2% in October 2017 from 30.8% in May
2015."

Analytical Considerations

S&P said, "We incorporate various considerations into our decisions
to raise, lower, or affirm ratings when reviewing the indicative
ratings suggested by our projected cash flows. These considerations
are based on transaction-specific performance or structural
characteristics (or both) and their potential effects on certain
classes."

Some of these considerations include:

-- Collateral performance/delinquency trends;
-- Historical interest shortfalls;
-- Missed interest payments;
-- Priority of principal payments;
-- Erosion/increase in credit support;
-- Loan modifications; and
-- Available subordination and/or overcollateralization.

Rating Actions

The affirmations of ratings reflect S&P's opinion that its
projected credit support and collateral performance on these
classes has remained relatively consistent with its prior
projections.

A list of Affected Ratings can be viewed at:

          http://bit.ly/2BK9hn0


[*] S&P Takes Various Actions on 89 Classes From 21 US RMBS Deals
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings completed its review of 89 classes from 21 U.S.
residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) transactions issued
between 2004 and 2007. All of these transactions are backed by
negative amortization (Neg-Am) mortgage loan collateral. The review
yielded 10 downgrades, 50 affirmations, and 29 discontinuances.

Analytical Considerations

S&P incorporates various considerations into its decisions to lower
or affirm ratings when reviewing the indicative ratings suggested
by our projected cash flows. These considerations are based on
transaction-specific performance or structural characteristics (or
both) and their potential effects on certain classes. Some of these
considerations include:

-- Collateral performance/delinquency trends;
-- Priority of principal payments;
-- Proportion of reperforming loans in the pool;
-- Available subordination and/or overcollateralization; and/or
-- Principal write-downs

Rating Actions

S&P said, "The affirmations of ratings reflect our opinion that our
projected credit support and collateral performance on these
classes has remained relatively consistent with our prior
projections."

A list of Affected Ratings can be viewed at:

          http://bit.ly/2iiT6pl


                            *********

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.

TCR subscribers have free access to our on-line news archive.
Point your Web browser to http://TCRresources.bankrupt.com/and use
the e-mail address to which your TCR is delivered to login.

                            *********

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 2017.  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 ***