/raid1/www/Hosts/bankrupt/TCR_Public/180506.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, May 6, 2018, Vol. 22, No. 125

                            Headlines

ABFC 2004-HE1: Moody's Hikes Ratings of Class M-5 to 'Ca'
ACAPULCO FUNDING 2005-1: S&P Lowers Class A Notes Rating to D(sf)
AMMC CLO XI: S&P Assigns B (sf) Rating on $6.4MM Class F Notes
AMMC CLO XI: S&P Assigns B (sf) Rating on $6.4MM Class F Notes
ARES XLVII: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating on Class E Notes

ARROYO MORTGAGE 2018-1: S&P Gives Prelim. Bsf Rating on B-2 Notes
ASCENTIUM EQUIPMENT 2018-1: S&P Assigns BB(sf) Rating on Cl. E Note
ASSET BACKED 1999-LB1: Moody's Confirms Ba3 Rating to A-1F Bonds
ASSURANT CLO II: Moody's Rates Class E Notes 'Ba3'
BACM 2005-4: Fitch Hikes Class E Debt Rating to Bsf

BACM 2006-3: Fitch Affirms 'C' Rating on Class A-M Certificates
BACM 2007-2: Fitch Lowers Ratings on 3 Tranches to Csf
BALLYROCK CLO-2018-1: Moody's Rates Class E Notes 'B3'
BATTALION CLO XII: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Class E Notes
BEAN CREEK: Moody's Gives 'Ba3' Rating to Class E-R Notes

BEAR STEARNS 2006-PWR14: Fitch Hikes Cl. C Debt Rating From CCsf
BICENTENNIAL TRUST 2017-1: DBRS Confirms 'B' Rating on G Certs
BLACK DIAMOND 2016-1: S&P Assigns BB-(sf) Rating on Cl. DR Notes
BX TRUST 2018-BILT: Fitch to Rate Commercial Mortgage P-T Certs
BX TRUST 2018-GW: DBRS Gives Prov. B(low) Rating on Class G Certs

BX TRUST 2018-MCSF: Fitch Rates Class F Certs 'B-sf'
CARLYLE CLO 2014-2-R: S&P Assigns Prelim B- (sf) Rating on E Notes
CD 2017-CD4: Fitch Affirms Class X-F Certs at B-sf, Outlook Stable
CFCRE 2016-C4: Fitch Affirms Class E Certs at 'BB-sf'
CGRBS COMMERCIAL 2013-VNO5TH: S&P Hikes E Notes Rating to BB+(sf)

CHURCHILL MIDDLE: DBRS Assigns BB(low) Rating on Class D Notes
CIM TRUST 2018-J1: DBRS Assigns Prov. BB Rating on Class B-4 Certs
CITIGROUP MORTGAGE 2018-RP2: Moody's Rates Class B-2 Debt 'B3'
COBALT 2007-C2: Fitch Lowers $15.1MM Class E Debt Rating to 'Csf'
COMM 2006-C8: Fitch Hikes Class A-J Debt Rating to CCCsf

COMM 2012-CCRE2: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on Class G Debt
COMM 2012-CCRE4: S&P Lowers Class F Certs Rating to CCC- (sf)
COMM 2013-300P: Fitch Affirms BB+ Rating on Class E Debt
COMM 2014-CCRE18: DBRS Confirms 'B' Rating on Class X-C Certs
COMM 2014-CCRE18: Fitch Affirms BB- on Class E Certs

CSAIL 2018-CX11: DBRS Finalizes B(high) Rating on Class G-RR Certs
CSAIL 2018-CX11: Fitch Rates Class G-RR Certificates 'B-sf'
CSFB 2001-MH29: S&P Discountinues 'D' Ratings on M-2 & B-1 Certs.
CSFB 2002-MH3: S&P Lowers Class M-2 Certs Rating to D(sf)
CUMBERLAND PARK: Moody's Gives Ba3 Rating to Class E-R Notes

DB COMM 2010-C1: Fitch Affirms Non-Investment Rating on 2 Notes
DBJPM 2016-C1: DBRS Confirms 'Bsf' Rating of 2 Tranches
DLJ COMMERCIAL 1999-CG3: Fitch Affirms D Rating on Cl. B-5 Debt
DRYDEN 64 CLO: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating on Class E Notes
EQUITY ONE 2004-2: Moody's Hikes Class M-2 Notes Rating to Caa2

EXETER AUTOMOBILE 2018-2: S&P Assigns BB(sf) Rating on Cl. E Notes
FANNIE MAE 2018-C03: DBRS Gives Prov. B Rating on 19 Note Classes
FLAGSTAR MORTGAGE: DBRS Finalizes 'B' Rating on Class B-5 Certs
GALAXY CLO XXVII: Moody's Rates Class F Notes 'B3'
GFCM 2003-1: Fitch Affirms Class F Certs at 'Bsf', Outlook Stable

GMAC COMMERCIAL 1999-C2: Moody's Amends Class K Debt Rating to B3
GOLDMAN SACHS 2010-C2: Fitch Affirms Bsf Rating on Class F Certs
GOLUB CAPITAL 26: Moody's Gives Ba3 Rating to Class E-R Notes
GREENWICH CAPITAL 2007-GG9: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 5 Classes
GREYWOLF CLO VI: S&P Assigns BB- Rating on $18.5MM Class D Notes

GS MORTGAGE 2013-G1: S&P Affirms BB- (sf) Rating on Class DM Certs
GS MORTGAGE 2015-590M: S&P Affirms BB (sf) Rating on Class E Certs
GS MORTGAGE II 20016-CC1: Moody's Affirms 'Ca' Rating on A Certs
HAYFIN KINGSLAND IX: S&P Assigns B- (sf) Rating on Class F-R Notes
HAYFIN KINGSLAND IX: S&P Assigns Prelim B-(sf) Rating on F-R Notes

ICG US 2015-2: Moody's Assigns Ba3 to Class E-R Notes
ICON BRAND 2012-1: S&P Affirms BB(sf) Rating on Class A-1/2 Notes
IVY HILL XIV: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on $75MM Class D Notes
JP MORGAN 2002-CIBC4: Fitch Hikes Rating on Class D Certs to BBsf
JP MORGAN 2005-LDP2: Fitch Keeps Default Rating on $11MM Debt

JP MORGAN 2013-C13: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on Class F Certs
JP MORGAN 2018-4: DBRS Assigns Prov. 'B' Rating on Class B-5 Certs
JP MORGAN 2018-4: S&P Assigns B+ (sf) Rating on Class B-5 Certs
JP MORGAN 2018-PTC: S&P Assigns Prelim BB(sf) Rating on Cl. E Certs
JPMBB 2013-C14: Moody's Lowers Class G Certs Rating to B3

JPMBB 2015-C29: Loans on Watchlist over Tenant Bankruptcies
JPMCC 2004-C3: Moody's Hikes Class H Debt Rating to Caa2
LCM XVIII: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on $23.6MM Class E-R Notes
LCM XVIII: S&P Assigns Prelim BB-(sf) Rating on Class E-R Certs
LMRK ISSUER 2016-1: Fitch Affirms BB- Rating on Class B Notes

LOOMIS SAYLES II: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Class E-R Notes
LSTAR COMMERCIAL 2014-2: DBRS Confirms 'B' Rating on Class G Certs
MARANON LOAN 2018-1: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on E Notes
MESA 2002-3: Moody's Cuts Ratings on Class B-1 Notes to Caa1
MILL CITY 2018-1: DBRS Finalizes 'B' Rating on Class B2 Notes

MILL CITY 2018-1: Fitch Rates Class B2 Notes 'Bsf'
MORGAN STANLEY 2007-IQ16: DBRS Lowers Ratings on 3 Classes to C
MORGAN STANLEY 2016-C29: DBRS Confirms B Rating on Class X-G Certs
NEUBERGER BERMAN 28: S&P Assigns Prelim BB-(sf) Rating on E Notes
NEUBERGER BERMAN XIX: Moody's Gives B2 Rating on Class E-R2 Notes

NEWSTAR ARLINGTON: S&P Assigns B-(sf) Rating on Class F-R Notes
NEWSTAR ARLINGTON: S&P Assigns Prelim B-(sf) Rating on F-R Notes
NORTHERN TOBACCO: Moody's Reviews Ba2 Rating on 2006-A-1 Bonds
NORTHWOODS CAPITAL XI-B: S&P Assigns BB-(sf) Rating on Cl. E Notes
NRMLT 2018-2: DBRS Gives Prov. 'B' Rating on 10 Note Classes

ONDECK ASSET 2018-1: DBRS Finalizes BB(high) Rating on Cl. D Notes
OZLM VI: Moody's Rates Class E-S Notes 'B3'
PALMER SQUARE 2018-2: Fitch Rates Class E Notes 'Bsf'
REALT 2007-2: Moody's Cuts Ratings on 2 Classes to Caa2
REVELSTOKE CDO I: DBRS Confirms 'CC' Rating on Class A-1 Notes

SDART 2018-2: Fitch Rates $83.3MM Class E Notes 'BB-sf'
SDART: Fitch Takes Ratings Actions on 8 Trusts
SEQUOIA MORTGAGE 2018-5: Moody's Assigns (P)B2 to Cl. B-4 Debt
SHACKLETON 2013-IV-R: Moody's Rates Class E Notes 'B3'
SOUND POINT: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating to Class F Debt

STEELE CREEK 2018-1: Moody's Gives (P)Ba3 Rating on Class E Notes
SYMPHONY CLO XVII: Moody's Gives Ba3 Rating to Cl. E-R Notes
TICP CLO III-2: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Class E Notes
VENTURE XVII CLO: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating to F-RR Notes
VERUS SECURITIZATION 2018-INV1: S&P Rates Class B-3 Certs 'B+(sf)'

WBCMT 2005-C20: Fitch Affirms Class F Certs at 'CCCsf'
WELLS FARGO 2015-C30: Fitch Affirms BB- Rating on Class X-E Debt
WELLS FARGO 2015-NXS1: DBRS Confirms 'B' Rating on Class X-F Certs
WELLS FARGO 2018-C44: DBRS Assigns Prov. B Rating on G-RR Certs
WELLS FARGO 2018-C44: Fitch to Rate Class G-RR Certs 'B-sf'

[*] DBRS Reviews 350 Classes From 53 US RMBS Transactions
[*] DBRS Reviews Ratings on 57 Asset-Backed Securities
[*] Fitch Corrects April 6 Release on 23 CRE CDOs
[*] Fitch Takes Actions on Distressed Bonds in 3 CMBS Deals
[*] Moody's Hikes Ratings on 8 Tranches From 6 US RMBS Deals

[*] Moody's Takes Action on $161.4MM Alt-A RMBS Issued 2001-2005
[*] Moody's Takes Action on $70.3MM Subprime RMBS Issued 2002-2006
[*] Moody's Takes Action on $73MM of Subprime RMBS
[*] Moody's Upgrades Ratings on 27 Tranches from 9 Transactions
[*] Moody's Upgrades Ratings on 54 Tranches From 18 US RMBS Deals

[*] S&P Cuts Ratings on 44 Classes From 31 US RMBS Deals to D(sf)
[*] S&P Takes Various Actions on 195 Classes from 20 US RMBS Deals
[*] S&P Takes Various Actions on 65 Classes from 19 US RMBS Deals
[*] S&P Takes Various Actions on 75 Classes From 25 US RMBS Deals

                            *********

ABFC 2004-HE1: Moody's Hikes Ratings of Class M-5 to 'Ca'
---------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of forty-four
tranches and downgraded the rating of one tranche from 17
transactions, backed by Subprime RMBS loans, issued by multiple
issuers.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: ABFC Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2004-HE1

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to B2 (sf)

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

Cl. M-5, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Mar 24, 2011 Downgraded
to C (sf)

Issuer: ACE Securities Corp. Home Equity Loan Trust, Series
2006-HE1

Cl. A-1B2, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jul 5, 2016 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Underlying Rating: Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Financial Guarantor: Assured Guaranty Corp (Affirmed at A3, Outlook
Stable on Aug 08, 2016)

Cl. A-2D, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to Baa3 (sf)

Issuer: Aegis Asset Backed Securities Trust 2005-5

Cl. IA4, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to A1 (sf)

Cl. IIA, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to Aa3 (sf)

Cl. M1, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M2, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2011 Downgraded
to C (sf)

Issuer: Amortizing Residential Collateral Trust, Series 2002-BC5

Cl. M1, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to A1 (sf)

Cl. M2, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded to
Baa2 (sf)

Issuer: Asset Backed Securities Corporation Home Equity Loan Trust,
Series OOMC 2006-HE5

Cl. A1, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to Aa2 (sf)

Cl. A4, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded to
Baa1 (sf)

Cl. A5, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded to
Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M1, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Dec 3, 2010 Downgraded
to C (sf)

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2007-HE7

Cl. I-A-1, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. I-A-2, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Jun 15, 2009
Downgraded to C (sf)

Cl. II-A-1, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Aug 7, 2013
Confirmed at Caa3 (sf)

Cl. III-A-1, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017
Upgraded to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: C-BASS Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Certificates, Series
2005-CB3

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Sep 22, 2015 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Cl. B-2, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Sep 22, 2015 Upgraded
to Ca (sf)

Issuer: Centex Home Equity Loan Trust 2004-D

Cl. AF-5, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 23, 2013
Confirmed at A1 (sf)

Cl. AF-6, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 23, 2013
Downgraded to A1 (sf)

Cl. MV-2, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jun 17, 2016 Upgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

Cl. MV-3, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Mar 18, 2011
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Cl. MV-4, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Mar 18, 2011
Downgraded to C (sf)

Cl. MV-5, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 18, 2011
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: CIT Home Equity Loan Trust 2002-1

Cl. MV-2, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 24, 2011
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: CIT Home Equity Loan Trust 2003-1

Cl. A-5, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to A1 (sf)

Cl. A-6, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to A1 (sf)

Issuer: Encore Credit Receivables Trust 2005-3

Cl. M-6, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Sep 22, 2015 Upgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: Park Place Securities, Inc., Asset-Backed Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2004-WCW2

Cl. M-2, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Oct 23, 2014
Downgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Issuer: RAMP Series 2004-RS2 Trust

Cl. A-I-4, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 16, 2017
Upgraded to Aa3 (sf)

Cl. A-I-5, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 16, 2017
Upgraded to Aa3 (sf)

Cl. M-I-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on May 16, 2017
Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-II-1, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on May 16, 2017
Upgraded to Baa1 (sf)

Issuer: RASC Series 2001-KS3 Trust

A-II, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on May 16, 2017 Upgraded to
Baa1 (sf)

M-II-1, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Jun 17, 2016 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: SG Mortgage Securities Trust 2006-FRE1

Cl. A-1A, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

Issuer: Specialty Underwriting and Residential Finance Series
2006-BC3

Cl. A-1, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Aug 14, 2012
Confirmed at Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: Terwin Mortgage Trust 2006-5

Cl. I-A-1, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 18, 2017
Upgraded to Aa2 (sf)

Cl. II-A-2, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Feb 6, 2015
Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. II-A-3, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Sep 24, 2012
Downgraded to C (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating upgrades are due to the change in the total credit
enhancement available to the bonds and/or improvement in underlying
pool performance. The rating downgrade on Park Place Securities,
Inc., Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2004-WCW2 Cl.
M-2 is due to the outstanding interest shortfalls on this bond
which are not expected to be reimbursed. The rating actions reflect
the recent performance of the underlying pools and Moody's updated
loss expectation on these pools.

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 March 2018 from 4.5% in March
2017. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of 3.5% to
4.5% for 2018. 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 2018. 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.


ACAPULCO FUNDING 2005-1: S&P Lowers Class A Notes Rating to D(sf)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings corrected its rating on the class A notes from
Acapulco Funding 2005-1 by lowering it to 'D (sf)' from 'CC (sf)'.
This transaction has not been making full interest payments on the
class A notes since the May 2017 payment date. Due to an error,
S&P's rating action on the class A notes did not occur promptly
subsequent to the interest payment shortfalls.

Acapulco Funding 2005-1 is a repackage transaction backed by the
series 2000-1 class A-1 notes from ACG Trust. ACG Trust was
liquidated in September 2016, however, the class A notes from
Acapulco Funding 2005-1 were still receiving timely interest
payments, therefore S&P did not lower the rating at that time.



AMMC CLO XI: S&P Assigns B (sf) Rating on $6.4MM Class F Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A-1-R2,
A-2-R2, A-3A-R2, A-3B-R2, B-R2, C-R2, D-R2, and E-R2 replacement
notes, as well as to the new class X and F notes from AMMC CLO XI
Ltd., a collateralized loan obligation (CLO) originally issued in
2012 that is managed by American Money Management Corp.

S&P withdrew its ratings on the originally refinanced class A-1-R
loans and class A-1-R, A-2-R, B-R, C-R, D-R, and E-R notes
following payment in full on the April 30, 2018, refinancing date.


On the April 30, 2018, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
issuance of the replacement notes were used to redeem the
originally refinanced 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 it is assigning
ratings to 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:

-- Extend the reinvestment period to April 30, 2023, from Oct. 30,
2018. Extend the legal final maturity date on the notes to April
30, 2031, from Oct. 30, 2023.

-- Adopt the use of the non-model version of CDO Monitor for this
transaction. During the reinvestment period, the non-model version
of CDO Monitor may be used to indicate whether changes to the
collateral portfolio are generally consistent with the transaction
parameters S&P assumed when initially assigning ratings to the
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.

"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

  AMMC CLO XI Ltd.
  Replacement class         Rating      Amount (mil. $)
  A-1-R2                    AAA (sf)             216.60
  A-2-R2                    AAA (sf)              30.00
  A-3A-R2                   AAA (sf)              30.00
  A-3B-R2                   AAA (sf)               2.50
  B-R2                      AA (sf)               45.20
  C-R2                      A (sf)                30.00
  D-R2                      BBB (sf)              23.60
  E-R2                      BB (sf)               17.20
  Subordinated notes        NR                    44.60

  New class                 Rating      Amount (mil. $)
  X                         AAA (sf)               6.00
  F                         B (sf)                 6.40

  RATINGS WITHDRAWN

  AMMC CLO XI Ltd.                           
  Original class         To              From
  A-1-R Loan             NR              AAA (sf)
  A-1-R Note             NR              AAA (sf)
  A-2-R                  NR              AAA (sf)
  B-R                    NR              AA (sf)
  C-R                    NR              A (sf)
  D-R                    NR              BBB (sf)
  E-R                    NR              BB- (sf)

  NR--Not rated.


AMMC CLO XI: S&P Assigns B (sf) Rating on $6.4MM Class F Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A-1-R2,
A-2-R2, A-3A-R2, A-3B-R2, B-R2, C-R2, D-R2, and E-R2 replacement
notes, as well as to the new class X and F notes from AMMC CLO XI
Ltd., a collateralized loan obligation (CLO) originally issued in
2012 that is managed by American Money Management Corp. S&P
withdrew its ratings on the originally refinanced class A-1-R loans
and class A-1-R, A-2-R, B-R, C-R, D-R, and E-R notes following
payment in full on the April 30, 2018, refinancing date.

On the April 30, 2018, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
issuance of the replacement notes were used to redeem the
originally refinanced 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 it is assigning
ratings to 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:

-- Extend the reinvestment period to April 30, 2023, from Oct. 30,
2018. Extend the legal final maturity date on the notes to April
30, 2031, from Oct. 30, 2023.

-- Adopt the use of the non-model version of CDO Monitor for this
transaction. During the reinvestment period, the non-model version
of CDO Monitor may be used to indicate whether changes to the
collateral portfolio are generally consistent with the transaction
parameters S&P assumed when initially assigning ratings to the
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.

"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

  AMMC CLO XI Ltd.
  Replacement class         Rating      Amount (mil. $)
  A-1-R2                    AAA (sf)             216.60
  A-2-R2                    AAA (sf)              30.00
  A-3A-R2                   AAA (sf)              30.00
  A-3B-R2                   AAA (sf)               2.50
  B-R2                      AA (sf)               45.20
  C-R2                      A (sf)                30.00
  D-R2                      BBB (sf)              23.60
  E-R2                      BB (sf)               17.20
  Subordinated notes        NR                    44.60

  New class                 Rating      Amount (mil. $)
  X                         AAA (sf)               6.00
  F                         B (sf)                 6.40

  RATINGS WITHDRAWN

  AMMC CLO XI Ltd.                           
  Original class         To              From
  A-1-R Loan             NR              AAA (sf)
  A-1-R Note             NR              AAA (sf)
  A-2-R                  NR              AAA (sf)
  B-R                    NR              AA (sf)
  C-R                    NR              A (sf)
  D-R                    NR              BBB (sf)
  E-R                    NR              BB- (sf)

  NR--Not rated.


ARES XLVII: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating on Class E Notes
-------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to six classes of
notes issued by Ares XLVII CLO Ltd.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$406,000,000 Class A-1 Senior Floating Rate Notes due 2030 (the
"Class A-1 Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$49,000,000 Class A-2 Senior Floating Rate Notes due 2030 (the
"Class A-2 Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$73,500,000 Class B Senior Floating Rate Notes due 2030 (the
"Class B Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$41,300,000 Class C Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (the "Class C Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

US$44,800,000 Class D Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (the "Class D Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$29,400,000 Class E Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2030 (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.

Ares XLVII CLO is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated 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 collateral obligations that are not senior
secured loans. The portfolio is approximately 80% ramped as of the
closing date.

Ares CLO 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 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: 70

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2976

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.20%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 6.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 49.0%

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 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 2976 to 3422)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: 0

Class A-2 Notes: -1

Class B Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: 0

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2976 to 3869)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: 0

Class A-2 Notes: -3

Class B Notes: -3

Class C Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1


ARROYO MORTGAGE 2018-1: S&P Gives Prelim. Bsf Rating on B-2 Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Arroyo
Mortgage Trust 2018-1's $1.240 billion mortgage pass-through
notes.

The note issuance is a residential mortgage-backed securities
transaction backed by first-lien, fixed- and adjustable-rate, fully
amortizing residential mortgage loans (some with interest-only
periods) secured by single-family residential properties,
planned-unit developments, condominiums, and two- to four-family
residential properties to both prime and nonprime borrowers. The
loans are primarily non-qualified mortgage loans.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of April 26,
2018. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect:

-- The pool's collateral composition;
-- The credit enhancement provided for this transaction;
-- The transaction's associated structural mechanics;
-- The representation and warranty framework for this
transaction;
-- The geographic concentration; and
-- The mortgage aggregator, Western Asset Management Co. as
investment manager for Western Asset Opportunity Fund L.P.

  PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED
  Arroyo Mortgage Trust 2018-1

  Class       Rating           Amount ($)
  A-1         AAA (sf)        982,549,000
  A-2         AA (sf)          80,322,000
  A-3         A (sf)          101,493,000
  M-1         BBB (sf)         39,850,000
  B-1         BB (sf)          23,038,000
  B-2         B (sf)           13,076,000
  B-3         NR                4,981,677
  A-IO-S      NR                 Notional(i)
  XS          NR                 Notional(i)
  R           NR                      N/A

(i)Notional amount will equal the aggregate stated principal
balance of the mortgage loans as of the first day of the related
due period.
N/A--Not applicable.
NR--Not rated.


ASCENTIUM EQUIPMENT 2018-1: S&P Assigns BB(sf) Rating on Cl. E Note
-------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Ascentium Equipment
Receivables 2018-1 Trust's $318.478 million receivables-backed
notes.

The note issuance is an asset-backed securities transaction backed
by small-ticket equipment leases and loans, associated equipment,
and a special unit of beneficial interest in lease contracts and
underlying vehicles.

The ratings reflect:

-- The availability of 21.73%, 15.36%, 11.18%, 7.37%, and 5.25%
credit support to the class A, B, C, D, and E notes, respectively,
based on stressed break-even cash flow scenarios. S&P said, "These
credit support levels provide coverage--based on multiples in our
equipment leasing criteria and, for ratings below the 'BBB'
category, our securitized consumer receivables criteria--of our
cumulative net loss range, which is consistent with the ratings.
Our cumulative net loss ranges from 3.30% to 4.00% because it
reflects our stressed recovery rate range of 15%-30%, with higher
recovery rates assumed for lower rating categories."

-- S&P said, "Our expectation that, under our credit stability
analysis, in a moderate stress ('BBB') scenario, all else being
equal, the ratings on the class A and B notes would not decline by
more than one rating from our 'AAA (sf)' and 'AA (sf)' ratings,
respectively, and the ratings on the class C, D, and E notes would
not decline by more than two rating categories from our 'A (sf)',
'BBB (sf)', and 'BB (sf)' ratings, respectively, in the first
year." These potential rating movements are consistent with our
credit stability criteria.

-- S&P's expectation for the timely payment of periodic interest
and principal by the final maturity date according to the
transaction documents, based on stressed cash flow modeling
scenarios that it believes are appropriate for the rating
categories.

-- The collateral characteristics of the securitized pool of
equipment leases and loans, including individual obligor
concentrations of less than 1.50%, a high percentage of contracts
with personal guarantees, and no residual values.

-- Ascentium Capital LLC's historical recovery rates, which are
generally higher than those of other small-ticket commercial
finance companies. S&P believes this results from the high
percentage of personal guarantees and the servicer's pursuit of
realizations on them.

-- S&P's strong and stable outlook for the credit quality of the
small- and medium-size businesses that represent the obligors in
the pool.

-- The presence of a backup servicer, U.S. Bank N.A.

-- The transaction's legal structure.

  RATINGS ASSIGNED

  Ascentium Equipment Receivables 2018-1 Trust

  Class       Rating       Type           Interest        Amount
                                          rate          (mil. $)
  A-1         A-1+ (sf)    Senior         Fixed           90.000
  A-2         AAA (sf)     Senior         Fixed          100.000
  A-3         AAA (sf)     Senior         Fixed           71.845
  B           AA (sf)      Subordinate    Fixed           22.153
  C           A (sf)       Subordinate    Fixed           14.158
  D           BBB (sf)     Subordinate    Fixed           13.492
  E           BB (sf)      Subordinate    Fixed            6.830


ASSET BACKED 1999-LB1: Moody's Confirms Ba3 Rating to A-1F Bonds
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of two bonds,
confirmed the rating of one bond, withdrawn the ratings of two
underlying components, and re-assigned the rating on one bond from
Asset Backed Securities Corporation Home Equity Loan Trust 1999-LB1
("Asset Backed Securities Corp. 1999-LB1").

Complete list of rating actions is as follows:

Issuer: Asset Backed Securities Corporation Home Equity Loan Trust
1999-LB1

A-1F, Confirmed at Ba3 (sf); previously on Jan 23, 2018 Ba3 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Upgrade

A-3A, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 23, 2018 Baa1 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Upgrade

A-5A, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 23, 2018 Baa1 (sf)
Placed Under Review for Possible Upgrade

B-1, Assigned Caa3 (sf)

B-1F, Withdrawn (sf); previously on Jan 23, 2018 Ca (sf) Placed
Under Review for Possible Upgrade

B-1A, Withdrawn (sf); previously on Jan 23, 2018 Ba3 (sf) Placed
Under Review Direction Uncertain

RATINGS RATIONALE

The actions reflect the recent performance of the underlying pools
and Moody's updated expected losses on the pools. The rating
upgrades are a result of an increase in credit enhancement
available to the bonds.

These actions resolve the review of five bonds from Asset Backed
Securities Corp. 1999-LB1, which were among those placed on review
on January 23, 2018 due to errors in prior ratings analysis of the
transaction and an update in the approach used to analyze the
transaction structure. In our prior analysis of this transaction,
Moody's mistakenly considered the cash flow structure of each group
of bonds to be independent within its respective collateral group
and therefore did not reflect the cross-collateralization between
the collateral groups backing these bonds. These errors have now
been corrected, and these rating actions reflect the corrected
transaction structure. Additionally, in Moody's prior analysis for
this transaction, Moody's used a static approach in which Moody's
compared the total credit enhancement for a bond, including excess
spread, subordination, overcollateralization, and other external
support, if any, to its expected losses on the mortgage pool(s)
supporting that bond. Moody's said: "We have updated our approach
to include a cash flow analysis, wherein we run several different
loss levels, loss timing, and prepayment scenarios using our
scripted cash flow waterfalls to estimate the losses to the
different bonds under these scenarios, as described in more detail
in the "US RMBS Surveillance Methodology" published in January
2017. These rating actions reflect this cash flow analysis."

Further, the rating actions on Class B-1, Class B-1A and Class
B-1F are driven by the correction of an error. At closing, Moody's
assigned ratings to the following certificates issued by Asset
Backed Securities Corp. 1999-LB1: Class A-1F, Class A-2F, Class
A-3A, Class A-4A, Class A-5A, Class A-IO and Class B-1. Class B-1
has two components, identified in the Pooling and Servicing
Agreement as Class B-1A and Class B-1F Component Certificates,
which generate the cash-flows supporting the Class B-1 bond. After
the assignment of the initial rating on Class B-1, Moody's
erroneously began publishing ratings on the underlying components
but not on Class B-1 itself. Moody’s is now correcting this error
and re-assigning a rating to Class B-1, the certificate originally
rated by us and issued by Asset Backed Securities Corp. 1999-LB1.
Moody’s has also withdrawn the ratings on Class B-1A and Class
B-1F. The rating history of these underlying components will remain
on moodys.com. Hereafter, Moody's will only publish the rating at
the certificate level and will not publish ratings for the related
underlying components.

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 4.1% in February 2018 from 4.7% in
February 2017. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of
3.5% to 4.5% for the 2018 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 2018. 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.




ASSURANT CLO II: Moody's Rates Class E Notes 'Ba3'
--------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to six classes of
notes issued by Assurant CLO II, Ltd.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$270,000,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2031
(the "Class A Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$36,000,000 Class B-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2031
(the "Class B-1 Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$15,000,000 Class B-2 Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2031
(the "Class B-2 Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$23,250,000 Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$26,250,000 Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$20,500,000 Class E Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2031 (the "Class E Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

The 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.

Assurant CLO II 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
first lien 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 approximately 90% ramped as of
the closing date.

Assurant 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 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: $425,000,000

Diversity Score: 65

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2831

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.15%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 6.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 9.0 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. Please see the Rating Methodologies page on
www.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.

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 2831 to 3256)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Notes: 0

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 2831 to 3680)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

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


BACM 2005-4: Fitch Hikes Class E Debt Rating to Bsf
---------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded one class and affirmed nine classes of
Banc of America Commercial Mortgage, Inc. (BACM) commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates series 2005-4.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

High Credit Enhancement/Rating Cap: The upgrade to class E reflects
the class' high credit enhancement and the stabilization of the
values of the REO assets remaining in the pool. While Fitch expects
full repayment of the class is likely, the rating of class E has
been capped at 'B' due to the quality of the remaining collateral,
concentrated nature of the pool and the high percentage of REO
assets.

As of the April 2018 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 98.5% to $24 million from
$1.59 billion at issuance. Interest shortfalls totaling $12.6
million are currently affecting classes F through P.

Pool Concentration and Adverse Selection: The pool is highly
concentrated with only three loans/assets remaining, two of which
(62.9% of the pool) are real-estate owned (REO).

The only non-specially serviced loan composes 36.4% of the current
pool and was originally secured by a portfolio of 10 single-tenant
retail properties located across six states. Seven properties
currently remain in the portfolio after two were released in April
2015 and one in late-2016. After spending nearly four years in
special servicing, the loan was modified in September 2014, which
resulted in a maturity extension to July 2021 and the application
of interest-only payments at a reduced rate, among other terms.
Since returning to the master servicer in December 2014, the loan
has remained on the servicer's watchlist, most recently for
declining occupancy. The portfolio was 78.9% occupied as of the
December 2017 rent roll and the servicer-reported net operating
income debt service coverage ratio was 1.66x. One of the underlying
properties is currently vacant and being marketed for lease and/or
sale.

REO Assets: The ultimate workout and timing of resolution for the
REO assets remain uncertain at this time. The largest asset (52.7%
of the pool) is a 121,502 square foot (sf) retail shopping center
located in East Norriton, PA. The loan was transferred to special
servicing in September 2015 due to maturity default and the asset
became REO in August 2016. The special servicer has no immediate
disposition plans as it is currently implementing a value-add
strategy through lease extensions and addressing deferred
maintenance at this time. The servicer-reported occupancy was 100%
as of March 2018, unchanged from year-end 2016 and 2017.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

No further upgrades to class E are likely. The rating of class E
has been capped at 'B' due to the quality of the remaining
collateral, concentrated nature of the pool and the high percentage
of REO assets. Class E could be subject to downgrade should losses
on the REO assets or the one performing loan exceed Fitch's
expectations.

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 upgraded following classes:

-- $3.7 million class E to 'Bsf' from 'CCCsf'; Assign Outlook
    Stable.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

-- $19.8 million class F at 'Dsf'; RE 50%;
-- $0.8 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%;
-- $0 class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class O at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

The class A-1 through D certificates have been paid in full. Fitch
does not rate the class P certificates. Fitch previously withdrew
the ratings on the interest-only class XP and XC certificates.


BACM 2006-3: Fitch Affirms 'C' Rating on Class A-M Certificates
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 13 classes of Banc of America Commercial
Mortgage Inc. (BACM) commercial mortgage pass-through certificates
series 2006-3.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Concentration and Adverse Selection: The pool is highly
concentrated with only two of the original 97 assets remaining in
the transaction, both of which are in special servicing.

High Expected Losses: Fitch expects limited recoveries on the
remaining loans in the pool and expects that losses will reach the
A-M class. Expected losses for the specially serviced loans were
based on a stressed haircut applied to the most recent appraised
values provided by the servicer. A full loss was assumed on the $36
million B note for the Rushmore Mall.

The largest loan is the Rushmore Mall (67%) secured by a 737,725sf
regional mall located in Rapid City, SD. The loan was previously in
special servicing and had a 'hope note' modification and maturity
extension and was returned to the master servicer in 2014. The loan
was re-transferred to the special servicer in April 2018 due to
anchor stores Sears vacating and Herberger's potentially closing
based on the ongoing BonTon bankruptcy.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Losses to the A-M class are considered inevitable based on Fitch's
expected losses for the remaining loans in the pool. The class
rating will be downgraded to 'Dsf' as losses are realized.

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:

-- $99.7 million class A-M at 'Csf'; RE 30%;
-- $41.2 million class A-J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class B at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class C at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class D at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class E at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class F at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class G at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class H at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

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


BACM 2007-2: Fitch Lowers Ratings on 3 Tranches to Csf
------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded three and affirmed 14 classes of Banc
of America Commercial Mortgage Trust, commercial mortgage
pass-through certificates, series 2007-2 (BACM 2007-2).

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Increased Loss Expectations; Specially Serviced Regional Mall: The
downgrades reflect an increase in loss expectations, most notably
the largest loan, The Mall of Acadiana (65.1% of the pool), which
is secured by 300,000 square feet (sf) (of a 1.6 million sf)
regional mall in Lafayette, LA. The property has recently been
impacted by a major anchor closure, with Sears (non-collateral)
closing in September 2017; the closure poses significant co-tenancy
implications and negative impact on cash flow and collateral
occupancy. The mall also has exposure to Macy's and J.C. Penney
(both non-collateral) and several inline tenants that have filed
for bankruptcy including Aeropostale, Claire's, Payless and rue 21.
Per the December 2017 rent roll, 15% of collateral net rentable
area (NRA) is scheduled to roll in 2018; total mall occupancy
reported at 87% and total collateral occupancy was 98%.

The loan transferred to special servicing in February 2017 due to
imminent maturity default, and matured in April 2017 without
repayment. Modification discussions with the borrower have been
unsuccessful and the servicer is moving forward with foreclosure.
Per servicer updates, a receiver was appointed in January 2018 and
a foreclosure sale is anticipated for second quarter 2018.

Pool Concentration: Only 12 of the original 185 loans remain, all
of which are specially serviced, with four loans in foreclosure
(75.6% of pool) and eight REO loans (24.4%). Ten loans are secured
by retail properties (88.7% of pool), one is secured by a
multifamily complex (6.1%) and one is secured by a hotel property
(5.2%). Given the concentration, Fitch analyzed potential class
payoff and losses from liquidations based on the most recent
servicer appraised values. Per this analysis, all remaining classes
would incur losses.

Since Fitch's prior rating action in May 2017, 21 loans have paid
in full and five loans have been liquidated with $5.6 million in
additional losses incurred to the pool. As of the April 2018
distribution date, the transaction has been reduced by 94.1% since
issuance, to $186.3 million from $3.17 billion. Cumulative interest
shortfalls of $31.9 million are currently affecting classes B
through S and there has been $305.1 million (9.6% of original pool
balance) in realized losses to date.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Downgrades to classes A-J, A-JFL and B reflect increased loss
expectations from specially serviced loans, which are considered
imminent based on the most recently reported values. Upgrades,
while unlikely due to pool concentration, may occur if recoveries
on the specially serviced assets are better than expected.
Distressed classes are subject to downgrades as losses are
realized.

Fitch has downgraded the following classes:

-- $67.1 million class A-J to 'Csf' from 'CCCsf'; RE 50%;
-- $43.6 million class A-JFL to 'Csf' from 'CCCsf'; RE 50%;
-- $15.9 million class B to 'Csf' from 'CCsf'; RE 0%.

In addition, Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

-- $47.6 million class C at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $12.2 million class D at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class E at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class F at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class G at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class H at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class O at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class P at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class Q at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

The class A-1, A-1A, A-2, A-2FL, A-3, A-AB, A-4 and A-M
certificates have paid in full. Fitch does not rate the class S
certificates. Fitch had previously withdrawn the ratings on the
interest-only class XW certificates.


BALLYROCK CLO-2018-1: Moody's Rates Class E Notes 'B3'
------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to six classes of
notes issued by Ballyrock CLO 2018-1 Ltd.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$322,500,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class A-1 Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

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

US$24,500,000 Class B Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2031 (the "Class B Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$33,500,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2031 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$22,000,000 Class D Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2031 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

US$10,000,000 Class E Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2031 (the "Class E Notes"), Assigned B3 (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.

Ballyrock 2018-1 is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will
be collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated senior secured
corporate loans. At least 90% of the portfolio must consist of
first lien senior secured loans and eligible investments, and up to
10% of the portfolio may consist of loans other than senior secured
loans. The portfolio is approximately 80% ramped as of the closing
date.

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

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

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): 2921

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.25%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 9.0 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 2921 to 3359)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: -1

Class A-2 Notes: -2

Class B Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -1

Class D Notes: 0

Class E Notes: 0

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2921 to 3797)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: -1

Class A-2 Notes: -4

Class B Notes: -4

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: -3


BATTALION CLO XII: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Class E Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to eight
classes of notes to be issued by Battalion CLO XII Ltd.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$359,000,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class A-1 Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$25,000,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2031
(the "Class A-2 Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$40,000,000 Class B-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2031
(the "Class B-1 Notes"), Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

US$24,500,000 Class B-2 Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2031
(the "Class B-2 Notes"), Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

US$22,000,000 Class C-1 Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class C-1 Notes"), Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

US$8,250,000 Class C-2 Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Fixed Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class C-2 Notes"), Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

US$37,500,000 Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

US$35,750,000 Class E Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2031 (the "Class E Notes"), Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

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

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

RATINGS RATIONALE

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

Battalion CLO XII is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will
be collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated senior secured
corporate loans. At least 92.5% of the portfolio must consist of
first lien senior secured loans and eligible investments, and up to
7.5% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans and
unsecured loans. Moody's expects the portfolio to be approximately
90% ramped as of the closing date.

Brigade Capital Management, LP 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 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: 65

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2880

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.00%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 6.50%

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.

Here 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 2880 to 3312)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: 0

Class A-2 Notes: 0

Class B-1 Notes: -2

Class B-2 Notes: -2

Class C-1 Notes: -2

Class C-2 Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2880 to 3744)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: -1

Class A-2 Notes: -1

Class B-1 Notes: -3

Class B-2 Notes: -3

Class C-1 Notes: -4

Class C-2 Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1


BEAN CREEK: Moody's Gives 'Ba3' Rating to Class E-R Notes
---------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to six classes of
CLO refinancing notes (the "Refinancing Notes") issued by Bean
Creek CLO, Ltd:

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$3,000,000 Class X-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2031
(the "Class X-R Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$196,500,000 Class A-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
2031 (the "Class A-R Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$31,500,000 Class B-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2031
(the "Class B-R Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$18,000,000 Class C-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2031 (the "Class C-R Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$17,250,000 Class D-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2031 (the "Class D-R Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$12,750,000 Class E-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2031 (the "Class E-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 broadly syndicated senior secured corporate loans
CreekSource 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 addresses 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 April 20, 2018 (the
"Refinancing Date") in connection with the refinancing of all
classes of the secured notes (the "Refinanced Original Notes")
previously issued on December 30, 2015 (the "Original Closing
Date"). On the Refinancing Date, the Issuer used proceeds from the
issuance of the Refinancing Notes, along with the proceeds from the
issuance of additional subordinated 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: 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 base-case assumptions:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: $300,000,000

Defaulted par: $0

Diversity Score: 80

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2758

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.10%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.0%

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.

Here 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% (2758 to 3172)
Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X-R Notes: 0
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% (2758 to 3585)
Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X-R Notes: 0
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




BEAR STEARNS 2006-PWR14: Fitch Hikes Cl. C Debt Rating From CCsf
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings upgrades one class and affirms the remaining classes
of Bear Stearns Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust series
2006-PWR14 commercial mortgage pass-through certificates.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Defeasance and Increased Credit Enhancement: The transaction has
paid down 97% since issuance, to $64.9 million from $2.5 billion.
Three loans totaling 34.9% of the pool have defeased. Class C is
now 100% covered by defeased collateral. The upgrades reflect the
defeasance and the significant increase in credit enhancement since
the last rating action.

Better than Expected Recoveries on Two Fitch Loans of Concern: One
Newark Center A Note ($82 million) and a smaller retail property
($8.5 million) paid in full post-maturity. Based on Fitch's
previous analysis a loss had been assumed on both Loans of Concern.
The One Newark Center B Note (hope note - $9.7 million) incurred
full losses as expected.

Concentrated Pool: Only 10 of the original 251 loans remain. Due to
the concentrated nature of the pool, Fitch performed a sensitivity
analysis that grouped the remaining loans based on loan structure
features, collateral quality, and performance, then ranked them by
the perceived likelihood of repayment. This includes defeased
loans, fully amortizing loans, and balloon loans; and losses
assumed on the specially serviced assets. The ratings reflect this
sensitivity analysis.

Specially Serviced Assets: There are three specially serviced
assets (25.8%) including two real estate owned (REO) properties
(16.4%) and one in foreclosure (9.4%). The largest is the REO
Lakeview Village (16%), a 65,900-sf retail center in D'Iberville
(Biloxi), MS. Per the special servicer, a sale contract is being
reviewed by a potential buyer.

Classes D and E remain distressed as losses from the specially
serviced assets are expected to fully deplete class E and impact
class D.

Performing Loans: There are seven performing loans in the
transaction (74.2%) and include the three fully defeased loans,
each of which matures in July 2020. The remaining loans consist of
three balloon loans, one maturing in May 2018 (19.5%) and two
maturing in 2021 (16.4%). There is one fully amortizing loan (3.4%)
that matures in 2021. The largest loan is a balloon loan maturing
in May 2018 and is collateralized by a 165,790 sf office property
located in Lexington, KY. The property is 100% leased to Xerox
through 2025; however, almost half of the space is being listed for
lease. Given the upcoming maturity, Fitch is concerned about the
ability to refinance the loan.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The upgrade to class D is based on defeasance and is expected to
pay in full. Losses are expected to impact class D which will
result in a downgrade to 'Dsf'. Upgrades to class D, while
unlikely, are possible with significantly better than expected
recoveries on the specially serviced loans.

Fitch has upgraded the following ratings:

-- $24.7 million class C to 'AAAsf' from 'CCsf'; Outlook Stable
    assigned.

Fitch has affirmed the ratings and affirmed or revised the Recovery
Ratings as follows:

-- $37 million class D at 'Csf'; RE 50 from RE 0%.
-- $5.2 million class E at 'Dsf'; RE 0%

Fitch does not rate class P.

Class A-1, A-2, A3, A-AB, A-4, A-M, A-J and B have paid in full.
Class F, G, H, J, K, L, M, N, and O are affirmed at 'Dsf; RE 0%'
due to full losses incurred.

Fitch has previously withdrawn the ratings on the interest-only
classes X-1, X-2 and X-W.


BICENTENNIAL TRUST 2017-1: DBRS Confirms 'B' Rating on G Certs
--------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS Limited confirmed the ratings on the Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2017-1 issued by Bicentennial Trust as
follows:

-- Class A Certificates rated AAA (sf)
-- Class B Certificates rated AA (sf)
-- Class C Certificates rated A (sf)
-- Class D Certificates rated BBB (sf)
-- Class E Certificates rated BBB (low) (sf)
-- Class F Certificates rated BB (sf)
-- Class G Certificates rated B (sf) (collectively, the Rated
     Certificates)

The Class H Certificates and Class Z Certificates (collectively
with the Rated Certificates, the Certificates) are not rated by
DBRS.

This rating confirmation is based on an analysis of the performance
of the portfolio to date. The portfolio is a diversified pool of
first-lien, fixed-rate, conventional Canadian residential mortgages
with a maximum loan-to-value of 80% originated by Bank of Montreal
(BMO). The portfolio has performed well since inception, and the
pass-through structure of the Certificates has resulted in higher
subordination. Current credit enhancement continues to provide
sufficient protection to the Rated Certificates at their current
rating.

The Seller and Administrator, BMO, is rated AA/R-1 (high) with
Stable trends by DBRS as of April 19, 2018.

DBRS monitors the performance of each transaction to identify any
deviation from DBRS's expectation at issuance and to ensure the
ratings remain appropriate. The review is predicated upon the
timely receipt of performance information from the related
providers.

Notes: All figures are in Canadian dollars unless otherwise noted.


BLACK DIAMOND 2016-1: S&P Assigns BB-(sf) Rating on Cl. DR Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A1AR, A1BR,
A2AR, A2BR, BR, CR, and DR replacement notes from Black Diamond CLO
2016-1 Ltd., a collateralized loan obligation (CLO) originally
issued in 2016 that is managed by Black Diamond CLO 2016-1 Adviser
LLC, a special-purpose investment management affiliate of Black
Diamond Capital Management LLC. The replacement notes have been
issued via a proposed supplemental indenture.

S&P said, "The ratings reflect our opinion that the credit support
available is commensurate with the associated rating levels. Of the
replacement classes, those that are floating-rate are expected to
be issued at lower spreads over three-month LIBOR than the current
respective floating-rate notes. Meanwhile, the fixed-rate
replacement class A1BR and A2BR notes are expected to be issued at
a higher coupon than the current fixed-rate class A-1B and A-2B
notes.

On the April 26, 2018, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
replacement note issuance were used to redeem the original notes.

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

-- Issue the replacement notes at a slightly lower weighted
average cost of debt than the current notes.

-- Extend the reinvestment period and stated maturity by nearly
three years and the non-call period by nearly two years.

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."

  RATINGS ASSIGNED

  Black Diamond CLO 2016-1 Ltd.
  Replacement class         Rating      Amount (mil. $)
  A1AR                      AAA (sf)             288.00
  A1BR                      AAA (sf)              25.00
  A2AR                      AA (sf)               57.10
  A2BR                      AA (sf)               10.00
  BR                        A (sf)                34.00
  CR                        BBB- (sf)             23.50
  DR                        BB- (sf)              22.50
  Subordinated notes        NR                    51.40

  RATINGS WITHDRAWN

  Black Diamond CLO 2016-1 Ltd.
                                Rating
  Replacement class        To            From
  A1a                      NR            AAA (sf)
  A1b                      NR            AAA (sf)
  A2a                      NR            AA (sf)
  A2b                      NR            AA (sf)
  B                        NR            A (sf)
  C                        NR            BBB- (sf)
  D                        NR            BB- (sf)


BX TRUST 2018-BILT: Fitch to Rate Commercial Mortgage P-T Certs
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has issued a presale report on BX Trust 2018-BILT
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2018-BILT.
Fitch expects to rate the transaction and assign Rating Outlooks as
follows:

  --$110,000,000 class A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$22,000,000 class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$16,000,000 class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$25,000,000 class D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$37,000,000 class E 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$43,000,000 class F 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$173,000,000a class X-CP 'BBB-'; Outlook Stable;

  --$173,000,000a class X-EXT 'BBB-'; Outlook Stable.

Fitch does not expect to rate following classes:

  --$28,000,000b class HRR.

a) Notional amount and interest-only.
b) Horizontal credit risk retention interest.

The BX Trust 2018-BILT commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates represent the beneficial interest in a trust that
holds a single, two-year, floating-rate interest-only mortgage
loan, subject to five, one-year extension options in the amount of
$281.0 million secured by the fee simple and leasehold interest in
the Arizona Biltmore Resort (Arizona Biltmore), a 606-key, luxury,
full-service hotel located in Phoenix, AZ.

Loan proceeds in combination with $39.0 million of subordinate
mezzanine financing and approximately $109.4 million of sponsor
equity were used to acquire the property for an allocated purchase
price of approximately $429.4 million, including closing costs. The
certificates will follow a sequential-pay structure.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Asset Quality and Amenities: Fitch assigned the Arizona Biltmore a
property quality grade of 'A-'. The historic hotel features 606
guestrooms, including 23 specialty suites and 119 'Club Level'
rooms in the Ocatilla building, six food and beverage (F&B)
outlets, 200,000 square feet (sf) of indoor and outdoor meeting
space, eight pools, seven tennis courts, seven retail shops and a
22,000-sf full-service health spa.

Capital Improvements: The property has benefited from approximately
$38.4 million ($63,438 per key) in capital expenditures since 2013
including comprehensive guestroom renovations in 2014 ($11.7
million; $19,348 per key). Other recent improvements included a
$2.4 million and $3.0 million renovation of the F&B outlets and
meeting spaces, respectively, from 2014 through 2016.

High Fitch Leverage: The Fitch stressed debt service coverage ratio
(DSCR) for the entire trust is 0.92x, with a Fitch stressed
loan-to-value (LTV) of 111.6%.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

For this transaction, Fitch's net cash flow (NCF) was 5.2% below
the TTM March 2018 NCF. Included in Fitch's presale report are
numerous Rating Sensitivities that describe the potential impact
given further NCF declines below Fitch's NCF. Fitch evaluated the
sensitivity of the ratings for class A and found that a 30% decline
would result in a downgrade to 'BBBsf'.

The Rating Sensitivity section in the presale report includes a
detailed explanation of additional stresses and sensitivities. Key
Rating Drivers and Rating Sensitivities are further described in
the accompanying presale report.
USE OF THIRD-PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G-10

Fitch was provided with third-party due diligence information from
Ernst & Young LLP. The third-party due diligence information was
provided on ABS Due Diligence Form-15E and focused on a comparison
and re-computation of certain characteristics with respect to the
mortgage loan and related mortgaged properties in the data file.
Fitch considered this information in its analysis, and the findings
did not have an impact on its analysis.


BX TRUST 2018-GW: DBRS Gives Prov. B(low) Rating on Class G Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS, Inc. assigned provisional ratings to the following classes of
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2018-GW to be
issued by BX Trust 2018-GW:

-- Class A at AAA (sf)
-- Class X-CP at A (low) (sf)
-- Class X-EXT at A (low) (sf)
-- Class B at AA (low) (sf)
-- Class C at A (high) (sf)
-- Class D at BBB (high)
-- Class E at BBB (low) (sf)
-- Class F at BB (low) (sf)
-- Class G at B (low) (sf)

All trends are Stable.

All classes will be privately placed. The Class X-CP and Class
X-EXT balances are notional, with the notional balances referencing
the Class A, Class B, Class C and Class D certificates.

The subject property is a Four-Diamond oceanfront luxury resort
located on Wailea Beach on the island of Maui. Originally developed
in 1991, the property features 776 hotel keys, seven food and
beverage outlets, 100,000 square feet (sf) of meeting/event space,
a 50,000 sf spa and a 20,000 sf recreation outlet center for
children. The resort also features 120 third-party-owned villas, 61
of which are currently enrolled in the hotel's rental program. Loan
proceeds are being used to facilitate the acquisition of the
subject as part of a three-property portfolio transaction that also
includes the Arizona Biltmore and the La Quinta Resort & Club. The
subject financing package totals $800.0 million, with $510.5
million structured as first mortgage debt and $289.5 million
structured as mezzanine debt. The sponsor, Blackstone Real Estate
Partners VIII-NQ L.P. (Blackstone), is acquiring the portfolio for
an aggregate purchase price of $1.635 billion, $980 million of
which is allocated to the Grand Wailea. Inclusive of $20.0 million
in closing costs, the sponsor will have a total cost basis of $1.0
billion in the subject property. The seller of the portfolio, The
Government of Singapore Investment Corp. (GIC), acquired the
portfolio out of bankruptcy in 2013 for approximately $1.5 billion
when the prior ownership, made up of a group of junior mezzanine
lenders, took over the property in a debt-to-equity swap in January
2011. Up to that point, Morgan Stanley Real Estate Fund had
historically owned the property after acquiring it in 2007 but
struggled during the financial crisis and ultimately lost control
when the loan transferred to special servicing in October 2009. The
prior $1.0 billion portfolio mortgage debt, which was securitized
in COMM 2006-CNL2, was fully repaid with no loss incurred.

The property has performed well over the past several years as
compared with its competitive set of luxury properties Maui, with
overall revenue per available room (RevPAR) penetration falling
below 100.0% only in 2015 but averaging 110.0% since 2008. The
underperformance in RevPAR penetration in 2015 can largely be
attributed to the $22.6 million ($28,182 per key) guest room and
suite renovation that took place between 2014 and 2015. Since the
renovation, the average daily rate (ADR) has climbed 36.0% from
$413.19 in 2013 to $561.86 as of the trailing 12 months (T-12)
ended January 2018. The considerable rate lift corresponds with net
cash flow growth of 60.4% over the same period. Since bottoming out
in 2009 and excluding the renovation years, the subject has seen
consistent year-over-year RevPAR growth, reporting a T-12 January
2018 RevPAR 76.5% above the 2009 low. While the overall luxury
hotel market was severely affected by the Great Recession, the
subject fared well against its competitive set, reporting average
RevPAR penetration of 116.7% over the three-year period between
2008 to 2010. The overall increase in RevPAR since 2009 can largely
be attributed to a combination of property renovations, which have
averaged $12.2 million ($15,743 per key) annually over the past
five years, and general market recovery.

Given the high barriers to entry on Maui, which are reflected in
the lack of new supply and projects under construction, there is
minimal threat of over-building despite the very high RevPAR
figures achieved on the island. The two most recently delivered
hotels carry Residence Inn and Westin flags, while the only project
under construction is a 388-key Hilton Grand Vacations Club in
Kihei. None of these are expected to be directly competitive with
the subject property. Maui is served by three airports: the
Kahului, the Kapalua and the Hana airports. The island further
benefits from the increased airlift to the island, as seat capacity
to Kahului airport rose 2.8% to 2.3 million in 2016. In addition to
the increase in airline flights, total visitor expenditures in Maui
grew 5.2% to $4.8 billion in 2017. In addition to the senior
mortgage and mezzanine debt, the sponsor will be contributing
$200.0 million of fresh equity to close. At 0.90 times (x), the
DBRS refinance debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) on the mortgage
debt is low for a hotel loan, even one with an excellent location
and flag such as the subject. Term default risk, is considered
modest, as reflected in a DBRS Term DSCR of 1.59x, which assumes a
2.72% loan margin that will contractually increase by 25 basis
points during the fourth of five one-year extension options and a
LIBOR of 3.07% based on the DBRS Unified Interest Rate Model for
Rating U.S. Structure Finance Transactions, which is lower than the
3.1% LIBOR strike of the interest rate cap in place at closing.

At a discount of 55.6%, the DBRS value of $470.2 million is
considerably below the as-is appraised value of $1.06 billion.
Further, the appraiser concludes to an as-stabilized value of $1.23
billion, which indicates further upside as the recent renovations
continue to enhance property performance. While the leverage on the
full $510.5 million mortgage loan is high at a DBRS loan-to-value
(LTV) of 108.6%, the last $25.5 million is unrated, and the
cumulative investment-grade-rated proceeds of $383.0 million have a
more modest DBRS LTV of 81.5%. Additionally, the appraiser
concluded to a land value of $232.8 million, which is well in
excess of AAA proceeds. As a result of the property's excellent
location and brand affiliation, continued increase in ADR due to
recent renovations, lack of competitive new supply and strong
value-add upside potential, DBRS anticipates that the mortgage loan
will perform well during its fully extended seven-year term. At
refinance, the irreplaceable location, which drives extremely high
investor appetite for an asset such as the subject, should greatly
insulate the property value from volatility in the overall market.

Class X-CP and Class X-EXT are interest-only (IO) certificates that
reference a single rated tranche or multiple rated tranches. The IO
rating mirrors the lowest-rated reference tranche adjusted upward
by one notch if senior in the waterfall.

Notes: All figures are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted.


BX TRUST 2018-MCSF: Fitch Rates Class F Certs 'B-sf'
----------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned the following ratings and Rating
Outlooks to BX Trust 2018-MCSF Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates series 2018-MCSF.

-- $172,500,000 class A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $32,000,000 class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $21,500,000 class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $34,000,000 class D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $52,000,000 class E 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $50,900,000 class F 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable.

Fitch does not rate the following class:

-- $19,100,000a class HRR.

(a) Horizontal credit risk retention interest.

Since Fitch published its expected ratings on April 3, 2018, the
issuer removed the interest-only classes X-CP and X-EXT from the
transaction. As such, Fitch withdrew its ratings on these classes.
The classes above reflect the final ratings and deal structure.

The certificates represent the beneficial interests in the two-year
(with five, one-year extension options), floating-rate, first lien
mortgage loan secured by the fee simple interest in two adjacent
office towers, totaling 758,687 sf, known as Market Center. The
center is located at 555 and 575 Market Street in San Francisco,
CA. The collateral includes 740,452 sf of office/storage and 18,235
sf of retail space.

Proceeds from the loan, along with $42.0 million in subordinate
mezzanine debt, were used to refinance $394.4 million in existing
debt, fund upfront reserves of $7.3 million, pay closing costs and
return approximately $16.3 million of equity to the sponsor. The
certificates will follow a sequential-pay structure.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

San Francisco CBD Location: The property consists of 758,687 sf of
high quality office space located along Market Street within the
financial district of the San Francisco CBD. The buildings feature
immediate access to public transportation with a BART stop located
at the base of the complex and are a five-minute walk from the new
Transbay Transit Terminal.

Historical Occupancy and Granular Tenancy: The property is
currently 91.3% occupied and has maintained an average historical
occupancy of 91.9% since 2008. The complex is leased to over 50
tenants, with the largest tenant, Uber, occupying approximately
31.1% of total NRA. No other tenant occupies more than 4.8% of the
total NRA.

High Aggregate Leverage: The $382.0 million mortgage loan has a
Fitch DSCR and LTV of 0.82x and 107.3%, respectively, and debt of
$504 per sf. The total debt package includes a $42.0 million
mezzanine loan, resulting in a total debt Fitch DSCR and LTV of
0.74x and 119.1%, respectively.

Institutional Sponsorship: The sponsor of the loan will be
Blackstone Real Estate Partners VIII, which is owned by affiliates
of the Blackstone Group, L.P., a global leader in real estate
investment with over $115.3 billion in assets under management as
of December 2017, including more than 230 million sf of office
space.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

For this transaction, Fitch's net cash flow (NCF) was 8.4% above
the 2017 NCF. Included in Fitch's presale report are numerous
Rating Sensitivities that describe the potential impact given
further NCF declines below Fitch's NCF. Fitch evaluated the
sensitivity of the ratings for class A and found that a 30% decline
would result in a downgrade to 'BBB-sf'.


CARLYLE CLO 2014-2-R: S&P Assigns Prelim B- (sf) Rating on E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Carlyle
Global Market Strategies CLO 2014-2-R Ltd./Carlyle Global Market
Strategies CLO 2014-2-R LLC's $550.10 million floating-rate notes.
This is a proposed reissue of the Carlyle Global Market Strategies
CLO 2014-2 Ltd. transaction, which is expected to be redeemed in
full on the May 15, 2018, proposed closing date, and all of the
underlying assets are expected to be elevated to the new issuer via
participations.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of May 1, 2018.
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
  Carlyle Global Market Strategies CLO 2014-2-R Ltd.
   Class                 Rating                     Amount
                                                  (mil. $)
  X                     AAA (sf)                     5.00
  A-1                   AAA (sf)                   374.00
  A-2                   NR                          20.00
  A-3                   AA (sf)                     60.00
  B (deferrable)        A (sf)                      38.00
  C (deferrable)        BBB- (sf)                   36.00
  D (deferrable)        BB- (sf)                    24.00
  E (deferrable)        B- (sf)                     13.10
  Subordinated notes    NR                          51.00

  NR--Not rated.


CD 2017-CD4: Fitch Affirms Class X-F Certs at B-sf, Outlook Stable
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 19 classes of CD 2017-CD4 Mortgage Trust
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2017-CD4.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Stable Performance: The overall pool performance remains stable
from issuance; Fitch's loss expectations are unchanged from
issuance. There are no delinquent or specially serviced loans. As
of the April 2018 distribution date, the pool's aggregate balance
has been reduced by 0.4% to $897 million, from $900 million at
issuance. One loan (6.6%) is on the servicer's watchlist, and none
are considered Fitch loans of concern.

High Office and Hotel Loan Concentration: Loans backed by office
properties represent 41.7% of the pool, including 33% in the top
15. Hotel properties represent 20.8%, including 16.2% in the top
10.

Watchlist Loan: The pool has one loan (6.6%) on the servicer's
watchlist, Los Angeles Corporate Center, which is four office
buildings with 385,775 SF located in Monterey Park, CA. The
property was put on the watchlist due to the third largest tenant
Synermed (12%) being in monetary default for failure to remit
February 2018 rent and there are reports that Synermed is shutting
down all operations. The property also contains multiple high
quality tenants.

Single-Tenant Concentration: Four loans among the largest 20 are
secured by single-tenant properties (14.1% of the pool). Moffett
Place Google (8.4%), Malibu Vista (2.0%), Alvogen Pharma US (1.9%),
and SG360 (1.8%) are secured by single-tenant properties.

Credit Opinion Loan: One loan in the pool, Hilton Hawaiian Village
(6.3%), had an investment-grade credit opinion at issuance.
Although, Fitch did not receive updated financials for the
property, occupancy, ADR, RevPAR penetration levels have increased
slightly since issuance.

Limited Amortization: Ten loans representing 28.4% of the pool are
full-term interest-only and 18 loans representing 44.5% of the pool
are partial interest-only. The pool is scheduled to amortize by
9.9% of the initial pool balance prior to maturity.

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. For additional sensitivity analysis,
please see Fitch's original presale on the transaction dated, April
25, 2017.

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.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

  --$28,878,487 class A-1 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$90,250,000 class A-2 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$53,102,000 class A-SB at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$192,000,000 class A-3 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$234,483,000 class A-4 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$669,372,000* class X-A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$70,573,000 class A-M at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$36,355,000 class B at 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$39,564,000 class C at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$75,919,000* class X-B at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$44,910,000* class X-D at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$21,386,000* class X-E at 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$8,554,000* class X-F at 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$44,910,000 class D at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$21,386,000 class E at 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$8,554,000 class F at 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$11,385,272** class at V-A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$1,297,277,000** class V-BC at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$767,406** class V-D at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable.

* Notional amount and interest only.
** Exchangeable classes that are a component of VRR Interest.

Fitch does not rate class G, X-G, V-E, and VRR Interest
certificates.


CFCRE 2016-C4: Fitch Affirms Class E Certs at 'BB-sf'
-----------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 17 classes of Cantor Commercial Real
Estate Mortgage Trust (CFCRE) commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates series 2016-C4.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Stable Performance: Overall pool performance remains stable and
generally in line with expectations at issuance, with minimal
paydown or changes to credit enhancement. As of the April 2018
remittance, the pool's aggregate principal balance has been reduced
by 1.5% to $827 million from $840 million at issuance. Interest
shortfalls are currently impacting class G.

Fitch Loans of Concern: Fitch has designated six loans (9% of pool)
as Fitch Loans of Concern (FLOCs), including two loans in the top
15 and one specially serviced loan. The sixth largest loan, One
Commerce Plaza (3.9%), is secured by a 746,052 square foot (sf)
office property located in Albany, NY. The three largest tenants at
the property include NYS OGS Department of Health (22.5% of NRA),
NYS Dept. of State (16.6%) and NYS Higher Education (13.8%). The
second largest tenant has an upcoming lease expiration on May 31,
2018 and the third largest tenant's lease expired in July 2017. At
issuance, the landlord was in the process of drafting these two
tenants' leases, which then had to undergo the standard State
signature process. In addition, the largest tenant had initiated a
renewal of its lease in March 2016; however, based upon the latest
January 2018 rent roll provided by the servicer, an updated lease
expiration date for the tenant was not provided. Further,
approximately 37.6% of the NRA is comprised of tenants on
month-to-month leases. Fitch has an outstanding inquiry to the
servicer for an overall leasing update. The 13th largest loan,
Broadstone Plaza II, is secured by an 118,103 sf anchored retail
center located in Folsom, CA. Occupancy as of March 2018 declined
to 72.9% from 98.8% at year-end (YE) 2017 due to the second largest
tenant, Babies R Us (25.9% of NRA) vacating ahead of its January
2023 lease expiration. The servicer indicated the space is being
actively marketed.

The FLOCs outside of the top 15 loans were flagged for low debt
service coverage ratios. The Concord Place Apartments and Lakeview
Terrace loans (0.7%) are two cross-collateralized and
cross-defaulted loans secured by student housing properties located
in Oshkosh, WI, next to the University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh. While
performance of The Concord Place Apartments loan has been stable
since issuance, the Lakeview Terrace loan reported a low net
operating income debt service coverage ratio (NOI DSCR) of 1.02x
for year-to-date (YTD) September 2017, compared to 1.05x at YE 2016
and 1.40x underwritten at issuance. Although there has been no new
supply or declining university enrollment, the low DSCR has been
due to a decrease in average rents by 4% to $544 per month as of
the third quarter 2017 from $565 as of YE 2016. The borrower has
been lowering rents to attract new tenants and retain existing
tenants. The Marsh Creek Village loan (0.4%) is secured by a 20,794
sf mixed-use property located in Sandy Springs, GA. Although
occupancy has remained at 100%, YE 2017 NOI DSCR declined to 1.07x
from 1.30x at YE 2016 due to a decrease in the average rental rate
and an increase in operating expenses.

Specially-Serviced Loan: The Wharfside Village loan (1.1% of pool)
transferred to special servicing in November 2017 due to
significant damage caused by Hurricanes Maria and Irma. The loan is
secured by a 30,570 sf mixed-use property located in St. John, U.S.
Virgin Islands. According to the special servicer, a $7.7 million
insurance settlement was received, which consists of $5.9 million
for property coverage and $1.8 million for rental loss and business
interruption. There may be an additional claim of $1 million that
the borrower is working on with the insurance company. The total
estimated damages are still being finalized; however, the amount is
not expected to exceed the funds received from the insurance
claims. Additionally, the rental loss insurance funds are expected
to sufficiently cover debt service while the property is being
rebuilt, which is estimated to be between nine and 12 months. As of
April 2018, the property was vacant, with tenants expected to
reoccupy their space on a rolling basis.

Pool and Loan Concentrations: The top 10 loans account for 48% of
the current pool balance. Office properties comprise 25.6%,
followed by retail at 17.5% and hotel at 16.4%.

Amortization: The pool is scheduled to amortize by 11.6% of the
initial pool balance prior to maturity. Nine loans (30.6% of pool)
are full-term interest-only and 12 loans (29%) are partial
interest-only. Three partial interest-only loans (8.4%) are
currently amortizing.

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.

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 ratings:

  --$20.8 million class A-1 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$24.8 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$46.5 million class A-SB at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$200 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$230.2 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$52.8 million class A-HR at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$585.3 million(b) class X-A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$52.8 million(b) class X-HR at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$37.8 million(b) class X-B at 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$21 million(a)(b) class X-E at 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$9.5 million(a)(b) class X-F at 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$63 million class A-M at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$37.8 million class B at 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$37.8 million class C at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$45.1 million(a) class D at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$21 million(a) class E at 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$9.5 million(a) class F at 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable.

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

Fitch does not rate the class G or class X-G certificates. Fitch
had previously withdrawn the ratings on the interest-only classes
X-C and X-D.


CGRBS COMMERCIAL 2013-VNO5TH: S&P Hikes E Notes Rating to BB+(sf)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its ratings on four classes of commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates from CGRBS Commercial Mortgage
Trust 2013-VNO5TH, a U.S. commercial mortgage-backed securities
(CMBS) transaction. In addition, S&P affirmed its ratings on two
other classes from the same transaction.

For the upgrades and affirmations, S&P's expectation of credit
enhancement was in line with the raised or affirmed rating levels.

S&P affirmed its rating on the class X-A interest-only (IO)
certificates based on its 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. Class X-A's notional
balance references class A.

This is a stand-alone (single borrower) transaction backed by a
fixed-rate IO mortgage loan secured by the borrower's fee interest
in a 38,814-sq.-ft. retail condominium unit and a leasehold
interest on 75,555 sq. ft. of space at an office condominium that
the borrower leases from the office condominium owner. The
condominiums are within 666 Fifth Avenue, a 1.4 million-sq.-ft.,
39-story, class A office building located in Midtown Manhattan
between 52nd and 53rd streets. S&P said, "Our property-level
analysis included a re-evaluation of the property that secures the
mortgage loan in the trust and considered the stable
servicer-reported net operating income and occupancy for the past
four years (2014 through 2017). We then derived our sustainable
in-place net cash flow, which we divided by a 6.00% S&P Global
Ratings capitalization rate to determine our expected-case value."
This yielded an overall S&P Global Ratings loan-to-value ratio and
debt service coverage (DSC) of 70.2% and 2.31x, respectively, on
the trust balance.

According to the April 13, 2018, trustee remittance report, the IO
mortgage loan has a trust and whole loan balance of $390.0 million,
pays an annual fixed interest rate of 3.61%, and matures on March
6, 2023. To date, the trust has not incurred any principal losses.

The master servicer, Wells Fargo Bank N.A., reported a DSC of 2.87x
on the trust balance for the year ended Dec. 31, 2017, and
occupancy was 100% according to the Dec. 18, 2017, rent roll. Based
on the December 2017 rent roll, the property is leased to three
tenants with leases expiring in 2024 and 2026.

RATINGS LIST

  CGRBS Commercial Mortgage Trust 2013-VNO5TH
  Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2013-VNO5TH

                                            Rating
    Class             Identifier       To             From
    A                 125354AA8        AAA (sf)       AAA (sf)
    X-A               125354AC4        AAA (sf)       AAA (sf)
    B                 125354AE0        AA+ (sf)       AA (sf)
    C                 125354AG5        A+ (sf)        A (sf)
    D                 125354AJ9        BBB (sf)       BBB- (sf)
    E                 125354AL4        BB+ (sf)       BB (sf)


CHURCHILL MIDDLE: DBRS Assigns BB(low) Rating on Class D Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS, Inc. assigned these ratings to the Class A-R Loans, the Class
A-T Loans, the Class B Loans and Notes, the Class C Loans and
Notes, and the Class D Loans and Notes (collectively, the Loans and
Notes) issued by Churchill Middle Market CLO IV Ltd.:

-- Class A-R Loans rated AA (sf)
-- Class A-T Loans rated AA (sf)
-- Class B Loans and Class B Notes rated A (low) (sf)
-- Class C Loans and Class C Notes rated BBB (low) (sf)
-- Class D Loans and Class D Notes rated BB (low) (sf)

The ratings on the Loans are being assigned pursuant to the Credit
Agreement dated as of April 19, 2018, among Churchill Middle Market
CLO IV Ltd. as Borrower; Natixis, New York Branch (Natixis) as
Administrative Agent; The Bank of New York Mellon Trust Company,
National Association (BNYM) as Collateral Agent, Collateral
Administrator, Information Agent and Custodian; and the Lenders
referred to therein. The ratings on the Notes are being assigned
pursuant to the Note Purchase Agreement, dated as of April 19,
2018, among Churchill Middle Market CLO IV Ltd. as Issuer, BNYM as
Collateral Agent and Note Agent, and the Purchasers referred to
therein.

The ratings on the Class A-R Loans and Class A-T Loans address the
timely payment of interest (excluding any Capped Amounts and the
additional 2% of interest payable at the Post-Default Rate, as
defined in the Credit Agreement referred to above) and the ultimate
payment of principal on or before the Stated Maturity (as defined
in the Credit Agreement referred to above). The ratings on the
Class B Loans and Notes, Class C Loans and Notes, and Class D Loans
and Notes address the ultimate payment of interest (excluding the
additional 2% of interest payable at the Post-Default Rate, as
defined in the Credit Agreement and the Note Purchase Agreement
referred to above) and the ultimate payment of principal on or
before the Stated Maturity (as defined in the Credit Agreement and
the Note Purchase Agreement referred to above).

The Loans and Notes issued by Churchill Middle Market CLO IV Ltd.
will be collateralized primary by a portfolio of U.S. middle-market
corporate loans. Churchill Middle Market CLO IV Ltd. will be
managed by Nuveen Alternative Advisors LLC. Additionally, Churchill
Asset Management LLC will act as Sub-Advisor for this transaction.

The rating reflects the following:

(1) The Credit Agreement dated April 19, 2018.

(2) The Note Purchase Agreement dated as of April 19, 2018.

(3) The integrity of the transaction structure.

(4) DBRS's assessment of the portfolio quality.

(5) Adequate credit enhancement to withstand projected collateral
loss rates under various cash flow stress scenarios.

(6) DBRS's assessment of the origination, servicing and
collateralized loan obligation management capabilities of Nuveen
Alternative Advisors LLC and Churchill Asset Management LLC as
Sub-Advisor.

To assess portfolio credit quality, DBRS provides a credit estimate
or internal assessment for each non-financial corporate obligor in
the portfolio, not rated by DBRS. Credit estimates are not ratings;
rather, they represent a model-driven default probability for each
obligor that is used in assigning a rating to the facility.

Notes: All figures are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted.


CIM TRUST 2018-J1: DBRS Assigns Prov. BB Rating on Class B-4 Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS, Inc. assigned the following provisional ratings to the
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2018-J1 (the
Certificates) issued by CIM Trust 2018-J1 (the Trust):

-- $338.2 million Class A-1 at AAA (sf)
-- $338.2 million Class A-2 at AAA (sf)
-- $338.2 million Class A-3 at AAA (sf)
-- $253.7 million Class A-4 at AAA (sf)
-- $253.7 million Class A-5 at AAA (sf)
-- $253.7 million Class A-6 at AAA (sf)
-- $84.6 million Class A-7 at AAA (sf)
-- $84.6 million Class A-8 at AAA (sf)
-- $84.6 million Class A-9 at AAA (sf)
-- $270.6 million Class A-10 at AAA (sf)
-- $270.6 million Class A-11 at AAA (sf)
-- $270.6 million Class A-12 at AAA (sf)
-- $67.6 million Class A-13 at AAA (sf)
-- $67.6 million Class A-14 at AAA (sf)
-- $67.6 million Class A-15 at AAA (sf)
-- $16.9 million Class A-16 at AAA (sf)
-- $16.9 million Class A-17 at AAA (sf)
-- $16.9 million Class A-18 at AAA (sf)
-- $20.9 million Class A-19 at AAA (sf)
-- $20.9 million Class A-20 at AAA (sf)
-- $20.9 million Class A-21 at AAA (sf)
-- $359.1 million Class A-22 at AAA (sf)
-- $359.1 million Class A-23 at AAA (sf)
-- $359.1 million Class A-24 at AAA (sf)
-- $359.1 million Class A-IO1 at AAA (sf)
-- $338.2 million Class A-IO2 at AAA (sf)
-- $338.2 million Class A-IO3 at AAA (sf)
-- $338.2 million Class A-IO4 at AAA (sf)
-- $253.7 million Class A-IO5 at AAA (sf)
-- $253.7 million Class A-IO6 at AAA (sf)
-- $253.7 million Class A-IO7 at AAA (sf)
-- $84.6 million Class A-IO8 at AAA (sf)
-- $84.6 million Class A-IO9 at AAA (sf)
-- $84.6 million Class A-IO10 at AAA (sf)
-- $270.6 million Class A-IO11 at AAA (sf)
-- $270.6 million Class A-IO12 at AAA (sf)
-- $270.6 million Class A-IO13 at AAA (sf)
-- $67.6 million Class A-IO14 at AAA (sf)
-- $67.6 million Class A-IO15 at AAA (sf)
-- $67.6 million Class A-IO16 at AAA (sf)
-- $16.9 million Class A-IO17 at AAA (sf)
-- $16.9 million Class A-IO18 at AAA (sf)
-- $16.9 million Class A-IO19 at AAA (sf)
-- $20.9 million Class A-IO20 at AAA (sf)
-- $20.9 million Class A-IO21 at AAA (sf)
-- $20.9 million Class A-IO22 at AAA (sf)
-- $359.1 million Class A-IO23 at AAA (sf)
-- $359.1 million Class A-IO24 at AAA (sf)
-- $359.1 million Class A-IO25 at AAA (sf)
-- $4.8 million Class B-1 at AA (sf)
-- $6.7 million Class B-2 at A (sf)
-- $3.8 million Class B-3 at BBB (sf)
-- $3.2 million Class B-4 at BB (sf)

Classes A-IO1, A-IO2, A-IO3, A-IO4, A-IO5, A-IO6, A-IO7, A-IO8,
A-IO9, A-IO10, A-IO11, A-IO12, A-IO13, A-IO14, A-IO15, A-IO16,
A-IO17, A-IO18, A-IO19, A-IO20, A-IO21, A-IO22, A-IO23, A-IO24 and
A-IO25 are interest-only certificates. The class balances represent
notional amounts.

Classes A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, A-5, A-7, A-8, A-9, A-10, A-11, A-12,
A-13, A-14, A-16, A-17, A-19, A-20, A-22, A-23, A-24, A-IO2, A-IO3,
A-IO4, A-IO5, A-IO8, A-IO9, A-IO10, A-IO11, A-IO12, A-IO13, A-IO14,
A-IO17, A-IO20, A-IO23, A-IO24 and A-IO25 are exchangeable
certificates. These classes can be exchanged for a combination of
exchange certificates as specified in the offering documents.

Classes A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, A-5, A-6, A-7, A-8, A-9, A-10, A-11,
A-12, A-13, A-14, A-15, A-16, A-17 and A-18 are super-senior
certificates. These classes benefit from additional protection from
senior support certificates (Classes A-19, A-20 and A-21) with
respect to loss allocation.

The AAA (sf) ratings on the Certificates reflect the 5.50% of
credit enhancement provided by subordinated Certificates in the
pool. The AA (sf), A (sf), BBB (sf) and BB (sf) ratings reflect
4.25%, 2.50%, 1.50% and 0.65% of credit enhancement, respectively.

This transaction is a securitization of a portfolio of first-lien,
fixed-rate, prime residential mortgages. The Certificates are
backed by 530 loans with a total principal balance of $380,008,740
as of the Cut-off Date (April 1, 2018).

The mortgage loans were originated by Quicken Loans, Inc. (18.1%),
Guild Mortgage Company (13.7%), New Penn Financial, LLC (9.9%),
Guaranteed Rate, Inc. (8.8%), JMAC Lending, Inc. (8.5%) and various
other originators, each comprising no more than 7.0% of the pool by
principal balance. On or prior to the Closing Date, the Sellers,
Chimera Funding TRS LLC and Chimera Residential Mortgage Inc., will
acquire the mortgage loans from Bank of America, National
Association. Through bulk purchases, BANA acquired the mortgage
loans underwritten either to its jumbo whole loan acquisition
guidelines (94.5%) or pursuant to Fannie Mae's Automated
Underwriting System (AUS) (5.5%).

Shell point Mortgage Servicing will service 100% of the mortgage
loans, directly or through subservices. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. will
act as Master Servicer, Securities Administrator and Custodian.
Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB will serve as Trustee.

The transaction employs a senior-subordinate, shifting-interest
cash flow structure that is enhanced from a pre-crisis structure.

The ratings reflect transactional strengths that include
high-quality underlying assets and well-qualified borrowers.

This transaction employs a representations and warranties (R&W)
framework that contains certain weaknesses, such as unrated R&W
providers, unrated entities (the Sellers) providing a back-stop and
sunset provisions on the back-stop. To capture the perceived
weaknesses, DBRS reduced the originator scores for all loans in
this pool. A lower originator score results in increased default
and loss assumptions and provides additional cushions for the rated
securities.

Notes:  All figures are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted.


CITIGROUP MORTGAGE 2018-RP2: Moody's Rates Class B-2 Debt 'B3'
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned definitive ratings to eight
classes of notes issued by Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust 2018-RP2
("CMLTI 2018-RP2"), which are backed by one pool of primarily
re-performing residential mortgage loans. As of the cut-off date of
February 28, 2018, the collateral pool is comprised of 1,139 first
lien mortgage loans, with a weighted average (WA) updated primary
borrower FICO score of 651, a WA current loan-to-value Ratio (LTV)
of 94.1% and a total unpaid balance of $344,794,833. Total deal
balance is $346,027,026 which includes a pre-existing servicing
advance of $1,232,194. Approximately 10.5% of the pool balance is
non-interest bearing, which consists of both principal reduction
alternative (PRA) and non-PRA deferred principal balance.

Fay Servicing, LLC ("Fay") will be the primary servicer and will
not advance any principal or interest on the delinquent loans.
However, it will be required to advance costs and expenses incurred
in connection with a default, delinquency or other event in the
performance of its servicing obligations.

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust 2018-RP2

Class A-1, Assigned Aaa (sf)

Class A, Assigned Aaa (sf)

Class M-1, Assigned Aa2 (sf)

Class M-2, Assigned A3 (sf)

Class M-3, Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Class B-1, Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Class B-2, Assigned B3 (sf)

Class B-3, Assigned C (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

Summary Credit Analysis and Rating Rationale

Moody's said it expected losses on CMLTI 2018-RP2's collateral pool
average 14.0% in Moody's base case scenario. "Our loss estimates
take into account the historical performance of loans that have
similar collateral characteristics as the loans in the pool. Our
credit opinion is the result of our analysis of a wide array of
quantitative and qualitative factors, a review of the third-party
review of the pool, servicing framework and the representations and
warranties framework," Moody's said.

The methodologies used in these ratings were "Moody's Approach to
Rating Securitisations Backed by Non-Performing and Re-Performing
Loans" published in August 2016 and "US RMBS Surveillance
Methodology" published in January 2017.

Collateral Description

CMLTI 2018-RP2's collateral pool is primarily comprised of
re-performing mortgage loans. About 85.9% of mortgage loans in the
pool have been previously modified.

Moody's based its expected losses on its estimates of 1) the
default rate on the remaining balance of the loans and 2) the
principal recovery rate on the defaulted balances. The two factors
that most strongly influence a re-performing mortgage loan's
likelihood of re-default are the length of time that the loan has
performed since a loan modification, and the amount of the
reduction in the monthly mortgage payment as a result of the
modification. The longer a borrower has been current on a
re-performing loan, the less likely the borrower is to re-default.
Approximately 36.3% of the borrowers have been current on their
payments for at least the past 24 months under the MBA method of
calculating delinquencies.

The sponsor noted that there is no material damage to the
properties that were in geographic areas affected by Hurricanes
Irma and Harvey and the California mudslides and wildfires. The
transaction also contains a representation and warranty that there
is no material damage to the properties.

Moody's estimated expected losses for the pool using two approaches
-- (1) pool-level approach, and (2) re-performing loan level
analysis.

In the pool-level approach, Moody's estimated losses on the pool
using an approach similar to its surveillance approach whereby
Moody's applies assumptions of future delinquencies, default rates,
loss severities and prepayments based on observed performance of
similar collateral. Moody's projects future annual delinquencies
for eight years by applying an initial annual default rate and
delinquency burnout factors. Based on the loan characteristics of
the pool and the demonstrated pay histories, Moody's expects an
annual delinquency rate of 13.3% on the collateral pool for year
one. Moody's then calculated future delinquencies on the pool using
its default burnout and voluntary conditional prepayment rate (CPR)
assumptions. The delinquency burnout factors reflect its  future
expectations of the economy and the U.S. housing market. Moody's
then aggregated the delinquencies and converted them to losses by
applying pool-specific lifetime default frequency and loss severity
assumptions. Moody's loss severity assumptions are based off
observed severities on liquidated seasoned loans and reflect the
lack of principal and interest advancing on the loans.

Moody's also conducted a loan level analysis on CMLTI 2018-RP2's
collateral pool. Moody's applied loan-level baseline lifetime
propensity to default assumptions, and considered the historical
performance of seasoned loans with similar collateral
characteristics and payment histories. Moody's then adjusted this
base default propensity up for (1) adjustable-rate loans, (2) loans
that have the risk of coupon step-ups and (3) loans with high
updated loan to value ratios (LTVs). Moody's applied a higher
baseline lifetime default propensity for interest-only loans, using
the same adjustments. To calculate the expected loss for the pool,
Moody's applied a loan-level loss severity assumption based on the
loans' updated estimated LTVs. Moody's further adjusted the loss
severity assumption upwards for loans in states that give
super-priority status to homeowner association (HOA) liens, to
account for potential risk of HOA liens trumping a mortgage.

As of the cut-off date, approximately 10.5% of the pool balance is
non-interest bearing, which consists of both PRA and non-PRA
deferred principal balance. However, the PRA deferred amount of
$1,999,572 will be carved out as a separate Class PRA note.

For non-PRA forborne amounts, the deferred balance is the full
obligation of the borrower and must be paid in full upon (i) sale
of property (ii) voluntary payoff or (iii) final scheduled payment
date. Upon sale of the property, the servicer therefore could
potentially recover some of the deferred amount. For loans that
default in future or get modified after the closing date, the
servicer may opt for partial or full principal forgiveness to the
extent permitted under the servicing agreement. Based on
performance and information from servicers, Moody's applied a
slightly higher default rate than what it assumed for the overall
pool given that these borrowers have experienced past credit events
that required loan modification, as opposed to borrowers who have
been current and have never been modified. In addition, Moody's
assumed approximately 95% severity as the servicer may recover a
portion of the deferred balance. Moody's expected loss does not
consider the PRA deferred amount.

Transaction Structure

The securitization has a simple sequential priority of payments
structure without any cash flow triggers. The servicer will not
advance any principal or interest on delinquent loans. However, the
servicer will be required to advance costs and expenses incurred in
connection with a default, delinquency or other event in the
performance of its servicing obligations. Credit enhancement in
this transaction is comprised of subordination provided by
mezzanine and junior tranches and loss allocation to the
subordinate bonds. To the extent excess cashflow is available, it
will be used to pay down additional principal of the bonds
sequentially, building overcollateralization.

Moody's coded CMLTI 2018-RP2's cashflows using SFW(R), a cashflow
tool developed by Moody's Analytics. To assess the final rating on
the notes, Moody's ran 96 different loss and prepayment scenarios
through SFW. The scenarios encompass six loss levels, four loss
timing curves, and four prepayment curves. The structure allows for
timely payment of interest and ultimate payment of principal with
respect to the notes by the legal final maturity.

Third Party Review

The sponsor engaged third party diligence providers to conduct the
following due diligence reviews: (i) a title/lien review to confirm
the appropriate lien was recorded and the position of the lien and
to review for other outstanding liens and the position of those
liens; (ii) a state and federal regulatory compliance review on the
loans; (iii) a payment history review for the three year period (to
the extent available) to confirm that the payment strings matched
the data supplied by or on behalf of the third-party sellers; and
(iv) a data comparison review on certain characteristics of the
loans.

Based on its analysis of the TPR reports, Moody's determined that a
portion of the loans with some cited violations are at enhanced
risk of having violated TILA through an under-disclosure of the
finance charges or other disclosure deficiencies. Although the TPR
report indicated that the statute of limitations for borrowers to
rescind their loans has already passed, borrowers can still raise
these legal claims in defense against foreclosure as a set off or
recoupment and win damages that can reduce the amount of the
foreclosure proceeds. Such damages can include up to $4,000 in
statutory damages, borrowers' legal fees and other actual damages.
Moody's increased its base case losses for these loans to account
for such damages.

The diligence provider also noted 143 lien exceptions such as HOA
liens in super lien states, municipal liens, delinquent property
taxes and property tax lien. Loans with these findings are not
removed from the final pool, however, the seller is obligated to
cure the exception or repurchase the loan within 12 months of the
closing date. The review also consisted of validating 42 data
fields for each loan in the pool which resulted in 556 loans having
one or more data variances. It was determined that such data
variances were attributable to missing or defective source
documentation, non-material variances within acceptable tolerances,
allocation between documented and undocumented deferred principal
balances, timing and data formatting differences. Moody's did not
make any adjustments for these findings.

Representations & Warranties (R&W)

The R&W framework for this transaction is adequate. The scope of
the R&Ws are somewhat weaker compared to prior CMLTI
securitizations rated by us owing mainly to items identified in the
TPR being excluded from the R&Ws. However, the overall framework is
still adequate as there are well-defined breach discovery and
enforcement mechanisms and provisions that obligate the R&W
provider despite lack of its knowledge (R&W knowledge clawback
provisions).

The R&W provider is Citigroup Global Markets Realty Corp. Although
it itself is unrated, it is affiliated with an investment grade
entity, Citigroup Inc., though Citigroup Inc. has no contractual
obligation with respect to R&W breaches.

There is a good chance that any R&W breaches will be discovered
because an independent party is obligated to review for R&W
breaches if:

(i) a loan was at least 120 days delinquent following a threshold
event, which is satisfied if the sum of cumulative realized loss
and unpaid principal balance of 120+ days delinquent loans (current
trigger amount) within the first three years exceeds 50% of
aggregate class B-3, class B-4 and class B-5 balance as of the
closing date or the current trigger amount exceeds 75% of aggregate
class B-3, class B-4 and class B-5 balance as of the closing date
thereafter.

(ii) a loan was liquidated at a loss if certain conditions
including but not limited to a reviewer waiver from controlling
holder or if the review fees and expenses were less than the loss
amount

(iii) the servicer has made a determination that it cannot
foreclose upon the loan

If the breach reviewer (an independent third party) identifies a
R&W breach, the R&W provider will be obligated to either cure the
breach, repurchase or substitute the loan, or pay for any loss (or
the portion of any loss attributable to the breach) if the loan has
been liquidated. The R&W provider will also cover losses incurred
due to a servicer's inability to foreclose on the mortgage. If the
R&W Provider disputes the findings, there is binding arbitration to
resolve the dispute. The loser of the arbitration pays all the
expenses.

There are a few weaknesses in the enforcement mechanisms. First,
the independent reviewer is not identified at closing and, if the
indenture trustee has difficulty engaging one on acceptable terms,
the controlling holder can direct the trustee not to engage one.
Furthermore, the review fees, which the trust pays, are not agreed
upon at closing and will be determined in the future. Second, the
remedies do not cover damages owing to TILA under-disclosures. We
made adjustments to account for such damages in our analysis.
Finally, there will be no remedy for an insurance-related R&W if
there is an insurance policy rescission.

Trustee Indemnification

Moody's believes there is a very low likelihood that the rated
notes in CMLTI 2018-RP2 will incur any loss from extraordinary
expenses or indemnification payments owing to potential future
lawsuits against key deal parties. First, majority of the loans are
seasoned with demonstrated payment history, reducing the likelihood
of a lawsuit on the basis that the loans have underwriting defects.
Second, historical performance of loans aggregated by the sponsor
to date has been within expectation, with minimal losses on
previously issued CMLTI transactions. Third, the transaction has
reasonably well defined processes in place to identify loans with
defects on an ongoing basis. In this transaction a well-defined
breach discovery and enforcement mechanism reduces the likelihood
that parties will be sued for inaction.

Transaction Parties

Fay will be the primary servicer for all loans in the pool. Wells
Fargo Bank, N.A. and Deutsche Bank National Trust Company will act
as custodians. U.S. Bank National Association will be the trust
administrator and Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB will be the
indenture trustee.

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

Factors that would lead to an upgrade of the ratings

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 our 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. Other reasons for
better-than-expected performance include changes to servicing
practices that enhance collections or refinancing opportunities
that result in prepayments.

Factors that would lead to a downgrade of the ratings

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 obligors defaulting 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.


COBALT 2007-C2: Fitch Lowers $15.1MM Class E Debt Rating to 'Csf'
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded one class and affirmed 16 classes of
COBALT CMBS Commercial Mortgage Trust's (COBALT) commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates series 2007-C2.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Stable Loss Expectations: The affirmations reflect relatively
stable loss expectations since Fitch's last rating action. Fitch
modeled losses of 10.8% of the original pool balance, including
4.4% of losses incurred to date. This is in-line with the previous
rating action in May 2017, when loss expectations of the original
pool balance were 11.6%. The downgrade to the distressed class
reflects increased certainty about expected losses and timing of
the disposition of the REO assets.

Pool Concentration and Adverse Selection: The pool is highly
concentrated with only 20 out of the original 152 loans remaining.
Eighteen loans (95%) have been identified as Fitch Loans of
Concern, including 13 loans (65%) currently in special servicing.
Of the delinquent loans, eight assets (33%) are real estate owned
and five loans (32%) are currently in the foreclosure process.
Risks surrounding the performing Fitch Loans of Concern include
modified loans with "Hope" notes, fluctuating property performance,
low debt service coverage ratios, and underperforming loans in
secondary market locations.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Outlooks on classes A-JFX and A-JFL remain Stable due to
relatively high CE; however, upgrades to these classes will be
limited due to the concentrated nature of the pool and adverse
selection. Downgrades could occur on these classes if losses on the
specially serviced loans/assets exceed Fitch's expectations, if
pool performance deteriorates, or as losses are realized.

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 class:

-- $15.1 million class E to 'Csf' from 'CCsf'; RE 0%.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

-- $90.7 million class A-JFX at 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- 88.4 million class A-JFL at 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $21.2 million class B at 'CCCsf'; RE 80%;
-- $27.2 million class C at 'CCsf'; RE 0%.
-- $21.2 million class D at 'CCsf'; RE 0%;
--  $18.1 million class F at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
--$30.2 million class G at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $24.2 million class H at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $17.7 million class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;

Classes K, L, M, N, O, P and Q are fully depleted and have been
affirmed at 'Dsf', RE 0% due to realized losses.

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


COMM 2006-C8: Fitch Hikes Class A-J Debt Rating to CCCsf
--------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded one and affirmed 13 distressed classes
of COMM Mortgage Trust series 2006-C8 commercial mortgage
pass-through certificates.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Better than Expected Recoveries: The upgrade of class B to 'CCCsf'
from 'CCsf' reflects better than expected recoveries over the past
year on disposed assets. Since the last rating action, six
specially serviced loans/real estate owned (REO) assets were
disposed at minimal realized losses of $933,000.

Concentrated Pool/Adverse Selection: The pool is highly
concentrated with only seven loans/REO assets remaining, all of
which are in special servicing. The two largest loans/assets
comprise 61.1% of the pool. Due to the concentrated nature of the
pool, Fitch performed a sensitivity analysis, which assumed
conservative loss expectations on the remaining loans/REO assets.
The ratings reflect this sensitivity and liquidation analysis.

As of the April 2018 distribution, the pool's aggregate principal
balance has been reduced by 92.1% to $296.8 million from $3.78
billion at issuance. Interest shortfalls in the amount of $43.1
million are currently affecting classes B through S.

JQH Portfolio: The largest loan in the pool is the specially
serviced JQH Hotel Portfolio (35.8% of the pool), which is secured
by five full and limited service hotels located in five states. The
hotels, which have a total of 1,110 rooms, include three Embassy
Suites, one Holiday Inn Express, and one Courtyard by Marriott. The
loan transferred to special servicing in July 2016 due to the
voluntary Chapter 11 bankruptcy filing of the borrower in June
2016. This action is part of a larger bankruptcy that includes 71
John Q Hammons entities with secured debt of over $900 million.
Bankruptcy proceeds remain ongoing. The loan, which had a servicer
reported Sept. 30, 2017 NOI DSCR of 1.90x, remains current.

Sierra Vista Mall: The REO Sierra Vista Mall (25.4% if the pool)
consists of a leasehold interest in a 503,998 sf portion of a
688,724 sf regional mall in Clovis, CA. The mall was built in 1998
and is anchored by non-collateral Target (109,648 sf, through
2023), non-collateral Kohl's (75,088 sf, through July 31, 2019),
Sears (116,641 sf, through Oct. 31, 2019), MB2 Raceway (58,210 sf,
through May 31, 2019), and Sierra Vista Cinema 16 (55,034 sf,
through 2032). The loan originally transferred to the special
servicer in September 2013 after a dispute between the borrower and
the ground lessor became known to the special servicer. The ground
lessor was granted an award of nearly $1 million from the borrower
and ground rent was increased by approximately $150,000/year.
Foreclosure was pursued and the property became REO in January
2015. The special servicer has continued to sign new leases and
renewals, including recent new leases with a 33,000 sf laser tag
tenant and an 8,000 sf Japanese restaurant. Per the February 2018
rent roll, occupancy was 88.3%. The special servicer is making roof
repairs and plans to market the property for sale later this year.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

All remaining classes have distressed ratings, which are subject to
further downgrade as losses are realized. Further upgrades are
unlikely due to the concentrated nature of the pool, and distressed
nature of the collateral.

DUE DILIGENCE USAGE

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

Fitch has upgraded the following class:

-- $112.6 million class A-J to 'CCCsf' from 'CCSf'; RE 100%;

Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

-- $28.3 million class B at 'CCsf'; RE 50%;
-- $42.5 million class C to 'Csf'; RE 0%.
-- $37.8 million class D at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $23.6 million class E at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $28.3 million class F at 'Csf'; RE 0%;
-- $23.7 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%;
-- $0 class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class O at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

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


COMM 2012-CCRE2: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on Class G Debt
----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on sixteen
classes in COMM 2012-CCRE2 Mortgage Trust as follows:
Cl. A-SB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 4, 2017 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 4, 2017 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

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

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

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

Cl. B, Affirmed Aa2 (sf); previously on May 4, 2017 Affirmed Aa2
(sf)

Cl. B-PEZ, Affirmed Aa2 (sf); previously on May 4, 2017 Affirmed
Aa2 (sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on May 4, 2017 Affirmed A2
(sf)

Cl. C-PEZ, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on May 4, 2017 Affirmed A2
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Baa1 (sf); previously on May 4, 2017 Affirmed Baa1
(sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on May 4, 2017 Affirmed Baa3
(sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on May 4, 2017 Affirmed Ba2
(sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on May 4, 2017 Affirmed B2
(sf)

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

Cl. X-B, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on May 4, 2017 Affirmed Ba3
(sf)

Cl. PEZ, Affirmed A1 (sf); previously on May 4, 2017 Affirmed A1
(sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

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

The ratings on the IO classes were affirmed based on the credit
quality of their referenced classes.

The ratings on class PEZ was affirmed due to the due to the
weighted average rating factor (WARF) of the exchangeable classes.
Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 1.7% of the
current balance, unchanged from Moody's last review. Moody's base
expected loss plus realized losses is now 1.4% of the original
pooled balance, unchanged from Moody's last review.

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

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

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

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

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The methodologies used in rating COMM 2012-CCRE2 Mortgage Trust,
Cl. A-SB, Cl. A-3, Cl. A-4, Cl. A-M, Cl. A-M-PEZ, Cl. B, Cl. B-PEZ,
Cl. C, Cl. C-PEZ, Cl. D, Cl. E, Cl. F and Cl. G 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. The principal methodology
used in rating COMM 2012-CCRE2 Mortgage Trust, Cl. PEZ was "Moody's
Approach to Rating Repackaged Securities" published in June 2015.
The methodologies used in rating COMM 2012-CCRE2 Mortgage Trust,
Cl. X-A and Cl. X-B were "Approach to Rating US and Canadian
Conduit/Fusion CMBS" published in July 2017, "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.

DEAL PERFORMANCE
As of the April 17, 2018 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 15% to $1.12 billion
from $1.32 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 49 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 10% of the pool, with the top ten loans (excluding
defeasance) constituting 64% of the pool. One loan, constituting
8.4% of the pool, has an investment-grade structured credit
assessment. Seven loans, constituting 6.1% of the pool, have
defeased and are 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 17, compared to 18 at Moody's last review.
Seven loans, constituting 11.4% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews the
watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that could
affect performance.

There have been no loans which have liquidated at a loss and there
are no loans currently in special servicing.

Moody's received full year 2016 operating results for 97% of the
pool, and full or partial year 2017 operating results for 100% of
the pool (excluding specially serviced and defeased loans). Moody's
weighted average conduit LTV is 89%, compared to 92% 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 11% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.4%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.68X and 1.19X,
respectively, compared to 1.61X and 1.13X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.
The loan with a structured credit assessment is the 520 Eighth
Avenue Loan ($93.7 million -- 8.4% of the pool), which is secured
by three adjacent and interconnected office buildings that have
been combined into a single office property. The properties are
located at 520 8th Avenue, 266 West 37th Street and 261 West 36th
Street, totaling 758,000 square feet (SF). The buildings are
occupied by a diverse mix of tenants including not-for-profit
associations, professional services firms, media and entertainment
services companies. As of December 2017, the property was 99%
leased, essentially unchanged from the prior review and
securitization. Moody's structured credit assessment and stressed
DSCR are a1 (sca.pd) and 1.45X, respectively.

The top three conduit loans represent 28.7% of the pool balance.
The largest loan is the 77 K Street Loan ($108.6 million -- 9.7% of
the pool), which is secured by a 327,000 SF Class-A office building
located in the Capitol Hill submarket of Washington, D.C. The
property was built in 2008 for a total cost of $113 million. The
property was 100% leased as of December 2017, unchanged from
December 2016 and up from 93% at securitization. Performance has
increased due to free rent periods burning off. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 92% and 1.06X, respectively, compared to 97% and
1.01X at the last review.

The second largest loan is the 1055 West 7th Street Loan ($107.3
million -- 9.6% of the pool), which is secured by a 616,000 SF
office Class-A property located in downtown Los Angeles,
California. The property was built in 1987 and is 32 stories high.
The building is located just west of Interstate 110, one block away
from the 7th Street Metro Station, and a few blocks from the
Staples Convention Center. As of December 2017, the property was
87% leased, compared to 92% as of December 2016 and 85% at
securitization. Performance has increased due to free rent periods
burning off. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 102% and 0.98X,
respectively, compared to 104% and 0.96X at the last review.

The third largest loan is the 260 and 261 Madison Avenue Loan
($105.0 million -- 9.4% of the pool), which is secured by two
Class-B office towers located in midtown Manhattan on Madison
Avenue between East 36th and East 37th Street. The properties total
840,000 SF of office space, 37,000 SF of retail space, and a 46,000
SF parking garage. This loan represents a pari-passu interest in a
$231 million loan. As of December 2017, the properties had a
combined occupancy of approximately 82%, compared to 90% at
December 2016 and 90% at securitization. The second largest tenant
Consumer Source Inc. / Primedia (8.0% NRA) vacated at lease
expiration in November 2017. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 97%
and 0.98X, respectively, the same as at the prior review.



COMM 2012-CCRE4: S&P Lowers Class F Certs Rating to CCC- (sf)
-------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings lowered its ratings on six classes of commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates from COMM 2012-CCRE4 Mortgage
Trust, a U.S. commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS)
transaction. At the same time, S&P affirmed its ratings on five
other classes from the same transaction.

S&P said, "For the downgrades and affirmations, our expectation of
credit enhancement was in line with the lowered or affirmed rating
levels.

"The downgrades on classes B, C, D, E, and F primarily reflect
credit support erosion that we anticipate will occur upon the
eventual resolution of the two assets ($77.0 million, 8.0%) with
the special servicer, as well as reduced liquidity support
available to these classes due to ongoing interest shortfalls.

"We affirmed our rating on the class X-A and lowered our rating on
the class X-B interest-only (IO) certificates based on our criteria
for rating IO securities."

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

As of the April 17, 2018, trustee remittance report, the collateral
pool balance was $963.7 million, which is 86.7% of the pool balance
at issuance. The pool currently includes 38 loans and one real
estate-owned (REO) asset, down from 48 loans at issuance. Two of
these assets ($77.0 million, 8.0%) are with the special servicer,
three ($35.1 million, 3.6%) are defeased, and six ($117.7 million,
12.2%) are on the master servicer's watchlist.

S&P calculated a 1.80x S&P Global Ratings weighted average debt
service coverage (DSC) and 74.7% S&P Global Ratings weighted
average loan-to-value (LTV) ratio using a 7.78% S&P Global Ratings
weighted average capitalization rate. The DSC, LTV, and
capitalization rate calculations exclude the two specially serviced
assets and three defeased loans.

The top 10 nondefeased loans have an aggregate outstanding pool
trust balance of $598.3 million (62.1%). Adjusting the
servicer-reported numbers, S&P calculated an S&P Global Ratings'
weighted average DSC and LTV of 1.70x and 78.5%, respectively, for
nine of the top 10 nondefeased loans. The remaining loan is
specially serviced.

To date, the transaction has experienced minimal losses totaling
$0.1 million in principal losses. S&P expects losses to reach
approximately 4.5% 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 two specially serviced
assets.

CREDIT CONSIDERATIONS

As of the April 17, 2018, trustee remittance report, two assets in
the pool were with the special servicer, Rialto Capital Advisors
LLC. Details of the two specially serviced assets, one of which is
a top 10 nondefeased loan, are as follows:

-- The Fashion Outlets of Las Vegas loan ($66.3 million, 6.9%) is
the third-largest nondefeased loan in the pool and has a total
reported exposure of $68.8 million. The loan is secured by an
anchored retail outlet center totaling 375,722 sq. ft. in Primm,
Nev. The loan was transferred to the special servicer on Aug. 18,
2017, due to imminent default. The special servicer stated that the
collateral will be foreclosed upon in the next 6-12 months and that
a property receiver and management team are attempting to stabilize
the property. The reported DSC and occupancy as of year-end 2017
were 0.84x and 75.0%, respectively. A $16.5 million appraisal
reduction amount is in effect against this loan. Based on
currently-available information, S&P expects a significant loss
upon this loan's eventual resolution.

-- The TownePlace Suites Odessa REO asset ($10.7 million, 1.1%)
has a total reported exposure of $12.6 million. The asset is a
108-key limited service hotel in Odessa, Texas. The loan was
transferred to the special servicer on April 7, 2016, because of
payment default, and the asset became REO on Dec. 6, 2016. The
special servicer indicated that they will continue to stabilize
operations and list the property for sale at the end of 2019. As of
year-end 2016, reported occupancy was 35.0%, and the property's
effective gross income was not sufficient to cover operating
expenses. A $4.4 million appraisal reduction amount is in effect
against this asset. S&P expects a moderate loss upon this asset's
eventual resolution.

S&P estimated losses for the two specially serviced assets,
arriving at a weighted-average loss severity of 65.5%.

With respect to the specially serviced assets noted above, a
minimal loss is less than 25%, a moderate loss is 26%-59%, and a
significant loss is 60% or greater.

  RATINGS LIST

  COMM 2012-CCRE4 Mortgage Trust
  Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2012-CCRE4
                                          Rating
  Class             Identifier            To           From
  A-2               12624QAP8             AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)
  A-SB              12624QAQ6             AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)
  A-3               12624QAR4             AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)
  X-A               12624QAS2             AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)
  A-M               12624QAT0             AAA (sf)     AAA (sf)
  X-B               12624QAA1             BBB (sf)     A (sf)
  B                 12624QBA0             A (sf)       AA (sf)
  C                 12624QAC7             BBB (sf)     A (sf)
  D                 12624QAE3             B+ (sf)      BBB (sf)
  E                 12624QAG8             CCC- (sf)    BB+ (sf)
  F                 12624QAJ2             CCC- (sf)    BB- (sf)



COMM 2013-300P: Fitch Affirms BB+ Rating on Class E Debt
--------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed all rated classes of COMM 2013-300P
Mortgage Trust.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Low Trust Leverage: Fitch's stressed debt service coverage ratio
(DSCR) for the trust component of the debt is 1.27x, and the
stressed loan to value (LTV) is 68.7%. Additionally, the 'AAAsf'
rated debt is only $385 per square foot (psf), which implies that
the property could sustain a 70% decline in value from its current
$1 billion appraised value and still repay 'AAAsf' debt.

Excellent Location: The property location borders the Grand Central
and Plaza submarkets. It is situated between 49th and 50th streets
on the west side of Park Avenue. The location is four blocks north
of Grand Central Terminal and offers excellent accessibility and
proximity to public transportation.

Tenant Concentration and Rollover Risk: Colgate-Palmolive is the
largest tenant, occupying 65.3% of the net rentable area (NRA) and
representing 72.6% of the current base rent. Although there is a
negligible amount of tenant rollover in the next few years,
Colgate-Palmolive's lease expires two months before the loan is
scheduled to mature. The tenant has agreed to give back 109,631sf
of space (14.2% of the NRA), which it is currently subleasing to
WeWork, at the end of the current lease. This space has already
been pre-leased, according to the most recent rent roll, although
it is unclear to whom. Colgate-Palmolive has demonstrated a
commitment to the property though long-term occupancy of 60 years
and ongoing investments in their space.

Limited Structural Features: The loan was not originated with any
structural features to mitigate the Colgate-Palmolive lease
expiration. The loan had no upfront reserves other than real estate
taxes, there is no springing cash management and there is no
carve-out guarantor.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Rating Outlook for all classes remains Stable due to the
collateral's stable performance. No rating actions are expected
unless there are material changes to the property occupancy and
cash flow.

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 ratings:

-- $222 million class A1 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $75 million class A1P at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $297 million* class X-A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $61 million class B at 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $42 million class C at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $57 million class D at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $28 million class E at 'BB+sf'; Outlook Stable.

*Notional amount and interest only.


COMM 2014-CCRE18: DBRS Confirms 'B' Rating on Class X-C Certs
-------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS Limited confirmed all classes of the Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-CCRE18 (the Certificates)
issued by COMM 2014-CCRE18 Mortgage Trust as follows:

-- Class A-1 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-2 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-3 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-4 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-5 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-SB at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-M at AAA (sf)
-- Class X-A at AAA (sf)
-- Class B at AA (low) (sf)
-- Class C at A (low) (sf)
-- Class PEZ at A (low) (sf)
-- Class X-B at BBB (sf)
-- Class D at BBB (low) (sf)
-- Class E at BB (low) (sf)
-- Class X-C at B (sf)
-- Class F at B (low) (sf)

Additionally, DBRS assigned Negative trends for Classes F and X-C
to reflect DBRS's concerns with the loans in special servicing and
with the larger loans on the servicer's watch list. The trends on
the remaining classes are Stable.

At issuance, the collateral consisted of 49 fixed-rate loans
secured by 60 commercial properties. As at the April 2018
remittance, all loans remain in the pool with an outstanding
balance of $960.1 million, representing a collateral reduction of
3.6% since issuance. There are two loans that are fully defeased as
at the April 2018 remittance, representing 7.7% of the pool
balance. The weighted-average (WA) DBRS Term debt service coverage
ratio (DSCR) and WA DBRS Debt Yield at issuance were 1.45 times (x)
and 9.1%, respectively. As of the most recent reporting, the pool
reported a WA DSCR and in-place debt yield of 1.60x and 10.3%,
respectively. Forty-eight loans (61.9% of the pool) are reporting
YE2017 financials while 11 loans (25.3% of the pool) reported Q3
2017 financials. Based on the most recent financials, the top 15
loans (69.3% of the pool) had a WA DSCR of 1.64x, compared with the
YE2016 WA DSCR of 1.55x and the DBRS issuance figure of 1.50x,
reflective of a 7.3% NCF increase year over year.

As at April 2018, there ten 10 loans (18.7% of the pool) on the
servicer's watch list. These loans are being monitored for a
variety of reasons, with noteworthy loans including the Pacific
Design Center loan (Prospectus ID #2, 9.9% of the pool), which is
being monitored for a low occupancy and DSCR, and the 399 Thornall
Street loan (Prospectus ID #8, 3.6% of the pool), which is being
monitored for major tenant rollover. To capture concerns with the
watch listed loans, DBRS assumed a stressed cash flow scenario to
increase the probability of default where merited.

There are three loans (6.2% of the pool) currently in special
servicing. The largest of these loans is Midwest Portfolio
(Prospectus ID #9, 3.0% of the pool), which was transferred in May
2017 when the borrower failed to cooperate with the servicer's
efforts to establish a lockbox and cash management as required by
the loan documents. The special servicer is reportedly pursuing
foreclosure, and it is noteworthy that the most recent appraisals
show an overall improvement in value of 8.0% since issuance. The
second-largest loan in special servicing, 22 Exchange Apartments
(Prospectus ID #17, 2.0% of the pool), was transferred to special
servicing in January 2018 due to imminent default and the special
servicer is currently evaluating the workout strategy with a
receiver appointed. The third loan in special servicing, Great Stay
Hotel Portfolio (Prospectus ID #23, 1.2% of the pool), was
transferred to special servicing in March 2017 due to payment
default. Portfolio cash flows fell after a downturn in the energy
markets where the properties are located. The special servicer is
pursuing foreclosure and the most recent valuation suggests a loss
at liquidation is likely.

Classes X-A, X-B and X-C are interest-only (IO) certificates that
reference a single rated tranche or multiple rated tranches. The IO
rating mirrors the lowest-rated reference tranche adjusted upward
by one notch if senior in the waterfall.

Notes: All figures are in U.S dollars unless otherwise noted.


COMM 2014-CCRE18: Fitch Affirms BB- on Class E Certs
----------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 14 classes of Deutsche Bank Securities,
Inc.'s commercial mortgage pass-through certificates, series
2014-CCRE18 (COMM 2014-CCRE18).

KEY RATING DRIVERS

High Concentration of Fitch Loans of Concern: Fitch has designated
11 loans (25.6% of current pool) as Fitch Loans of Concern (FLOCs),
including three in the top 15 (15.8%), one of which is specially
serviced (3%), and two additional specially serviced loans (3.2%).
Fitch performed an additional sensitivity scenario, which assumed
the potential for higher losses on the FLOCs, and the ratings and
Outlooks reflect this analysis.

Of the top 15 FLOCs, two of these properties have reported
significant occupancy declines and one property faces significant
upcoming lease rollover in 2018. Occupancy at the Pacific Design
Center (9.9%) in West Hollywood, CA declined to 54.6% due to a
large number of tenants related to the former largest tenant,
Interpublic Group, vacating the property during first quarter 2017
to relocate to another office tower in Century City, CA. Occupancy
at the Deerfield Park Plaza (2.3%) retail property in Deerfield, IL
declined by nearly 14% in December 2017 after five tenants vacated
at or prior to lease expiration. Over 50% of the NRA at the 399
Thornall Street (3.6%) office property in Edison, NJ is rolling in
2018 when the leases of the two largest tenants, Daiichi Sankyo and
Oracle Financial, expire. Daiichi Sankyo will be vacating the
property to consolidate its New Jersey operations into a new U.S.
headquarters in Basking Ridge, NJ. Oracle Financial is already
subleasing half of its space currently. The other non-specially
serviced FLOCs outside of the top 15 (combined 3.6%) were flagged
for declining occupancy, low debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) or
lease rollover concerns.

Specially Serviced Loans: Since Fitch's last rating action in April
2017, two additional loans have transferred to special servicing
(5%). The Midwest Portfolio loan (3%), which is secured by a
portfolio of four multifamily properties located in Indiana,
Wisconsin and Illinois, transferred to special servicing in May
2017 after the borrower failed to set up and properly use the lock
box for cash management. Foreclosure complaints have been filed and
a receiver is in place. Litigation remains ongoing; however, the
borrower is pursuing a sale of the collateral. The 22 Exchange loan
(2%), which became 60 days delinquent as of March 2018, transferred
to special servicing in January 2018 due to imminent payment
default. The loan is secured by a student housing property in
Akron, OH where performance has been negatively impacted by
declining enrollment and increased competition. As for the
GreatStay Hotel Portfolio loan (1.2%), which has been with the
special servicer since March 2017 due to payment default, a
settlement agreement was executed in January 2018, which involved a
principal payment by the guarantor and consent by the obligors to
the appointment of a receiver; the loan is in foreclosure.

Increased Credit Enhancement: The affirmations reflect increased
credit enhancement to the classes relative to Fitch's loss
expectations. The majority of the pool continues to exhibit
relatively stable performance. One loan (6.6% of current pool) has
been defeased. There have been no realized losses since issuance.

Pool and Loan Concentrations: Loans secured by retail properties
comprise 24.1% of the current pool balance and include two of the
top 15 loans (16.3%). The largest loan, Bronx Terminal Market
(14.1%), is secured by the leasehold interest in a retail power
center located in an infilled area in Bronx, NY with the majority
of NRA leased to national big-box retailers such as Target, BJ's
Wholesale Club, Home Depot, Burlington Coat Factory, Best Buy and
Bed Bath & Beyond. Toys "R" Us/Babies "R" Us, which occupies 8.4%
of the NRA, is expected to vacate by June, following its bankruptcy
filing in September 2017 and liquidation plans announced in March
2018. The top 10 loans represent 58% of the pool by balance. Loans
secured by multifamily properties comprise 19.4% of the current
pool balance, including three of the top 15 loans (11.1%).

Amortization: As of the March 2018 distribution date, the pool's
aggregate principal balance has paid down by 3.5% to $961.1 million
from $996.3 million at issuance. The majority of the pool (42
loans; 65.3% of pool) is currently amortizing. Three loans (17%)
are full-term interest-only, and an additional four loans (17.7%)
still have a partial interest-only component during their remaining
loan term, compared to 47.3% of the original pool at issuance.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Negative Rating Outlooks on classes D and E reflect the high
concentration of FLOCs, including three specially serviced loans,
two of which are new transfers since the last rating action.
Downgrades are possible should performance of the FLOCs continue to
further decline or with prolonged vacancies at these properties.
Fitch's analysis included an additional sensitivity scenario to
address the potential for higher losses on the 399 Thornall Street
loan given the high in-place vacancy and secondary office market
location, and the specially serviced GreatStay Hotel Portfolio loan
given the increased market competition and overall economic stress
in the Marcellus shale region. The Rating Outlooks for classes A-1
through C remain Stable due to increasing credit enhancement and
expected continued paydown. Future upgrades may occur with improved
pool performance and/or additional paydown or defeasance.

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 and revised Rating Outlooks on the following
classes as indicated:

-- $11.8 million class A-1 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $139.7 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $53.6 million class A-SB at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $20.4 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $195 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $241.7 million class A-5 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $723.2 million class X-A* at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $61 million class A-M at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $58.5 million class B at 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $158.2 million class X-B* at 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $46.1 million class C at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $0 class PEZ** at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $53.6 million class D at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook to Negative from
    Stable;
-- $26.2 million class E at 'BB-sf'; Outlook Negative.

  * Notional amount and interest-only.

** Class A-M, B and C certificates may be exchanged for a related

    amount of class PEZ certificates, and class PEZ certificates
    may be exchanged for class A-M, B and C certificates.

Fitch does not rate the class F, G, and X-C certificates.


CSAIL 2018-CX11: DBRS Finalizes B(high) Rating on Class G-RR Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS, Inc. finalized its provisional ratings of the following
classes of Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series
2018-CX11 issued by CSAIL 2018-CX11 Commercial Mortgage Trust:

-- Class A-1 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-2 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-3 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-4 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-5 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-SB at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-S at AAA (sf)
-- Class X-A at AAA (sf)
-- Class B at AA (low) (sf)
-- Class C at A (low) (sf)
-- Class X-D at BBB (high) (sf)
-- Class D at BBB (sf)
-- Class E-RR at BBB (low) (sf)
-- Class F-RR at BB (low) (sf)
-- Class G-RR at B (high) (sf)

DBRS has withdrawn its provisional rating of the following class:

-- Class X-B at A (sf)

DBRS has also assigned a new rating to the following class:

-- Class X-B at AA (sf)

Classes X-D, D, E-RR, F-RR and G-RR have been privately placed. The
Class X-A, X-B and X-D balances are notional.

As a result of the pricing of the transaction, no excess interest
proceeds from the Class C Certificates will be available to be
contributed to the Class X-B Certificates. Therefore, excess
interest proceeds that will be contributed to Class X-B will only
come from the Class B Certificates. Per the DBRS Rating North
American CMBS Interest-Only Certificates Methodology, DBRS rates IO
tranches to the lowest rated Applicable Reference Obligation, which
in the case for Class X-B now references Class B with a one notch
deviation.

The collateral consists of 56 fixed-rate loans secured by 118
commercial and multifamily properties. The transaction is of a
sequential-pay pass-through structure. The trust assets contributed
from five loans, representing 16.2% of the pool, are shadow-rated
investment grade by DBRS. Proceeds for each shadow-rated loan are
floored at their respective ratings within the pool. When 16.2% of
the pool has no proceeds assigned below the rated floor, the
resulting pool subordination is diluted or reduced below the rated
floor. The conduit pool was analyzed to determine the provisional
ratings, reflecting the long-term probability of loan default
within the term and its liquidity at maturity. When the cut-off
loan balances were measured against the stabilized net cash flow
(NCF) and their respective actual constants, eight loans,
representing 11.6% of the pool, have a DBRS Term debt service
coverage ratio (DSCR) below 1.15 times (x), a threshold indicative
of a higher likelihood of mid-term default. Additionally, to assess
refinance risk given the current low interest rate environment,
DBRS applied its refinance constants to the balloon amounts. This
resulted in 27 loans, representing 55.8% of the pool, having
refinance DSCRs below 1.00x, and 21 loans, representing 51.7% of
the pool, having refinance DSCRs below 0.90x.

Five of the largest loans – One State Street, Moffett Towers II
– Building 2, the Northrop Grumman Portfolio, Lehigh Valley Mall
and Yorkshire & Lexington Towers – exhibit credit characteristics
consistent with investment-grade shadow ratings. These loans
represent 16.2% of the transaction balance. One State Street and
the Northrop Grumman Portfolio have credit characteristics
consistent with a AAA shadow rating, Moffett Towers II – Building
2 exhibits credit characteristics consistent with a BBB shadow
rating and Lehigh Valley Mall and Yorkshire & Lexington Towers have
credit characteristics consistent with a BBB (low) shadow rating.
Only nine loans, totaling 12.7% of the transaction balance, are
secured by properties that are either fully or primarily leased to
a single tenant. The largest of these loans are Moffett Towers II
– Building 2 and the Northrop Grumman Portfolio, representing
6.0% of the pool balance and 47.3% of the single-tenant
concentration, and both are shadow-rated investment grade. Loans
secured by properties occupied by single tenants have been found to
suffer higher loss severities in an event of default.

Sixteen loans, representing 25.1% of the pool, are secured by 18
hotel properties, including three of the top ten loans. Hotels have
the highest cash flow volatility of all major property types, as
their income, which is derived from daily contracts rather than
multi-year leases, and their expenses, which are often mostly
fixed, are quite high as a percentage of revenue. These two factors
cause revenue to fall swiftly during a downturn and cash flow to
fall even faster as a result of high operating leverage. However,
the loans in the pool secured by hotel properties exhibit a
weighted-average (WA) DBRS Debt Yield and DBRS Exit Debt Yield of
10.0% and 11.6%, respectively, which compare quite favorably with
the comparable figures of 8.2% and 8.9%, respectively, for the
non-hotel properties in the pool. Additionally, the majority, or
87.2%, of such loans are located in established urban or suburban
markets that benefit from increased liquidity and more stable
performance.

The deal appears concentrated by property type, with 14 loans,
representing 36.3% of the pool, secured by office properties. Of
the office property concentration, 44.3% of the loans are located
in urban markets and four loans, representing 46.2% of the office
concentration, are secured by multiple properties (41 in total),
which insulates the loans from issues at any one property.
Furthermore, three of these loans, representing 30.9% of the office
concentration and 11.2% of the total pool balance, are shadow-rated
investment grade.

The DBRS Refinance (Refi) DSCR is 0.99x, indicating a higher
refinance risk on an overall pool level. In addition, 27 loans,
representing 55.8% of the pool, have DBRS Refi DSCRs below 1.00x.
Twenty-one of these loans, comprising 51.7% of the pool, have DBRS
Refi DSCRs less than 0.90x, including six of the top ten loans and
eight of the top 15 loans. These metrics are based on whole-loan
balances. Two of the pool's loans with a DBRS Refi DSCR below
0.90x, One State Street and Yorkshire & Lexington Towers, which
represent 7.3% of the transaction balance, are shadow-rated
investment grade by DBRS and have a large piece of subordinate
mortgage debt outside the trust. Based on A-note balances only, the
deal's WA DBRS Refi DSCR improves to 1.07x, and the concentration
of loans with DBRS Refi DSCRs below 1.00x and 0.90x reduces to
49.4% and 43.3%, respectively. The pool's DBRS Refi DSCRs for these
loans are based on a WA stressed refinance constant of 9.90%, which
implies an interest rate of 9.28% amortizing on a 30-year schedule.
This represents a significant stress of 4.47% over the WA
contractual interest rate of the loans in the pool. DBRS models the
probability of default based on the more constraining of the DBRS
Term DSCR and DBRS Refi DSCR.

Classes X-A, X-B and X-D are interest-only (IO) certificates that
reference a single rated tranche or multiple rated tranches. The IO
rating mirrors the lowest-rated reference tranche adjusted upward
by one notch if senior in the waterfall.


CSAIL 2018-CX11: Fitch Rates Class G-RR Certificates 'B-sf'
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned the following final ratings and Rating
Outlooks to Credit Suisse CSAIL 2018-CX11 Commercial Mortgage Trust
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2018-CX11.

-- $30,370,000 class A-1 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $50,930,000 class A-2 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $61,244,000 class A-3 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $158,100,000 class A-4 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $329,412,000 class A-5 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $36,952,000 class A-SB 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $745,619,000a class X-A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $80,994,000a class X-B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $78,611,000 class A-S 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $39,306,000 class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $41,688,000 class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $30,968,000ab class X-D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $30,968,000b class D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $19,058,000bc class E-RR 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $23,822,000bc class F-RR 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $9,528,000bc class G-RR 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable.

The following class is not rated:

-- $42,879,784bc class NR-RR.

(a) Notional amount and interest-only.

(b) Privately placed and pursuant to Rule 144A.

(c) Horizontal credit risk retention interest which equals at
    least 5% of the estimated fair value of all the classes of
    regular certificates issued by the issuing entity (as of the
    closing date).

Since Fitch published its expected ratings on March 22, 2018, class
A-5 increased in size to $329,412,000 from $292,512,000 and class
A-4 decreased to $158,100,000 from $195,000,000. Additionally,
there will be no cashflow generated from the class C to the X-B
notes. As such, the rating of the class X-B is 'AA-sf', which is a
change from the expected rating of 'A-sf' for the class X-B. The
classes above reflect the final ratings and deal structure.

The ratings are based on information provided by the issuer as of
April 17, 2018.

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership interest in the
trust, primary assets of which are 56 loans secured by 118
commercial properties having an aggregate principal balance of
$952,868,784 as of the cut-off date. The loans were contributed to
the trust by: Column Financial, Inc., Argentic Real Estate Finance
LLC, Natixis Real Estate Capital LLC, Barclays Bank PLC and Benefit
Street Partners CRE Finance LLC.

Fitch reviewed a comprehensive sample of the transaction's
collateral, including site inspections on 61.8% of the properties
by balance, cash flow analysis of 81.9%, and asset summary review
on 100.0% of the pool.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Higher Fitch Leverage Relative to Recent Transactions: The pool has
average leverage relative to other recent Fitch-rated multiborrower
transactions. The pool's Fitch LTV of 102.7% is slightly higher
than the 2017 average of 101.6% and lower than the 2016 average of
105.2%. The pool's Fitch DSCR of 1.22x is below the 2017 average of
1.26x and in line with the 2016 average of 1.21x. Excluding the
credit opinion loans, the Fitch DSCR is 1.19x and the Fitch LTV is
108.0%.

Investment-Grade Credit Opinion Loans: There are four loans with
investment-grade credit opinions totalling 11.6% of the pool. These
loans include One State Street Plaza (BBB+sf*; 5.2%), Moffett
Towers II - Building 2 (BBB-sf*; 3.1%), Yorkshire & Lexington
Towers (BBBsf*; 2.1%) and 111 West Jackson (BBB+sf*, 1.2%). The
portion of the pool with investment-grade credit opinions is in
line with the 2017 average of 11.7% credit opinion loans in other
Fitch-rated multiborrower transactions. Net of these loans, the
Fitch DSCR and LTV are 1.19x and 108.0%, respectively, for this
transaction.

Better Than Average Pool Diversity: The top 10 loans comprise 46.1%
of the pool. This is lower than the 2017 and 2016 averages of 53.1%
and 54.8%, respectively. Additionally, the loan concentration index
(LCI) is 310, which is also below the 2017 and 2016 averages of 398
and 421, respectively.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

For this transaction, Fitch's net cash flow (NCF) was 14.3% 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 the
CSAIL 2018-CX11 certificates and found that the transaction
displays average sensitivities to further declines in NCF. A
scenario in which NCF declined a further 20% from Fitch's NCF,
could result in a downgrade of the junior 'AAAsf' certificates to
'A-sf'. A more severe scenario, in which NCF declined a further 30%
from Fitch's NCF, could result in a downgrade of the junior 'AAAsf'
certificates to 'BBB-sf'.


CSFB 2001-MH29: S&P Discountinues 'D' Ratings on M-2 & B-1 Certs.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings discontinued its 'D (sf)' ratings on class M-2
and B-1 from CSFB Manufactured Housing Pass-Through Certificates
Series 2001-MH29 and class B-1 from CSFB Manufactured Housing
Pass-Through Certificates Series 2002-MH3.

The discontinued ratings were previously lowered to 'D (sf)'
because the relative classes experienced interest shortfalls that
S&P believed would remain outstanding for an extended period of
time. In addition, the notes with discontinued ratings continue to
experience interest shortfalls and are undercollateralized due to
collateral deterioration and would likely fail to pay full
principal by the classes' respective legal final maturity dates, in
S&P's view.

S&P discontinued these ratings according to its surveillance and
withdrawal policy and because it is no longer providing ongoing
surveillance for these classes.

RATINGS DISCONTINUED

  CSFB Manufactured Housing Pass-Through Certificates
  Series 2001-MH29
                                  Rating
  Series      Class          To            From
  2001-MH29   M-2            NR            D (sf)
  2001-MH29   B-1            NR            D (sf)

  CSFB Manufactured Housing Pass-Through Certificates
  Series 2002-MH3
                                  Rating
  Series      Class          To            From
  2002-MH3    B-1            NR            D (sf)

  NR--Not rated.


CSFB 2002-MH3: S&P Lowers Class M-2 Certs Rating to D(sf)
---------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its rating on class M-1 and lowered its
rating on class M-2 from CSFB Manufactured Housing Pass-Through
Certificates Series 2002-MH3.

S&P said, "The upgrade on class M-1 reflects the class' senior
position in the waterfall, collateral performance to date, and our
expectations regarding future collateral performance, as well as
the transaction's structure and credit enhancement. Additionally,
we incorporated secondary credit factors, including credit
stability, payment priorities under various scenarios, and sector-
and issuer-specific analysis. Considering all these factors, we
believe the creditworthiness of the notes remains consistent with
the raised rating.

As of the April 2018 distribution date, series 2002-MH3 had
experienced cumulative net losses of 17.88% after 191 months of
performance and had a pool factor of 13.18%. Given the stable
performance over the past few years, we are maintaining our loss
expectation for series 2002-MH3 between 22.00%-23.00%.

The transaction was structured with overcollateralization, excess
spread, and subordination for the more senior classes. As a result
of the higher-than-initially expected losses, the
overcollateralization for the 2002-MH3 transaction has been fully
depleted, and the subordinated class B-2 certificate has been fully
written down.

  Table 1 Hard Credit Support (%)
  As of the April 2018 distribution date
                           Current total hard
                               credit support
  Series          Class     (% of current)(i)
  2002-MH3        M-1                   62.10
  2002-MH3        M-2                   20.67

(i)Calculated as a percentage of the total gross receivable pool
balance, consisting of a reserve account, overcollateralization
and, if applicable, subordination.

S&P said, "The raised rating on the class M-1 certificates reflects
the class' senior position in the capital structure since the class
A paid off in April 2017, and our view that the total credit
support as a percent of the amortizing pool balance, compared with
our expected remaining cumulative net losses, is sufficient to
support the raised ratings."

The downgrade on the class M-2 certificates reflects that this
transaction did not make its full interest payment on the class on
the January 2018 remittance date and each remittance date since.

As mentioned above, the series 2002-MH3 transaction has experienced
higher-than-expected losses and incurred principal write-downs to
the class M-2 certificates. Due to the erosion of the hard credit
enhancement available to class M-2 and a relatively small amount of
monthly excess spread, class M-2 has experienced periodic interest
shortfalls. S&P said, "As a result, we lowered our rating on the
class M-2 certificates to 'D (sf).' We also believe additional
interest shortfalls in the future are probable. In addition, it is
likely that the class will not be paid off in full at final
maturity."

S&P will continue to monitor the performance of the transaction to
ensure that the credit enhancement remains sufficient, in its view,
to cover its cumulative net loss expectations under its stress
scenarios.

  RATING RAISED

  CSFB Manufactured Housing Pass-Through Certificates Series 2002-
  MH3
                                   Rating
  Series      Class          To            From
  2002-MH3    M-1            A (sf)        BB+ (sf)

  RATING LOWERED

  CSFB Manufactured Housing Pass-Through Certificates Series 2002-

  MH3
                                   Rating
  Series      Class          To            From
  2002-MH3    M-2            D (sf)        B- (sf)


CUMBERLAND PARK: Moody's Gives Ba3 Rating to Class E-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to six classes of
CLO refinancing notes (the "Refinancing Notes") issued by
Cumberland Park CLO, Ltd:

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$362,000,000 Class A-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
2028 (the "Class A-R Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$70,750,000 Class B-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2028
(the "Class B-R Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

US$55,500,000 Class C-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2028 (the "Class C-R Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

US$33,500,000 Class D-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2028 (the "Class D-R Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$31,750,000 Class E-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2028 (the "Class E-R Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

US$10,500,000 Class F-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2028 (the "Class F-R Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned B3 (sf)

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

GSO / Blackstone Debt Funds Management 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
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 April 20, 2018 (the
"Refinancing Date") in connection with the refinancing of all
classes of the secured notes (the "Refinanced Original Notes")
previously issued on August 19, 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: extensions of the stated maturity
and non-call period; changes to the weighted average life (WAL)
collateral quality test; and amendment of the Minimum Diversity
Score/Maximum Rating/Minimum Spread Matrix and Recovery Rate
Modifier Matrix.

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: US$597,531,420

Defaulted par: US$2,776,032

Diversity Score: 73

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3289

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.39%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.47%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 6.33 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.

Here 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 3289 to 3782)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-R Notes: 0

Class B-R Notes: -1

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 3289 to 4276)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-R Notes: 0

Class B-R Notes: -3

Class C-R Notes: -3

Class D-R Notes: -2

Class E-R Notes: -1

Class F-R Notes: -4


DB COMM 2010-C1: Fitch Affirms Non-Investment Rating on 2 Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 10 classes of the Deutsche Bank
Securities COMM 2010-C1 commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

High Retail Concentration; Potential for Outsized Losses: Loans
secured by retail properties comprise 78% of the current pool
balance, including the four largest loans (70%). Fitch designated
three loans (48%) as Fitch Loans of Concern (FLOCs), including the
largest loan, The Fashion Outlets of Niagara Falls (34.7%), the
third largest loan, Auburn Mall (11.9%) and a dark Walgreens in
Lilburn, GA (1.1%). The Fashion Outlets of Niagara Falls, an outlet
center located in Niagara, NY near the United States and Canada
border, has reported significantly lower sales since issuance, as
well as declining occupancy, coupled with upcoming lease rollover
concerns. Performance at this outlet property is heavily reliant on
tourism. The Auburn Mall, a regional mall in Auburn, MA anchored by
Sears and a non-collateral Macy's, has experienced declining sales
since issuance. The mall lost an anchor tenant, Macy's Home, in
2015 and the space is currently in the process of being converted
into a two-story medical center, which is expected to open in early
2019. Due to refinance concerns of these FLOCs, Fitch performed an
additional sensitivity scenario, which assumed the potential for
outsized losses on The Fashion Outlets of Niagara Falls and Auburn
Mall loan and factoring in expected paydown of the transaction from
loans maturing in 2020 that are not designated as FLOCs. The
ratings and Outlooks reflect this additional analysis.

Pool/Maturity Concentrations: The transaction is highly
concentrated. Only 15 of original 42 loans remain. The largest loan
comprises 34.7% of the pool, and the three largest loans comprise
58.8% of the pool. All of the remaining loans mature in 2020.

Higher Credit Enhancement to Offset Losses: Despite the increased
credit enhancement resulting from paydown and scheduled
amortization, there is the potential for losses to increase given
Fitch's concerns with the declining performance of the two largest
Fitch FLOCs and if the loans fail to payoff at maturity in 2020. As
of the April 2018 distribution date, the pool's aggregate principal
balance has paid down by 63% to $316 million from $857 million at
issuance. Ten loans (95% of pool) are currently amortizing. Five
loans (5%) are full-term interest-only.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The negative outlooks on Classes C thru G reflect the high retail
concentration and declining performance of the two largest FLOCs.
These classes could be subject to downgrades should the performance
of The Fashion Outlets of Niagara Falls and the Auburn Mall further
decline and or the loans fail to payoff at maturity. Fitch's
additional sensitivity scenario reflects an outsized loss of 25% on
the balloon balance of The Fashion Outlets of Niagara Falls loan
and 50% on the balloon balance of the Auburn Mall loan and
factoring in expected paydown of the transaction from loans
maturing in 2020 that are not designated as FLOCs. All of the
remaining loans mature in 2020. The Rating Outlooks on classes A-3
and B remain stable due to sufficient credit enhancement resulting
from payoffs and scheduled amortization.

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 or revised the Rating Outlooks on the following
classes as indicated:

  --$166.7 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;

  --Interest-only class XP-A at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;

  --Interest-only class XS-A at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;

  --Interest-only class XW-A at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;

  --$24.6 million class B at 'AAAsf', Outlook Stable;

  --$28.9 million class C at 'AAAsf', Outlook to Negative from
Stable;

  --$45 million class D at 'Asf', Outlook to Negative from Stable;

  --$7.5 million class E at 'BBB-sf', Outlook to Negative from
Stable;

  --$12.8 million class F at 'BBsf', Outlook Negative;

  --$12.9 million class G at 'B-sf', Outlook Negative.

Classes A-1, A-1D and A-2 have paid in full. Fitch does not rate
the interest-only class XW-B or the $17.1 million class H.


DBJPM 2016-C1: DBRS Confirms 'Bsf' Rating of 2 Tranches
-------------------------------------------------------
DBRS Limited confirmed all classes of the Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2016-R1 (the Certificates) issued
by DBJPM 2016-C1 Mortgage Trust as follows:

-- Class A-1 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-2 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-3A at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-3B at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-4 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-M at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-SB at AAA (sf)
-- Class X-A at AAA (sf)
-- Class B at AA (low) (sf)
-- Class X-B at A (sf)
-- Class C at A (low) (sf)
-- Class X-C at BBB (sf)
-- Class D at BBB (low) (sf)
-- Class X-D at BB (sf)
-- Class E at BB (low) (sf)
-- Class F at B (sf)
-- Class X-E at B (sf)
-- Class G at B (low) (sf)

All trends are Stable.

The rating confirmations reflect the overall stable performance of
the transaction, which has remained in line with DBRS's
expectations since issuance. At issuance, the transaction consisted
of 33 fixed-rate loans secured by 45 commercial properties for a
total trust balance of approximately $818.0 million. As of the
April 2018 remittance report, the trust balance was $810.9 million,
representing a collateral reduction of 0.9% since issuance as a
result of scheduled amortization. All of the original loans remain
in the pool. Seven loans, representing 39.0% of the pool, are
structured with full-term interest-only (IO) payments. An
additional 11 loans, representing 35.1% of the pool, have partial
IO payments remaining, with four of those loans (6.0% of the pool),
scheduled to begin amortizing in the next year. Loans representing
56.9% of the pool reported YE2017 financials, with a
weighted-average (WA) debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and debt
yield of 1.55 times (x) and 9.3%, respectively. The largest 15
loans reported either partial-year or YE2017 financials, with a WA
DSCR and WA debt yield of 1.73x and 9.4%, respectively,
representing a WA cash flow improvement of 7.9% over the DBRS net
cash flow figures derived at issuance.

As of the April 2018 remittance, there were five loans on the
servicer's watch list, collectively representing 15.7% of the pool,
and no loans in special servicing. Three of the loans on the watch
list are being monitored due to deferred maintenance, while the
other two are being monitored for a low YE2017 or Q3 2017 net cash
flow figure. The two loans being monitored for cash flow declines
are hotel properties located in Miami and Houston. Performance
declines for these properties were attributed to weakening
corporate demand in Houston and increased competition in Miami
within the hospitality sector. The hotel property located in
Houston, Prospectus ID #4 – Sheraton North Houston (4.9% of the
current pool balance), was also affected by the loss of a United
Airlines corporate contract, which represented an average of 180 to
200 rooms per night, as the airline moved its pilot training to
Denver in August 2017. According to the servicer, the borrower was
able to secure a deal with a smaller airline for approximately 20
rooms per night, and is working to secure two additional corporate
contracts at the subject. For additional information on this loan,
please see the loan commentary on the DBRS Viewpoint platform, for
which information is provided below.

At issuance, DBRS assigned an investment-grade shadow rating on two
loans, 787 Seventh Avenue (Prospectus ID #1), representing 9.9% of
the pool balance and 225 Liberty Street (Prospectus ID #5),
representing 5.0% of the pool. DBRS has confirmed that the
performance of these loans remains consistent with investment-grade
loan characteristics.

Classes X-A, X-B, X-C, X-D and X-E are interest-only (IO)
certificates that reference a single rated tranche or multiple
rated tranches. The IO rating mirrors the lowest-rated reference
tranche adjusted upward by one notch if senior in the waterfall.

All ratings will be subject to ongoing surveillance, which could
result in ratings being upgraded, downgraded, placed under review,
confirmed or discontinued by DBRS. DBRS will continue to monitor
this transaction with periodic updates provided in the DBRS
Viewpoint platform.


DLJ COMMERCIAL 1999-CG3: Fitch Affirms D Rating on Cl. B-5 Debt
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded one class and affirmed five classes of
DLJ Commercial Mortgage Corporation commercial mortgage
pass-through certificates series 1999-CG3.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Defeasance: The upgrade reflects the largest loan has defeased
(53.4% of the pool balance) and has an anticipated repayment date
(ARD) in September 2018. The second largest loan is already
defeased (26.6%). Class B-4 is expected to pay in full at the ARD
of the largest defeased loan.

Concentrated Pool: The pool is highly concentrated with only four
loans remaining. As of the April 2018 distribution date, the
transaction has paid down 98.9% since issuance, to $10.2 million
from $899.3 million. Interest shortfalls reach up to class B-5,
which is already rated 'Dsf' due to realized losses.

Loan Maturities: The remaining loans are scheduled to mature in
2023 (two loans, 34.1%) and 2024 (one loan, 12.5%). The largest
loan (53.4%) has an ARD in September 2018 and a scheduled maturity
date in 2028.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Rating Outlook on class B-4 is Stable due to sufficient credit
enhancement, defeasance and continued paydown. Classes B-5 through
C have realized losses and will remain at 'Dsf'.

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

Form ABS Due Diligence-15E was not provided to, or reviewed by,
Fitch in relation to this rating action.

Fitch has upgraded the following class:

-- $2.63 million class B-4 to 'AAAsf' from 'Asf'; Outlook Stable.

Fitch has affirmed the following ratings:

--$7.25 million class B-5 at 'Dsf'; RE 95%;
--$0 class B-6 at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
--$0 class B-7 at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
--$0 class B-8 at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
--$0 class C at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

The class A-1A, A-1B, A-1C, A-2, A-3, A-4, A-5, B-1, B-2 and B-3
certificates have paid in full. Fitch does not rate the class D
certificates. Fitch previously withdrew the rating on the
interest-only class S certificates.


DRYDEN 64 CLO: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating on Class E Notes
----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to seven classes of
notes issued by Dryden 64 CLO, Ltd.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

U.S.$3,000,000 Class X Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2031
(the "Class X Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

U.S.$390,000,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
2031 (the "Class A Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

U.S.$64,500,000 Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2031
(the "Class B Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

U.S.$30,000,000 Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due 2031 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

U.S.$37,500,000 Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due 2031 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

U.S.$30,000,000 Class E Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due 2031 (the "Class E Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

U.S.$12,000,000 Class F Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes Due 2031 (the "Class F Notes"), Assigned B3 (sf)

The Class X Notes, the Class A Notes, the Class B Notes, the Class
C Notes, the Class D Notes, the Class E Notes and the Class F 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.

Dryden 64 CLO is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated senior secured
corporate loans. At least 90% of the portfolio must consist of
senior secured loans and up to 10% of the portfolio may consist of
second-lien loans and unsecured loans. The portfolio is
approximately 85% ramped as of the closing date.

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

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

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.

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

Par amount: $600,000,000

Diversity Score: 70

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2910

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.05%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 6.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.0%

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 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.

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 2910 to 3347)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A Notes: -1

Class B Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: -1

Class F Notes: -2

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2910 to 3783)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A Notes: -1

Class B Notes: -4

Class C Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1

Class F Notes: -4


EQUITY ONE 2004-2: Moody's Hikes Class M-2 Notes Rating to Caa2
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of 34 tranches
from 14 transactions issued by various issuers, and downgraded the
rating of Class M3 from Fieldstone Mortgage Investment Trust
2004-5.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: BNC Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-2

Cl. A4, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on May 25, 2017 Upgraded to
Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: C-BASS Mortgage Loan Asset-Backed Certificates, Series
2005-CB5

Cl. AF-3, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 22, 2016 Upgraded
to A1 (sf)

Cl. AF-4, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 22, 2016 Upgraded
to Aa3 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on May 25, 2017 Upgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: Citicorp Residential Mortgage Trust Series 2006-2

Cl. A-4, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 3, 2016 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. A-5, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Aug 3, 2016 Upgraded
to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. A-6, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 3, 2016 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 25, 2017 Upgraded
to B2 (sf)

Issuer: Equity One Mortgage Pass-Through Trust 2004-2

Cl. AV-1, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on May 3, 2012
Downgraded to A1 (sf)

Cl. AV-2, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on May 3, 2012
Downgraded to A1 (sf)

Cl. AF-4, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2011
Downgraded to Aa1 (sf)

Cl. AF-5, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 7, 2011
Downgraded to Aa1 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on May 3, 2012
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: Fieldstone Mortgage Investment Trust 2004-5

Cl. M3, Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Oct 1, 2015 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Issuer: GSAMP Trust 2006-HE3

Cl. A-1, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Aug 26, 2016 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. A-2C, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Aug 26, 2016 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. A-2D, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Aug 26, 2016 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

Issuer: GSAMP Trust 2006-HE8

Cl. A-1, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Oct 16, 2015 Upgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

Cl. A-2C, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Jun 21, 2010
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Cl. A-2D, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Jun 21, 2010
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: Long Beach Mortgage Loan Trust 2001-1

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Mar 8, 2011
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: Long Beach Mortgage Loan Trust 2002-2

Cl. M3, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Mar 8, 2011 Downgraded
to Ca (sf)

Cl. M2, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Oct 9, 2013 Upgraded to
Caa1 (sf)

Cl. M4A, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jan 18, 2008
Downgraded to C (sf)

Cl. M4B, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jan 18, 2008
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: Long Beach Mortgage Loan Trust Asset-Backed Certificates,
Series 2001-3

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Jun 13, 2012
Confirmed at Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: Morgan Stanley ABS Capital I Inc. Trust 2003-HE2

Cl. B-3, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Mar 15, 2011 Downgraded
to C (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Mar 15, 2011
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Capital I Inc. Trust 2002-AM1

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Mar 15, 2011 Downgraded
to C (sf)

Issuer: Park Place Securities, Inc., Asset-Backed Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2004-MCW1

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Apr 1, 2013 Affirmed
Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: Saxon Asset Securities Trust 2007-3

Cl. 1-A, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Aug 26, 2016 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Cl. 2-A2, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Aug 26, 2016 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. 2-A3, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jul 16, 2010
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Cl. 2-A4, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jul 16, 2010
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: Wachovia Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-WMC1

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Jul 14, 2010
Downgraded to C (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 total credit enhancement
available to the bonds. Rating upgrades for Long Beach Mortgage
Loan Trust 2001-1, Long Beach Mortgage Loan Trust 2002-2 and Long
Beach Mortgage Loan Trust Asset-Backed Certificates, Series 2001-3
are primarily due to the settlement funds distributed to these
transactions in February 2018. The rating downgrade for Fieldstone
Mortgage Investment Trust 2004-5 Class M3 is due to outstanding
interest shortfalls that are not expected to be recouped due to the
weak reimbursement mechanism for interest shortfalls.

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 March 2018 from 4.5% in March
2017. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of 3.5% to
4.5% for the 2018 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 2018. 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.


EXETER AUTOMOBILE 2018-2: S&P Assigns BB(sf) Rating on Cl. E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Exeter Automobile
Receivables Trust 2018-2's $550 million automobile receivables
backed notes. The note issuance is an asset-backed securities
transaction backed by subprime auto loan receivables.

The ratings reflect:

-- The availability of approximately 60.4%, 53.6%, 44.8, 34.8%,
and 29.2% credit support for the class A, B, C, D, and E notes,
respectively, based on stressed cash flow scenarios (including
excess spread), which provide coverage of approximately 2.85x,
2.50x, 2.05x, 1.55x, and 1.27x our 20.50%-21.50% expected
cumulative net loss range. These break-even scenarios withstand
cumulative gross losses of approximately 92.9%, 82.5%, 71.7%,
55.7%, and 46.7%, respectively.

-- The timely interest and principal payments that we believe will
be made to the rated notes under stressed cash flow modeling
scenarios, which, in our view, are appropriate for the assigned
ratings.

-- S&P said, "The expectation that under a moderate ('BBB') stress
scenario (1.55x our expected loss level), all else being equal, our
ratings on the class A notes will not be lowered and the ratings on
the class B and C notes will remain within one rating category of
the assigned 'AA (sf)' and 'A (sf)' ratings, respectively, for the
deal's life. We expect the class D notes to remain within two
rating categories of the assigned 'BBB (sf)' rating over the deal's
life under the 'BBB' stress scenario, and the class E notes to
remain within two rating categories over the first year then
eventually default. These rating movements are within the limits
specified by our credit stability criteria."

-- The collateral characteristics of the subprime automobile loans
securitized in this transaction.

-- The transaction's payment, credit enhancement, and legal
structures.

RATINGS ASSIGNED

  Exeter Automobile Receivables Trust 2018-2
  Class       Rating        Type          Interest    Amount
                                            rate      (mil. $)
  A           AAA (sf)      Senior          Fixed      254.09
  B           AA (sf)       Subordinate     Fixed       76.96
  C           A (sf)        Subordinate     Fixed       82.76
  D           BBB (sf)      Subordinate     Fixed       92.92
  E           BB (sf)       Subordinate     Fixed       43.27


FANNIE MAE 2018-C03: DBRS Gives Prov. B Rating on 19 Note Classes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS, Inc. assigned the following provisional ratings to the
Connecticut Avenue Securities (CAS), Series 2018-C03 notes (the
Notes) issued by Fannie Mae (the Issuer):

-- $251.4 million Class 1M-1 at BBB (sf)
-- $204.1 million Class 1M-2A at BBB (low) (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1M-2B at BB (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1M-2C at B (high) (sf)
-- $606.4 million Class 1M-2 at B (high) (sf)
-- $204.1 million Class 1A-I1 at BBB (low) (sf)
-- $204.1 million Class 1E-A1 at BBB (low) (sf)
-- $204.1 million Class 1A-I2 at BBB (low) (sf)
-- $204.1 million Class 1E-A2 at BBB (low) (sf)
-- $204.1 million Class 1A-I3 at BBB (low) (sf)
-- $204.1 million Class 1E-A3 at BBB (low) (sf)
-- $204.1 million Class 1A-I4 at BBB (low) (sf)
-- $204.1 million Class 1E-A4 at BBB (low) (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1B-I1 at BB (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1E-B1 at BB (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1B-I2 at BB (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1E-B2 at BB (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1B-I3 at BB (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1E-B3 at BB (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1B-I4 at BB (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1E-B4 at BB (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1C-I1 at B (high) (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1E-C1 at B (high) (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1C-I2 at B (high) (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1E-C2 at B (high) (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1C-I3 at B (high) (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1E-C3 at B (high) (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1C-I4 at B (high) (sf)
-- $201.1 million Class 1E-C4 at B (high) (sf)
-- $405.2 million Class 1E-D1 at BB (sf)
-- $405.2 million Class 1E-D2 at BB (sf)
-- $405.2 million Class 1E-D3 at BB (sf)
-- $405.2 million Class 1E-D4 at BB (sf)
-- $405.2 million Class 1E-D5 at BB (sf)
-- $402.3 million Class 1E-F1 at B (high) (sf)
-- $402.3 million Class 1E-F2 at B (high) (sf)
-- $402.3 million Class 1E-F3 at B (high) (sf)
-- $402.3 million Class 1E-F4 at B (high) (sf)
-- $402.3 million Class 1E-F5 at B (high) (sf)
-- $405.2 million Class 1-X1 at BB (sf)
-- $405.2 million Class 1-X2 at BB (sf)
-- $405.2 million Class 1-X3 at BB (sf)
-- $405.2 million Class 1-X4 at BB (sf)
-- $402.3 million Class 1-Y1 at B (high) (sf)
-- $402.3 million Class 1-Y2 at B (high) (sf)
-- $402.3 million Class 1-Y3 at B (high) (sf)
-- $402.3 million Class 1-Y4 at B (high) (sf)

The holders of Class 1M-2 may exchange for proportionate interests
in Classes 1M-2A, 1M-2B and 1M-2C (Exchangeable Notes) and vice
versa. Holders of the Exchangeable Notes may further exchange for
proportionate interests in the Related Combinable or Recombinable
Notes (RCR Notes) and vice versa. Certain classes of the RCR Notes
may be further exchanged for other classes of RCR Notes and vice
versa. Classes 1M-2, 1A-I1, 1E-A1,1A-I2, 1E-A2, 1A-I3, 1E-A3,
1A-I4, 1E-A4, 1B-I1, 1E-B1, 1B-I2, 1E-B2, 1B-I3, 1E-B3, 1B-I4,
1E-B4, 1C-I1, 1E-C1, 1C-I2, 1E-C2, 1C-I3, 1E-C3, 1C-I4, 1E-C4,
1E-D1, 1E-D2, 1E-D3, 1E-D4, 1E-D5, 1E-F1, 1E-F2, 1E-F3, 1E-F4,
1E-F5, 1-X1, 1-X2, 1-X3, 1-X4, 1-Y1, 1-Y2, 1-Y3 and 1-Y4 are RCR
Notes.

Classes’ 1A-I1, 1A-I2, 1A-I3, 1A-I4, 1B-I1, 1B-I2, 1B-I3, 1B-I4,
1C-I1, 1C-I2, 1C-I3, 1C-I4, 1-X1, 1-X2, 1-X3, 1-X4, 1-Y1, 1-Y2,
1-Y3 and 1-Y4 are interest-only notes. The class balances represent
notional amounts.

The BBB (sf) rating on the Notes reflects the 3.20% of credit
enhancement provided by subordinated Notes in the pool. The BBB
(low) (sf), BB (sf) and B (high) (sf) ratings reflect 2.51%, 1.83%
and 1.15% of credit enhancement, respectively.

The Notes in the transaction represent unsecured general
obligations of Fannie Mae. The Notes are subject to the credit and
principal payment risk of a certain reference pool (the Reference
Pool) of residential mortgages held in various Fannie
Mae-guaranteed mortgage-backed securities.

The Reference Pool consists of 127,544 fully amortizing first-lien,
fixed-rate mortgage loans (greater than 20 years) underwritten to a
full documentation standard with original loan-to-value ratios
greater than 60% and less than or equal to 80%. Payments to the
Notes will be determined by the credit performance of the Reference
Pool.

Cash flow from the Reference Pool will not be used to make any
payment to the Note holders; instead, Fannie Mae will be
responsible for making monthly interest payments at the note rate
and periodic principal payments on the Notes based on the actual
principal payments it collects from the Reference Pool.

CAS 2018-C03 is the 18th transaction in the CAS series where note
write-downs are based on actual realized losses and not on a
predetermined set of loss severities. Furthermore, unlike earlier
CAS transactions where a credit event could occur as early as the
date on which a mortgage becomes 180 or more days delinquent, for
this transaction a delinquent mortgage would typically need to go
through the entire liquidation process for a credit event to
occur.

The Reference Pool consists of approximately 1.9% of loans
originated under the Home Ready program. Home Ready is Fannie Mae's
affordable mortgage product designed to expand the availability of
mortgage financing to creditworthy low-to-moderate income
borrowers.

This is the second CAS transaction where, after any refinancing of
a reference obligation under the High LTV Refinance Option, the
resulting refinanced reference obligation will be included in the
Reference Pool as a replacement of the original reference
obligation. The high LTV refinance program, effective October 1,
2017, provides refinance opportunities to borrowers with existing
Fannie Mae mortgages who are current in their mortgage payments but
whose LTV ratios exceed the maximum permitted for standard
refinance products. The refinancing and replacement of a reference
obligation under this option will not constitute a credit event and
any reductions in the loan balance of the replacement reference
obligation will be treated as unscheduled principal.

Fannie Mae is obligated to retire the Notes by October 2030 by
paying an amount equal to the remaining class balance plus accrued
and unpaid interest. The Notes also may be redeemed on or after (1)
the date on which the Reference Pool pays down to less than 10% of
its cut-off date balance or (2) the payment date in April 2028,
whichever comes first. If there are unrecovered losses for any of
the Notes as of the termination date, then Note holders are
entitled to certain projected recovery amounts.

DBRS notes the following strengths and challenges for this
transaction:

STRENGTHS

-- Seller (or lender)/servicer approval process and quality
     control platform;
-- Well-diversified reference pool;
-- Strong alignment of interest;
-- Strong structural protections; and
-- Extensive performance history.

CHALLENGES

-- Unsecured obligation of Fannie Mae;
-- Representation and warranties framework; and
-- Limited third-party due diligence.

Notes: All figures are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted.


FLAGSTAR MORTGAGE: DBRS Finalizes 'B' Rating on Class B-5 Certs
---------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS, Inc. finalized the following provisional ratings of the
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2018-2 (the
Certificates) issued by Flagstar Mortgage Trust 2018-2 (the
Trust):

-- $660.1 million Class A-1 at AAA (sf)
-- $660.1 million Class A-2 at AAA (sf)
-- $598.5 million Class A-3 at AAA (sf)
-- $598.5 million Class A-4 at AAA (sf)
-- $478.8 million Class A-5 at AAA (sf)
-- $478.8 million Class A-6 at AAA (sf)
-- $119.7 million Class A-7 at AAA (sf)
-- $119.7 million Class A-8 at AAA (sf)
-- $89.4 million Class A-9 at AAA (sf)
-- $89.4 million Class A-10 at AAA (sf)
-- $30.3 million Class A-11 at AAA (sf)
-- $30.3 million Class A-12 at AAA (sf)
-- $61.6 million Class A-13 at AAA (sf)
-- $61.6 million Class A-14 at AAA (sf)
-- $660.1 million Class A-X-1 at AAA (sf)
-- $660.1 million Class A-X-2 at AAA (sf)
-- $598.5 million Class A-X-3 at AAA (sf)
-- $478.8 million Class A-X-4 at AAA (sf)
-- $119.7 million Class A-X-5 at AAA (sf)
-- $89.4 million Class A-X-6 at AAA (sf)
-- $30.3 million Class A-X-7 at AAA (sf)
-- $61.6 million Class A-X-8 at AAA (sf)
-- $660.1 million Class A-X-9 at AAA (sf)
-- $10.6 million Class B-1 at AA (sf)
-- $12.3 million Class B-2 at A (sf)
-- $8.8 million Class B-3 at BBB (sf)
-- $5.3 million Class B-4 at BB (sf)
-- $3.2 million Class B-5 at B (sf)

Classes A-X-1, A-X-2, A-X-3, A-X-4, A-X-5, A-X-6, A-X-7, A-X-8 and
A-X-9 are interest-only certificates. The class balances represent
notional amounts.

Classes A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, A-5, A-7, A-8, A-9, A-11, A-13, A-X-2,
A-X-3, A-X-5 and A-X-9 are exchangeable certificates. These classes
can be exchanged for a combination of initial exchangeable
certificates as specified in the offering documents.

Classes A-3, A-4, A-5, A-6, A-7, A-8, A-9, A-10, A-11 and A-12 are
super-senior certificates. These classes benefit from additional
protection from senior support certificates (Classes A-13 and A-14)
with respect to loss allocation.

The AAA (sf) ratings on the Certificates reflect the 6.25% of
credit enhancement provided by subordinated Certificates in the
pool. The AA (sf), A (sf), BBB (sf), BB (sf) and B (sf) ratings
reflect 4.75%, 3.00%, 1.75%, 1.00% and 0.55% of credit enhancement,
respectively.

This transaction is a securitization of a portfolio of first-lien,
fixed-rate, prime residential mortgages. The Certificates are
backed by 1,097 loans with a total principal balance of
$704,069,156 as of the Cut-off Date (April 1, 2018).

Flagstar Bank, FSB is the originator and servicer of the mortgage
loans and the sponsor of the transaction. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.
will act as the Master Servicer, Securities Administrator,
Certificate Registrar and Custodian. Wilmington Trust, National
Association will serve as Trustee. IngletBlair, LLC will act as the
Representation and Warranty (R&W) Reviewer.

The transaction employs a senior-subordinate, shifting-interest
cash flow structure that is enhanced from a pre-crisis structure.

Unique to this transaction, the servicing fee payable to the
Servicer comprises three separate components: the base servicing
fee, the aggregate delinquent servicing fee and the aggregate
incentive servicing fee. These fees vary based on the delinquency
status of the related loan and will be paid from interest
collections before distribution to the securities. The base
servicing fee will reduce the net weighted-average coupon (WAC)
payable to certificate holders as part of the aggregate expense
calculation. However, the delinquent and incentive servicing fees
will not be included in the reduction of Net WAC and will thus
reduce available funds entitled to the certificate holders (except
for the Class B-6-C Net WAC). To capture the impact of such
potential fees, DBRS ran additional cash flow stresses based on its
60+-day delinquency and default curves, as detailed in the Cash
Flow Analysis section of the related report.

The ratings reflect transactional strengths that include
high-quality underlying assets and well-qualified borrowers.

This transaction exhibits certain challenges such as limited
third-party due diligence as well as a R&W framework that contains
materiality factors, an unrated R&W provider, knowledge qualifiers
and sunset provisions that allow for certain R&Ws to expire within
three to six years after the Closing Date. The framework is
perceived by DBRS to be limiting compared with traditional lifetime
R&W standards in certain DBRS-rated securitizations. To capture the
perceived weaknesses, DBRS reduced the originator score in this
pool. A lower originator score results in increased default and
loss assumptions and provides additional cushions for the rated
securities.

Notes: All figures are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted.


GALAXY CLO XXVII: Moody's Rates Class F Notes 'B3'
--------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to eight classes of
notes issued by Galaxy XXVII CLO, Ltd.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$4,000,000 Class X Senior Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the
"Class X Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$254,000,000 Class A Senior Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the
"Class A Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$24,840,000 Class B-1 Senior Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the
"Class B-1 Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$23,160,000 Class B-2 Senior Fixed Rate Notes due 2031 (the
"Class B-2 Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$20,000,000 Class C Deferrable Mezzanine Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$24,000,000 Class D Deferrable Mezzanine Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$22,000,000 Class E Deferrable Junior Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class E Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

US$8,000,000 Class F Deferrable Junior Floating Rate Notes due 2031
(the "Class F Notes"), Assigned B3 (sf)

The Class X Notes, the Class A Notes, the Class B-1 Notes, the
Class B-2 Notes, the Class C Notes, the Class D Notes, Class E
Notes and the Class F 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.

Galaxy XXVII is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated senior secured
corporate loans. At least 90% of the portfolio must consist of
first lien senior secured loans and eligible investments, and up to
10% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans, first-lien
last-out loans, and unsecured loans. The portfolio is approximately
82% ramped as of the closing date.

PineBridge Investments 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.

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: $400,000,000

Diversity Score: 75

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3037

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.20%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 50.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 9.0 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 3037 to 3493)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X Notes: 0

Class A Notes: 0

Class B-1 Notes: -2

Class B-2 Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: -1

Class F Notes: -2

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 3037 to 3948)

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

Class F Notes: -4


GFCM 2003-1: Fitch Affirms Class F Certs at 'Bsf', Outlook Stable
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed nine classes of General Electric Capital
Assurance Company (GFCM) commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates series 2003-1.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Overall Stable Performance: 49 of the original 171 loans remain. As
of the April 2018 distribution date, the pool's aggregate principal
balance has been reduced by 88.1% to $98 million from $822.6
million at issuance. All loans are current and there are no
specially serviced loans. Cumulative interest shortfalls of
$134,255 are currently affecting classes H and J and there has been
$2.9 million (0.4% of original pool balance) in realized losses to
date.

Fitch Loans of Concern: 10 loans (17.3%) were on the servicer
watchlist due to performance triggers, of which five (5%) were
considered Fitch Loans of Concern. While not on the watchlist, five
additional loans within the top 15 (30.5%) were flagged as Fitch
Loans of Concern due to significant upcoming rollover risk.

An additional sensitivity test was performed to address the retail
concentration and losses were assumed on five loans within the top
15 given concerns with tenant rollover. The ratings reflect this
additional stress.

Property Type Concentration: Approximately 46.6% of the pool,
including four of the top 15 loans (28.6%), consists of retail
properties.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Rating Outlooks on classes A-5 through F remain Stable due to
overall stable performance of the pool and increased credit
enhancement. Upgrades to classes D, E and F were not recommended
based on Fitch additional stress scenarios that assumed higher cap
rates and cash flow stresses, as well as a scenario which assumed
losses on five Fitch Loans of Concern in the top 15 due to
significant upcoming tenant rollover risk. Upgrades may occur with
improved pool performance and significant paydown or defeasance.
Downgrades are possible should overall pool performance decline and
Fitch's loss expectations increase.

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 ratings:

  --$40 million class A-5 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$11.3 million class B at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$13.7 million class C at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$11.3 million class D at 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$10.3 million class E at 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$12.3 million class F at 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable;

  --$7.2 million class G at 'Csf'; RE 75%.

  --$1.2 million class H at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;

  --$0 class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

Classes A-1, A-2, A-3 and A-4 were repaid in full. Fitch previously
withdrew the ratings on the interest-only class X certificates.


GMAC COMMERCIAL 1999-C2: Moody's Amends Class K Debt Rating to B3
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service corrected the rating on the GMAC
Commercial Mortgage Securities, Inc., Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 1999-C2 Cl. K to B3 (sf) from
B1(sf). Due to an internal administrative error, Series 1999-C2 Cl.
K was inadvertently upgraded to B1(sf) from Caa2(sf) on March 22,
2018. The rating should instead have been upgraded to B3(sf) on
March 22, 2018.


GOLDMAN SACHS 2010-C2: Fitch Affirms Bsf Rating on Class F Certs
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed eight classes of Goldman Sachs
Commercial Mortgage Capital, L.P. commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates series 2010-C2.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Stable Performance: All loans in the pool continue to exhibit
property-level performance in line with issuance expectations.
There are no delinquent or specially serviced loans. Fitch modeled
losses of 4.4% of the remaining pool; expected losses on the
original pool balance total 2.8%. The pool has experienced no
realized losses to date. As of the March 2018 distribution date,
the pool's aggregate principal balance decreased by 36.5% to $556.9
million from $876.5 million at issuance. Interest shortfalls are
currently affecting class G.

Concentrated Pool: The transaction is concentrated, with only 27
loans remaining, down from 43 at issuance. The largest 10 loans
account for 69% of the pool, and the largest 15 account for 85%.

Single Tenant Exposure: Ten loans totaling 35.4% of the pool are
secured by single-tenant properties. Of this concentration, five
loans are secured by multiple properties, including Cole Portfolios
I and II, Louisiana Walgreens Portfolio, and ARC Credit Portfolios
I and II, each among the largest 15 loans in the pool.

Fitch Loan of Concern: Fitch has designated one loan (4.9%) as a
Fitch Loan of Concern. The Payless & Brown Industrial Portfolio is
composed of two single-tenant industrial properties totaling
1,153,374 square feet. The Brown Shoe distribution facility is in
Lebec, CA, (approximately 40 miles south of Bakersfield) and the
Payless distribution center is in Brookville, OH (roughly 22 miles
west of Dayton). Payless ShoeSource emerged from bankruptcy court
protection in August 2017 after filing for Chapter 11. The company
closed 673 stores and shed $435 million in debt during the
bankruptcy process. An additional 227 stores were closed throughout
2016 and 2017 as a normal course of business. Roughly 3,500 stores
remain across the U.S. and in Canada, Asia, Central and South
America and the Caribbean.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Rating Outlooks on classes A-1 though F remain Stable as the
majority of the pool has maintained performance consistent with
issuance. Rating downgrades are considered unlikely, but are
possible should there be any significant performance declines.

Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

-- $27.5 million class A-1 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $376.1 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $403.6 million interest-only class X-A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook
    Stable;
-- $26.3 million class B at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $29.6 million class C at 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $47.1 million class D at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $12.1 million class E at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $9.9 million class F at 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable.

Fitch does not rate the class G certificates or the interest-only
X-B certificates.


GOLUB CAPITAL 26: Moody's Gives Ba3 Rating to Class E-R Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to six classes of
CLO refinancing notes (the "Refinancing Notes") issued by Golub
Capital Partners CLO 26(B)-R, Ltd. (the "Issuer"):

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$226,000,000 Class A-1-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
2031 (the "Class A-1-R Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$30,000,000 Class A-2-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due
2031 (the "Class A-2-R Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$42,000,000 Class B-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2031
(the "Class B-R Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$21,250,000 Class C-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2031 (the "Class C-R Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$26,250,000 Class D-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2031 (the "Class D-R Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$22,500,000 Class E-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes Due
2031 (the "Class E-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 broadly syndicated senior secured corporate loans.

OPAL BSL LLC (the "Manager"), a successor to GC Investment
Management LLC, will manage 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
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 April 17, 2018 (the
"Refinancing Date") in connection with the refinancing of all
classes of the secured notes and subordinated notes (the
"Refinanced Original Notes") previously issued on November 5, 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: extension of the reinvestment period; extensions of the
stated maturity and non-call period; 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:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: $400,000,000

Defaulted par: $0

Diversity Score: 60

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2935

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.25%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 6.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.25%

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 2935 to 3375)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

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

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2935 to 3816)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

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: -1


GREENWICH CAPITAL 2007-GG9: Moody's Affirms C Rating on 5 Classes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on six classes
in Greenwich Capital Commercial Funding Corp., 2007-GG9, Commercial
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-GG9 as follows:

Cl. A-J, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on Apr 21, 2017 Affirmed
Caa2 (sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 21, 2017 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 21, 2017 Downgraded to C
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 21, 2017 Affirmed C (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 21, 2017 Affirmed C (sf)

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

RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings on the five P&I classes, Classes A-J, B, C, D and E,
were affirmed because the ratings are consistent with Moody's
expected loss.

The rating on the IO class, Cl. X, was affirmed based on the credit
quality of the referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 82.3% of the
current pooled balance, compared to 42.0% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 12.4% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 12.6% at the last review.

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 rating Greenwich Capital
Commercial Funding Corp., 2007-GG9, Cl. A-J, Cl. B, Cl. C, Cl. D,
and Cl. E was "Moody's Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single
Asset/Single Borrower CMBS" published in July 2017. The
methodologies used in rating Greenwich Capital Commercial Funding
Corp., 2007-GG9, Cl. 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.

Moody's analysis incorporated a loss and recovery approach in
rating the P&I classes in this deal since 99.9% 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 loans to the most junior classes and the
recovery as a pay down of principal to the most senior classes.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the April 12, 2018 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 95% to $319 million
from $6.58 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 12 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 40% of the pool. The only non-specially serviced loan,
constituting less than 1% 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 four, compared to five at Moody's last review.
Sixty-seven loans have been liquidated from the pool, contributing
to an aggregate realized loss of $549.5 million (for an average
loss severity of 28%). Eleven loans, constituting 99.9% of the
pool, are currently in special servicing. The largest specially
serviced loan is the COPT Office Portfolio ($127.5 million -- 40%
of the pool), which was originally secured by 14 office properties
located in suburban Baltimore, Maryland and Colorado Springs,
Colorado. The loan was transferred to special servicing in March
2013 and became REO in December 2013. Nine buildings have been sold
and the five remaining properties are located in Linthicum,
Maryland. Moody's anticipates a significant loss on this loan.
The second largest specially serviced loan is the Boulevard Mall
Loan ($89.4 million -- 28% of the pool), which is secured by a one
million square foot regional mall located in Amherst, NY. Mall
anchors include Macys and JC Penney (non-collateral), plus Dick's
Sporting Goods. Sears closed its store in March 2017 and Macy's
closed its separate men's store in October 2017. The loan
transferred to special servicing November 2016 and became REO in
November 2017. The servicer's strategy is to stabilize the existing
tenant base and the asset is not actively being marketed for sale.

The third largest specially serviced loan is the Verizon Wireless
Center ($21.8 million -- 6.8% of the pool), which is secured by a
197,000 SF office property located in Albuquerque, NM. The building
is fully leased to Verizon, which recently executed a three year
lease extension to December 2020. The loan transferred to special
servicing in February 2017 and foreclosure occurred in February
2018.

The remaining eight specially serviced loans are secured by a mix
of property types. Moody's estimates an aggregate $262.7 million
loss for the specially serviced loans (82% expected loss on
average).

As of the April 12, 2018 remittance statement cumulative interest
shortfalls were $73.3 million and impact up to Class A-J. Moody's
anticipates interest shortfalls will continue because of the
exposure to specially serviced loans and/or modified loans.
Interest shortfalls are caused by special servicing fees, including
workout and liquidation fees, appraisal entitlement reductions
(ASERs), loan modifications and extraordinary trust expenses.



GREYWOLF CLO VI: S&P Assigns BB- Rating on $18.5MM Class D Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Greywolf CLO VI Ltd.'s
$456.80 million floating-rate notes.

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

The ratings reflect:

-- The diversified collateral pool, which consists primarily of
broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior secured term loans that
are governed by collateral quality tests.

-- The credit enhancement provided through the subordination of
cash flows, excess spread, and overcollateralization.

-- The collateral manager's experienced team, which can affect the
performance of the rated notes through collateral selection,
ongoing portfolio management, and trading.

-- The transaction's legal structure, which is expected to be
bankruptcy remote.

  RATINGS ASSIGNED

  Greywolf CLO VI Ltd./Greywold CLO VI LLC
  Class               Rating                Amount
                                          (mil. $)
  A-1                 AAA (sf)              301.70
  A-2                 AA (sf)                54.70
  B                   A (sf)                 49.40
  C                   BBB- (sf)              32.50
  D                   BB- (sf)               18.50
  Subordinated notes  NR                     48.35

  NR--Not rated.


GS MORTGAGE 2013-G1: S&P Affirms BB- (sf) Rating on Class DM Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its rating on the class B commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates from GS Mortgage Securities
Trust 2013-G1, a U.S. commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS)
transaction. In addition, S&P affirmed its ratings on six other
classes from the same transaction.

The upgrade and affirmations on the pooled certificates reflect
S&P's expectation that the credit enhancement was in line with the
raised and affirmed rating levels.

The affirmation on the class DM raked certificates reflects S&P's
re-evaluation of the Deptford Mall loan. Class DM derives 100% of
its cash flow from a subordinate nonpooled component of the loan.

The affirmation on the class X-A 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-A
references classes A-1 and A-2.

This is a large-loan transaction backed by three fixed-rate
mortgage loans that are not cross-collateralized or
cross-defaulted. S&P's analysis included a re-evaluation of the
three loans in the pool--which are each secured by a retail
property -- using the reported 2013 through year-to-date Sept. 30,
2017, operating data and the most recent rent rolls provided by the
master servicer.

S&P's analysis also considered that retail properties have
generally come under pressure in recent years, as competition with
online shopping continues, forcing many retailers to pursue
alternative strategies or close their stores.

In addition, each of the retail properties faces moderate near-term
rollover risk.

As of the April 12, 2018, trustee remittance report, the trust
consisted of three fixed-rate loans with an aggregate pooled
balance of $503.4 million and an aggregate trust balance of $526.0
million, down from $543.9 million and $569.0 million, respectively,
at issuance. The pooled trust has not incurred any principal losses
to date.

Details on the three loans are as follows:

-- The Great Lakes Crossing Outlets loan, the largest loan in the
pool, has a trust and whole-loan balance of $201.9 million (40.1%),
down from $224.6 million at issuance. The loan amortizes on a
30-year schedule, pays a 3.601% interest rate annually, and matures
on Jan. 6, 2023. The loan is secured by 1,123,098 sq. ft. of a
1,352,398–sq.-ft. one-story regional outlet shopping center in
Auburn Hills, Mich. The occupancy per the Jan. 31, 2018, rent roll
was 92.7%. The five largest collateral tenants make up 24.4% of the
collateral's total net rentable area (NRA). In addition, 7.0%,
12.8%, and 13.9% of the NRA has leases that expire in 2018, 2019,
and 2020, respectively. S&P said, "Our analysis considered the
slight decline in reported occupancy, market occupancy, and the
near-term rollover risk at the property. We then derived our
sustainable in-place net cash flow, which we divided by a 7.25% S&P
Global Ratings capitalization rate to determine our expected-case
value. This yielded an overall S&P Global Ratings loan-to-value
(LTV) ratio and debt service coverage (DSC) of 64.8% and 1.84x,
respectively, on the trust balance."

-- The Deptford Mall loan is the second-largest loan in the pool
with an aggregate trust balance of $184.1 million, comprising a
$161.5 million pooled trust balance (32.1%) and a $22.6 million
nonpooled trust balance that supports class DM, down from $204.4
million at issuance. The loan amortizes on a 30-year amortization
schedule, pays a 3.7277% interest rate annually, and matures on
April 3, 2023. The loan is secured by 343,910 sq. ft. of a
1,040,352–sq.-ft. regional mall in Deptford, N.J. The occupancy
per the Sept. 30, 2017, rent roll was 98.9%. The five largest
collateral tenants make up 20.9% of the collateral's total NRA. In
addition, approximately 13.3%, 8.8%, and 7.3% of the NRA has leases
that expire in 2018, 2019, and 2020, respectively. S&P said, "Our
analysis considered the stable reported performance, market
occupancy, and near-term tenant rollover risk. We then derived our
sustainable in-place net cash flow, which we divided by a 6.75% S&P
Global Ratings capitalization rate to determine our expected-case
value. This yielded an overall S&P Global Ratings LTV ratio and DSC
of 65.6% and 1.67x, respectively, on the pooled trust balance."

-- The Katy Mills loan is the smallest loan in the pool with a
trust balance of $140.0 million (27.8%), the same as at issuance.
The loan is IO, pays a 3.49% interest rate annually, and matures on
Dec. 6, 2022. The loan is secured by a 1,200,771-sq.-ft. regional
mall in Katy, Texas. The occupancy per the Sept. 30, 2017, rent
roll was 94.5%. The five largest collateral tenants make up 32.4%
of the collateral's total NRA. In addition, approximately 10.0%,
24.2% and 24.1% of the NRA has leases that expire in 2018, 2019,
and 2020, respectively. S&P said, "Our analysis considered the
improved reported performance, market occupancy, and near-term
rollover risk. We then derived our sustainable in-place net cash
flow, which we divided by a 7.25% S&P Global Ratings capitalization
rate to determine our expected-case value. This yielded an overall
S&P Global Ratings LTV ratio and DSC of 42.0% and 4.88x,
respectively, on the trust balance."

  RATINGS LIST

  GS Mortgage Securities Trust 2013-G1
  Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2013-G1
                                      Rating
  Class       Identifier       To             From
  A-1         36197QAA7        AAA (sf)       AAA (sf)
  A-2         36197QAC3        AAA (sf)       AAA (sf)
  X-A         36197QAE9        AAA (sf)       AAA (sf)
  B           36197QAG4        AA+ (sf)       AA (sf)
  C           36197QAJ8        A (sf)         A (sf)
  D           36197QAL3        BBB- (sf)      BBB- (sf)
  DM          36197QAN9        BB- (sf)       BB- (sf)


GS MORTGAGE 2015-590M: S&P Affirms BB (sf) Rating on Class E Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings affirmed its ratings on six classes of
commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from GS Mortgage
Securities Corporation Trust 2015-590M, a U.S. commercial
mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transaction.

S&P said, "For these affirmations, our expectation of credit
enhancement was in line with the affirmed rating levels. Our
analysis is also based on our expectation that the office property
securing the loan would reach the stabilized valuation we
determined at issuance.

"We affirmed our rating on the class X-A interest-only (IO)
certificates 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. Class X-A's notional
balance references class A."

This is a stand-alone (single borrower) transaction backed by a
fixed-rate IO mortgage loan secured by 590 Madison Avenue, which is
a 42-story, 1.03 million net-rentable-sq.-ft. office building, and
the leased-fee interest in the 10,040 sq.-ft. adjacent parcel in
midtown Manhattan. S&P said, "Our property-level analysis included
a re-evaluation of the office property that secures the mortgage
loan in the trust and considered the relatively stable
servicer-reported net operating income and reported occupancy
percentages in the mid- to high-70s range for the past three years
(2015 through 2017). Our analysis also considered our expectation
at issuance that the property's occupancy would stabilized to
approximately 85%. Although the property has not yet reached our
stabilization assumptions, our analysis considered the property's
desirable location, as well as the market and historical
occupancy."

If the property fails to reach S&P's stabilized valuation, it may
revise its analysis. Using a 6.25% S&P Global Ratings
capitalization rate and S&P Global Ratings valuation of $820.8
million yielded an overall S&P Global Ratings loan-to-value ratio
of 79.2% on the whole loan balance.

According to the April 12, 2018, trustee remittance report, the IO
mortgage loan has a $650.0 million whole loan balance, of which
$450.0 million ($169.4 million A-1 note and $280.6 million B note)
is included in the trust. The $100.0 million A-2 and $100.0 million
A-3 notes (aggregating $200.0 million) are in GS Mortgage
Securities Trust 2015-GS1 and Citigroup Commercial Mortgage Trust
2015-GC35, both U.S. CMBS transactions, and pari passu to the
trust's A-1 note. The trust's B note is junior to the A notes. The
whole loan pays a fixed interest rate per annum of 3.815% and
matures on Oct. 1, 2025. To date, the trust has not incurred any
principal losses.

The master servicer, Wells Fargo Bank N.A., reported a debt service
coverage ratio of 1.80x on the whole loan balance for the 12 months
ended Dec. 31, 2017, and occupancy was 78.7% according to the Dec.
31, 2017, rent roll. Based on the December 2017 rent roll, the five
largest tenants make up 37.4% of the collateral's total net
rentable area (NRA). In addition, 2.0%, 6.5%, and 1.3% of the NRA
have leases that expire in 2018, 2019, and 2020, respectively.

  RATINGS LIST

  GS Mortgage Securities Corporation Trust 2015-590M
  Commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series 2015-590M
                                       Rating
  Class       Identifier      To              From
  A           36250WAA8       AAA (sf)        AAA (sf)
  X-A         36250WAC4       AAA (sf)        AAA (sf)
  B           36250WAG5       AA- (sf)        AA- (sf)
  C           36250WAJ9       A- (sf)         A- (sf)
  D           36250WAL4       BBB- (sf)       BBB- (sf)
  E           36250WAN0       BB (sf)         BB (sf)


GS MORTGAGE II 20016-CC1: Moody's Affirms 'Ca' Rating on A Certs
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the rating on the following
class of certificates issued by GS Mortgage Securities Corporation
II, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2006-CC1
("GSMS 2006-CC1"):

Cl. A, Affirmed Ca (sf); previously on May 25, 2017 Affirmed Ca
(sf)

The Cl. A Certificates are referred to herein as the "Rated
Certificates".

RATINGS RATIONALE

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

GSMS 2006-CC1 is a static cash transaction backed solely by a
portfolio of commercial mortgage backed securities (CMBS) (100% of
the current pool balance); issued between 2003 and 2005. As of the
trustee's March 21, 2018 report, the aggregate certificate balance
of the transaction, including preferred shares, is $88.9 million,
compared to $406.2 million at issuance with the pay down directed
to the senior most outstanding class of certificates as a result of
amortization of the underlying collateral and recoveries from
defaulted collateral. Partial losses have been applied to the Rated
Certifictaes as a result of realized losses on the underlying
collateral.

Moody's has identified the following parameters as key indicators
of the expected loss within CRE CDO transactions: the weighted
average rating factor (WARF), the weighted average life (WAL), the
weighted average recovery rate (WARR), number of asset obligors;
and pair-wise asset correlation. These parameters are typically
modeled as actual parameters for static deals and as covenants for
managed deals.

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

WARF is a primary measure of the credit quality of a CRE CDO pool.
Moody's has updated its assessments for the collateral it does not
rate. The rating agency modeled a bottom-dollar WARF of 4664,
compared to 4651 at last review. The current rating[s] on the
Moody's-rated collateral and the assessments of the non-Moody's
rated collateral follow: Aaa-Aa3 (15.3% compared to 20.7% at last
review), A1-A3 (8.6% compared to 0.0% at last review), Baa1-Baa3
(16.4% compared to 12.2% at last review), Ba1-Ba3 (2.3% compared to
14.5% at last review), B1-B3 (14.2% compared to 4.7% at last
review), Caa1-Ca/C (43.3% compared to 47.9% at last review).

Moody's modeled a WAL of 1.5 years, compared to 1.6 years at last
review. The WAL is based on assumptions about extensions on the
underlying CMBS collateral look-through assets.

Moody's modeled a fixed WARR of 0%, same as that at last review.

Moody's modeled 23 obligors, compared to 26 obligors at last
review.

Moody's modeled a pair-wise asset correlation of 48.7%, same as
that at last review.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Approach
to Rating SF CDOs" published in June 2017.

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

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

Moody's Parameter Sensitivities: Changes in any one or combination
of the key parameters may have rating implications on certain
classes of Rated Certificates. However, in many instances, a change
in key parameter assumptions in certain stress scenarios may be
offset by a change in one or more of the other key parameters. The
Rated Certificates are particularly sensitive to changes in the
recovery rates of the underlying collateral and credit assessments.
Holding all other parameters constant, increasing the recovery
rates of 100% of the collateral pool by 10% would result in an
average modeled rating movement on the Rated Certificates of zero
notches upward (e.g., one notch up implies a ratings movement of
Baa3 to Baa2).

Primary sources of assumption uncertainty are the extent of growth
in the current macroeconomic environment. Commercial real estate
property values are continuing to move in a positive direction
along with a rise in investment activity and stabilization in core
property type performance. Limited new construction, moderate job
growth and the decreased cost of debt and equity capital have aided
this improvement.


HAYFIN KINGSLAND IX: S&P Assigns B- (sf) Rating on Class F-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A-1-R, B-R,
C-R, D-R, E-R, and F-R replacement notes from Hayfin Kingsland IX
Ltd. (formerly known as Kingsland VI), a collateralized loan
obligation originally issued in 2013 that is managed by Hayfin
Capital Management LLC. S&P withdrew its ratings on the class class
A loans and class A-1, A-2, B, C, D, E, and F notes following
payment in full on the April 30, 2018, refinancing date.

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

On the April 30, 2018, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
issuance of the replacement notes were used to redeem the original
notes as outlined in the transaction document provisions.
Therefore, S&P discontinued its ratings on the refinanced notes in
line with their full redemption, and it is assigning ratings to the
replacement notes.

Based on provisions in the supplemental indenture:

-- The replacement class A-1-R, B-R, C-R, D-R, E-R, and F-R notes
are being issued at lower spreads than the original notes.

-- The stated maturity is being extended by 6.5 years, and the
reinvestment period is being extended by 5.5 years.

-- The non-call period is being reinstated, now ending in April
2020.

-- The issuer name has changed to Hayfin Kingsland IX Ltd. from
Kingsland VI.

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."

  RATINGS ASSIGNED

  Hayfin Kingsland IX Ltd.  
  Replacement class         Rating      Amount (mil. $)
  A-1-R                     AAA (sf)             271.00
  B-R                       AA (sf)               61.00    
  C-R                       A (sf)                32.00    
  D-R                       BBB- (sf)             28.70    
  E-R                       BB- (sf)              19.25    
  F-R                       B- (sf)                8.00       
  Subordinated notes        NR                    54.56

  RATINGS WITHDRAWN

  Hayfin Kingsland IX Ltd.  

  Class                     To                   From
  A loans                   NR                   AAA (sf)
  A-1                       NR                   AAA (sf)
  A-2                       NR                   AAA (sf)
  B                         NR                   AA (sf)    
  C                         NR                   A (sf)    
  D                         NR                   BBB (sf)    
  E                         NR                   BB (sf)    
  F                         NR                   B (sf)
  NR--Not rated.


HAYFIN KINGSLAND IX: 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 Hayfin
Kingsland IX Ltd. (formerly known as Kingsland VI), a
collateralized loan obligation originally issued in 2013 that is
managed by Hayfin Capital Management LLC. 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 April 27,
2018. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

On the April 30, 2018, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
issuance of the replacement notes are expected to redeem the
original notes. 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.
Based on provisions in the supplemental indenture:

-- The replacement class A-R, B-R, C-R, D-R, E-R, and F-R notes
are expected to be issued at lower spreads than the original
notes.

-- The stated maturity will be extended by 6.5 years, and the
reinvestment period will be extended by 5.5 years.

-- The non-call period will be reinstated, now ending in April
2020.

-- On the refinancing date, the issuer name will be changed to
Hayfin Kingsland IX Ltd., from Kingsland VI.

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

  Hayfin Kingsland IX Ltd.  
  Replacement class         Rating      Amount (mil. $)
  A-R                       AAA (sf)             271.00
  B-R                       AA (sf)               61.00
  C-R                       A (sf)                32.00
  D-R                       BBB- (sf)             28.70
  E-R                       BB- (sf)              19.25
  F-R                       B- (sf)                8.00
  Subordinated notes        NR                    54.56

  NR--Not rated.


ICG US 2015-2: Moody's Assigns Ba3 to Class E-R Notes
-----------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned the following ratings to the
following notes (the "Refinancing Notes") issued by ICG US CLO
2015-2, LTD. (the "Issuer"):

US$256,000,000 Class A-R Senior Term Notes due 2028 (the "Class A-R
Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$49,250,000 Class B-R Senior Term Notes due 2028 (the "Class B-R
Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$19,000,000 Class C-R Deferrable Mezzanine Term Notes due 2028
(the "Class C-R Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$23,750,000 Class D-R Deferrable Mezzanine Term Notes due 2028
(the "Class D-R Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$20,000,000 Class E-R Deferrable Junior Term Notes due 2028 (the
"Class E-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.

ICG Debt Advisors LLC -- Manager Series (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 April 16, 2018 (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 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-R: 0

Class B-R: +2

Class C-R: +3

Class D-R: +3

Class E-R: +1

Moody's Assumed WARF + 20% (3840)

Class A-R: 0

Class B-R: -2

Class C-R: -2

Class D-R: -1

Class E-R: -2

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: $399,228,624

Defaulted par: $1,542,752

Diversity Score: 65

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3200 (corresponding to a
weighted average default probability of 26.73%)

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.57%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.17%

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.


ICON BRAND 2012-1: S&P Affirms BB(sf) Rating on Class A-1/2 Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings affirmed its ratings on the class A-1, A-2, and
2013-1 A-2 notes from Icon Brand Holdings LLC's series 2012-1 and
removed them from CreditWatch, where S&P placed them with negative
implications on Nov. 2, 2017. Icon Brand Holdings LLC is a
corporate securitization transaction backed by royalty payments
from licensing agreements associated with various brands from
Iconix Brand Group Inc. (Iconix).

On March 16, 2018, S&P Global Ratings raised the corporate credit
rating on Iconix to 'CCC' from 'SD' following the company's full
retirement of the convertible notes. However, Iconix's corporate
business risk profile (BRP) remains unchanged at 'vulnerable'.

Since the transaction closed in November 2012, it has paid down
over $466.83 million in principal along with timely interest. The
transaction has an interest reserve account to cover any liquidity
issues that would impair timely interest payments for up to three
months.

The debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) is one of the important
surveillance metrics we monitor. Although it has decreased since
the deal closed, the transaction has not breached any DSCR triggers
so far. The DSCR is likely to continue declining in the upcoming
quarters from the current level of 1.65x due to the declining
royalty streams of Danskin and Mossimo after Walmart and Target,
respectively, did not renew their contracts. If the DSCR drops
below certain levels, the cash trap triggers are likely to be
breached.  

  Table 1
  DSCR Triggers

  DSCR trigger (x)  Cash trap (%)
  1.45              25
  1.35              50
  1.25              100
  1.10              Rapid amortization

  DSCR--Debt service coverage ratio.

Although there is uncertainty regarding the royalties from the
Danskin and Mossimo brands, the company is pursuing plans to
reposition both. S&P ran various stress scenarios to address this
uncertainty. The transaction's cash flows, even excluding both of
these brand royalties completely, indicate that the notes can
withstand the current rating levels and pay timely interest and
ultimate principal before the legal final maturity.

S&P said, "Per our corporate securitization criteria, the BVS
considers the BRP of Iconix, which has remained unchanged at
'vulnerable'. After applying the five analytical steps in this
criteria, we are affirming our 'BB (sf)' ratings on the notes and
removing them from CreditWatch with negative implications at this
time. We will continue to monitor the situation related to the
Danskin and Mossimo brands and take action as necessary."

  RATINGS AFFIRMED

  Icon Brand Holdings LLC

  Class                 To             From
  A-1                   BB (sf)        BB (sf)/Watch neg
  A-2                   BB (sf)        BB (sf)/Watch neg
  2013-1 A-2            BB (sf)        BB (sf)/Watch neg


IVY HILL XIV: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on $75MM Class D Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Ivy Hill Middle Market
Credit Fund XIV Ltd.'s $900 million floating-rate notes.

The note issuance is collateralized loan obligation transaction
backed by primarily 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

  Ivy Hill Middle Market Credit Fund XIV Ltd. Class                
               

                                    Rating           Amount
                                                    (mil. $)
  A-1                                AAA (sf)         560.00
  A-2                                AA (sf)          130.00
  B (deferrable)                     A (sf)            72.50
  C (deferrable)                     BBB- (sf)         62.50
  D (deferrable)                     BB- (sf)          75.00
  Subordinated notes                 NR               109.50

  NR--Not rated.


JP MORGAN 2002-CIBC4: Fitch Hikes Rating on Class D Certs to BBsf
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded two classes and affirmed eight classes
of JP Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corporation
(JPMC) commercial mortgage pass-through certificates, series
2002-CIBC4.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Increasing Credit Enhancement; Stable Performance: The upgrades
reflect the increasing credit enhancement (CE) relative to the
remaining pool balance as a result of amortization. The transaction
has paid down approximately $2.3 million since Fitch's last rating
action in April 2017. Based on the current amortization schedule of
the performing loans, class C is expected to pay in full over the
next three months.

The pool has remained relatively unchanged since Fitch's prior
rating action in April 2017; one loan remains in special servcing
(13% of the pool), with no additional transfers or liquidations
since the prior review. The remaining non-specially serviced assets
are either defeased or fully amortizing performing loans with low
loan to values (LTVs). Interest shortfalls are currently effecting
classes D though NR.

Concentrated Pool: Only eight of the original 121 loans remain. Due
to the concentrated nature of the pool, Fitch performed a
sensitivity analysis that grouped the remaining loans based on loan
features, performance and collateral quality then ranked them by
the perceived likelihood of repayment. This includes defeased loans
(16%), fully amortizing loans with low LTVs but posing some binary
risks (55%), loans with declining performance (16%), and a
specially serviced loan (13%). The ratings reflect this sensitivity
analysis.

Defeasance: Three loans (16% of the pool) have fully defeased.
Class C is fully covered by the defeasance, and class D is 15%
covered by defeased collateral.

Fitch Loans of Concern; REO Asset: Two loans (29% of the pool) have
been identified as Fitch Loans of Concern (FLOC), including one
loan (13%) in special servicing.

The non-specially serviced FLOC is the 555 Post Street loan (16% of
the pool), which is secured by a 61,608 square foot (sf) office
building in San Francisco, CA. The loan has been flagged due to
declining in occupancy and low debt service coverage ratio (DSCR),
although the property benefits from its strong location and low
LTV. Per the December 2017 rent roll, occupancy has declined to 76%
from 100% since 2015, due to third-quarter (3Q) 2017 tenant
vacancies. Occupancy is expected to further decline in 2018 from
the departure of one tenant (24% of the net rentable area (NRA))
whose lease has had short-term extensions, most recently to June
2018. The remaining tenant, Post Street Renaissance (53% NRA), is
currently on a long-term lease through 2059. Then tenant has been
at the property since 1990, but per the terms of the lease rental
payment had only begun in October 2017. DSCR has been below 1.15x
since 2010, most recently reporting at 1.13x as of 3Q17, 1.15x at
year end (YE) 2016, and 0.77x at YE2015. Per servicer updates, the
borrower is actively marketing the vacated space for new tenants.
The fully amortizing loan has remained current since issuance and
is scheduled to mature in November 2021.

The specially serviced asset, Northstar Center Building Two (13% of
the pool) is a 19,545sf mixed use property in Edwards, CO. Built in
1998, the property consists of 3,588sf of Retail, 4,913sf of Bank
space, 10,394sf of Brewery and a 650sf apartment. The property had
experienced cash flow issues in 2011 due to declining base rents
and occupancy declines. The loan had transferred to special
servicing in February 2012 for maturity default. After unsuccessful
attempts by the borrower to refinance or sell the property, a
receiver was assigned in April 2013 and the asset became REO in
July 2013. Per the December 2017 rent roll, the property is 87%
leased, but the servicer has reported the largest tenant, Crazy
Mountain Brewing Company (54%), was recently evicted for failure to
pay rent. Per servicer updates, the REO strategy is to stabilize
occupancy with new and existing lease negotiations; the asset is
not currently on the market.

Maturity Schedule: The remaining non-specially serviced loans have
final maturity dates in 2020 (3.1%), 2021 (16%), and 2022 (67.8%).

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The rating Outlook for Class C is Stable due to high CE and
defeasance; the class is expected to pay in full over the next
three months based on the current amortization schedule of the
performing loans. The Positive Outlook on class D reflects the
possibility of future upgrades as class CE increases from continued
amortization and decreasing leverage of the performing loans,
and/or additional defeasance. While downgrades are not expected,
they are possible should an asset-level or economic event cause a
decline in pool performance.

Fitch upgrades the following classes and revises Outlooks as
indicated:

-- $620,573 class C to 'AAAsf' from 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $10 million class D to 'BBsf' from 'Bsf'; Outlook to Positive
    from Stable.

Fitch affirms the following classes:

-- $2.3 million class E at 'Dsf'; RE 60%;
-- $0 million class F at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 million class G at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 million class H at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 million class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 million class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 million class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 million class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

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


JP MORGAN 2005-LDP2: Fitch Keeps Default Rating on $11MM Debt
-------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded one and affirmed 10 classes of J.P.
Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Corp.'s commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates series 2005-LDP2 (JPMCC
2005-LDP2).

KEY RATING DRIVERS

High Credit Enhancement: The upgrade reflects the increasing credit
enhancement relative to the remaining pool balance as a result of
amortization and loan payoffs. Since last review, classes D and E
were paid in full and class F was reduced by $7 million. Four loans
were disposed, which resulted in higher recoveries than Fitch
previously modeled.

Concentrated Pool and High Loss Expectations: Only 19 of the
original 295 loans remain, one of which is specially serviced
(3.9%) and five were flagged as Fitch Loans of Concern (36.1%) due
to significant upcoming tenant rollover risk. 82.4% of the pool
matures in 2020 and 81.1% of the pool consists of retail
properties. Due to the concentrated nature of the pool, Fitch
performed a liquidation analysis which assumed full losses on the
specially serviced loan and the seven Fitch Loans of Concern. The
ratings reflect this liquidation analysis as the distressed ratings
reflect the high expected losses.

As of the March 2018 distribution date, the transaction has been
reduced by 98% since issuance, to $60.5 million from $3 billion.
Cumulative interest shortfalls of $7.7 million are currently
affecting classes H through Q and there has been $201 million (6.7%
of original pool balance) in realized losses to date.

RATING SENSITIVITIES
The Stable Rating Outlook for class F reflects increased credit
enhancement. Recoveries on previously liquidated loans since the
last rating action exceeded Fitch's expectations. The rating for
class F was capped at 'B' due to maturity concentration as 82.4% of
the pool matures in 2020, and retail concentration as 81.1% of the
pool consists of retail properties. Losses to class G are
considered probable as the class is expected to be impacted by
modeled losses. Further downgrades are possible if pool performance
deteriorates and/or expected losses increase significantly.

Fitch has upgraded the following rating:

-- $22.8 million class F to 'Bsf' from 'CCsf'; Outlook Stable
    assigned.

Fitch has affirmed the following ratings:

-- $26.1 million class G at 'CCsf'; RE 0%;
-- $11.6 million class H at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class O at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class P at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;
-- $0 class Q at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

Classes A-1 through E were paid in full. Fitch does not rate the
class NR certificates. Fitch previously withdrew the ratings on the
interest-only class X-1 and X-2 certificates.


JP MORGAN 2013-C13: Moody's Affirms B2 Rating on Class F Certs
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on 11 classes in
J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2013-C13,
Commercial Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2013-C13 as follows:

Cl. A-2, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 27, 2017 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 27, 2017 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-4, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 27, 2017 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-SB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 27, 2017 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-S, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 27, 2017 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Apr 27, 2017 Affirmed Aa3
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on Apr 27, 2017 Affirmed A3
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Apr 27, 2017 Affirmed Baa3
(sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Apr 27, 2017 Affirmed Ba2
(sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Apr 27, 2017 Affirmed B2
(sf)

Cl. X-A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 27, 2017 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

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

The rating on the IO class, Cl.X-A, was affirmed based on the
credit quality of the referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 2.0% of the
current pooled balance, compared to 2.4% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 1.8% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 2.3% 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 rating J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial
Mortgage Securities Trust 2013-C13, Cl. A-2, Cl. A-3, Cl. A-4, Cl.
A-SB, Cl. A-S, Cl. B, Cl. C, Cl. D, Cl. E, Cl. F 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. The methodologies used in
rating J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust
2013-C13, Cl. X-A were "Approach to Rating US and Canadian
Conduit/Fusion CMBS" published in July 2017, "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.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the March 17, 2018 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 8% to $883.6 million
from $961.2 million at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 43 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 11% of the pool, with the top ten loans (excluding
defeasance) constituting 63% of the pool. Two loans, constituting
13% of the pool, have investment-grade structured credit
assessments.

Six loans, constituting 8% of the pool, have defeased and are
secured by US government securities.

Three loans, constituting 10% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews the
watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that could
affect performance.

There have been no loans liquidated from the pool which have
resulted in a loss and there are no loans currently in special
servicing.

Moody's received full year 2016 operating results for 96% of the
pool, and full or partial year 2017 operating results for 93% of
the pool (excluding specially serviced and defeased loans). Moody's
weighted average conduit LTV is 96%, compared to 97% 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 18% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.1%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.74X and 1.03X,
respectively, compared to 1.72X and 1.02X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The largest loan with a structured credit assessment is the
Americold Cold Storage Portfolio ($96.3 million -- 10.9% of the
pool), which represents a pari-passu portion of a $192.7 million
mortgage loan. The loan is secured by a portfolio of 15 cold
storage facilities located across nine U.S. states, with a total
storage capacity of 3.6 million square feet (SF). The loan sponsor
is Americold Realty Trust, the largest US operator of cold storage
facilities. The property is also encumbered by $102 million of
mezzanine debt. The loan benefits from amortization and Moody's
structured credit assessment and stressed DSCR are a3 (sca.pd) and
1.83X, respectively, compared to baa1 (sca.pd) and 1.72X at the
last review.

The other loan with a structured credit assessment is the 501 Fifth
Avenue Loan ($17.5 million -- 2.0% of the pool), which is secured
by a 159,000 SF, 23-story class B office building located in the
Grand Central submarket in New York City. As of September 2017, the
property was 88% occupied, compared to 90% at last review. The rent
roll is granular with 100+ tenant suites. Moody's structured credit
assessment and stressed DSCR are a1 (sca.pd) and 1.48X,
respectively, the same as at last review.

The top three conduit loans represent 27.5% of the pool balance.
The largest conduit loan is the IDS Center Loan ($87.9 million --
9.9% of the pool), which represents a pari-passu portion of a
$173.4 million mortgage loan. The loan is secured by a 1.4 million
SF mixed-use property located in downtown Minneapolis, Minnesota.
The collateral consists of a 57-story skyscraper office tower, an
eight-story annex building, a 100,000 SF retail center, and an
underground garage. The largest tenant, a law firm, renewed their
lease through May 2021, however, nearly 100% of the leases are set
to expire during the loan's ten year term. Moody's LTV and stressed
DSCR are 102% and 0.98X, respectively, compared to 101% and 0.99X
at the last review.

The second largest loan is the 589 Fifth Avenue Loan ($87.5 million
-- 9.9% of the pool), which represents a pari-passu portion of a
$175.0 million mortgage loan. The loan is secured by a 17-story,
169,000 SF mixed-use office and retail building property, located
in New York City at the corner of 48th street and 5th avenue. The
building has approximately 57,000 SF of retail space, while the
remainder is used as office space. H&M leased 40% of the net
rentable area (NRA) for their flagship store. As of the December
2017 rent roll, the property was 100% occupied, unchanged from the
last review. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 100% and 0.88X,
respectively, unchanged from the prior review.

The third largest loan is the Atlantic Times Square Loan ($67.9
million -- 7.7% of the pool), which is secured by 213,000 SF of
retail space and 100 multifamily units located in Monterey Park,
California. The largest retail tenants include a 14-screen AMC
theater and a 24 Hour Fitness. The multifamily units are part of a
210 condominium development. As of December 2017, the retail
component was 98% occupied, compared to 97% at the last review. The
overall property was 98% leased as of December 2017, the same as at
last review. The loan benefits from amortization. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 90% and 1.02X, respectively, compared to 91% and
1.00X at the last review.


JP MORGAN 2018-4: DBRS Assigns Prov. 'B' Rating on Class B-5 Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS, Inc. assigned provisional ratings to the Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2018-4 (the Certificates) issued
by J.P. Morgan Mortgage Trust 2018-4 as follows:

-- $692.3 million Class A-1 at AAA (sf)
-- $692.3 million Class A-2 at AAA (sf)
-- $648.1 million Class A-3 at AAA (sf)
-- $648.1 million Class A-4 at AAA (sf)
-- $518.5 million Class A-5 at AAA (sf)
-- $518.5 million Class A-6 at AAA (sf)
-- $129.6 million Class A-7 at AAA (sf)
-- $129.6 million Class A-8 at AAA (sf)
-- $99.3 million Class A-9 at AAA (sf)
-- $99.3 million Class A-10 at AAA (sf)
-- $30.3 million Class A-11 at AAA (sf)
-- $30.3 million Class A-12 at AAA (sf)
-- $44.2 million Class A-13 at AAA (sf)
-- $44.2 million Class A-14 at AAA (sf)
-- $408.3 million Class A-15 at AAA (sf)
-- $408.3 million Class A-16 at AAA (sf)
-- $110.2 million Class A-17 at AAA (sf)
-- $110.2 million Class A-18 at AAA (sf)
-- $692.3 million Class A-X-1 at AAA (sf)
-- $692.3 million Class A-X-2 at AAA (sf)
-- $648.1 million Class A-X-3 at AAA (sf)
-- $518.5 million Class A-X-4 at AAA (sf)
-- $129.6 million Class A-X-5 at AAA (sf)
-- $99.3 million Class A-X-6 at AAA (sf)
-- $30.3 million Class A-X-7 at AAA (sf)
-- $44.2 million Class A-X-8 at AAA (sf)
-- $408.3 million Class A-X-9 at AAA (sf)
-- $110.2 million Class A-X-10 at AAA (sf)
-- $11.0 million Class B-1 at AA (sf)
-- $12.2 million Class B-2 at A (sf)
-- $9.9 million Class B-3 at BBB (sf)
-- $5.2 million Class B-4 at BB (sf)
-- $2.2 million Class B-5 at B (sf)

Classes A-X-1, A-X-2, A-X-3, A-X-4, A-X-5, A-X-6, A-X-7, A-X-8,
A-X-9 and A-X-10 are interest-only notes. The class balances
represent notional amounts.

Classes A-1, A-2, A-3, A-4, A-5, A-6, A-7, A-8, A-9, A-11, A-13,
A-15, A-17, A-X-2, A-X-3, A-X-4 and A-X-5 are exchangeable
certificates. These classes can be exchanged for a combination of
depositable certificates, as specified in the offering documents.

Classes A-10, A-12, A-16 and A-18 are super-senior certificates.
These classes benefit from additional protection from the senior
support certificate (Class A-14) with respect to loss allocation.

The AAA (sf) ratings on the Certificates reflect the 6.00% of
credit enhancement provided by subordinated certificates in the
pool. The AA (sf), A (sf), BBB (sf), BB (sf) and B (sf) ratings
reflect 4.50%, 2.85%, 1.50%, 0.80% and 0.50% of credit enhancement,
respectively.

The Certificates are backed by 1,242 loans with a total principal
balance of $736,498,182 as of the Cut-Off Date (April 1, 2018).

The pool consists of fully amortizing fixed-rate mortgages (FRMs)
with original terms to maturity of primarily 30 years.
Approximately 65.7% of the pools are conforming mortgage loans,
originated by J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, National Association (JPMCB),
Quicken Loans, Inc. (Quicken) and loanDepot.com LLC (loan Depot),
which were eligible for purchase by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. For
conforming loans, JPMCB generally delegates underwriting authority
to correspondent lenders and does not subsequently review those
loans. Details on the underwriting of conforming loans can be found
in Key Probability of Default Drivers section in the related
report.

The originators for the aggregate mortgage pool are JPMCB (42.8%),
Quicken (13.8%), loan Depot (11.8%), United Shore Financial
Services (USFS, 7.4%), First Bank (6.7%) and various other
originators, each comprising less than 5.0% of the mortgage loans.
Approximately 0.7% of the loans sold to the mortgage loan seller
were acquired by MAXEX Clearing LLC (MaxEx), which purchased loans
from the related originators or an unaffiliated third party that
directly or indirectly purchased such loans from the related
originators.

The loans will be serviced or sub-serviced by JPMCB (42.8%), New
Penn Financial, LLC (New Penn) d/b/a Shell point Mortgage Servicing
(SMS, 33.1%), Cenlar FSB (Cenlar, 22.5%) and various other
servicers, each comprising less than 5.0% of the mortgage loans.
Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (Wells Fargo; rated AA by DBRS) will act as
the Master Servicer and Securities Administrator. Wells Fargo and
JPMCB will act as the Custodians. U.S. Bank Trust National
Association will serve as Delaware Trustee. Pentalpha Surveillance
LLC will serve as the representations and warranties (R&W)
Reviewer.

The transaction employs a senior-subordinate shifting-interest cash
flow structure that is enhanced from a pre-crisis structure.

The ratings reflect transactional strengths that include
high-quality underlying assets, well-qualified borrowers and a
satisfactory third-party due diligence review.

This transaction employs an R&W framework that contains certain
weaknesses, such as materiality factors, some unrated R&W
providers, knowledge qualifiers and sunset provisions that allow
for certain R&Ws to expire within three to six years after the
Closing Date. The framework is perceived by DBRS to be limiting
compared with traditional lifetime R&W standards in certain
DBRS-rated securitizations. To capture the perceived weaknesses in
the R&W framework, DBRS reduced the originator scores in this pool.
A lower originator score results in increased default and loss
assumptions and provides additional cushions for the rated
securities.

Notes: All figures are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted.


JP MORGAN 2018-4: S&P Assigns B+ (sf) Rating on Class B-5 Certs
---------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to J.P. Morgan Mortgage
Trust 2018-4's $732.8 million mortgage pass-through certificates.

The issuance is a residential mortgage-backed securities
transaction backed by residential mortgage loans.

The ratings reflect:

-- High-quality collateral in the pool;
-- Available credit enhancement;
-- Experienced aggregator;
-- The 100% due diligence sampling results consistent with
represented loan characteristics; and
-- The transaction's associated structural mechanics.

  RATINGS ASSIGNED
  J.P. Morgan Mortgage Trust 2018-4

  Class         Rating               Amount ($)
  A-1           AA+ (sf)            692,308,000
  A-2           AA+ (sf)            692,308,000
  A-3           AAA (sf)            648,118,000
  A-4           AAA (sf)            648,118,000
  A-5           AAA (sf)            518,494,000
  A-6           AAA (sf)            518,494,000
  A-7           AAA (sf)            129,624,000
  A-8           AAA (sf)            129,624,000
  A-9           AAA (sf)             99,296,000
  A-10          AAA (sf)             99,296,000
  A-11          AAA (sf)             30,328,000
  A-12          AAA (sf)             30,328,000
  A-13          AA+ (sf)             44,190,000
  A-14          AA+ (sf)             44,190,000
  A-15          AAA (sf)            408,314,000
  A-16          AAA (sf)            408,314,000
  A-17          AAA (sf)            110,180,000
  A-18          AAA (sf)            110,180,000
  A-X-1         AA+ (sf)            692,308,000(i)
  A-X-2         AA+ (sf)            692,308,000(i)
  A-X-3         AAA (sf)            648,118,000(i)
  A-X-4         AAA (sf)            518,494,000(i)
  A-X-5         AAA (sf)            129,624,000(i)
  A-X-6         AAA (sf)             99,296,000(i)
  A-X-7         AAA (sf)             30,328,000(i)
  A-X-8         AA+ (sf)             44,190,000(i)
  A-X-9         AAA (sf)            408,314,000(i)
  A-X-10        AAA (sf)            110,180,000(i)
  B-1           AA- (sf)             11,047,000
  B-2           A- (sf)              12,152,000
  B-3           BBB- (sf)             9,943,000
  B-4           BB- (sf)              5,156,000
  B-5           B+ (sf)               2,209,000
  B-6           NR                    3,683,181
  A-IO-S        NR                  243,457,464(i)
  A-R           NR                          N/A

  (i)Notional balance. NR--Not rated. N/A--Not applicable.


JP MORGAN 2018-PTC: S&P Assigns Prelim BB(sf) Rating on Cl. E Certs
-------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to J.P. Morgan
Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2018-PTC's $115.3
million commercial mortgage pass-through certificates series
2018-PTC.

The certificate issuance is a two-year floating-rate,
interest-only, first-lien mortgage loan with three, one-year
extension options with a principal balance as of the cut-off date
of $115.3 million (the trust loan), secured by the borrowers' fee
and leasehold interests in Peachtree Center, an approximately 2.5
million sq. ft. office and retail complex located in the heart of
Downtown Atlanta. A maximum of a $25.0 million future advance
amount will be pari passu in the payment to the trust loan, but
will not be an asset of the trust.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of April 30,
2018. 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 sponsor's and manager's
experience, the trustee-provided liquidity, the loan's terms, and
the transaction's structure.

  PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED
  J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2018-PTC

  Class       Rating(i)           Amount ($)
  A           AAA (sf)            58,000,000
  X-CP        BBB- (sf)           99,600,000(ii)
  X-EXT       BBB- (sf)           99,600,000(ii)
  B           AA- (sf)            15,700,000
  C           A- (sf)             11,600,000
  D           BBB- (sf)           14,300,000
  E           BB (sf)              9,840,000
  HRR(iii)    BB- (sf)             5,860,000

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

(iii)Nonoffered horizontal risk retention class.


JPMBB 2013-C14: Moody's Lowers Class G Certs Rating to B3
---------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on eleven
classes and downgraded the rating on one class of JPMBB Commercial
Mortgage Securities Trust 2013-C14, Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2013-C14 as follows:

Cl. A-2, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 13, 2017 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-3, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 13, 2017 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-4, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 13, 2017 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-SB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 13, 2017 Affirmed
Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-S, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 13, 2017 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. B, Affirmed Aa3 (sf); previously on Apr 13, 2017 Affirmed Aa3
(sf)

Cl. C, Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on Apr 13, 2017 Affirmed A3
(sf)

Cl. D, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Apr 13, 2017 Affirmed Baa3
(sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Apr 13, 2017 Affirmed Ba2
(sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Apr 13, 2017 Affirmed Ba3
(sf)

Cl. G, Downgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Apr 13, 2017 Affirmed
B2 (sf)

Cl. X-A, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Apr 13, 2017 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

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

The rating on Class G was downgraded due to expected losses from
the loan in special servicing and an increase in the number of
loans with a Moody's LTV above 130%. Moody's identified three
conduit loans, representing 10.6% of the pool, that currently have
a Moody's LTV ratio above 130%.

The rating on the IO class, Class X-A, was affirmed based on the
credit quality of the referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 4.8% of the
current pooled balance, compared to 4.0% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 4.1% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 3.7% at the last review.
Moody's provides a current list of base expected losses for conduit
and fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at
http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255.

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

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

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

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

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The methodologies used in rating JPMBB Commercial Mortgage
Securities Trust 2013-C14, Cl. A-2, Cl. A-3, Cl. A-4, Cl. A-SB, Cl.
A-S, Cl. B, Cl. C, Cl. D, Cl. E, Cl. F, and Cl. G 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. The methodologies used in
rating JPMBB Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2013-C14, Cl. X-A
were "Approach to Rating US and Canadian Conduit/Fusion CMBS"
published in July 2017, "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. Please see the Rating
Methodologies page on www.moodys.com for a copy of these
methodologies.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the March 16, 2018 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 14% to $987.6
million from $1.15 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 43 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 9.8% of the pool, with the top ten loans (excluding
defeasance) constituting 62.7% of the pool. Four loans,
constituting 3.9% of the pool, have defeased and are 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 18, compared to 20 at Moody's last review.

No loans are on the master servicer's watchlist and no loans have
been liquidated from the pool.

One loan, the Four Points Sheraton -- San Diego ($8.8 million --
less than 1% of the pool), is in special servicing. The loan is
secured by a 225-room full service hotel built in 1987 and located
in Kearny Mesa, approximately 10 miles north of the San Diego CBD.
The loan transferred to special servicing in February 2016 due to
imminent default followed by a monetary default. The borrower filed
for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in May 2016 and a bankruptcy plan was
subsequently confirmed in the second quarter of 2017. As of the
March 2016 remittance statement, the loan is current on its debt
service payments.

Moody's received full year 2016 operating results for 97% of the
pool, and full or partial year 2017 operating results for 95% of
the pool (excluding specially serviced and defeased loans). Moody's
weighted average conduit LTV is 97%, compared to 99% at Moody's
last review. Moody's conduit component excludes loans with
structured credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans, and
specially serviced and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF)
reflects a weighted average haircut of 17.0% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.7%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.61X and 1.12X,
respectively, compared to 1.61X and 1.09X at the last review.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The top three conduit loans represent 28.4% of the pool balance.
The largest loan is the Meadows Mall Loan ($97.1 million -- 9.8% of
the pool), which represents a pari passu portion of a $145.2
million mortgage loan. The loan is secured by a 308,190 square foot
portion of a 945,000 square foot (SF) regional mall located five
miles west of the Strip in Las Vegas, Nevada. The mall is anchored
by Dillard's, JC Penney, Sears and Macy's. In-line tenant sales for
tenants less than 10,000 SF were approximately $374 per square foot
(PSF) in 2016, compared to $383 PSF in December 2015. The total
mall was 98.2% leased as of September 2017, compared to 97.6% in
December 2016. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 97% and 1.09X,
respectively, compared to 97% and 1.06X at last review.

The second largest loan is the Spirit Portfolio Loan ($95.6 million
-- 9.7% of the pool), which is secured by a portfolio of 26
properties including retail, industrial, office, and mixed-use. The
collateral is located in 13 different states. The top five states
by allocated loan balance are Illinois (19%), New Hampshire (13%),
Texas (12%), North Carolina (11%), and Indiana (11%). Twenty-five
of the 26 properties are leased to single tenants. The portfolio
was fully leased as of June 2017, the same as at last review.
Several tenants have leases at more than one property: LA Fitness
leases two properties; CVS leases four properties; Walgreens leases
two properties; Ferguson Enterprises leases three properties; and
Tractor Supply leases two properties. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR
are 80% and 1.31X, respectively, compared to 81% and 1.29X at last
review.

The third largest loan is the 589 Fifth Avenue Loan ($87.5 million
-- 8.9% of the pool), which represents a pari passu interest in a
$175 million mortgage loan. The collateral is a 17-story, 169,000
SF office and retail property located near the Diamond District in
New York City. The entire retail portion is leased to H&M through
July 2033. The office portion is mostly leased to jeweler tenants.
No office tenant accounts for more than 5% of the net rentable
area. The property was 100% leased as of September 2017, the same
as at last review. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 100% and
0.88X, respectively, the same as at last review.

Including the largest loan in the pool, Moody's identified four
loans in the pool secured by regional malls that represent a
combined 27% of the pool. One regional mall identified as high risk
is Southridge Mall Loan ($71.3 million -- 7.2% of the pool), which
represents a pari-passu portion of a $118.8 million senior mortgage
loan. The loan is secured by a 550,000 SF portion of a 1.1 million
SF regional mall in Greendale, Wisconsin, a suburb of Milwaukee.
The mall underwent a $45 million renovation in 2012, during which a
new Macy's anchor opened on the site of a former Dillard's. Kohl's
announced that they will be moving their store to a new retail
development in late 2018. Sears (non-collateral) also closed in
2017, however, plans were recently announced to redevelop the
former Sears store into a Dick's Sporting Goods and a Round 1
Bowling and Amusement Complex. The property faces additional
competition as it is one of four regional or super-regional malls
in the Milwaukee MSA. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 138% and
0.76X, respectively, compared to 127% and 0.81X at the last review.


JPMBB 2015-C29: Loans on Watchlist over Tenant Bankruptcies
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 18 classes of JPMBB Commercial Mortgage
Securities Trust, series 2015-C29.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Overall Stable Pool Performance: There have been no material
changes to the pool's overall performance since issuance and there
are no delinquent or specially serviced loans. As of the April 2018
distribution date, the pool's aggregate principal balance was
reduced by 2.3% to $962.2 million from $984.5 million at issuance.
There are six loans (10.8%) currently on the master servicer's
watchlist primarily for hurricane damage, upcoming rollover, tenant
bankruptcy, occupancy declines, and deferred maintenance issues.
Six loans (20.6%) are considered Fitch Loans of Concern, four
(9.1%) of which are on the master servicer's watchlist. The Fitch
Loans of Concern include the second largest in the transaction
(6.2%). The Negative Outlook on class F reflects an additional
stress scenario, which assumed a higher cash flow haircut and loss
on this loan.

Energy Tenant Exposure: The second largest loan in the transaction,
One City Centre (6.2%) has approximately 24% exposure to oil and
gas related tenants: Energy XXI Ltd (21%) and Ballard Exploration
(3%). The property is a 602,122 sf office in the heart of Houston's
CBD in Houston, TX. The largest tenants are Waste Management (40% -
lease expiration Dec. 2020), Energy XXI Ltd (21% - expiration Dec.
2018) and Ballard Exploration (3% - expiration Aug. 31, 2027).

The second largest tenant, Energy XXI Ltd. (21%) filed for Chapter
11 bankruptcy in April 2016 and emerged from bankruptcy in December
2016 after a restructure took place. The Lender approved a lease
amendment with Energy XXI and the tenant had exercised the option
to give back up to four floors on only two of those floors
effective March 31, 2017. They now occupy (128,529 sf - 21%) thru
Dec. 31, 2018.

The property's occupancy has declined to 71.5% as of December 2017
from 81.2% December 2016. However, three new leases for a total of
(6,551 sf) went into effect in 1Q 2018, which brings occupancy to
72.6%. The property's rent remains below market at $16.64 sf. Fitch
requested an update regarding the upcoming lease expiration but has
yet to receive a response. Fitch's analysis included a sensitivity
test, which assumed a higher cash flow stress to this loan to
address the potential future decline in performance.

Retail Concentration/Toys R Us Exposure: 23.3% of the pool is
secured by retail properties; none of which are regional malls.
However, the fourth and fifth largest loans (10.8%) within the top
15, the Cole IV Retail Portfolio Pool I and Cole Retail Porfolio
Pool II have exposure to bankrupt retailer Toys R Us. The Cole
Retail Portfolio Pool I (5.2%) consists of six retail properties
totaling 680,486 sf across six states and four regions. Toys R Us
occupies a total of 114,027 sf, which accounts for 16.8% of the
portfolio. Cole Retail Portfolio Pool II (5.2%) consists of six
retail properties consisting of 551,854 sf across five states with
a diverse tenant mix. Toys R Us accounts for 9.2% of the
portfolio.

Hotel Concentration/Hurricane Irma Damage: 19.6% of the pool is
secured by hotel properties, of which, the eighth largest loan
(3.1%), Little Palm Island Resort, suffered major damage in
September 2017 as a result of Hurricane Irma. The property is a
full-service boutique resort consisting of 30 rooms, in Little
Torch Key, FL. The hotel's 30 guestrooms are bungalow-type
structures with Caribbean-themed decor. Amenities at the property
include sand beaches, a free-form pool with poolside bar,
restaurant, beauty salon and spa, multiple massage rooms and marina
facilities. The property suffered major damage to the landscaping,
docks, handicapped units and minimal damage to remaining units. The
collateral is currently closed for restoration and the target
reopening date is Jan. 1, 2019. The borrower has an umbrella
Property Insurance policy covering multiple properties, one of
which is the transaction's loan collateral.

The insurance company has advanced $20 million of a $20 million 1st
layer of insurance proceeds to the borrower for three properties
affected by Hurricane Irma: $17.5 million is for Little Palm Island
and $2.5 million was for damages sustained at the other properties.
Per the master servicer, approximately $5 million has been spent to
date on demo work and Business Interruption in relation to Little
Palm Island's restoration. The servicer has the remaining $12
million in a Loss Draft Reserve. The borrower's Business
Interruption coverage is currently running to cover the mortgage
payments. The Business Interruption coverage will provide for any
income loss during the entire restoration period and a 365-day
period of indemnity.

Fitch's ratings also reflect an additional cash flow stress on this
loan as it remains closed.

Higher Amortization: 13.9% of the initial pool balance is scheduled
to amortize prior to maturity, which is higher than the average for
similar Fitch-rated transactions. Six loans (17.9%) are full-term
interest only. Thirty-three loans (49.9%) are partial interest
only. The remaining 23 loans (30.8%) are amortizing balloon loans
with loan terms of five to 10 years.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Rating Outlooks for classes A-1 thru E and classes X-A, X-B, X-D,
and X-E remain Stable due to overall stable performance of the pool
and amortization. Upgrades, while unlikely in the near term given
concerns with energy and hotel concentration, are possible with
continued performance and significantly improved credit
enhancement. The Negative Outlooks on classes F and X-F reflect an
additional sensitivity test that assumed a higher cash flow haircut
and loss on One City Centre.

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 ratings and revised Outlooks as
indicated:

--$26.7 million class A-1 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$213 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$60 million class A-3A1 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$75 million class A-3A2 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$223.1 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$69.1 million class A-SB at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$64 million class A-S at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$54.1 million class B at 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$44.3 million class C at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$162.4 million class EC at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$52.9 million class D at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$20.9 million class E at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$11.1 million class F at 'Bsf'; Outlook to Negative from
   Stable;
--$730.8 million* class X-A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$54.1 million* class X-B at 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$52.9 million* class X-D at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$20.9 million* class X-E at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$11.1 million* class X-F at 'Bsf'; Outlook to Negative from
   Stable.

*Notional amount and interest-only.

Class A-S, B and C certificates may be exchanged for class EC
certificates, and class EC certificates may be exchanged for class
A-S, B and C certificates. Class X-C was previously withdrawn per
Fitch's criteria. Fitch does not rate the classes NR and X-NR
certificate.


JPMCC 2004-C3: Moody's Hikes Class H Debt Rating to Caa2
--------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service  has upgraded the rating on one class and
affirmed the rating on one class in J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial
Mortgage Securities Corp. 2004-C3, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2004-C3 as follows:

Cl. H, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Apr 27, 2017 Affirmed
Caa3 (sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed C (sf); previously on Apr 27, 2017 Affirmed C (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating on Class H was upgraded due to loan paydowns and higher
than expected recoveries from the liquidated loan since Moody's
last review.

The rating on Class J was affirmed because the rating is consistent
with Moody's expected loss plus realized loss. Class J has already
experienced a 77% realized loss as result of previously liquidated
loans.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 11.3% of the
current pooled balance, compared to 34.6% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 5.2% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 5.5% at the last review.
Moody's provides a current list of base expected losses for conduit
and fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at
http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255.

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

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

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

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

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

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

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the April 16, 2017 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 99% to $18.6 million
from $1.52 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by seven remaining mortgage loans. Two loans,
constituting 14% of the pool, have defeased and are 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 3, the same as at Moody's last review.

Twenty-two loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in
an aggregate realized loss of $76 million (for an average loss
severity of 54%). No loans are currently in special servicing.

Moody's received full year 2016 operating results for 100% of the
pool, and full or partial year 2017 operating results for 80% of
the pool (excluding defeased loans).

The top three non-defeased loans represent 70% of the pool balance.
The largest loan is the 9601 Renner Boulevard Loan, formerly known
as T-Mobile -- Lenexa KS, ($8.2 million -- 44.0% of the pool),
which is secured by a suburban office property currently subleased
to Quest Diagnostics through October 2019 (two months prior to the
loan's maturity date in December 2019). The property was previously
operated as a 600-seat call center by T-Mobile US Inc. Moody's
value incorporated a lit/dark analysis on the property to account
for single tenancy risk. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 149% and
0.67X, respectively, compared to 143% and 0.70X at the last
review.

The second largest loan is the Shops at Whitestone Loan ($2.7
million -- 14.5% of the pool), which is secured by a 36,000 SF
unanchored retail center in Cedar Park, Texas (approximately 20
miles north of Austin). The property was 72% leased as of September
2017, compared to 91% leased as of September 2016. The fully
amortizing loan has amortized 53% since securitization and matures
in January 2025. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 48% and 1.99X,
respectively, compared to 49% and 1.92X at the last review.

The third largest loan is the Sandalwood MHP Loan ($2.2 million --
11.8% of the pool), which is secured by a 183-unit manufactured
housing community located in Santa Ana, California. The property
was 95% leased as of December 2017, compared to 100% leased at the
last review. The fully amortizing loan has amortized 57% since
securitization and matures in December 2023. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 22% and 4.64X, respectively, compared to 25% and
4.13X at the last review.


LCM XVIII: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on $23.6MM Class E-R Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the replacement class
A-1-R, B-R, C-R, D-R, and E-R notes, as well as to the new class
X-R notes, from LCM XVIII L.P., a collateralized loan obligation
(CLO) originally issued on March 31, 2015, that is managed by LCM
Asset Management LLC. S&P withdrew its ratings on the original
class A-1, A-2, B-1, B-2, C-1, C-2, D, and E notes following
payment in full on the May 1, 2018 refinancing date. The class
A-2-R replacement notes are not rated by S&P Global Ratings.

On the May 1, 2018, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
replacement notes, combined with the proceeds of the issuance of
the class X-R notes and additional L.P. certificates, 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 it is assigning
ratings to the replacement notes.

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

-- Decrease the rated par amount to $513.85 million from $552.00
million. In addition, the issuer will change the target initial par
amount to $590.50 million from $600.00 million.

-- The first payment date following the May 1, 2018, refinancing
date is expected to be on July 20, 2018.

-- Extend the reinvestment period to April 20, 2023, from April
20, 2019.

-- Extend the non-call period on the replacement notes to April
20, 2020, from April 20, 2017.

-- Extend the weighted average life test to 9.25 years from the
May 1, 2018, refinancing date, from 8.50 years from the original
March 31, 2015, closing date.

-- Extend the legal final maturity date on the notes (and L.P.
certificates) to April 20, 2031, from April 20, 2027.

-- Issue additional class X-R senior floating-rate notes, which
are expected to be paid using interest proceeds in 12 quarterly
installments beginning on July 20, 2018. In addition, the issuer
will issue additional L.P. certificates, increasing the total
balance of the L.P. certificates to $72.07 million from $57.63
million.

-- Adopt the use of the non-model version of CDO Monitor for this
transaction. During the reinvestment period, the non-model version
of CDO Monitor may be used to indicate whether changes to the
collateral portfolio are generally consistent with the transaction
parameters S&P assumed when initially assigning ratings to the
notes.

-- Change the required minimum thresholds for the coverage tests.

-- Incorporate the recovery rate methodology and updated industry
classifications outlined in S&P's August 2016 CLO criteria update

-- Allow the issuer the ability to purchase long-dated obligations
(subject to a 1% cap). In addition, each additional obligation
purchased after the refinancing date must have a purchase price of
60% of the principal balance thereof. S&P's view is that 80% is the
demarcation line for the market's perception of an asset as
distressed or nondistressed. The issuer will hold both purchased
discount obligations and discount obligations at their respective
purchase prices in the overcollateralization ratio calculation.

  REPLACEMENT AND ORIGINAL NOTE ISSUANCES

  Replacement Notes
  Class                Amount    Interest                          

                     (mil. $)    rate (%)        
  X-R                   3.10     Three-month LIBOR + 0.60
  A-1-R               351.35     Three-month LIBOR + 1.02
  A-2-R                32.50     Three-month LIBOR + 1.22
  B-R                  64.95     Three-month LIBOR + 1.60
  C-R                  38.35     Three-month LIBOR + 1.85
  D-R                  32.50     Three-month LIBOR + 2.80
  E-R                  23.60     Three-month LIBOR + 5.95
  L.P. certificates    72.07     N/A

  Original Notes
  Class                Amount    Interest                          

                      (mil. $)    rate (%)        
  A-1                 349.75     Three-month LIBOR + 1.51  
  A-2                  20.00     3.35
  B-1                  68.50     Three-month LIBOR + 2.30
  B-2                  20.00     (i)
  C-1                  29.75     Three-month LIBOR + 3.15
  C-2                   7.00     (ii)
  D                    30.00     Three-month LIBOR + 3.80
  E                    27.00     Three-month LIBOR + 5.35
  L.P. certificates    57.63     N/A

(i)3.23% until the payment date occurring in April 2017, and then
three-month LIBOR + 2.30% thereafter

(ii)4.08% until the payment date occurring in April 2017 and then
three-month LIBOR plus 3.15% thereafter.

N/A--Not applicable.

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

  Replacement class          Rating      Amount (mil $)
  X-R                        AAA (sf)              3.10
  A-1-R                      AAA (sf)            351.35
  A-2-R                      NR                   32.50
  B-R                        AA (sf)              64.95
  C-R                        A (sf)               38.35
  D-R                        BBB- (sf)            32.50
  E-R                        BB- (sf)             23.60
  L.P. certificates          NR                   72.07

  RATINGS WITHDRAWN

                             Rating
  Original class       To              From
  A-1                  NR              AAA (sf)
  A-2                  NR              AAA (sf)
  B-1                  NR              AA (sf)
  B-2                  NR              AA (sf)
  C-1                  NR              A (sf)
  C-2                  NR              A (sf)
  D                    NR              BBB (sf)
  E                    NR              BB- (sf)

  NR--Not rated.


LCM XVIII: S&P Assigns Prelim BB-(sf) Rating on Class E-R Certs
---------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to the class
A-1-R, B-R, C-R, D-R, and E-R notes replacement notes, as well as
to the new class X-R notes, from LCM XVIII L.P., a collateralized
loan obligation (CLO) originally issued on March 31, 2015, that is
managed by LCM Asset Management LLC. The replacement notes will be
issued via a proposed supplemental indenture. The class A-2-R
replacement notes are not rated by S&P Global Ratings.

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 April 27,
2018. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

On the May 1, 2018, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
issuance of the replacement notes, combined with the proceeds of
the issuance of the class X-R notes and additional L.P.
certificates, are expected to redeem the original notes. S&P said,
"At that time, we anticipate withdrawing the ratings on the
original class A-1, A-2, B-1, B-2, C-1, C-2, D, and E notes and
assigning ratings to the class A-1-R, B-R, C-R, D-R, and E-R
replacement notes, as well as to the new class X-R notes. However,
if the refinancing doesn't occur, we may affirm the ratings on the
original class A-1, A-2, B-1, B-2, C-1, C-2, D, and E notes and
withdraw our preliminary ratings on the replacement class A-1-R,
B-R, C-R, D-R, and E-R notes, as well as to the new class X–R
notes."

The replacement class A-1-R, A-2-R, B-R, C-R, and D-R notes are
expected to be issued at lower spreads over three-month LIBOR than
that of the original respectively named notes, while the class E-R
notes are expected to be issued at a higher spread over three-month
LIBOR than that of the original respectively named 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:

-- Decrease the rated par amount to $513.85 million from $552.00
million. In addition, the issuer will change the target initial par
amount to $590.50 million from $600.00 million. The first payment
date following the May 1, 2018, refinancing date is expected to be
on July 20, 2018.

-- Extend the reinvestment period to April 20, 2023, from April
20, 2019.

-- Extend the non-call period on the replacement notes to April
20, 2020, from April 20, 2017.

-- Extend the weighted average life test to 9.25 years from the
May 1, 2018, refinancing date, from 8.5 years from the original
March 31, 2015, closing date.

-- Extend the legal final maturity date on the notes (and L.P.
certificates) to April 20, 2031, from April 20, 2027.

-- Issue additional class X-R senior floating-rate notes, which
are expected to be paid using interest proceeds in equal quarterly
installments of $258,333.33 beginning on July 20, 2018. In
addition, the issuer will issue additional L.P. certificates,
bringing the total balance of the L.P. certificates to $72.07
million from $57.63 million.

-- Adopt the use of the non-model version of CDO Monitor for this
transaction. During the reinvestment period, the non-model version
of CDO Monitor may be used to indicate whether changes to the
collateral portfolio are generally consistent with the transaction
parameters we assumed when initially assigning ratings to the
notes.

-- Change the required minimum thresholds for the coverage tests.

-- Incorporate the recovery rate methodology and updated industry
classifications outlined in our August 2016 CLO criteria update.

-- The issuer has proposed the ability to purchase long-dated
obligations (subject to a 1% cap). In addition, each additional
obligation purchased after the refinancing date must have a
purchase price of 60% of the principal balance thereof. S&P's view
is that 80% is the demarcation line for the market's perception of
an asset as distressed or nondistressed. The issuer has proposed
holding both purchased discount obligations and discount
obligations at their respective purchase prices in the
overcollateralization ratio calculation.

  REPLACEMENT AND ORIGINAL NOTE ISSUANCES

  Replacement Notes
  Class                Amount    Interest                          

                      (mil. $)    rate (%)        
  X-R                   3.10     Three-month LIBOR + 0.60
  A-1-R               351.35     Three-month LIBOR + 1.02
  A-2-R                32.50     Three-month LIBOR + 1.22
  B-R                  64.95     Three-month LIBOR + 1.60
  C-R                  38.35     Three-month LIBOR + 1.85
  D-R                  32.50     Three-month LIBOR + 2.80
  E-R                  23.60     Three-month LIBOR + 5.95
  L.P. certificates    72.07     N/A

  Original Notes
  Class                Amount    Interes  
                     (mil. $)    rate (%)        
  A-1                 349.75     Three-month LIBOR + 1.51
  A-2                  20.00     3.35
  B-1                  68.50     Three-month LIBOR + 2.30
  B-2                  20.00     (i)
  C-1                  29.75     Three-month LIBOR + 3.15
  C-2                   7.00     (ii)
  D                    30.00     Three-month LIBOR + 3.80
  E                    27.00     Three-month LIBOR + 5.35
  LP Certificates      57.63     N/A

(i)3.23% until the payment date occurring in April 2017, and then
three-month LIBOR + 2.30% thereafter
(ii)4.08% until the payment date occurring in April 2017, and then
three-month LIBOR + 3.15% thereafter
N/A--Not applicable.

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

  LCM XVIII L.P.
  Replacement class         Rating      Amount (mil. $)
  X-R                       AAA (sf)              3.10
  A-1-R                     AAA (sf)            351.35
  A-2-R                     NR                   32.50
  B-R                       AA (sf)              64.95
  C-R                       A (sf)               38.35
  D-R                       BBB- (sf)            32.50
  E-R                       BB- (sf)             23.60
  L.P. certificates         NR                   72.07     

  NR--Not rated.


LMRK ISSUER 2016-1: Fitch Affirms BB- Rating on Class B Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings affirms LMRK Issuer Co. LLC's landmark infrastructure
secured tenant site contract revenue notes, series 2016-1 as
follows:

-- $88.8 million 2016-1, class A at 'A-sf', Outlook Stable;
-- $25.1 million 2016-1, class B at 'BB-sf', Outlook Stable.

The pool's aggregate principal balance has been reduced by 2.3% to
$113.9 million from $116.6 million at issuance. Fitch analyzed the
collateral data and site information provided by the issuer, LMRK
Issuer Co. As of April 2018, the issuer annualized net cash flow
increased 4.5% to $13.7 million since issuance.

The transaction is an issuance of notes backed by mortgages
representing not less than 95% of the annualized net cash flow
(ANCF) and a pledge and a perfected first-priority security
interest in 100% of the equity interest of the issuer and the asset
entities and is guaranteed by the direct parent of LMRK Issuer Co.
LLC (LMRK, or the issuer). The ownership interest in the sites
consists of perpetual easements, long-term easements, prepaid
leases, and fee interests in land, rooftops, or other structures on
which site space is allocated for placement and operation of
wireless tower and wireless communication equipment.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Stable Performance: Overall performance of the collateral is stable
due to the expected cash flow growth from issuance. The Fitch
stressed DSCR increased to 1.27x from 1.22x at issuance as a result
of the increase in net cash flow.

Additional Notes: The transaction allows for the issuance of
additional notes. Such additional notes may rank senior, pari passu
with, or subordinate to the 2016-1 notes based on the alphabetical
class designation. Additional notes may be issued without the
benefit of additional collateral, provided the post-issuance actual
DSCR is not less than 2.0x. The possibility of upgrades may be
limited due to this provision.

Nonfirst Liens: In this transaction, approximately 15% of the
issuer revenue is from sites that have existing mortgages on the
related site that are therefore senior to the interests of the
trust asset. If the site owner fails to perform any obligations of
the existing senior mortgage, the holder of the existing senior
mortgage could foreclose on the fee interest and, following that
foreclosure, have a senior claim to the remaining rents payable
thus terminating the interests of the asset entities in such
wireless sites. The remaining 85% of the revenue is from sites for
which either a nondisturbance agreement (NDA) is not required or
the issuer has obtained NDAs from mortgage lenders holding a senior
security interest in a site.

Long-Term Easements: The ownership interests in the sites consist
of 90.8% easements, 6.7% assignment of rents, and 2.5% fee. The
weighted average remaining life of the ownership interest is 76
years (assumes 99 years for perpetual easements and fee sites).

Scheduled Amortization Paid Sequentially: The transaction is
structured with scheduled monthly principal payments that will
amortize down the principal balance 15.0% by the ARD in year five,
reducing the refinance risk.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Outlooks are expected to remain stable, and downgrades are
unlikely based on continued cash flow growth due to annual rent
escalations and automatic renewal clauses resulting in higher debt
service coverage ratios since issuance. Upgrades are limited based
on the provision to issue additional notes.

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.


LOOMIS SAYLES II: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Class E-R Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to five classes of
CLO refinancing notes (the "Refinancing Notes") issued by Loomis
Sayles CLO II, Ltd. (the "Issuer"):

Moody's rating action is as follows:

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

US$45,700,000 Class A-2-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2028 (the "Class A-2-R Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US 20,000,000 Class B-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2028 (the "Class B-R Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$26,300,000 Class C-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2028 (the "Class C-R Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$20,750,000 Class D-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2028 (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 broadly syndicated senior secured corporate loans.

Loomis, Sayles & Company, L.P. (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
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 April 16, 2018 (the
"Refinancing Date") in connection with the refinancing of all
classes of the secured notes (the "Refinanced Original Notes")
previously issued on August 27, 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: $398,676,848

Defaulted par: $5,996,043

Diversity Score: 70

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3069

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.50%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.50%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 45.5%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 6 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% (3069 to 3529)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1-R Notes: 0

Class A-2-R Notes: -2

Class B-R Notes: -2

Class C-R Notes: -1

Class D-R Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (3069 to 3990)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1-R Notes: -1

Class A-2-R Notes: -3

Class B-R Notes: -4

Class C-R Notes: -2

Class D-R Notes: -1


LSTAR COMMERCIAL 2014-2: DBRS Confirms 'B' Rating on Class G Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS Limited upgraded these four classes of Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-2 issued by LSTAR Commercial
Mortgage Trust 2014-2:

-- Class B to AAA (sf) from AA (sf)
-- Class X-A to AAA (sf) from AA (high) (sf)
-- Class X-B to AAA (sf) from AA (high) (sf)
-- Class C to AA (low) (sf) from A (sf)

Additionally, DBRS has confirmed the ratings on these classes:

-- Class A-2 at AAA (sf)
-- Class D at BBB (high) (sf)
-- Class E at BBB (low) (sf)
-- Class F at BB (sf)
-- Class G at B (sf)

All trends are Stable.

The rating upgrades reflect the transaction's overall healthy
performance, including significant collateral reduction since
issuance. As of the April 2018 remittance, there has been a
collateral reduction of 62.1% as a result of loan prepayments and
loan liquidations, as 109 of the original 208 loans have paid out
of the trust ahead of their respective maturity dates. According to
the most recent reporting available, the remaining loans in the
pool have a weighted-average (WA) debt service coverage ratio
(DSCR) and WA debt yield of 1.42 times (x) and 11.4%, respectively.
The transaction is concentrated by loan size as the largest two
loans represent 48.0% of the current pool balance. According to the
YE2017 financials, these two loans have a WA DSCR of 1.37x and WA
in-place debt yield of 10.0%.

The two largest remaining loans in the pool were newly originated
at issuance, while the other 97 loans remaining are seasoned loans
that were purchased by the loan seller from Fannie Mae or were
originally part of the now-retired LASL 2006-MF2 and LASL 2006-MF3
commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) transactions. The
largest loan, 399 Jefferson (Prospectus ID #21, 33.8% of the pool),
is secured by an office building in Parsippany, New Jersey, and the
second-largest loan, Doubletree Hotel Wilmington (Prospectus ID #4,
14.3% of the pool), is secured by a full-service hotel in
Wilmington, Delaware. All of the seasoned loans, the largest of
which represents 2.3% of the pool balance, are secured by
multifamily and manufactured housing community properties. Of the
remaining seasoned loans, 90 loans, representing 49.0% of the
current pool balance, are fully amortizing.

As of the April 2018 remittance, there are seven loans in special
servicing, representing 4.3% of the current pool balance. The
largest specially-serviced loan is Prospectus ID #11, 6050 S.
Harvey Avenue (1.8% of the pool). That loan is secured by a
multifamily property in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma and was transferred
to special servicing for significant condition issues at the
property. Based on the information provided by the servicer, DBRS
assumed a loss for this loan, with a loss severity in excess of
30.0%. The remaining loans in special servicing were either
analyzed with a stressed cash flow scenario to increase the POD and
LGD or were liquidated based on recent appraised values.

In addition, there are six loans on the servicer's watch list,
representing 19.0% of the current pool balance, including the
second-largest loan, Prospectus ID#2 – Doubletree Hotel
Wilmington (14.3% of the current pool balance), which was flagged
for a decline in performance, partially related to the increase in
supply within the market.

Class X-A and X-B are interest-only (IO) certificates that
reference a single rated tranche or multiple rated tranches. The IO
rating mirrors the lowest-rated applicable reference obligation
tranche adjusted upward by one notch if senior in the waterfall.
The ratings assigned to Class C materially deviate from the higher
ratings implied by the quantitative results. DBRS considers a
material deviation to be a rating differential of three or more
notches between the assigned rating and the rating implied by the
quantitative results that is a substantial component of a rating
methodology. The deviations are warranted given loan-level event
risk.

Notes: All figures are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted.


MARANON LOAN 2018-1: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Maranon Loan
Funding 2018-1 Ltd./Maranon Loan Funding 2018-1 LLC 's $556.14
million fixed- and floating-rate notes.

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

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of April 30,
2018. 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
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.

  PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED
  Maranon Loan Funding 2018-1 Ltd./Maranon Loan Funding 2018-1 LLC

  Class               Rating     Amount (mil. $)
  A-1                 AAA (sf)            319.00
  A-2                 AAA (sf)             40.00
  B                   AA (sf)              53.40
  C-1                 A (sf)               18.95
  C-2                 A (sf)               31.05
  D                   BBB- (sf)            48.44
  E                   BB- (sf)             45.30
  Subordinated notes  NR                   69.24


MESA 2002-3: Moody's Cuts Ratings on Class B-1 Notes to Caa1
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of two tranches
from J.P. Morgan Mortgage Trust, Series 2008-R4 and downgraded the
rating of one tranche from MESA 2002-3 Global Issuance Company.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Trust, Series 2008-R4

Cl. 1-A-1, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Oct 29, 2010
Upgraded to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. 1-A-2, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Oct 29, 2010
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: MESA 2002-3 Global Issuance Company

Cl. B-1, Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Nov 13, 2012
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating upgrades are a result of an improvement to our updated
loss projection on the pool of mortgages backing the underlying
certificate. The upgrades also reflect the increase in the recovery
value of the underlying bond. The resecuritization bonds Class
1-A-1 and Class 1-A-2 issued by J.P. Morgan Mortgage Trust, Series
2008-R4, are backed by Class 11-L1 issued by Chase Mortgage Finance
Trust Series 2007-A1. Class 1-A-1 is a senior class, supported by
the subordinated bond Class 1-A-2, which receives principal
payments after Class 1-A-1 but absorbs losses before Class 1-A-1.

The rating downgrade is a result of the depletion of credit
enhancement available to the bond and the recent performance of the
pool of mortgages backing the resecuritization. The bond is backed
by a pool of subprime fixed-rate and adjustable-rate home equity
and home improvement loans.

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 macroeconomic
uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment rate. The
unemployment rate fell to 4.1% in March 2018 from 4.5% in March
2017. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of 3.5% to
4.5% for the 2018 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 2018. 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.


MILL CITY 2018-1: DBRS Finalizes 'B' Rating on Class B2 Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS, Inc. finalized its provisional ratings of the Mortgage Backed
Securities, Series 2018-1 (the Notes) issued by Mill City Mortgage
Loan Trust 2018-1 (the Trust) as follows:

-- $243.5 million Class A1 at AAA (sf)
-- $273.1 million Class A2 at AA (sf)
-- $296.2 million Class A3 at A (sf)
-- $317.2 million Class A4 at BBB (low) (sf)
-- $29.6 million Class M1 at AA (sf)
-- $23.1 million Class M2 at A (sf)
-- $21.0 million Class M3 at BBB (low) (sf)
-- $17.7 million Class B1 at BB (low) (sf)
-- $13.2 million Class B2 at B (sf)

Classes A2, A3 and A4 are exchangeable notes. These classes can be
exchanged for combinations of exchange notes as specified in the
offering documents.

The AAA (sf) rating on the Notes reflects 36.20% of credit
enhancement provided by subordinated Notes in the pool. The AA
(sf), A (sf), BBB (low) (sf), BB (low) (sf) and B (sf) ratings
reflect 28.45%, 22.40%, 16.90%, 12.25% and 8.80% of credit
enhancement, respectively.

This transaction is a securitization of a portfolio of primarily
first-lien, seasoned, performing and re-performing residential
mortgages and home equity lines of credit (HELOC) mortgage loans.
The Notes are backed by 2,242 loans with a total principal balance
of approximately $381,651,881 as of the Cut-Off Date (March 31,
2018).

The loans are approximately 125 months seasoned. As of the Cut-off
Date, 98.7% of the pool is current, and 1.3% is 30 days delinquent
under the Mortgage Banker Associations (MBA) delinquency method.
Thirty-nine loans (2.0% of the pool) are in bankruptcy (all
bankruptcy loans are performing or 30 days delinquent).
Approximately 50.9% of the pool has been zero times 30 days
delinquent (0 x 30) for the past 24 months, 70.8% has been 0 x 30
for the past 12 months and 90.4% has been 0 x 30 for the past six
months.

The portfolio contains 68.5% modified loans. The modifications
happened more than two years ago for 88.3% of the modified loans.
Within the pool, 694 loans have non-interest-bearing deferred
amounts, which equates to 7.5% of the total principal balance.
Included in the deferred amounts are Home Affordable Modification
Program principal reduction alternative amounts, which comprise
less than 0.1% of the total principal balance. In accordance with
the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) Qualified Mortgage
(QM) rules, 8.6% of the loans are designated as QM Safe Harbor,
0.4% as QM Rebuttable Presumption and 1.2% as non-QM. Approximately
89.8% of the loans are not subject to the QM rules.

Approximately 2.9% of the pool comprises first-lien HELOCs. These
loans have a fixed credit limit for a 120-month draw period and
then amortize for the remaining 240 months, subject to a decreasing
credit limit. HELOC borrowers may make draws on the mortgage up to
the credit limit until maturity, which will increase the current
principal balance of such loans. In addition, HELOC borrowers may
also experience payment shocks when the amortization period begins.
As of the Closing Date, Mill City Depositor, LLC (the Depositor)
will fund a HELOC Draw Reserve Account to purchase future draws
from the related services.

Through a series of transactions, Mill City Holdings, LLC (Mill
City) will acquire the mortgage loans on the Closing Date. Prior to
the Closing Date, the loans were held in one or more trusts that
acquired the mortgage loans between November 2009 and January 2018.
Such trusts are entities in which the Representation Provider or an
affiliate thereof holds an indirect interest. Upon acquiring the
loans, Mill City, through a wholly owned subsidiary (the
Depositor), will contribute loans to the Trust. As the Sponsor,
Mill City, through a majority-owned affiliate, will acquire and
retain a 5.0% eligible vertical interest in each class of
securities to be issued (other than any residual certificates) to
satisfy the credit risk retention requirements under Section 15G of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the regulations promulgated
thereunder. These loans were originated and previously serviced by
various entities through purchases in the secondary market.

As of the Cut-Off Date, the loans are serviced by Shell point
Mortgage Servicing (72.7%), Fay Servicing, LLC (17.7%) and Select
Portfolio Servicing, Inc. (9.6%).

There will not be any advancing of delinquent principal or interest
on any mortgages by the servicers or any other party to the
transaction; however, the servicers are obligated to make advances
in respect of taxes and insurance, reasonable costs and expenses
incurred in the course of servicing and disposing of properties.

The transaction employs a sequential-pay cash flow structure.
Principal proceeds can be used to cover interest shortfalls on the
Notes, but such shortfalls on Class M2 and more subordinate bonds
will not be paid until the more senior classes are retired.

The lack of principal and interest advances on delinquent mortgages
may increase the possibility of periodic interest shortfalls to the
Note holders; however, principal proceeds can be used to pay
interest to the Notes sequentially and subordination levels are
greater than expected losses, which may provide for timely payment
of interest to the rated Notes.

The ratings reflect transactional strength in that the underlying
assets have generally performed well through the crisis.
Additionally, a satisfactory third-party due diligence review was
performed on the portfolio with respect to regulatory compliance,
payment history and data capture as well as title and lien review.
Updated broker price opinions or exterior appraisals were provided
for 100.0% of the pool; however, a reconciliation was not performed
on the updated values.

The transaction employs a relatively weak representations and
warranties framework that includes a 13-month sunset, an unrated
provider (CVI CVF III Lux Master S.à.r.l.), certain knowledge
qualifiers and fewer mortgage loan representations relative to DBRS
criteria for seasoned pools. Mitigating factors include (1)
significant loan seasoning and relative clean performance history
in recent years, (2) a comprehensive due diligence review and (3) a
representations and warranties enforcement mechanism, including a
delinquency review trigger and a breach reserve account.

The DBRS ratings of AAA (sf) and AA (sf) address the timely payment
of interest and full payment of principal by the legal final
maturity date in accordance with the terms and conditions of the
related Notes. The DBRS ratings of A (sf), BBB (low) (sf), BB (low)
(sf) and B (sf) address the ultimate payment of interest and full
payment of principal by the legal final maturity date in accordance
with the terms and conditions of the related Notes.

Notes: All figures are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted.


MILL CITY 2018-1: Fitch Rates Class B2 Notes 'Bsf'
--------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings rates Mill City Mortgage Loan Trust 2018-1 (MCMLT
2018-1) as follows:

-- $243,493,000 class A1 notes 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $29,578,000 class M1 notes 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $23,090,000 class M2 notes 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $20,991,000 class M3 notes 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $17,747,000 class B1 notes 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $13,167,000 class B2 notes 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $273,071,000 class A2 subsequent exchangeable notes 'AAsf';
Outlook Stable;
-- $296,161,000 class A3 subsequent exchangeable notes 'Asf';
Outlook Stable;
-- $317,152,000 class A4 subsequent exchangeable notes 'BBBsf';
Outlook Stable.

The following classes will not be rated by Fitch:

-- $11,450,000 class B3 notes;
-- $11,067,000 class B4 notes;
-- $11,068,881 class B5 notes.

The notes are supported by one collateral group that consists of
2,242 seasoned performing and re-performing mortgages with a total
balance of approximately $381.65 million, which includes $28.5
million, or 7.5%, of the aggregate pool balance in
non-interest-bearing, deferred principal amounts, as of the
statistical calculation date.

The 'AAAsf' rating on the class A1 notes reflects the 36.20%
subordination provided by the 7.75% class M1, 6.05% class M2, 5.50%
class M3, 4.65% class B1, 3.45% class B2, 3.00% class B3, 2.90%
class B4 and 2.90% class B5 notes.

Fitch's ratings on the class notes reflect the credit attributes of
the underlying collateral, the quality of the servicers: Select
Portfolio Servicing, Inc. (SPS) rated 'RPS1-', Shellpoint Mortgage
Servicing (Shellpoint) and Fay Servicing, LLC (Fay), both rated
'RSS3+'; the representation (rep) and warranty framework; minimal
due diligence findings and the sequential pay structure.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Distressed Performance History (Concern): The collateral pool
consists primarily of peak-vintage seasoned re-performing loans
(RPLs), including loans that have been paying for the past 24
months, which Fitch identifies as 'clean current' (50.9%), and
loans that are current but have recent delinquencies or incomplete
paystrings, identified as 'dirty current' (47.8%). Additionally,
1.3% of the loans are 30 days delinquent; 68.5% of the loans have
received modifications.

Due Diligence Findings (Concern): The third-party review (TPR)
firm's due diligence review resulted in approximately 415 loans
(19%) graded 'C' and 'D', 197 of which were subject to a loss
severity (LS) adjustment for issues regarding high-cost testing,
and 265 loans that were not reviewed by any TPR firm, the majority
of which were second liens.

Eighteen second lien loans that did not have diligence performed
and are located on Freddie Mac's 'do not purchase' list due to high
cost received a 200% LS adjustment. Fitch extended timelines on 99
loans that were missing final modification documents.

Sequential-Pay Structure (Positive): The transaction's cash flow is
based on a sequential-pay structure whereby the subordinate classes
do not receive principal until the senior classes are repaid in
full. Losses are allocated in reverse-sequential order.
Furthermore, the provision to re-allocate principal to pay interest
on the 'AAAsf' and 'AAsf' rated notes prior to other principal
distributions is highly supportive of timely interest payments to
those classes, in the absence of servicer advancing.

Deferred Amounts (Concern): Non-interest-bearing principal
forbearance amounts totaling $28.5 million, 7.5% of the unpaid
principal balance, are outstanding on 694 loans. Fitch included the
deferred amounts when calculating the borrower's LTV and sLTV,
despite the lower payment and amounts not being owed during the
term of the loan. The inclusion resulted in higher PDs and LS than
if there were no deferrals. Fitch believes that borrower default
behavior for these loans will resemble that of the higher LTVs, as
exit strategies (that is, sale or refinancing) will be limited
relative to those borrowers with more equity in the property.

Potential Interest Deferrals (Mixed): To address the lack of an
external P&I advance mechanism, principal otherwise distributable
to the notes may be used to pay monthly interest. While this helps
provide stability in the cash flows to the high
investment-grade-rated bonds, the lower-rated bonds may experience
long periods of interest deferral that will generally not be repaid
until such notes become the most senior outstanding.

Under Fitch's 'Global Structured Finance Rating Criteria' dated May
2017, the agency may assign ratings of up to 'Asf' on notes that
incur deferrals if such deferrals are permitted under terms of the
transaction documents, provided such amounts are fully recovered
well in advance of the legal final maturity under the relevant
rating stress.

Representation Framework (Mixed): Fitch generally considers the
representation, warranty and enforcement (RW&E) mechanism construct
for this transaction to be generally consistent with a Tier 2
framework due to the inclusion of knowledge qualifiers and the
exclusion of loans from certain reps as a result of third-party due
diligence findings. For 42 loans that are seasoned less than 24
months, Fitch viewed the framework as a Tier 3 because the reps
related to the origination and underwriting of the loan, which are
typically expected for newly originated loans, were not included.
Thus, Fitch increased its 'AAAsf' loss expectations by
approximately 239bps to account for a potential increase in
defaults and losses arising from weaknesses in the reps.

Limited Life of Rep Provider (Concern): CVI CVF III Lux Master
S.a.r.l., as rep provider, will only be obligated to repurchase a
loan due to breaches prior to the payment date in May 2019.
Thereafter, a reserve fund will be available to cover amounts due
to noteholders for loans identified as having rep breaches. Amounts
on deposit in the reserve fund, as well as the increased level of
subordination, will be available to cover additional defaults and
losses resulting from rep weaknesses or breaches occurring on or
after the payment date in May 2019. Fitch applied a breach reserve
account credit, which lowered Fitch's loss expectations by
approximately 25bps.

No Servicer P&I Advances (Mixed): The servicers will not be
advancing delinquent monthly payments of P&I, which reduces
liquidity to the trust. However, as P&I advances made on behalf of
loans that become delinquent and eventually liquidate reduce
liquidation proceeds to the trust, the loan-level LS is less for
this transaction than for those where the servicer is obligated to
advance P&I. Structural provisions and cash flow priorities,
together with increased subordination, provide for timely payments
of interest to the 'AAAsf' and 'AAsf' rated classes.

Timing of Recordation and Document Remediation (Neutral): A review
to confirm that the mortgage and subsequent assignments were
recorded in the relevant local jurisdiction was performed. The
review confirmed that all mortgages and subsequent assignments were
recorded in the relevant local jurisdiction or were being
recorded.

While the expected timelines for recordation and remediation are
viewed by Fitch as reasonable, the obligation of CVI CVF III Lux
Master S.a.r.l. to repurchase loans, for which assignments are not
recorded and endorsements are not completed by the payment date in
May 2019, aligns the issuer's interests regarding completing the
recordation process with those of noteholders. While there will not
be an asset manager in this transaction, the indenture trustee will
be reviewing the custodian reports. The indenture trustee will
request CVI CVF III Lux Master S.a.r.l. to purchase any loans with
outstanding assignment and endorsement issues two days prior to the
May 2019 payment date.

Solid Alignment of Interest (Positive): The sponsor, Mill City
Holdings, LLC, will acquire and retain a 5% interest in each class
of the securities to be issued. In addition, the rep provider is an
indirect owner of the sponsor.

CRITERIA APPLICATION

Fitch analyzed the transaction in accordance with its criteria, as
described in its June 2017 report 'U.S. RMBS Rating Criteria.' This
incorporates a review of the originators' lending platforms, as
well as an assessment of the transaction's R&Ws provided by the
originators and arranger, which were found to be consistent with
the ratings assigned to the certificates.

Fitch's analysis incorporated one criteria variation from 'U.S.
RMBS Rating Criteria,".

The variation relates to 42 loans (approximately 3% by balance) in
the pool are seasoned less than 24 months and considered newly
originated. On average, these loans are approximately 21 months
seasoned. The due diligence scope for these loans was not
consistent with Fitch's scope for newly originated loans. Fitch is
comfortable with the due diligence that was completed on these
loans as the loans made up a small percentage of the pool. In
addition, conservative assumptions were made on the collateral
analysis for these loans.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Fitch's analysis incorporates sensitivity analyses to demonstrate
how the ratings would react to steeper market value declines (MVDs)
than assumed at both the metropolitan statistical area (MSA) and
national levels. The implied rating sensitivities are only an
indication of some of the potential outcomes and do not consider
other risk factors that the transaction may become exposed to or be
considered in the surveillance of the transaction.

Fitch conducted sensitivity analysis determining how the ratings
would react to steeper MVDs at the national level. The analysis
assumes MVDs of 10%, 20% and 30%, in addition to the
model-projected 38.8% at 'AAAsf'. The analysis indicates there is
some potential rating migration with higher MVDs, compared with the
model projection.

Fitch also conducted sensitivities to determine the stresses to
MVDs that would reduce a rating by one full category, to
non-investment-grade, and to 'CCCsf'.

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

Fitch was provided with Form ABS Due Diligence-15E (Form 15E) as
prepared by Meridian Asset Services (Meridian), Clayton Services
LLC, and AMC Diligence, LLC (AMC)/JCIII & Associates, Inc. (JCIII).
The third-party due diligence described in Form 15E focused on
regulatory compliance, pay history, the presence of key documents
in the loan file and data integrity. In addition, Meridian was
retained to perform an updated title and tax search, as well as a
review to confirm that the mortgages were recorded in the relevant
local jurisdiction and the related assignment chains.

A regulatory compliance, pay history and data integrity review was
completed on more than 96% of the pool. Fitch considered this
information in its analysis and based on the findings, Fitch made
the following adjustments:

Fitch made an adjustment on 96 loans that were subject to federal,
state and/or local predatory testing. These loans contained
material violations, including an inability to test for high-cost
violations or confirm compliance, which could expose the trust to
potential assignee liability. These loans were marked as
'indeterminate.' The 96 loans also include 17 loans where the
compliance review was not completed. Typically, the HUD issues are
related to missing the final HUD, illegible HUDs, incomplete HUDs
due to missing pages or only having estimated HUDs where the final
HUD1 was not used to test for high-cost loans. To mitigate this
risk, Fitch assumed a 100% LS for loans in the states that fall
under Freddie Mac's 'do not purchase' list of high cost or 'high
risk'; 33 loans were affected by this approach.

For the remaining 63 loans, where the properties are not located in
the states that fall under Freddie Mac's 'do not purchase' list,
the likelihood of all loans being high cost is lower. However,
Fitch assumes the trust could potentially incur additional legal
expenses. Fitch increased its LS expectations by 5% for these loans
to account for the risk.

There were 99 loans missing modification documents or a signature
on modification documents. For these loans, timelines were extended
by an additional three months, in addition to the six-month
timeline extension applied to the entire pool.

Two loans were found to be in violation of federal high-cost
violations and received a 200% LS. Additionally, 248 second lien
loans did not have diligence performed on them. As second liens
already receive a 100% severity in Fitch's model, a 200% severity
was applied to these loans that were located in the states that
fall under Freddie Mac's 'do not purchase' list. This approach
affected 18 loans. The remaining 230 loans did not receive an
additional adjustment as the model output severity is sufficient to
capture the incremental risk.


MORGAN STANLEY 2007-IQ16: DBRS Lowers Ratings on 3 Classes to C
---------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS Limited downgraded three classes of the Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-IQ16 issued by Morgan
Stanley Capital I Trust, Series 2007-IQ16 (the Trust) as follows:

-- Class A-J downgraded to C (sf) from CCC (sf)
-- Class A-JFL downgraded to C (sf) from CCC (sf)
-- Class A-JA downgraded to C (sf) from CCC (sf)

In addition, four classes were confirmed as follows:

-- Class A-MA confirmed at AA (sf)
-- Class B confirmed at C (sf)
-- Class C confirmed at C (sf)
-- Class D confirmed at C (sf)

The trend on Class A-MA is Stable. All other classes have ratings
that do not carry a trend. In addition, DBRS has maintained the
Interest in Arrears designation for Classes C and D.

The rating actions reflect DBRS's outlook for the remaining loans
in the transaction, particularly for the largest loan remaining in
the pool in Prospectus ID#7 – Bangor Mall (29.6% of the pool). As
of the March 2018 remittance, the pool has experienced a collateral
reduction of approximately 89.6% since issuance, with 20 loans
remaining out of the original 234 loans in the transaction. To
date, 50 loans have been liquidated from the Trust, resulting in a
total loss of $242.6 million. Based on the YE2016 financials, the
pool is reporting a weighted-average (WA) debt service coverage
ratio (DSCR) of 1.10 times (x), WA debt yield of 7.9% and exit debt
yield of 7.0%. All defeasance collateral has repaid from the
Trust.

Out of the 20 loans remaining in the pool, 19 loans (95.7% of the
pool) are in special servicing as of the March 2018 remittance. The
only loan still with the master servicer is Prospectus ID#37 –
Kmart Portfolio Roll Up. The majority of the loans that are in
special servicing were transferred for maturity default. DBRS
anticipates that the cumulative losses that will be realized when
the defaulted loans are liquidated will likely affect Classes A-J,
A-JFL and A-JA as losses are applied on a pro-rata basis.

The pool is currently concentrated by loan size, with the two
largest loans cumulatively representing 56.1% of the pool balance.
These loans include the previously mentioned Bangor Mall loan and
Prospectus ID#8 – Milford Crossing (26.4% of the pool).

The Bangor Mall loan is secured by a 535,000 square feet regional
mall located in Bangor, Maine. The property is owned and operated
by the loan sponsor, Simon Property Group. The loan was transferred
to special servicing in August 2017 after the sponsor notified the
servicer the loan would not be repaid at maturity. The property was
originally anchored by JCPenney and Sears; however, Sears (16.1% of
net rental area) has announced plans to vacate the subject in Q2
2018. With the Sears departure, DBRS estimates the property's
occupancy rate will fall to approximately 65.0%. According to the
October 2017 appraisal, the subject's as-is value was reported at
$28.9 million, representing a 78.1% decline from over the issuance
value of $128.0 million and well below the Trust's current exposure
of approximately $81.0 million. The loan is reporting a Q3 2017
DSCR of 1.41x, in comparison with the YE2016 DSCR of 1.65x and
YE2015 DSCR of 1.75x; however, DBRS expects the cash flow to
decline further in the near term as Sears departs and co-tenancy
clauses for in-line tenants kick in. The special servicer reports
the sponsor is not interested in modifying the loan and expects
foreclosure to occur by the end of April 2018. In the analysis for
this review, DBRS assumed a loss severity for the loan in excess of
80.0%.


MORGAN STANLEY 2016-C29: DBRS Confirms B Rating on Class X-G Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS Limited confirmed the ratings on the following classes of
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2016-C29 (the
Certificates) issued by Morgan Stanley Bank of America Merrill
Lynch Trust 2016-C29:

-- Class A-1 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-2 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-3 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-4 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-S at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-SB at AAA (sf)
-- Class X-A at AAA (sf)
-- Class X-B at AAA (sf)
-- Class B at AA (high) (sf)
-- Class C at A (high) (sf)
-- Class X-D at BBB (high) (sf)
-- Class D at BBB (sf)
-- Class X-E at BBB (low) (sf)
-- Class E at BB (high) (sf)
-- Class X-F at BB (sf)
-- Class F at BB (low) (sf)
-- Class X-G at B (sf)
-- Class G at B (low) (sf)

All trends are Stable.

The rating confirmations reflect the overall stable performance of
the transaction, which has remained in line with DBRS's
expectations since issuance. As of the March 2018 remittance, all
69 loans remain in the pool, with an aggregate outstanding
principal balance of approximately $799.0 million, representing a
collateral reduction of approximately 1.2% since issuance. Eight
loans, representing 23.9% of the pool balance, including the three
largest loans in the pool, are structured with full-term
interest-only (IO) payments. An additional 18 loans, representing
24.5% of the pool balance, have partial IO payments remaining.
There are 30 loans, representing 30.4% of the pool balance,
reporting YE2017 financials, while 65 loans, representing 95.8% of
the pool, reported a YE2016 figure. Based on the most recent
year-end reporting available, the pool had a weighted-average (WA)
debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and WA debt yield of 1.73 times
(x) and 10.0%, respectively, an improvement as compared with the WA
DBRS Term DSCR and DBRS Debt Yield figures derived at issuance for
the pool of 1.58x and 9.1%, respectively.

As of the March 2018 remittance, there are six loans, representing
13.7% of the pool balance, on the servicer's watch list and no
loans in special servicing. Four of the six watch listed loans,
representing 8.0% of the pool balance, are being monitored for
non-performance-related issues. The largest watch listed loan,
Reger Industrial Portfolio (Prospectus ID#4; 3.8% of the pool) is
secured by seven industrial properties, all located in South
Carolina. The loan was added to the servicer's watch list in June
2017 after Westinghouse Electric Co. (Westinghouse), which occupies
100% of the net rentable area at the 375 Metropolitan property
(27.9% of the allocated loan balance), declared bankruptcy in March
2017. In March 2018, the bankruptcy court approved the sale of the
company to Brookfield Properties. The status of the subject lease
is unknown, and DBRS will continue to monitor the situation
closely. For the purposes of this review, a stressed cash flow
scenario was applied to increase the probability of default for the
loan in DBRS's analysis.

At issuance, DBRS assigned an investment-grade shadow rating to one
loan, Penn Square Mall (Prospectus ID#3; 5.8% of the pool balance).
The investment-grade shadow rating was based on the low leverage
and low loan-to-value (LTV) of 47.0% for the whole loan, the strong
sponsor in the Simon Property Group and the strong sales for the
property. However, it is noteworthy that since issuance, in-line
sales have precipitously declined and in-place property cash flows
have fallen slightly as well. It is also noteworthy that the
overall effect of the shadow rating for pool levels is minimal,
generally a factor of the low LTV, the $103.5 million B note and
the high in-place whole loan DSCR of 2.61x at YE2017. Given all of
these factors, DBRS has confirmed the shadow rating with this
review but will monitor sales and cash flow trends closely, noting
that the recent declines are likely partially due to a flooding
incident at the mall in the summer of 2017. A DBRS analyst visited
the property in mid-April 2018 and confirmed all repairs have been
completed, and all affected tenants are open, with the exception of
Gap, which had signage posted to indicate a renovation was underway
for the suite. Traffic was healthy, and the mall showed well during
the DBRS visit.

Classes X-A, X-B, X-D, X-E, X-G and X-F are interest-only (IO)
certificates that reference a single rated tranche or multiple
rated tranches. The IO rating mirrors the lowest-rated reference
tranche adjusted upward by one notch if senior in the waterfall.

Notes: All figures are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted.


NEUBERGER BERMAN 28: S&P Assigns Prelim BB-(sf) Rating on E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings today assigned its preliminary ratings to
Neuberger Berman Loan Advisers CLO 28 Ltd./Neuberger Berman Loan
Advisers CLO 28 LLC's $432.50 million floating-rate notes.

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

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of April 24,
2018. 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
Neuberger Berman Loan Advisers CLO 28 Ltd./Neuberger Berman Loan  
  Advisers CLO 28 LLC
   Class                  Rating           Amount
                                          (mil. $)
  A-1                    AAA (sf)         297.50
  A-2                    NR                27.50
  B                      AA (sf)           55.00
  C                      A (sf)            32.50
  D                      BBB- (sf)         27.50
  E                      BB- (sf)          20.00
  Subordinated notes     NR                49.40

  NR--Not rated.


NEUBERGER BERMAN XIX: Moody's Gives B2 Rating on Class E-R2 Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned the following ratings to the
following notes (the "Refinancing Notes") issued by Neuberger
Berman CLO XIX, Ltd.:

US$254,000,000 Class A-1-R2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2027 (the "Class A-1-R2 Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$49,000,000 Class A-2-R2 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2027 (the "Class A-2-R2 Notes"), Assigned Aa1 (sf)

US$23,600,000 Class B-R2 Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2027 (the "Class B-R2 Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$22,400,000 Class C-R2 Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2027 (the "Class C-R2 Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$19,750,000 Class D-R2 Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2027 (the "Class D-R2 Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

US$6,250,000 Class E-R2 Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2027 (the "Class E-R2 Notes"), Assigned B2 (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.

Neuberger Berman Investment Advisers 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 April 16, 2018 (the
"Second Refinancing Date") in connection with the refinancing of
the Class A-1-R Notes, Class A-2-R Notes, Class B-R Notes, and
Class C-R Notes (the "Refinanced Original Notes") previously issued
on July 17, 2017 (the "First Refinancing Date"), and the Class D
Notes, and Class E Notes (the "Original Notes") previously issued
on July 16, 2015 (the "Original Closing Date"). On the Second
Refinancing Date, the Issuer used the proceeds from the issuance of
the Refinancing Notes to redeem in full the Refinanced Original
Notes and the 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 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% (2397)

Class A-1-R2: 0

Class A-2-R2: +1

Class B-R2: +4

Class C-R2: +2

Class D-R2: +1

Class E-R2: +1

Moody's Assumed WARF + 20% (3595)

Class A-1-R2: 0

Class A-2-R2: -2

Class B-R2: -2

Class C-R2: -2

Class D-R2: -1

Class E-R2: -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: $396,870,355

Defaulted par: $3,547,435

Diversity Score: 67

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2996 (corresponding to a
weighted average default probability of 25.38%)

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.17%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 49.26%


NEWSTAR ARLINGTON: S&P Assigns B-(sf) Rating on Class F-R Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to NewStar Arlington Senior
Loan Program LLC's $375.00 million fixed- and floating-rate notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation transaction
backed primarily by middle-market senior secured term loans. This
is a refinancing of its June 2014 transaction, which S&P did not
rate.

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
  NewStar Arlington Senior Loan Program LLC

  Class                        Rating          Amount (mil. $)
  X                            AAA (sf)                   3.50
  A-R                          AAA (sf)                 236.00
  B-R                          AA (sf)                   38.00
  C-1-R                        A (sf)                     8.50
  C-2-R                        A (sf)                    27.50
  D-R                          BBB- (sf)                 25.50
  E-R                          BB- (sf)                  26.50
  F-R                          B- (sf)                    9.50
  Subordinated notes           NR                        40.67

  NR--Not rated.


NEWSTAR ARLINGTON: S&P Assigns Prelim B-(sf) Rating on F-R Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to NewStar
Arlington Senior Loan Program LLC's $375.00 million fixed- and
floating-rate notes.

The note issuance is a collateralized loan obligation transaction
backed primarily by middle-market senior secured term loans. This
is a proposed refinancing of its June 2014 transaction, which we
did not rate.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of April 24,
2018. 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
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.

  PRELIMINARY RATINGS ASSIGNED
  NewStar Arlington Senior Loan Program LLC

    Class                        Rating          Amount (mil. $)
    X                            AAA (sf)                   3.50
    A-R                          AAA (sf)                 236.00
    B-R                          AA (sf)                   38.00
    C-1-R                        A (sf)                     8.50
    C-2-R                        A (sf)                    27.50
    D-R                          BBB- (sf)                 25.50
    E-R                          BB- (sf)                  26.50
    F-R                          B- (sf)                    9.50
    Subordinated notes           NR                        40.67

    NR--Not rated.



NORTHERN TOBACCO: Moody's Reviews Ba2 Rating on 2006-A-1 Bonds
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has placed under review for upgrade the
2006-A-1 bonds issued by Northern Tobacco Securitization
Corporation, Series 2006. The issuer is a nonprofit corporation
organized as a subsidiary of the Alaska Housing Finance
Corporation.

The complete rating action is as follows:

Issuer: Northern Tobacco Securitization Corporation, Series 2006

2006-A-1, Ba2 (sf) Placed Under Review for Possible Upgrade;
previously on Jan 19, 2017 Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The transaction is backed by future payments that certain tobacco
manufacturers owe to various states and territories pursuant to the
1998 Master Settlement Agreement ("the MSA"). The Issuer purchased
80% of the State of Alaska's right to the MSA payments. The
transaction has a sequential pay structure in which bond principal
is retired in the order of bond maturity. The 2006-A-1 bond
currently has an outstanding balance of $35.8 million with a
maturity date of 2023.

The rating action is prompted by the State of Alaska becoming a
signatory to the October 2017 NPM Adjustment Settlement Agreement
(the "Settlement Agreement"). The State of Alaska's joinder
agreement relates, in part, to disputes with the tobacco companies
over the Master Settlement Agreement (MSA) for sale years 2005 to
2017. As a result of joining the Settlement Agreement, in addition
to the yearly MSA payments, the State of Alaska anticipates that
the State as well as bondholders will receive funds totaling
approximately $26 million in 2018. As of April 19, 2018, the 2018
MSA payments and amounts related to disputes for years 2005 to
2017, as provided by the National Association of Attorneys General
("NAAG"), totaled $51 million.

During the review period, Moody's will evaluate the ratings impact
due to funds being released to the bondholders as a result of
Alaska's joinder agreement.

METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Moody's Approach
to Rating Tobacco Settlement Revenue Securitizations" published in
January 2017.

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

Up

Moody's could upgrade the rating if, due to funds being released to
bondholders as a result of the joinder agreement, the bondholders
receive more cashflow than previously assumed, or if the annual
rate of cigarette shipment decline slows down.

Down

Moody's could downgrade the rating if the annual rate of decline in
the volume of domestic cigarette shipments increases significantly
beyond the 3% to 4% base case projection.


NORTHWOODS CAPITAL XI-B: S&P Assigns BB-(sf) Rating on Cl. E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Northwoods Capital XI-B
Ltd./Northwoods Capital XI-B LLC's $521.50 million floating-rate
notes. This is a reissue of Northwoods Capital XI Ltd., which
closed in April 2014 and was partially refinanced in April 2017.
The collateral manager is Angelo, Gordon & Co. L.P.

The transaction replaces the current outstanding notes from
Northwoods Capital XI Ltd. through an optional redemption and
issues new notes through a newly created issuer, Northwoods Capital
XI-B Ltd. The new notes are being issued with amended spreads and
extended stated maturity dates.

Northwoods Capital XI Ltd.'s outstanding notes were fully redeemed
prior to Northwoods Capital XI-B Ltd.'s closing date. We are
withdrawing the ratings on the original notes from Northwoods
Capital XI Ltd. and assigning ratings to the new notes from
Northwoods Capital XI-B Ltd.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of:

-- The diversified collateral pool, which consists primarily of
broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior secured term loans that
are governed by collateral quality tests.

-- The credit enhancement provided through the subordination of
cash flows, excess spread, and overcollateralization.

-- The collateral manager's experienced team, which can affect the
performance of the rated notes through collateral selection,
ongoing portfolio management, and trading.

-- The transaction's legal structure, which is expected to be
bankruptcy remote.

  RATINGS ASSIGNED
  Northwoods Capital XI-B Ltd./Northwoods Capital XI-B LLC  
  New class               Rating        Amount (mil $)
  A-1                     AAA (sf)              352.00
  A-2                     NR                     27.25
  B (deferrable)          AA (sf)                71.50
  C (deferrable)          A (sf)                 39.00
  D (deferrable)          BBB- (sf)              29.75
  E (deferrable)          BB- (sf)               29.25
  Subordinated notes      NR                     54.45

  RATINGS WITHDRAWN
  Northwoods Capital XI Ltd./Northwoods Capital XI LLC  
  Class                             Rating
                                To          From
  A-R                           NR          AAA (sf)
  B-1-R                         NR          AA (sf)
  B-2-R (deferrable)            NR          AA (sf)
  C-R (deferrable)              NR          A (sf)
  D (deferrable)                NR          BBB (sf)
  E (deferrable)                NR          BB (sf)

  NR--Not rated.


NRMLT 2018-2: DBRS Gives Prov. 'B' Rating on 10 Note Classes
------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS, Inc. assigned the following provisional ratings to the
Mortgage-Backed Notes, Series 2018-2 (the Notes) issued by New
Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2018-2 (NRMLT or the Trust):

-- $319.5 million Class A-1 at AAA (sf)
-- $319.5 million Class A-IO at AAA (sf)
-- $319.5 million Class A-1A at AAA (sf)
-- $319.5 million Class A-1B at AAA (sf)
-- $319.5 million Class A-1C at AAA (sf)
-- $319.5 million Class A1-IOA at AAA (sf)
-- $319.5 million Class A1-IOB at AAA (sf)
-- $319.5 million Class A1-IOC at AAA (sf)
-- $344.0 million Class A-2 at AA (sf)
-- $319.5 million Class A at AAA (sf)
-- $24.5 million Class B-1 at AA (sf)
-- $24.5 million Class B1-IO at AA (sf)
-- $24.5 million Class B-1A at AA (sf)
-- $24.5 million Class B-1B at AA (sf)
-- $24.5 million Class B-1C at AA (sf)
-- $24.5 million Class B-1D at AA (sf)
-- $24.5 million Class B1-IOA at AA (sf)
-- $24.5 million Class B1-IOB at AA (sf)
-- $24.5 million Class B1-IOC at AA (sf)
-- $16.0 million Class B-2 at A (sf)
-- $16.0 million Class B2-IO at A (sf)
-- $16.0 million Class B-2A at A (sf)
-- $16.0 million Class B-2B at A (sf)
-- $16.0 million Class B-2C at A (sf)
-- $16.0 million Class B-2D at A (sf)
-- $16.0 million Class B2-IOA at A (sf)
-- $16.0 million Class B2-IOB at A (sf)
-- $16.0 million Class B2-IOC at A (sf)
-- $20.2 million Class B-3 at BBB (sf)
-- $20.2 million Class B3-IO at BBB (sf)
-- $20.2 million Class B-3A at BBB (sf)
-- $20.2 million Class B-3B at BBB (sf)
-- $20.2 million Class B-3C at BBB (sf)
-- $20.2 million Class B-3D at BBB (sf)
-- $20.2 million Class B3-IOA at BBB (sf)
-- $20.2 million Class B3-IOB at BBB (sf)
-- $20.2 million Class B3-IOC at BBB (sf)
-- $11.7 million Class B-4 at BB (sf)
-- $11.7 million Class B-4A at BB (sf)
-- $11.7 million Class B-4B at BB (sf)
-- $11.7 million Class B-4C at BB (sf)
-- $11.7 million Class B4-IOA at BB (sf)
-- $11.7 million Class B4-IOB at BB (sf)
-- $11.7 million Class B4-IOC at BB (sf)
-- $7.5 million Class B-5 at B (sf)
-- $7.5 million Class B-5A at B (sf)
-- $7.5 million Class B-5B at B (sf)
-- $7.5 million Class B-5C at B (sf)
-- $7.5 million Class B-5D at B (sf)
-- $7.5 million Class B5-IOA at B (sf)
-- $7.5 million Class B5-IOB at B (sf)
-- $7.5 million Class B5-IOC at B (sf)
-- $7.5 million Class B5-IOD at B (sf)
-- $19.2 million Class B-7 at B (sf)

Classes A-IO, A1-IOA, A1-IOB, A1-IOC, B1-IO, B1-IOA, B1-IOB,
B1-IOC, B2-IO, B2-IOA, B2-IOB, B2-IOC, B3-IO, B3-IOA, B3-IOB,
B3-IOC, B4-IOA, B4-IOB, B4-IOC, B5-IOA, B5-IOB, B5-IOC and B5-IOD
are interest-only notes. The class balances represent notional
amounts.

Classes A-1A, A-1B, A-1C, A1-IOA, A1-IOB, A1-IOC, A-2, A, B-1A,
B-1B, B-1C, B-1D, B1-IOA, B1-IOB, B1-IOC, B-2A, B-2B, B-2C, B-2D,
B2-IOA, B2-IOB, B2-IOC, B-3A, B-3B, B-3C, B-3D, B3-IOA, B3-IOB,
B3-IOC, B-4A, B-4B, B-4C, B4-IOA, B4-IOB, B4-IOC, B-5A, B-5B, B-5C,
B-5D, B5-IOA, B5-IOB, B5-IOC, B5-IOD and B-7 are exchangeable
notes. These classes can be exchanged for combinations of initial
exchangeable notes as specified in the offering documents.

The AAA (sf) ratings on the Notes reflect the 25.00% of credit
enhancement provided by subordinated Notes in the pool. The AA
(sf), A (sf), BBB (sf), BB (sf) and B (sf) ratings reflect 19.25%,
15.50%, 10.75%, 8.00% and 6.25% of credit enhancement,
respectively.

This transaction is a securitization of a portfolio of seasoned
performing and re-performing first-lien residential mortgages. The
Notes are backed by 3,628 loans with a total principal balance of
$425,956,677 as of the Cut-Off Date (April 1, 2018).

All but ten loans are significantly seasoned with a
weighted-average (WA) age of 164 months. As of the Cut-Off Date,
93.0% of the pool is current, 6.6% is 30 days delinquent under the
Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) delinquency method and 0.5% is
in bankruptcy (all bankruptcy loans are performing or 30 days
delinquent). Approximately 69.8% and 76.3% of the mortgage loans
have been zero times 30 days delinquent (0 x 30) for the past 24
months and 12 months, respectively, under the MBA delinquency
method. The portfolio contains 35.8% modified loans. The
modifications happened more than two years ago for 78.5% of the
modified loans. In accordance with the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau (CFPB) Qualified Mortgage (QM) rules, 0.2% of the
loans are designated as QM Safe Harbor and 0.1% as QM Rebuttable
Presumption. The majority of the pools (99.7%) are not subject to
the QM rules.

The Seller, NRZ Sponsor IX LLC (NRZ), acquired the loans prior to
the Closing Date in connection with the termination of various
securitization trusts. Upon acquiring the loans from the
securitization trusts, NRZ, through an affiliate, New Residential
Funding 2018-2 LLC (the Depositor), will contribute the loans to
the Trust. As the Sponsor, New Residential Investment Corp, through
a majority-owned affiliate, will acquire and retain a 5% eligible
vertical interest in each class of securities to be issued (other
than the residual notes) to satisfy the credit risk retention
requirements under Section 15G of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 and the regulations promulgated thereunder. These loans were
originated and previously serviced by various entities through
purchases in the secondary market.

As of the Cut-Off Date, 58.7% of the pool is serviced by Nation
star Mortgage LLC (Nation star), 19.7% by Ocwen Loan Servicing,
LLC; 9.6% by Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.; 6.3% by PNC Mortgage; 4.6% by
Specialized Loan Servicing LLC; 0.8% by New Penn Financial, LLC
d/b/a Shell point Mortgage Servicing (SMS); and 0.3% by Fay
Servicing, LLC. Nation star will act as the Master Servicer and SMS
will act as the Special Servicer.

The Seller will have the option to repurchase any loan that becomes
60 or more days delinquent under the MBA method or any REO property
acquired in respect of a mortgage loan at a price equal to the
principal balance of the loan (Optional Repurchase Price), provided
that such repurchases will be limited to 10% of the principal
balance of the mortgage loans as of the Cut-Off Date.

Unlike other seasoned re-performing loan securitizations, the
Servicers in this transaction will advance principal and interest
on delinquent mortgages to the extent such advances are deemed
recoverable. The transaction employs a senior-subordinate, shifting
interest cash flow structure that is enhanced from a pre-crisis
structure.

The ratings reflect transactional strengths that include underlying
assets that have significant seasoning, relatively clean payment
histories and robust loan attributes with respect to credit scores,
product types and loan-to-value ratios. Additionally, historical
NRMLT securitizations have exhibited fast voluntary prepayment
rates.

The transaction employs a relatively weak representations and
warranties framework that includes an unrated representation
provider (NRZ), certain knowledge qualifiers and fewer mortgage
loan representations relative to DBRS criteria for seasoned pools.

Satisfactory third-party due diligence was performed on the pool
for regulatory compliance, title/lien, payment history and data
integrity. Updated Home Data Index and/or broker price opinions
were provided for the pool; however, a reconciliation was not
performed on the updated values.

Certain loans have missing assignments or endorsements as of the
Closing Date. Given the relatively clean performance history of the
mortgages and the operational capability of the servicers, DBRS
believes the risk of impeding or delaying foreclosure is remote.

Notes: All figures are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted.


ONDECK ASSET 2018-1: DBRS Finalizes BB(high) Rating on Cl. D Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS, Inc. finalized its provisional ratings on the following
classes of notes issued by OnDeck Asset Securitization Trust II
LLC, Series 2018-1 (the Issuer):

-- $177,500,000 Series 2018-1 Asset Backed Notes, Class A rated
     AA (sf)

-- $15,500,000 Series 2018-1 Asset Backed Notes, Class B rated A
     (sf)

-- $20,000,000 Series 2018-1 Asset Backed Notes, Class C rated
     BBB (sf)

-- $12,000,000 Series 2018-1 Asset Backed Notes, Class D rated BB

     (high) (sf)

The ratings are based on a review by DBRS of the following
analytical considerations:

-- Transaction capital structure, proposed ratings and form and
     sufficiency of available credit enhancement.

-- The transaction parties' capabilities with regard to
     origination, underwriting and servicing.

-- Credit quality of the collateral pool and the historical
     performance of On Deck Capital, Inc.'s small business loan
     portfolio.

-- The transaction incorporates both collateral performance
     triggers and servicer financial covenants that will be
     expected to protect the note holders in a stressed
     environment.

-- The structure and presence of legal opinions that address the
     true sale of the assets to the Issuer, the non-consolidation
     of the Issuer with On Deck Capital, Inc. and the trustee's
     valid first-priority security interest in the collateral
     assets.


OZLM VI: Moody's Rates Class E-S Notes 'B3'
-------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to nine classes of
CLO refinancing notes issued by OZLM VI, Ltd.:

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$7,000,000 Class X-S Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2031
(the "Class X-S Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$390,000,000 Class A-1-S Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class A-1-S Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$41,000,000 Class A-2a-S Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class A-2a-S Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$13,000,000 Class A-2b-S Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2031
(the "Class A-2b-S Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$20,500,000 Class B-1-S Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class B-1-S Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$17,000,000 Class B-2-S Senior Secured Deferrable Fixed Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class B-2-S Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$37,500,000 Class C-S Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class C-S Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$33,000,000 Class D-S Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class D-S Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

US$14,400,000 Class E-S Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class E-S Notes"), Assigned B3 (sf)

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

Och-Ziff Loan Management LP (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
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 April 17, 2018 (the
"Second Refinancing Date") in connection with the refinancing of
all classes of the secured notes (the "Refinanced Original Notes")
originally issued on April 16, 2014 (the "Original Closing Date"),
four classes of which were previously refinanced on January 17,
2017. On the Second 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:

Portfolio par: $600,000,000

Defaulted par: $0

Diversity Score: 70

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2898

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.35%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 9.0 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 2898 to 3333)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X-S Notes: 0

Class A-1-S Notes: -1

Class A-2a-S Notes: -2

Class A-2b-S Notes: -2

Class B-1-S Notes: -2

Class B-2-S Notes: -2

Class C-S Notes: -1

Class D-S Notes: -1

Class E-S Notes: -2

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2898 to 3767)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class X-S Notes: 0

Class A-1-S Notes: -1

Class A-2a-S Notes: -3

Class A-2b-S Notes: -3

Class B-1-S Notes: -4

Class B-2-S Notes: -4

Class C-S Notes: -2

Class D-S Notes: -1

Class E-S Notes: -5


PALMER SQUARE 2018-2: Fitch Rates Class E Notes 'Bsf'
-----------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned the following ratings and Rating
Outlooks to Palmer Square Loan Funding 2018-2, Ltd./LLC:

-- $338,200,000 class A-1 notes 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $59,300,000 class A-2 notes 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $33,300,000 class B notes 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $17,000,000 class C notes 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $17,200,000 class D notes 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $5,000,000 class E notes 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable.

Fitch does not rate the subordinated notes.

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Palmer Square Loan Funding 2018-2, Ltd. (the issuer) and Palmer
Square Loan Funding 2018-2, LLC (the co-issuer) comprise a
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) that will be serviced by
Palmer Square Capital Management LLC. Net proceeds from the
issuance of the secured and subordinated notes will be used to
purchase a static pool of primarily senior secured leveraged loans
totaling $500 million. The CLO will have an approximately 1.0-year
noncall period.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Sufficient Credit Enhancement: Credit enhancement (CE) available to
the class A-1, A-2, B, C, D and E notes (rated notes), in addition
to excess spread, is sufficient to protect against portfolio
default and recovery rate projections in each class's respective
rating stress scenario. The degree of CE available to class E notes
is in line with the average 'Bsf' category CE of recent CLO
issuances. The degree of CE available to class A-1, A-2, B, C and D
notes is below each rating level's recent average CE; however, the
transaction has a shorter risk horizon, and cash flow modeling
results for the notes indicate performance in line with their
respective ratings.

'B+'/'B' Asset Quality: The average credit quality of the purchased
portfolio is 'B+'/'B', which is comparable to recent CLOs. Issuers
rated in the 'B' rating category denote a highly speculative credit
quality. In Fitch Ratings' opinion, 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 portfolio consists of 97.8% first
lien senior secured loans and 2.2% second lien loans. Approximately
91.0% of the portfolio has either strong recovery prospects or a
Fitch-assigned recovery rating of 'RR2' or higher, and the base
case recovery assumption is 81.0%.

Shorter Risk Horizon: The transaction does not have a reinvestment
period. Therefore, the transaction's risk horizon is equal to the
portfolio's weighted average life. The shorter risk horizon means
the transaction is less vulnerable to underlying price movements
and economic and asset performance.

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. Fitch expects the
class A-1 and A-2 notes to remain investment grade, even under the
most extreme sensitivity scenarios, and for the other rated classes
to remain within two rating categories of their assigned ratings.
Sensitivity scenarios' passing ratings were 'AAAsf' for the class
A-1 notes, and ranged from 'A+sf' to 'AAAsf' for the class A-2
notes; 'BB+sf' to 'A+sf' for the class B notes; 'B+sf' to 'A+sf'
for the class C notes; 'CCCsf' to 'BBB-sf' for the class D notes
and lower than 'CCCsf' and 'BB+sf' for the class E notes.


REALT 2007-2: Moody's Cuts Ratings on 2 Classes to Caa2
-------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has affirmed the ratings on six classes
and downgraded the ratings on two classes in Real Estate Asset
Liquidity Trust 2007-2, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2007-2 as follows:

Cl. F, Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on May 3, 2017 Downgraded to
Ba3 (sf)

Cl. G, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on May 3, 2017 Downgraded to B2
(sf)

Cl. H, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on May 3, 2017 Downgraded to
Caa1 (sf)

Cl. J, Affirmed Caa2 (sf); previously on May 3, 2017 Downgraded to
Caa2 (sf)

Cl. K, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on May 3, 2017 Downgraded to
Caa3 (sf)

Cl. L, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on May 3, 2017 Downgraded to
Caa3 (sf)

Cl. XC-1, Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Jun 9, 2017
Downgraded to B3 (sf)

Cl. XC-2, Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Jun 9, 2017
Downgraded to B3 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

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

The rating on the IO Classes XC-1 and XC-2 were downgraded due to
the decline in the credit quality of its reference classes
resulting from principal paydowns of higher quality reference
classes.

Moody's does not anticipate losses from the remaining collateral in
the current environment. However, over the remaining life of the
transaction, losses may emerge from macro stresses to the
environment and changes in collateral performance. Our ratings
reflect the potential for future losses under varying levels of
stress. Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 0.2%
of the original pooled balance, compared to 2.5% at the last
review. Moody's provides a current list of base expected losses for
conduit and fusion CMBS transactions on moodys.com at
http://www.moodys.com/viewresearchdoc.aspx?docid=PBS_SF215255.

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

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

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

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

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The principal methodology used in rating Real Estate Asset
Liquidity Trust 2007-2, Cl. F, Cl. G, Cl. H, Cl. J, Cl. K, and Cl.
L was "Moody's Approach to Rating Large Loan and Single
Asset/Single Borrower CMBS" published in July 2017. The
methodologies used in rating Real Estate Asset Liquidity Trust
2007-2, Cl. XC-1 and Cl. XC-2 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.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the April 12, 2018 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 98% to $9.6 million
from $377 million at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by one remaining mortgage loan.

One loan has been liquidated from the pool, resulting in a realized
loss of $0.9 million (for a loss severity of 1.2%).

The sole remaining loan is the Rona Eglinton & Warden Loan ($9.6
million), which is secured by a 113,462 SF single tenant retail
building located 7 miles northeast of the Toronto CBD. The property
is fully leased by Rona, a banner of Lowe's Canada, with a lease
expiration in July 2021. The loan is scheduled to mature in April
2019. Moody's analysis incorporated a lit/dark analysis on the
property to account for the single tenancy risk. Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 89% and 1.09X, respectively, compared to 85% and
1.08X at the last review.


REVELSTOKE CDO I: DBRS Confirms 'CC' Rating on Class A-1 Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS Limited confirmed these ratings of Revelstoke CDO I Limited:

  -- Class A-1 Senior Variable Rate Secured Notes due 2020 (Class
     A-1 Notes) rated CC (sf)

  -- Class A-2 Senior Variable Rate Secured Notes due 2026 (Class
     A-2 Notes) rated C (sf)

  -- Class A-3 Senior Variable Rate Secured Notes due 2033 (Class
     A-3 Notes) rated C (sf)

The Transaction is exposed to pools of U.S. non-prime residential
mortgages as well as other collateralized debt obligations backed
by residential mortgages, among other assets. Because of the
decreasing quality of the underlying portfolio, DBRS expects that
the Class A-1 Notes will have a partial recovery of principal, and
it is expected that holders of both the Class A-2 Notes and the
Class A-3 Notes will not receive any return of initial principal
over the remaining term of the Transaction.

Notes: The related regulatory disclosures pursuant to the National
Instrument 25-101 Designated Rating Organizations are hereby
incorporated by reference.

The rated entity or its related entities did participate in the
rating process for this rating action. DBRS had access to the
accounts and other relevant internal documents of the rated entity
or its related entities in connection with this rating action.

The Affected Ratings is available at https://bit.ly/2rcbjsG


SDART 2018-2: Fitch Rates $83.3MM Class E Notes 'BB-sf'
-------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned the following ratings and Outlooks to
the notes issued by Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2018-2:

-- $210,000,000 class A-1 notes 'F1+sf';
-- $175,000,000 class A-2-A notes 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $75,000,000 class A-2-B notes 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $126,630,000 class A-3 notes 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $166,600,000 class B notes 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $151,730,000 class C notes 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $106,500,000 class D notes 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $83,300,000 class E notes 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Stable Credit Quality: 2018-2 is backed by collateral relatively
consistent with recent pools, with a non-zero weighted average (WA)
FICO score of 610 and internal WA loss forecast score (LFS) of 555.
Obligors with no FICO scores are down from peak levels but total
12.5%.

High Extended-Term Concentration: The concentration of 75-month
loans is at 12.5%, up from recent transactions. 61+ month loans
total 93.3% of the pool, which is toward the higher end of the
range for the platform. Consistent with prior Fitch-rated
transactions, an additional stress was applied to 75-month loans in
deriving the loss proxy as performance for these contracts has been
volatile.

Stable Portfolio/Securitization Performance: Recent managed
portfolio annual vintage losses are tracking higher. Loss frequency
has been driven higher by looser underwriting, while severity has
also increased due to weaker used vehicle values and early-stage
defaults on extended-term collateral. In response, Santander
Consumer USA (SC) has pulled back on originations and tightened
underwriting slightly, which has led to improved performance in the
2016-2017 vintages relative to 2014-2015. ABS performance remains
within Fitch's expectations to date.

Sufficient Credit Enhancement: Initial hard credit enhancement (CE)
totals 51.70%, 37.70%, 24.95%, 16.00% and 9.00% for classes A, B,
C, D and E, respectively. Hard CE is up from 2018-1 for the class A
notes but unchanged for the junior notes. Excess spread is
approximately 9.22% per annum. CE is sufficient to cover the loss
multiples and ratings under Fitch's 16.60% cumulative net loss
(CNL) proxy for 2018-2.

Stable Corporate Health: SC's recent financial results have been
weaker due to higher losses on the managed portfolio. However, the
company has been profitable since 2007, and Fitch currently rates
Santander, SC's majority owner, 'A-'/'F2'/Stable.

Consistent Origination/Underwriting/Servicing: SC demonstrates
adequate abilities as originator, underwriter and servicer, as
evidenced by historical portfolio and securitization performance.
Fitch deems SC capable to service this transaction.

Legal Structure Integrity: The legal structure of the transaction
should provide that a bankruptcy of SC would not impair the
timeliness of payments on the securities.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Unanticipated increases in the frequency of defaults and loss
severity on defaulted receivables could produce loss levels higher
than the base case. This in turn could result in Fitch taking
negative rating actions on the notes.

Fitch evaluated the sensitivity of the ratings assigned to 2018-2
to increased credit losses over the life of the transaction.
Fitch's analysis found that the transaction displays some
sensitivity to increased defaults and credit losses. This analysis
exhibited a potential downgrade of one or two categories under
Fitch's moderate (1.5x base case loss) scenario, and potentially
distressed ratings or defaults for the class E bonds. The notes
could experience downgrades of three or more rating categories,
potentially leading to distressed ratings (below Bsf) or possibly
default, under Fitch's severe (2x base case loss) scenario.


SDART: Fitch Takes Ratings Actions on 8 Trusts
----------------------------------------------
As part of its ongoing surveillance, Fitch Ratings, on April 24,
2018, took various rating actions on eight Santander Drive Auto
Receivables Trusts as follows:

Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2013-5
--Class D affirmed at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--Class E upgraded to 'AAAsf' from 'AAsf'; Outlook revised to
Stable from Positive.

Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2014-5
--Class C affirmed at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--Class D upgraded to 'AAAsf' from 'AAsf'; Outlook revised to
Stable from Positive;
--Class E upgraded to 'AAsf' from 'Asf'; Outlook Positive.

Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2015-1
--Class C affirmed at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--Class D upgraded to 'AAsf' from 'Asf'; Outlook Positive;
--Class E affirmed at 'BBBsf'; Outlook Positive.

Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2015-3
--Class C affirmed at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--Class D upgraded to 'AAsf' from 'Asf'; Outlook Positive;
--Class E affirmed at 'BBBsf'; Outlook Positive.

Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2015-4
--Class B affirmed at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--Class C upgraded to 'AAAsf' from 'AAsf'; Outlook revised to
Stable from Positive;
--Class D upgraded to 'AAsf' from 'Asf'; Outlook Positive;
--Class E upgraded to 'BBBsf' from 'BBsf'; Outlook Positive.

Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2015-5
--Class C upgraded to 'AAAsf' from 'AAsf'; Outlook revised to
Stable from Positive;
--Class D upgraded to 'AAsf' from 'Asf'; Outlook Positive;
--Class E upgraded to 'BBBsf' from 'BBsf'; Outlook Positive.

Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2016-2
--Class A-3 affirmed at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--Class B affirmed at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--Class C upgraded to 'AAsf' from 'Asf'; Outlook Positive;
--Class D upgraded to 'Asf' from 'BBBsf'; Outlook Positive;
--Class E upgraded to 'BBBsf' from 'BBsf'; Outlook Positive.

Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2017-2
--Class A-2 affirmed at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--Class A-3 affirmed at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--Class B upgraded to 'AAAsf' from 'AAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--Class C affirmed at 'Asf'; Outlook revised to Positive from
Stable;
--Class D affirmed at 'BBBsf'; Outlook revised to Positive from
Stable;
--Class E affirmed at 'BBsf'; Outlook revised to Positive from
Stable.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The rating actions are based on available credit enhancement (CE)
and loss performance to date. The collateral pools continue to
perform within Fitch's expectations and hard CE is building for the
notes. The securities are able to withstand stress scenarios
consistent with the current ratings and make full payments to
investors in accordance with the terms of the documents. The
Positive Outlooks on the applicable classes reflect the possibility
for an upgrade in the next one to two years.

Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2013-5

As of the April 2018 servicer report, 61+ day delinquencies were
6.97% of the outstanding collateral balance. Cumulative net losses
(CNLs) were at 12.39% and tracking below Fitch's initial base case
of 16.60%. Further, hard CE has grown to 85.07% for class D and
38.19% for class E.

For this analysis, Fitch utilized a lifetime CNL proxy of 13.50%.
Under Fitch's stressed cash flow assumptions, loss coverage for the
class C and D notes are able to support multiples in excess of
3.00x for a 'AAAsf' rating.

Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2014-5

As of the April 2018 servicer report, 61+ day delinquencies were
5.69% of the outstanding collateral balance. Cumulative net losses
(CNLs) were at 11.26% and tracking below Fitch's initial base case
of 17.15%. Further, hard CE has grown to 86.05% for Class C, 49.77%
for Class D, and 26.36% for class E.

For this analysis, Fitch utilized a lifetime CNL proxy of 14.00%.
Under Fitch's stressed cash flow assumptions, loss coverage for the
class C and D notes are able to support multiples in excess of
3.00x and the class E notes are consistent with 2.50x for 'AAAsf'
and 'AAsf,' respectively.

Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2015-1
As of the April 2018 servicer report, 61+ day delinquencies were
4.97% of the outstanding collateral balance. Cumulative net losses
(CNLs) were at 9.86% and tracking below Fitch's initial base case
of 17.15%. Further, hard CE has grown to 79.20% for class C, 46.52%
for class D, and 25.43% for class E.

For this analysis, Fitch utilized a lifetime CNL proxy of 14.00%.
Under Fitch's stressed cash flow assumptions, the class B and C
notes are able to support loss coverage multiples in excess of
3.00x, the D notes are able to support multiples in excess of 2.50x
and the class E notes in excess of 1.50x for 'AAAsf,' 'AAsf,' and
'BBBsf,' respectively.

Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2015-3

As of the April 2018 servicer report, 61+ day delinquencies were
4.49% of the outstanding collateral balance. Cumulative net losses
(CNLs) were at 9.96% and tracking below Fitch's initial base case
of 17.25%. Further, hard CE has grown to 67.30% for class C, 40.35%
for class D, and 22.96% for class E.

For this analysis, Fitch utilized a lifetime CNL proxy of 14.50%.
Under Fitch's stressed cash flow assumptions, the class C notes are
able to support loss coverage multiples in excess of 3.00x, the
class D notes in excess of 2.50x, and the class E notes in excess
of 1.50x for 'AAAsf,' 'AAsf,' and 'BBBsf,' respectively.

Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2015-4

As of the April 2018 servicer report, 61+ day delinquencies were
4.70% of the outstanding collateral balance. Cumulative net losses
(CNLs) were at 10.00% and tracking below Fitch's initial base case
of 17.25%. Further, hard CE has grown to 103.10% for class B,
62.31% for class C, 37.98% for class D, and 22.28% for class E.

For this analysis, Fitch utilized a lifetime CNL proxy of 15.00%.
Under Fitch's stressed cash flow assumptions, the class B and C
notes are able to support loss coverage multiples in excess of
3.00x, the class D notes in excess of 2.50x, and the class E notes
in excess of 1.50x for 'AAAsf,' 'AAsf,' and 'BBBsf,' respectively.

Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2015-5

As of the April 2018 servicer report, 61+ day delinquencies were
4.63% of the outstanding collateral balance. Cumulative net losses
(CNLs) were at 8.77% and tracking below Fitch's initial base case
of 17.30%. Further, hard CE has grown to 65.91% for class C, 37.57%
for class D, and 22.16% for class E.

For this analysis, Fitch utilized a lifetime CNL proxy of 14.00%.
Under Fitch's stressed cash flow assumptions, the class C notes are
able to support loss coverage multiples in excess of 3.00x, the
class D notes in excess of 2.50x, and the class E notes in excess
of 1.50x for 'AAAsf,' 'AAsf,' and 'BBBsf,' respectively.

Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2016-2

As of the April 2018 servicer report, 61+ day delinquencies were
4.56% of the outstanding collateral balance. Cumulative net losses
(CNLs) were at 7.66% and tracking below Fitch's initial base case
of 17.00%. Further, hard CE has grown to 102.98% for class A,
76.57% for class B, 48.20% for class C, 31.28% for class D, and
20.37% for class E.

For this analysis, Fitch utilized a lifetime CNL proxy of 15.75%.
Under Fitch's stressed cash flow assumptions, the class A and B
notes are able to support loss coverage multiples in excess of
3.00x, the class C notes in excess of 2.50x, the class D notes in
excess of 2.00x, and the class E notes in excess of 1.50x for
'AAAsf', 'AAsf,' 'Asf,' and 'BBBsf,' respectively.

Santander Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2017-2

As of the April 2018 servicer report, 61+ day delinquencies were
3.35% of the outstanding collateral balance. Cumulative net losses
(CNLs) were at 3.30% and tracking below Fitch's initial base case
of 17.00%. Further, hard CE has grown to 75.68% for class A, 59.92%
for class B, 40.69% for class C, 26.16% for class D, and 18.90% for
class E.

For this analysis, Fitch utilized a lifetime CNL proxy of 15.75%.
Under Fitch's stressed cash flow assumptions, the class A and B
notes are able to support loss coverage multiples in excess of
3.00x, the class C notes in excess of 2.00x, the class D notes in
excess of 1.50x, and the class E notes in excess of 1.25x for
'AAAsf', 'Asf,', 'BBBsf' and 'BBsf,' respectively.

Cash flow modelling assumptions were unchanged for this review
versus prior reviews. Fitch modelled voluntary prepayments of 1.00%
for all transactions other than 2016-2 and 2017-2, which assumed
voluntary prepayments of 1.15%. A 50% recovery rate was utilized
for each transaction. Fitch will continue to monitor all
Fitch-rated SDART transactions and may take additional rating
actions in the future. The ratings reflect the quality of Santander
Consumer USA, Inc.'s retail auto loan originations, the adequacy of
its servicing capabilities, and the sound financial and legal
structure of the transaction.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Unanticipated increases in the frequency of defaults and loss
severity could produce loss levels higher than the current
projected base case loss proxies and impact available loss coverage
and multiples levels for both transactions. Lower loss coverage
could impact ratings and Rating Outlooks, depending on the extent
of the decline in coverage.

In Fitch's initial review of the transactions, the notes were found
to have limited sensitivity to a 1.5x and 2.5x increase of Fitch's
base case loss expectation. To date, the transactions have
exhibited strong performance with losses within Fitch's initial
expectations with rising loss coverage and multiple levels
consistent with the current ratings. A material deterioration in
performance would have to occur within the asset pools to have
potential negative impact on the outstanding ratings.


SEQUOIA MORTGAGE 2018-5: Moody's Assigns (P)B2 to Cl. B-4 Debt
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to the
classes of residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) issued by
Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2018-5 ("SEMT 2018-5"). The certificates are
backed by one pool of prime quality, first-lien mortgage loans,
including 194 agency-eligible high balance mortgage loans. The
assets of the trust consist of 577 fully amortizing, fixed rate
mortgage loans, substantially all of which have an original term to
maturity of 30 years execpt for 3 loans which have an original term
to maturity of 20 years. The borrowers in the pool have high FICO
scores, significant equity in their properties and liquid cash
reserves. CitiMortgage Inc. ("CitiMortgage") will serve as the
master servicer for this transaction. There are three servicers in
this pool: Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing (94.55%), Homestreet Bank
(3.94%), First Republic Bank (1.50%).

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Sequoia Mortgage Trust 2018-5

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Cl. B-3, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Assigned (P)B2 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

Summary Credit Analysis

Moody's expected cumulative net loss on the aggregate pool is 0.40%
in a base scenario and reaches 4.60% at a stress level consistent
with the Aaa ratings. Our loss estimates are based on a
loan-by-loan assessment of the securitized collateral pool using
Moody's Individual Loan Level Analysis (MILAN) model. Loan-level
adjustments to the model included: adjustments to borrower
probability of default for higher and lower borrower DTIs,
borrowers with multiple mortgaged properties, self-employed
borrowers, origination channels and at a pool level, for the
default risk of HOA properties in super lien states. The adjustment
to our Aaa stress loss above the model output also includes
adjustments related to aggregator and originators assessments. The
model combines loan-level characteristics with economic drivers to
determine the probability of default for each loan, and hence for
the portfolio as a whole. Severity is also calculated on a
loan-level basis. The pool loss level is then adjusted for
borrower, zip code, and MSA level concentrations.

Collateral Description

The SEMT 2018-5 transaction is a securitization of 577 first lien
residential mortgage loans, with an aggregate unpaid principal
balance of $ 380,087,081. There are 122 originators in this pool,
including United Shore Financial Services (19.63%). None of the
originators other than United Shore contributed 10% or more of the
principal balance of the loans in the pool. The loan-level third
party due diligence review (TPR) encompassed credit underwriting,
property value and regulatory compliance. In addition, Redwood
Residential Acquisition Corporation ("Redwood") has agreed to
backstop the rep and warranty repurchase obligation of all
originators other than First Republic Bank.

The loans were all aggregated by Redwood. We consider Redwood, the
mortgage loan seller, as a stronger aggregator of prime jumbo loans
compared to its peers. As of February 2018 remittance report, there
have been no losses on Redwood-aggregated transactions that we have
rated to date, and delinquencies to date have also been very low.

Borrowers of the mortgage loans backing this transaction have
strong credit profile demonstrated by strong credit scores, high
down payment percentages and significant liquid reserves. Similar
to SEMT transactions we rated recently, SEMT 2018-5 has a weighted
average FICO at 770 and a percentage of loan purpose for home
purchase at 58.0%, in line with SEMT transactions issued earlier
this year, where weighted average original FICOs were slightly
above 770 and purchase money percentages were ranging from 40% to
60%.

Structural considerations

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

We believe there is a low likelihood that the rated securities of
SEMT 2018-5 will incur any losses from extraordinary expenses or
indemnification payments owing to potential future lawsuits against
key deal parties. First, the loans are prime quality and were
originated under a regulatory environment that requires tighter
controls for originations than pre-crisis, which reduces the
likelihood that the loans have defects that could form the basis of
a lawsuit. Second, Redwood, who initially retains the subordinate
classes and provides a back-stop to the representations and
warranties of all the originators except for FRB, has a strong
alignment of interest with investors, and is incentivized to
actively manage the pool to optimize performance. Third, historical
performance of loans aggregated by Redwood has been very strong to
date. Fourth, the transaction has reasonably well defined processes
in place to identify loans with defects on an ongoing basis. In
this transaction, an independent breach reviewer must review loans
for breaches of representations and warranties when a loan becomes
120 days delinquent, which reduces the likelihood that parties will
be sued for inaction.

Tail Risk & Subordination Floor

The transaction cash flows follow a shifting interest structure
that allows subordinated bonds to receive principal payments under
certain defined scenarios. Because a shifting interest structure
allows subordinated bonds to pay down over time as the loan pool
shrinks, senior bonds are exposed to increased performance
volatility, known as tail risk. The transaction provides for a
subordination floor of 1.10% of the closing pool balance, which
mitigates tail risk by protecting the senior bonds from eroding
credit enhancement over time.

Third-party Review and Reps & Warranties

Two TPR firms conducted a due diligence review of 100% of the
mortgage loans in the pool. For 577 loans, the TPR firms conducted
a review for credit, property valuation, compliance and data
integrity ("full review") and limited review for 26 First Republic,
Homestreet Bank, and Primelending loans. For the 26 loans, Redwood
Trust elected to conduct a limited review, which did not include a
TPR firm check for TRID compliance.

Generally, for the full review loans, the sponsor or the originator
corrected all material errors identified by following defined
methods of error resolution under the TRID rule or TILA 130(b) as
per the proposed SFIG TRID framework. The sponsor or the originator
provided the borrower with a corrected Closing Disclosure and
letter of explanation as well as a refund where necessary. All
technical errors on the Loan Estimate were subsequently corrected
on the Closing Disclosure. We believe that the TRID noncompliance
risk to the trust is immaterial due to the good-faith efforts to
correct the identified conditions.

No TRID compliance reviews were performed on the limited review
loans. Therefore, there is a possibility that some of these loans
could have unresolved TRID issues. We reviewed the initial
compliance findings of loans from the same originator where a full
review was conducted and there were no material compliance
findings. As a result, we did not increase our Aaa loss.

After a review of the TPR appraisal findings, we note that there
are 18 loans with escrow holdback in total, including 2 loans where
the initial escrow holdback amount is greater than 10%. In the
event escrow funds greater than 10% have not been disbursed within
six months of the closing date, the seller shall repurchase the
affected escrow holdback mortgage loan, on or before the date that
is six months after the closing date at the applicable repurchase
price. Given that the small number of such loans and that the
seller has the obligation to repurchase, we did not make an
adjustment for these loans.

Each of the originators makes the loan-level R&Ws for the loans it
originated, except for loans acquired by Redwood from the FHLB
Chicago. The mortgage loans purchased by Redwood from the FHLB
Chicago were originated by various participating financial
institution originators. For these mortgage loans, FHLB Chicago
will provide the loan-level R&Ws that are assigned to the trust.

In line with other SEMT transactions, the loan-level R&Ws for SEMT
2018-5 are strong and, in general, either meet or exceed the
baseline set of credit-neutral R&Ws we identified for US RMBS.

Among other things, the R&Ws address property valuation,
underwriting, fraud, data accuracy, regulatory compliance, the
presence of title and hazard insurance, the absence of material
property damage, and the enforceability of the mortgage.

The R&W providers vary in financial strength, which include some
financially weaker originators. To mitigate this risk, Redwood will
backstop any R&W providers who may become financially incapable of
repurchasing mortgage loans, except for First Republic Bank, which
is one of the strongest originators. Moreover, a third-party due
diligence firm conducted a detailed review on the loans of all of
the originators, which mitigates the risk of unrated and
financially weaker originators.

Trustee & Master Servicer

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

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

Down

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

Up

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


SHACKLETON 2013-IV-R: Moody's Rates Class E Notes 'B3'
------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to eight classes of
notes issued by Shackleton 2013-IV-R CLO, Ltd. (the "Issuer" or
"Shackleton 2013-IV-R").

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$255,000,000 Class A-1a Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class A-1a Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$15,700,000 Class A-1b Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2031
(the "Class A-1b Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$32,000,000 Class A-2a Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class A-2a Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$14,750,000 Class A-2b Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2031
(the "Class A-2b Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$21,000,000 Class B Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class B Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned A2
(sf)

US$27,750,000 Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class C Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned
Baa3 (sf)

US$18,300,000 Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class D Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned
Ba3 (sf)

US$8,400,000 Class E Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class E Notes"), Definitive Rating Assigned B3
(sf)

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

Shackleton 2013-IV-R is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes
will be collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated senior
secured corporate loans. At least 90% of the portfolio must consist
of first lien senior secured loans, cash, and eligible investments,
and up to 10% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans,
senior unsecured loans and first-lien last-out loans. The portfolio
is approximately 80% ramped as of the closing date.

Alcentra NY, 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 has issued 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: $418,000,000

Diversity Score: 60

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2821

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.15%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.0%

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 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 2821 to 3244)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1a Notes: 0

Class A-1b Notes: -1

Class A-2a Notes: -2

Class A-2b Notes: -2

Class B Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -1

Class D Notes: 0

Class E Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2821 to 3667)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1a Notes: -1

Class A-1b Notes: -1

Class A-2a Notes: -4

Class A-2b Notes: -4

Class B Notes: -4

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: -3


SOUND POINT: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating to Class F Debt
------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to seven classes of
notes issued by Sound Point CLO III-R, Ltd.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$310,100,000 Class A-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2029 (the "Class A-1 Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$22,500,000 Class A-2 Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2029
(the "Class A-2 Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$48,600,000 Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2029
(the "Class B Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$25,200,000 Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2029 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$32,800,000 Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2029 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$21,000,000 Class E Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2029 (the "Class E Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

US$10,000,000 Class F Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2029 (the "Class F Notes"), Assigned B3 (sf)

The Class A-1 Notes, the Class A-2 Notes, the Class B Notes, the
Class C Notes, the Class D Notes, the Class E Notes and the Class F
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.

Sound Point III-R 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
first lien 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 approximately 60% ramped as of
the closing date.

Sound Point Capital Management, LP (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 three year
reinvestment period. Thereafter, the Manager may reinvest
unscheduled principal payments and proceeds from sales of credit
risk and credit improved assets, subject to certain restrictions.

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer issued 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: 60

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2837

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.50%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 4.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.10%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 7.0 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 2837 to 3263)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: 0

Class A-2 Notes: 0

Class B Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: 0

Class F Notes: 0

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2825 to 3688)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-1 Notes: -1

Class A-2 Notes: -1

Class B Notes: -3

Class C Notes: -3

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1

Class F Notes: -2


STEELE CREEK 2018-1: Moody's Gives (P)Ba3 Rating on Class E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned provisional ratings to five
classes of notes to be issued by Steele Creek CLO 2018-1, Ltd.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

U.S.$260,000,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class A Notes"), Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

U.S.$44,000,000 Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2031
(the "Class B Notes"), Assigned (P)Aa2 (sf)

U.S.$24,500,000 Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

U.S.$23,500,000 Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

U.S.$16,000,000 Class E Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class E Notes"), Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

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

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

RATINGS RATIONALE

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

Steele Creek CLO 2018-1 is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued
notes will be collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated 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 expects the portfolio to be approximately 80% ramped as of
the closing date.

Steele Creek Investment Management LLC will direct the selection,
acquisition and disposition of the assets on behalf of the Issuer
and may engage in trading activity, including discretionary
trading, during the transaction's 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 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.

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

Par amount: $400,000,000

Diversity Score: 65

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2860

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.30%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.0%

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 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.

Here 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 2860 to 3289)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Notes: 0

Class B Notes: -2

Class C Notes: -2

Class D Notes: -1

Class E Notes: 0

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 2860 to 3718)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A Notes: -1

Class B Notes: -3

Class C Notes: -4

Class D Notes: -2

Class E Notes: -1


SYMPHONY CLO XVII: Moody's Gives Ba3 Rating to Cl. E-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned the following ratings to the
following notes (the "Refinancing Notes") issued by Symphony CLO
XVII, Ltd. (the "Issuer"):

US$320,750,000 Class A-R Senior Floating Rate Notes Due 2028 (the
"Class A-R Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$50,750,000 Class B-R Senior Floating Rate Notes Due 2028 (the
"Class B-R Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$32,000,000 Class C-R Deferrable Mezzanine Floating Rate Notes
Due 2028 (the "Class C-R Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$31,500,000 Class D-R Deferrable Mezzanine Floating Rate Notes
Due 2028 (the "Class D-R Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$25,000,000 Class E-R Deferrable Mezzanine Floating Rate Notes
Due 2028 (the "Class E-R Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Additionally, Moody's has taken rating actions on the following
outstanding notes issued by the Issuer on the original issuance
date of March 15, 2016 (the "Original Closing Date"):

US$50,000,000 Class 1 Combination Notes (composed of components
representing U.S.$36,250,000 Class B-R Notes, U.S.$3,750,000 Class
C-R Notes and U.S.$10,000,000 subordinated notes) Due 2028 (the
"Combination 1 Notes") (current rated balance of $45,327,903),
Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on December 30, 2016 Confirmed at
Aa3 (sf)

US$20,000,000 Class 2 Combination Notes (composed of components
representing U.S.$2,000,000 Class B-R Notes, U.S.$12,250,000 Class
C-R Notes and U.S.$5,750,000 subordinated notes) Due 2028 (the
"Combination 2 Notes") (current rated balance of $17,637,654),
Affirmed A3 (sf); previously on December 30, 2016 Confirmed at A3
(sf)

US$20,000,000 Class 3 Combination Notes (composed of components
representing U.S.$16,000,000 Class C-R Notes and U.S.$4,000,000
subordinated notes) Due 2028 (the "Combination 3 Notes") (current
rated balance of $17,833,428), Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on
December 30, 2016 Confirmed at A2 (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.

Symphony Asset Management 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 addresses 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 April 16, 2018 (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.

Moody's rating action on the Class 1 Combination Note is primarily
a result of the refinancing, which increases excess spread
available as credit enhancement to the note. The Class 1
Combination Note has also benefitted from deleveraging of its rated
balance. Since April 2017, the rated balance has been paid down
$2.3 million or 4.8%.

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 each class of the Issuer's notes is subject to
uncertainty relating to certain factors and circumstances, and this
uncertainty could lead to either an upgrade or downgrade of Moody's
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 (WAL): 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) Combination notes: The ratings on combination notes which
combine cash flows from one or more of the CLO's debt tranches and
the equity tranche, are subject to a higher degree of volatility
than the other rated notes. Actual equity distributions that differ
significantly from Moody's assumptions can lead to a faster (or
slower) speed of reduction in the combination notes' rated balance,
thereby resulting in better (or worse) ratings performance than
previously expected. Additionally, a refinancing of the CLO debt
tranches securing combination notes exposes them to the risks of
losing future coupon payments from the refinanced CLO debt
tranches, as well as shortening the weighted average life/duration
of the combination security.

8) 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% (3242 to 2594)

Class A-R: 0

Class B-R: +1

Class C-R: +2

Class D-R: +2

Class E-R: +1

Class 1 Combination Notes: +1

Class 2 Combination Notes: +3

Class 3 Combination Notes: +3

Moody's Assumed WARF + 20% (3242 to 3890)

Class A-R: 0

Class B-R: -3

Class C-R: -3

Class D-R: -1

Class E-R: -1

Class 1 Combination Notes: -3

Class 2 Combination Notes: -2

Class 3 Combination Notes: -2

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: $498,744,894

Defaulted par: $2,668,546

Diversity Score: 58

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3242 (corresponding to a
weighted average default probability of 27.51%)

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.29%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.8%


TICP CLO III-2: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to Class E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to seven classes of
notes issued by TICP CLO III-2, Ltd.

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$7,400,000 Class X Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2028
(the "Class X Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$316,600,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2028
(the "Class A Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$47,700,000 Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2028
(the "Class B Notes"), Assigned Aa2 (sf)

US$24,250,000 Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2028 (the "Class C Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$29,700,000 Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2028 (the "Class D Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$29,000,000 Class E Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2028 (the "Class E Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

US$7,150,000 Class F Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2028 (the "Class F Notes"), Assigned B3 (sf)

The Class X Notes, the Class A Notes, the Class B Notes, the Class
C Notes, the Class D Notes, the Class E Notes and the Class F 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.
TICP CLO III-2 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
first lien senior secured loans, cash, and eligible investments,
and up to 10.0% of the portfolio may consist of second lien loans
and unsecured loans. The portfolio is approximately 90% ramped as
of the closing date.

TICP CLO III 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 issued 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: US$487,000,000

Diversity Score: 70

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3083

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.30%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 6.0 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.

Here 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 3083 to 3545)
Rating Impact in Rating Notches
Class X Notes: 0
Class A Notes: 0
Class B Notes: -2
Class C Notes: -2
Class D Notes: -1
Class E Notes: -1
Class F Notes: -3

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (from 3083 to 4008)
Rating Impact in Rating Notches
Class X Notes: 0
Class A Notes: -1
Class B Notes: -3
Class C Notes: -3
Class D Notes: -2
Class E Notes: -1
Class F Notes: -4



VENTURE XVII CLO: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating to F-RR Notes
---------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has assigned ratings to six classes of
CLO refinancing notes issued by Venture XVII CLO, Limited:

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$451,000,000 Class A-RR Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2027 (the "Class A-RR Notes"), Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$69,500,000 Class B-RR Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2027 (the "Class B-RR Notes"), Assigned Aa1 (sf)

US$47,000,000 Class C-RR Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2027 (the "Class C-RR Notes"), Assigned A2 (sf)

US$37,500,000 Class D-RR Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2027 (the "Class D-RR Notes"), Assigned Baa3 (sf)

US$33,000,000 Class E-RR Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2027 (the "Class E-RR Notes"), Assigned Ba3 (sf)

US$8,500,000 Class F-RR Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2027 (the "Class F-RR Notes"), Assigned B3 (sf)

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

MJX Asset Management 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
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 April 16, 2018 (the
"Refinancing Date") in connection with the refinancing of all
classes of the secured notes previously issued on May 21, 2014 (the
"Original Closing Date") and July 17, 2017 (the "2017 refinancing
date"). On the Refinancing Date, the Issuer used proceeds from the
issuance of the Refinancing Notes to redeem in full all classes of
existing secured 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; 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: $680,041,349

Defaulted par: $17,513,360

Diversity Score: 100

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3167

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.6%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 6.0%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 6 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% (3167 to 3642)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-RR Notes: 0

Class B-RR Notes: -2

Class C-RR Notes: -2

Class D-RR Notes: -1

Class E-RR Notes: -1

Class F-RR Notes: -1

Percentage Change in WARF -- increase of 30% (3167 to 4117)

Rating Impact in Rating Notches

Class A-RR Notes: -1

Class B-RR Notes: -3

Class C-RR Notes: -4

Class D-RR Notes: -2

Class E-RR Notes: -1

Class F-RR Notes: -3


VERUS SECURITIZATION 2018-INV1: S&P Rates Class B-3 Certs 'B+(sf)'
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Verus Securitization
Trust 2018-INV1's $248.916 million mortgage pass-through
certificates. The class A-1 and A-2 balances have decreased and
increased, respectively, since we published our presale on April
16, 2018.

The certificate issuance is a RMBS securitization backed by
first-lien, fixed- and adjustable-rate, fully amortizing, and
interest-only residential mortgage loans secured by single-family
residential properties, planned-unit developments, condominiums,
and two- to four-family residential properties to both prime and
nonprime borrowers. The pool has 860 loans; all loans are
business-purpose investor loans.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of:
    
-- The pool's collateral composition;
-- The credit enhancement provided for this transaction;
-- The transaction's associated structural mechanics;
-- The representation and warranty framework for this transaction;
and
-- The mortgage aggregator, Invictus Capital Partners.

  RATINGS ASSIGNED
  Verus Securitization Trust 2018-INV1
  Class       Rating(i)    Interest         Amount ($)
                           rate(ii)                   
  A-1         AAA (sf)     Fixed           158,466,000(iii)
  A-2         AA (sf)      Fixed            21,875,000(iii)
  A-3         A (sf)       Fixed            32,037,000
  B-1         BBB- (sf)    Fixed            17,827,000
  B-2         BB- (sf)     Fixed            13,435,000
  B-3         B+ (sf)      Fixed             5,276,000
  B-4         NR           Fixed             9,453,395
  A-IO-S      NR           (vi)               Notional(iv)
  XS          NR           (vii)              Notional(v)
  P           NR           (viii)                  100
  R           NR           N/A                     N/A

(i)The collateral and structural information in this report reflect
the PPM; the ratings assigned to the classes address the ultimate
payment of interest and principal.
(ii)Interest can be deferred on the classes. Coupons are subject to
the pool's net WAC rate.
(iii)The class A-1 and A-2 balances have decreased and increased,
respectively, since we published our presale on April 16, 2018.
(iv)Notional amount equals the loans' stated principal balance.
(v)Notional amount equals the aggregate balance of the class A-1,
A-2, A-3, B-1, B-2, B-3, B-4, and P certificates.
(vi)Excess servicing strip plus the excess prepayment strip minus
compensating interest.
(vii)Certain excess amounts per the pooling and servicing
agreement.
(viii)Prepayment premiums during the related prepayment period.
PPM--Prepayment premium.
WAC--Weighted average coupon.
N/A--Not applicable.
NR--Not rated.


WBCMT 2005-C20: Fitch Affirms Class F Certs at 'CCCsf'
------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed nine classes of Wachovia Bank Commercial
Mortgage Trust commercial mortgage pass-through certificates,
series 2005-C20 (WBCMT 2005-C20).

KEY RATING DRIVERS
Concentrated Pool; Largest Loan in Special Servicing: The
affirmation of class F reflects possible default as the repayment
of this class is dependent upon proceeds from the specially
serviced NGP Rubicon GSA Pool loan, which comprises 97% of the
current pool, for which the workout and disposition timing of the
remaining assets is uncertain at this time. Since Fitch's last
rating action in March 2018, the two properties located in Kansas
City, KS and Concord, MA were sold. Five of the original 10 office
properties remain in the portfolio. These properties are either
fully or partially occupied by the GSA and are located in Suffolk,
VA, Providence, RI, Huntsville, AL, Aurora, CO and Lakewood, CO.

The lease with the sole tenant at the Suffolk, VA property (30.8%
of allocated loan balance) is scheduled to expire in May 2018. The
receiver is pursuing a lease extension at this time. Fitch's
inquiry to the servicer for a lease update remains outstanding. The
receiver is also having active discussions with potential buyers on
the remaining properties. According to the special servicer, the
Providence, RI property is on the market for sale with disposition
anticipated in the second quarter of 2018.

The two non-specially serviced loans include one defeased loan
(2.3% of pool) that matures in July 2020 and one fully amortizing
loan (0.6%) secured by an unanchored retail center located in
Salem, MA that matures in July 2020.

As of the April 2018 distribution date, the pool's aggregate
principal balance has been reduced by 99% to $50.2 million from
$3.7 billion at issuance. Realized losses since issuance total
$170.7 million (4.7% of original pool balance). Cumulative interest
shortfalls totaling $6 million are currently impacting classes G
through P.

RATING SENSITIVITIES
Upgrades to class F are possible with additional certainty of the
final disposition of the remaining properties in the NGP Rubicon
GSA Pool. Downgrades are not expected but are possible if the
expected losses for the NGP Rubicon GSA Pool increase
significantly.

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

Form ABS Due Diligence-15E was not provided to, or reviewed by,
Fitch in relation to this rating action.

Fitch has affirmed the following ratings:

  --$19.4 million class F at 'CCCsf'; RE 100%;

  --$30.8 million class G at 'Dsf'; RE 35%;

  --$0 class H at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;

  --$0 class J at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;

  --$0 class K at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;

  --$0 class L at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;

  --$0 class M at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;

  --$0 class N at 'Dsf'; RE 0%;

  --$0 class O at 'Dsf'; RE 0%.

Classes A-1, A-2, A-3SF, A-4, A-5, A-6A, A-6B, A-PB, A-7, A-1A
A-MFL, AMFX, A-J, B, C and D have repaid in full. Fitch does not
rate the class P certificates. Fitch previously withdrew the
ratings on the interest-only class X-P and X-C certificates.


WELLS FARGO 2015-C30: Fitch Affirms BB- Rating on Class X-E Debt
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 14 classes of Wells Fargo Commercial
Mortgage Trust 2015-C30 commercial pass-through certificates.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Stable Performance: The pool's performance and Fitch's loss
projections remain stable since the last rating action. There have
been no material changes to the pool's performance since issuance.

Limited Amortization: The pool has paid down 3.6% since issuance.
Five loans representing 11.5% of the pool are interest only (IO)
for the full term. An additional 33 loans representing 46.2% of the
pool have partial IO periods. Of the partial IO loans, 14 (18.4% of
the pool) have not yet begun to amortize.

High Leverage: The pool's Fitch stressed DSCR and LTV at issuance
were 1.44x and 104.9%, respectively. However, excluding co-op
collateral, these figures were 1.12x and 110.1%, respectively.

Secondary Markets: Only four of the top 15 loans are secured by
properties located in what Fitch considers to be primary markets.
Secondary and tertiary markets represented in the top 15 include
Troy, MI; Spokane, WA; Little Rock, AR; Columbus, OH; West
Sacramento, CA; and Slidell, LA.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

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 ratings:

-- $12.5 million class A-1 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $4.4 million class A-2 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $150.0 million class A-3 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $263.1 million class A-4 at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $61.8 million class A-SB at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $51.8 million class A-S at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $43.5 million class B at 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $31.5 million class C at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $0 million class PEX at 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $40.0 million class D at 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $16.7 million class E at 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $8.3 million class F at 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $491.8 million class X-A at 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
-- $16.7 million class X-E at 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable.

Fitch does not rate the class G, H, X-B, X-FG and X-H certificates.



WELLS FARGO 2015-NXS1: DBRS Confirms 'B' Rating on Class X-F Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS Limited confirmed all classes of Commercial Mortgage
Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2015-NXS1 (the Certificates)
issued by Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Trust 2015-NXS1 Trust as
follows:

-- Class A-1 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-2 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-3 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-4 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-5 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-SB at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-S at AAA (sf)
-- Class X-A at AAA (sf)
-- Class B at AA (low) (sf)
-- Class X-B at A (sf)
-- Class C at A (low) (sf)
-- Class PEX at A (low) (sf)
-- Class D at BBB (low) (sf)
-- Class X-E at BB (sf)
-- Class E at BB (low) (sf)
-- Class X-F at B (sf)
-- Class F at B (low) (sf)

All trends are Stable.

The rating confirmations reflect the overall stable performance of
the transaction since issuance when the collateral consisted of 68
fixed-rate loans secured by 93 commercial properties. As of the
April 2018 remittance, all 68 loans remained in the pool with an
aggregate principal balance of $935.8 million, representing a
collateral reduction of 2.0% since issuance. One loan, representing
0.6% of the pool, is fully defeased. The pool benefits from a
significant concentration of loans secured by properties located in
urban locations (over 30.0% of the pool) and a relatively low
concentration of limited- and full-service hotels, which represent
less than 10.0% of the pool. The pool is somewhat concentrated
compared with other WFCM deals of similar vintage, with the top 15
representing 57.7% of the transaction balance.

To date, 51 loans, representing 84.0% of the pool, have reported
year-end 2017 financials, while 13 loans, representing 14.0% of the
pool, have most recently reported partial-year 2017 financials.
Based on the most recent year-end financials available, the pool
had a weighted-average (WA) debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and
a WA debt yield of 1.71 times (x) and 9.3%, respectively, compared
with the DBRS Term DSCR and WA Debt Yield derived at issuance of
1.56x and 8.2%, respectively. Based on the same financials, the top
15 loans (excluding Prospectus ID #6, 100 West 57th Street (3.7% of
the pool), which was structured to cover debt service at 1.0x)
reported a WA DSCR of 1.88x compared with the WA DBRS Term DSCR of
1.58x, representing a WA net cash flow (NCF) growth of 22.4% over
the DBRS issuance figures.

As of the April 2018 remittance, there are no loans in special
servicing and 12 loans, representing 19.2% of the pool, on the
servicer's watch list. Five watch listed loans (12.6% of the pool)
were flagged due to tenant rollover and/or dark space, while
another five loans (5.0% of the pool) were flagged for deferred
maintenance. Of the remaining two watch listed loans, one loan
(1.0% of the pool) was flagged because of a recent performance
decline caused by ongoing renovations and exposure to the energy
market, while the other loan (0.4% of the pool) was flagged for not
providing updated financials. The seven loans on the watch list for
reasons not related to deferred maintenance reported a WA DSCR of
1.80x (based on the most recent financials available) compared with
the WA DBRS Term DSCR of 1.22x, representing a 49.0% WA NCF growth
over the DBRS issuance figures.

At issuance, DBRS shadow-rated both the Patriots Park (Prospectus
ID#1, 10.1% of the pool) and 45 Water view Boulevard (Prospectus
ID#9, 2.8% of the current pool balance) loans as investment grade.
With this review, DBRS confirms that the performance of both loans
remains consistent with investment-grade loan characteristics.

Classes X-A, X-B, X-E, X-F and X-G are interest-only (IO)
certificates that reference a single rated tranche or multiple
rated tranches. The IO rating mirrors the lowest-rated reference
tranche adjusted upward by one notch if senior in the waterfall.

Notes: All figures are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted.


WELLS FARGO 2018-C44: DBRS Assigns Prov. B Rating on G-RR Certs
---------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS, Inc. assigned provisional ratings to these classes of the
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2018-C44 to
be issued by Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Trust 2018-C44:

-- Class A-1 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-2 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-3 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-SB at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-4 at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-5 at AAA (sf)
-- Class X-A at AAA (sf)
-- Class A-S at AAA (sf)
-- Class B at AA (sf)
-- Class X-B at A (high) (sf)
-- Class C at A (sf)
-- Class X-D at BBB (high) (sf)
-- Class D at BBB (sf)
-- Class E-RR at BBB (low) (sf)
-- Class F-RR at BB (sf)
-- Class G-RR at B (high) (sf)

Classes X-D, D, E-RR, F-RR and G-RR will be privately placed. The
Class X-A, X-B and X-D balances are notional.

The collateral consists of 44 fixed-rate loans secured by 55
commercial and multifamily properties. The transaction is a
sequential-pay pass-through structure. One of the loans,
representing 3.9% of the pool, is shadow-rated investment grade by
DBRS. Proceeds for the shadow-rated loan are floored at their
respective rating within the pool. When 3.9% of the pool has no
proceeds assigned below the rated floor, the resulting pool
subordination is diluted or reduced below the rated floor. The
conduit pool was analyzed to determine the provisional ratings,
reflecting the long-term probability of loan default within the
term and its liquidity at maturity. When the cut-off loan balances
were measured against the stabilized net cash flow and their
respective actual constants, six loans, representing 19.0% of the
total pool, had a DBRS Term debt-service coverage ratio (DSCR)
below 1.15 times (x), a threshold indicative of a higher likelihood
of mid-term default. Additionally, to assess refinance risk, given
the current low interest rate environment, DBRS applied its
refinance constants to the balloon amounts. This resulted in 24
loans, representing 60.8% of the pool, having Refi DSCRs below
1.00x and 16 loans, representing 45.4% of the pool, with Refi DSCRs
below 0.90x. These credit metrics are based on whole-loan
balances.

One of the ten largest loans in the pool, 181 Fremont Street,
exhibits credit characteristics consistent with a shadow rating of
AA. This loan represents 3.9% of the transaction balance. None of
the loans in the pool are secured by student or military housing
properties, which often exhibit higher cash flow volatility than
traditional multifamily assets. Additionally, DBRS did not deem any
of the properties securing the loans to have Below Average or Poor
property quality. Only one loan, Crossroads at Stony Point, was
considered to have Average (-) property quality and represents 2.4%
of the DBRS sample balance. Furthermore, nine loans comprising
30.7% of the DBRS sample balance were either considered to have
Above Average or Average (+) property quality. The remaining loans
were classified as having Average property quality. Lastly, term
default risk is relatively low, as indicated by the strong DBRS
Term DSCR of 1.55x. In addition, 19 loans, representing 51.6% of
the pool, have a DBRS Term DSCR in excess of 1.50x. This includes
nine of the largest 15 loans. Even when excluding the shadow-rated
investment grade loan, the deal exhibits a favorable WA DBRS Term
DSCR of 1.49x.

Ten loans, comprising 25.9% of the transaction balance, are secured
by properties that are either fully or primarily leased to a single
tenant. This includes four of the largest ten loans: 3495 Deer
Creek Road, Konica Minolta Business Solutions HQ, Re/Max Plaza and
181 Fremont Street. Loans secured by properties occupied by single
tenants have been found to suffer higher loss severities in an
event of default. DBRS applied a penalty for single-tenant
properties that resulted in higher loan-level credit enhancement.
Additionally, except for properties occupied by long-term credit
tenants (LTCTs), single-tenant loans generally receive higher cash
flow volatility. Four of the loans -- Konica Minolta Business
Solutions HQ, 181 Fremont Street, Whole Foods Pittsburg and BITCO
Insurance HQ -- are fully occupied by LTCTs and represent 44.1% of
the total single-tenant loan concentration based on cut-off date
trust balances.

Six loans, representing 23.0% of the pool, have sponsorship with
negative credit history and/or loan collateral associated with a
borrowing structure that DBRS deemed to be weak. Such sponsors were
associated with a prior discounted payoff, loan default, voluntary
bankruptcy filing, limited net worth and/or liquidity or a
historical negative credit event. DBRS increased the probability of
default (POD) for loans with identified sponsorship concerns, which
include four of the top 15 loans.

The pool is relatively more concentrated than recent WFCM
transactions, with the top ten loans accounting for 52.2% of the
pool. This is above the top ten loan concentration seen in WFCM
2018-C43 of 49.4%. The deal's concentration profile is equivalent
to that of a pool of 26 equal-sized loans, which is less than
favorable. DBRS applied a concentration penalty to the pool,
effectively increasing the POD of all loans. Although the deal
consists of only 44 loans, the mortgaged properties are located
across 25 states, enhancing diversification. The highest state
concentrations include California (21.6%), Virginia (9.8%) and
Maryland (9.8%). Diversity is further enhanced by four loans,
representing 14.2% of the pool, that are secured by multiple
properties (15 in total). Increased pool diversity helps to
insulate the higher-rated classes from event risk.

Seventeen loans, representing 43.7% of the pool, including six of
the largest ten loans, are structured with IO payments for the full
term. An additional 13 loans, representing 34.9% of the pool, have
partial IO periods remaining ranging from ten months to 59 months.
This concentration includes the shadow-rated loan, which totals
3.9% of the pool. The DBRS Term DSCR is calculated by using the
amortizing debt service obligation and the DBRS Refi DSCR is
calculated by considering the balloon balance and lack of
amortization when determining refinance risk. DBRS determines POD
based on the lower of Term or Refi DSCR; therefore, loans that lack
amortization will be treated more punitively.

Classes X-A, X-B and X-D are interest-only (IO) certificates that
reference a single rated tranche or multiple rated tranches. The IO
rating mirrors the lowest-rated reference tranche adjusted upward
by one notch if senior in the waterfall.

Notes: All figures are in U.S. dollars unless otherwise noted.


WELLS FARGO 2018-C44: Fitch to Rate Class G-RR Certs 'B-sf'
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has issued a presale report on Wells Fargo Commercial
Mortgage Trust 2018-C44 commercial mortgage pass-through
certificates, series 2018-C44.

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

--$20,962,000 class A-1 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$27,202,000 class A-2 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$6,828,000 class A-3 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$37,620,000 class A-SB 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$160,000,000a class A-4 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$284,070,000a class A-5 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$536,682,000b class X-A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$117,878,000b class X-B 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$43,126,000 class A-S 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;
--$36,418,000 class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$38,334,000 class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$32,086,000bc class X-D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$32,086,000c class D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$12,957,000cd class E-RR 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$21,084,000cd class F-RR 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;
--$8,626,000cd class G-RR 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable.

The following class is not expected to be rated:

--$37,376,123c class H-RR

(a) The initial certificate balances of class A-4 and class A-5 are
unknown and expected to be $444,070,000 in aggregate. The
certificate balances will be determined based on the final pricing
of those classes of certificates. The expected class A-4 balance
range is $100,000,000 to $220,000,000 and the expected class A-4
balance range is $224,070,000 to $344,070,000.
(b) Notional amount and interest-only.
(c) Privately placed and pursuant to Rule 144A.
(d) Horizontal credit risk retention interest.

The expected ratings are based on information provided by the
issuer as of April 20, 2018.

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership interest in the
trust, primary assets of which are 44 loans secured by 55
commercial properties having an aggregate principal balance of
$766,689,123 as of the cut-off date. The loans were contributed to
the trust by Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, Barclays Bank
PLC, Ladder Capital Finance LLC and Argentic Real Estate Finance
LLC.

Fitch reviewed a comprehensive sample of the transaction's
collateral, including site inspections on 71.0% of the properties
by balance, cash flow analysis of 87.1%, and asset summary reviews
of 100% of the pool.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Higher Fitch Leverage Relative to Recent Transactions: The pool's
leverage is substantially higher than that of recent Fitch-rated
multiborrower transactions. The pool's Fitch DSCR of 1.09x is well
below the 2017 average of 1.26x. The pool's Fitch LTV of 111.3% is
well above the 2017 average of 101.6%. Excluding the credit opinion
loans, the Fitch DSCR is 1.08x and the Fitch LTV is 113.0%,
compared with the 2017 averages of 1.21x and 107.2%, respectively.

Investment-Grade Credit Opinion Loan: The seventh largest loan, 181
Fremont Street (3.9% of the pool), received an investment-grade
credit opinion of 'BBB-sf*' on a standalone basis. The portion of
the pool with investment-grade credit opinions is lower than the
2017 average of 11.7%.

Lower Hotel Exposure: Loans secured by hotel properties represent
only 12.8% of the pool by balance, which is lower than the 2017
average of 15.8% for Fitch-rated transactions. Hotels have the
highest probability of default in Fitch's multiborrower model, all
else equal. Loans secured by office properties and mixed-use
properties that are predominantly office make up 39.9% of the pool.
Loans secured by retail properties and mixed-use properties that
are predominantly retail make up 24.7% of the pool. Office and
retail properties have an average probability of default in Fitch's
multiborrower model, all else equal.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

For this transaction, Fitch's NCF was 10.4% below the most recent
year's NOI (for properties for which a full year NOI was provided,
excluding properties that were stabilizing during this period). The
following rating sensitivities describe how the ratings would react
to further NCF declines below Fitch's NCF. The implied rating
sensitivities are only indicative of some of the potential outcomes
and do not consider other risk factors to which the transaction is
exposed. Stressing additional risk factors may result in different
outcomes. Furthermore, the implied ratings, after the further NCF
stresses are applied, are more akin to what the ratings would be at
deal issuance had those further stressed NCFs been in place at that
time.

Fitch evaluated the sensitivity of the ratings assigned to the
Wells Fargo Commercial Mortgage Trust 2018-44 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 'BBB+sf' could result. In a more severe scenario,
in which NCF declined a further 30% from Fitch's NCF, a downgrade
of the junior 'AAAsf' certificates to 'BBB-sf' could result.


[*] DBRS Reviews 350 Classes From 53 US RMBS Transactions
---------------------------------------------------------
DBRS, Inc. reviewed 350 classes from 53 U.S. resecuritization of
real estate mortgage investment conduits (ReREMICs) and residential
mortgage-backed security (RMBS) transactions. Of the 350 classes
reviewed, DBRS upgraded 107 ratings, confirmed 228 ratings and
discontinued 15 ratings.

The rating upgrades reflect positive performance trends and
increases in credit support sufficient to withstand stresses at
their new rating levels. For transactions where the ratings have
been confirmed, current asset performance and credit-support levels
are consistent with the current ratings. The discontinued ratings
are the result of full repayment of principal to bondholders.

The rating actions are a result of DBRS's application of "RMBS
Insight 1.3: U.S. Residential Mortgage-Backed Securities Model and
Rating Methodology," published on April 4, 2017.

The transactions consist of U.S. ReREMIC and RMBS transactions. The
pools backing these transactions consist of prime, agency, seasoned
re-performing, subprime, second-lien, Alt-A, home equity line of
credit, option adjustable-rate mortgage and ReREMIC collateral.

The ratings assigned to the securities below differ from the
ratings implied by the quantitative model. DBRS considers this
difference to be a material deviation, but in this case, the
ratings of the subject notes reflect a dependency on another
tranche's ratings, as well as structural features and/or historical
performance that constrain the quantitative model output.

-- Financial Asset Securities Corp. AAA Trust 2005-2, Series
      2005-2, Class I-A3B
-- Financial Asset Securities Corp. AAA Trust 2005-2, Series
     2005-2, Class A3
-- Financial Asset Securities Corp. AAA Trust 2005-2, Series
     2005-2, Class I-X
-- Financial Asset Securities Corp. AAA Trust 2005-2, Series
     2005-2, Class II-X
-- CSMC Series 2014-7R, CSMC Series 2014-7R, 4-A-1
-- CSMC Series 2014-7R, CSMC Series 2014-7R, 5-A-1
-- CSMC Series 2014-7R, CSMC Series 2014-7R, 8-A-1
-- CSMC Series 2014-7R, CSMC Series 2014-7R, 8-A-3
-- CSMC Series 2014-7R, CSMC Series 2014-7R, 8-A-7
-- CSMC Series 2014-8R, CSMC Series 2014-8R, Class 2-A-1
-- CSMC Series 2014-9R, CSMC Series 2014-9R, Class 11-A-3
-- CSMC Series 2014-9R, CSMC Series 2014-9R, Class 11-A-5
-- GSMSC Resecuritization Trust 2014-3R, Series 2014-3R
     Resecuritization Trust Securities, Class 2A
-- GSMSC Resecuritization Trust 2014-3R, Series 2014-3R
     Resecuritization Trust Securities, Class 2A-2
-- APS Resecuritization Trust 2015-3, REMIC Notes, Series 2015-3,

     Class 1-A
-- Banc of America Funding 2015-R4 Trust, Resecuritization Trust

     Securities, Class 3A1
-- Banc of America Funding 2015-R4 Trust, Resecuritization Trust
     Securities, Class 6A2
-- Banc of America Funding 2015-R4 Trust, Resecuritization Trust
     Securities, Class 7A1
-- Jefferies Resecuritization Trust 2009-R4, Resecuritization
     Trust Certificates 2009-R4, Class 1-A2
-- Jefferies Resecuritization Trust 2009-R4, Resecuritization
     Trust Certificates 2009-R4, Class 2-A2
-- Jefferies Resecuritization Trust 2009-R4, Resecuritization
     Trust Certificates 2009-R4, Class 4-A2
-- Jefferies Resecuritization Trust 2009-R4, Resecuritization
     Trust Certificates 2009-R4, Class 5-A2
-- Jefferies Resecuritization Trust 2009-R8, Jefferies
     Resecuritization Trust 2009-R8, Class 4-A2
-- Jefferies Resecuritization Trust 2009-R8, Jefferies   
     Resecuritization Trust 2009-R8, Class 8-A2
-- Jefferies Resecuritization Trust 2009-R8, Jefferies   
     Resecuritization Trust 2009-R8, Class 10-A3
-- J.P. Morgan Resecuritization Trust, Series 2010-1, Series
     2010-1 Trust Certificates, Class 2-A-2
-- J.P. Morgan Resecuritization Trust, Series 2010-1, Series
     2010-1 Trust Certificates, Class 2-A-5
-- Morgan Stanley Resecuritization Trust 2014-R6,
     Resecuritization Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-R6,  
     Class A4
-- Morgan Stanley Resecuritization Trust 2014-R6,
     Resecuritization Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-R6,  
     Class A
-- Morgan Stanley Resecuritization Trust 2014-R7,  
     Resecuritization Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-R7,
     Class A3
-- Morgan Stanley Resecuritization Trust 2014-R7,
     Resecuritization Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-R7,
     Class A4
-- Morgan Stanley Resecuritization Trust 2014-R7,
     Resecuritization Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-R7,  
     Class A5
-- Morgan Stanley Resecuritization Trust 2014-R7,
     Resecuritization Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-R7,
     Class A6
-- Morgan Stanley Resecuritization Trust 2014-R7,
     Resecuritization Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2014-R7,
     Class A
-- Morgan Stanley Resecuritization Trust 2015-R2,
     Resecuritization Pass-Through Securities, Series 2015-R2,
     Class 1-A2
-- Morgan Stanley Resecuritization Trust 2015-R2,
     Resecuritization Pass-Through Securities, Series 2015-R2,  
     Class 2-A1
-- Morgan Stanley Resecuritization Trust 2015-R2,
     Resecuritization Pass-Through Securities, Series 2015-R2,  
     Class 2-A2
-- Nomura Resecuritization Trust 2014-4R, Resecuritization Trust
     Securities, Class 3A1
-- Nomura Resecuritization Trust 2014-6R, Resecuritization Trust
     Securities, Series 2014-6R, Class 2A1
-- Nomura Resecuritization Trust 2014-6R, Resecuritization Trust
     Securities, Series 2014-6R, Class 2A3
-- Nomura Resecuritization Trust 2015-5R, Resecuritization Trust
     Securities, Series 2015-5R, Class 2A1
-- Nomura Resecuritization Trust 2015-5R, Resecuritization Trust
     Securities, Series 2015-5R, Class 3A2
-- Nomura Resecuritization Trust 2015-5R, Resecuritization Trust
     Securities, Series 2015-5R, Class 4A1
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed  
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B-2
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B-2A
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B-2B
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B-2C
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B2-IO
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B2-IOA
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B2-IOB
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B2-IOC
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed  
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B-3
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B-3A
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B-3B
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B-3C
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed  
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B3-IOA
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed  
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B3-IOB
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B3-IOC
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B-4
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B-4A
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B4-IOA
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B-5
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B-5A
-- New Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2017-2, Mortgage-Backed
     Notes, Series 2017-2, Class B5-IOA

A list of the Affected Ratings is available at
https://bit.ly/2I5rlie


[*] DBRS Reviews Ratings on 57 Asset-Backed Securities
------------------------------------------------------
DBRS, Inc. reviewed the public ratings of 57 securities issued by
17 SoFi Professional Loan Program U.S. asset-backed securities
transactions that are backed by private student loans. Of the 57
securities reviewed, 46 were confirmed and 11 were upgraded.
Performance and revised loss expectations for the reviewed
securities are such that credit enhancement levels are sufficient
to cover DBRS's loss expectations at their respective rating
levels. Original loss expectancies were revised based on
historical-performance observations of proxy data.

The transactions reviewed are as follows:

-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2013-A LLC
-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2014-A LLC
-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2014-B LLC
-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2015-A LLC
-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2015-B LLC
-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2015-C LLC
-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2015-D LLC
-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2016-A LLC
-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2016-B LLC
-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2016-C LLC
-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2016-D LLC
-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2016-E LLC
-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2017-A LLC
-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2017-C LLC
-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2017-D LLC
-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2017-E LLC
-- SoFi Professional Loan Program 2017-F LLC

The ratings are based on DBRS's review of the following analytical
considerations:

  -- Transaction capital structure, proposed ratings and form and

     sufficiency of available credit enhancement.

  -- The transaction parties' capabilities with regard to
     origination, underwriting and servicing.

  -- The credit quality of the collateral pool and historical
     performance.

The Affected Ratings is available at https://bit.ly/2HIokB7.


[*] Fitch Corrects April 6 Release on 23 CRE CDOs
-------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings issued a correction of a release published April 6,
2018, titled Fitch Takes Various Rating Actions on 23 CRE CDOs. It
reinstates the ratings on 109 classes in 13 CRE CDOs that were
withdrawn in the original release as it was determined that they
remain relevant to the agency's coverage.

Fitch Ratings has upgraded three, downgraded 17 and affirmed 170
classes from 23 commercial real estate collateralized debt
obligations (CRE CDOs) with exposure to commercial mortgage-backed
securities (CMBS). Fitch has withdrawn the ratings for one CRE CDO
transaction that no longer has any remaining collateral.

The individual rating actions are detailed in the report 'Fitch
Takes Various Rating Actions on 23 CRE CDOs' at
https://bit.ly/2Ktt5Ab

KEY RATING DRIVERS

This review was conducted under the framework described in Fitch's
'Global Structured Finance Rating Criteria' and 'Structured Finance
CDOs Surveillance Rating Criteria.' None of the reviewed
transactions were analyzed within a cash flow model framework due
to the concentrated nature of these CDOs. Fitch also determined the
impact of any structural features to be minimal in the context of
these outstanding CDO ratings or where the hedge has expired. A
look-through analysis of the remaining underlying bonds was
performed to determine the collateral coverage of the remaining
liabilities.

The upgrade to the class S notes in Madison Square 2004-1 to
'AAAsf' is attributable to increased credit enhancement and
positive ratings migration of the underlying collateral. The
increased credit enhancement was due to unscheduled principal
distributions from the unexpected reimbursement of interest
shortfalls of $23.3 million in an underlying CMBS transaction, CMAT
1999-C1, which resulted from better than expected recoveries of a
real-estate owned asset. The positive ratings migration of the
underlying collateral was fully attributed to the CSFBMSC 1999-C1
class G bond, which comprises 36.3% of the current underlying pool,
being upgraded to 'AAAsf' since Fitch's last rating action of the
CDO. The repayment of the class S notes is reliant on 'AAAsf' rated
collateral that is fully covered by defeasance.

The upgrade to the class C notes in G-Force 2005-RR to 'Bsf' is
attributed to increased credit enhancement from deleveraging of the
capital structure. Since the last rating action, the CDO received
principal paydowns totaling $20.8 million (47% of the last rating
action collateral balance). The repayment of the class C notes is
reliant on collateral with credit characteristics consistent with a
'Bsf' rating.

The upgrade to the class A-2 notes in ARCap 2004-RR3 to 'Asf' is
attributed to increased credit enhancement from deleveraging of the
capital structure and positive ratings migration of the underlying
collateral. Since the last rating action, the CDO received
principal paydowns totaling $13.7 million (18% of the last rating
action collateral balance). In addition, the Fitch derived ratings
for approximately 63.5% of the underlying collateral pool were
upgraded a weighted average of 3.8 notches. The repayment of the
class A-2 notes is reliant on collateral with credit
characteristics consistent with an 'Asf' rating.

The downgrade of the class C notes in COMM 2004-RS1 to 'CCsf'
reflects the negative ratings migration of the underlying
collateral. Fitch had downgraded one of the underlying bonds, BACM
2004-1 class H, which comprises 44.5% of the current underlying
pool, to 'CCsf' due to credit enhancement erosion from incurred
losses. The repayment of the class C notes is reliant on distressed
collateral with a rating of 'CCsf' or lower.

Fitch downgraded 10 of the rated classes in LNR CDO 2007-1 to 'Dsf'
as no assets remain in the underlying pool. No additional principal
proceeds are expected to repay the outstanding classes.

Fitch affirmed two classes of notes in Anthracite CDO III, classes
D-FL and D-FX, at 'AAsf' as the repayment of these notes is reliant
on collateral with credit characteristics consistent with an 'AAsf'
rating.

Fitch has affirmed 116 classes at 'Csf' as default is considered
inevitable due to their undercollateralization or the reliance on
distressed collateral with a Fitch derived rating of 'CCsf' or
lower.

Fitch downgraded all six of the rated classes in Newcastle CDO VI,
Limited to 'Dsf' due to an Event of Default, according to the
transaction documents, which occurred in April 2017. Fitch has also
affirmed 52 classes at 'Dsf' because they are non-deferrable
classes that have experienced interest payment shortfalls or the
class has experienced principal writedowns.

Fitch has withdrawn the ratings on 12 classes in one CRE CDO as
they are no longer considered relevant to the agency's coverage as
no collateral remains.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Upgrades are possible with continued deleveraging of the capital
structure and/or positive migration of the underlying bond ratings.
Downgrades are possible with additional realized losses and/or
negative migration of the underlying bond ratings. Classes already
rated 'Csf' have limited sensitivity to further negative migration
given their highly distressed rating level. However, there is
potential for classes to be downgraded to 'Dsf' if they are
non-deferrable classes that experience any interest payment
shortfalls, if they are classes that experience principal
writedowns or should an Event of Default as set forth in the
transaction documents occur.


[*] Fitch Takes Actions on Distressed Bonds in 3 CMBS Deals
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has taken various ratings actions on already
distressed bonds in three U.S. commercial mortgage-backed
securities (CMBS) transactions.

Two bonds in two transactions, ML-CFC 2007-8 and PCMT 2003-PWR1,
have been downgraded to 'Dsf', as the bonds have incurred a
principal write-down. The bonds were previously rated 'Csf', which
indicated imminent default. Additionally, the rating on the class
in the PCMT 2003-PWR1 transaction has also been withdrawn as it is
no longer considered by Fitch to be relevant to the agency's
coverage. The trust balances have been reduced to zero and the
class has experienced non-recoverable realized losses.

Fitch has affirmed seven classes in two transactions, PCMT
2003-PWR1 and FUNBC 1999-C2, at 'Dsf' due to previously incurred
realized losses. The ratings on these classes have also been
withdrawn, as they are no longer considered relevant to the
agency's coverage. The trust balances have been reduced to zero and
the classes have experienced non-recoverable realized losses.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The downgrades are limited to the bonds with a principal
write-down. Any remaining bonds in the transaction have not been
analyzed as part of this review.

A copy of the Affected Ratings is available at
https://bit.ly/2Kk5Atn (subscription required).

RATING SENSITIVITIES

While the bonds that have defaulted are not expected to recover any
material amount of lost principal in the future, there is a limited
possibility this may happen. In this unlikely scenario, Fitch would
further review the affected classes.


[*] Moody's Hikes Ratings on 8 Tranches From 6 US RMBS Deals
------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of eight
tranches from six transactions issued by various issuers. The
collaterals backing these transactions consist of closed-end second
lien and scratch and dent residential mortgage loans.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities Trust 2005-4

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Apr 17, 2014 Upgraded
to Caa3 (sf)
Cl. M-3, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Apr 24, 2009 Downgraded
to C (sf)

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities Trust 2006-1

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jul 11, 2017 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)
Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on May 20, 2011
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: Bear Stearns Mortgage Funding Trust 2006-SL2

Cl. A, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Nov 10, 2010 Downgraded
to C (sf)

Issuer: Bear Stearns Mortgage Funding Trust 2006-SL3

Cl. A, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Nov 10, 2010 Downgraded
to C (sf)

Issuer: Bear Stearns Mortgage Funding Trust 2006-SL4

Cl. A, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Nov 10, 2010 Downgraded
to C (sf)

Issuer: SACO I Trust 2005-8

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Jan 17, 2018 Upgraded
to Caa3 (sf)


RATINGS RATIONALE

The upgrades are primarily due to the payments distributed to the
transactions in January 2018 pursuant to a settlement between J.P.
Morgan and certain RMBS investors. The actions further reflect the
recent performance of the underlying pools and Moody's updated loss
expectations on the pools.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in 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 4.1% in March 2018 from 4.5% in March
2017. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of 3.5% to
4.5% for the 2018 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 2018. 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.


[*] Moody's Takes Action on $161.4MM Alt-A RMBS Issued 2001-2005
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of 28 tranches
and downgraded the ratings of one tranche from six transactions,
backed by Alt-A RMBS loans, issued by multiple issuers.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Bear Stearns ALT-A Trust 2004-12

Cl. I-A-1, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 26, 2017
Upgraded to Aa2 (sf)
Cl. I-A-2, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 26, 2017
Upgraded to A1 (sf)
Cl. I-A-3, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 26, 2017
Upgraded to Aa2 (sf)
Cl. I-A-4, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 26, 2017
Upgraded to Aa3 (sf)
Cl. II-A-3, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2016
Upgraded to Ba2 (sf)
Cl. II-A-4, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2016
Upgraded to B3 (sf)
Cl. I-M-2, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Mar 14, 2011
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: CSFB Mortgage-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series
2004-AR1

Cl. II-A-1, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jul 16, 2012
Confirmed at Baa2 (sf)
Cl. III-A-1, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jul 16, 2012
Confirmed at Baa2 (sf)
Cl. IV-A-1, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jul 16, 2012
Confirmed at Baa2 (sf)
Cl. V-A-1, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jul 16, 2012
Confirmed at Baa2 (sf)

Issuer: CSFB Mortgage-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series
2005-11

Cl. 3-A-6, Downgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jul 13, 2010
Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: GSAA Home Equity Trust 2005-4

Cl. A-4, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 31, 2017 Upgraded
to Aa3 (sf)
Cl. A-6, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 31, 2017 Upgraded
to Aa3 (sf)
Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 31, 2017 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: Merrill Lynch Bank USA Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
2001-A

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on May 23, 2013 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)
Cl. B-2, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on May 23, 2013
Downgraded to C (sf)
Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on May 23, 2013
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)
Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 23, 2013 Downgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: Structured Adjustable Rate Mortgage Loan Trust 2004-4

Cl. 1-A1, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2012
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)
Cl. 1-A2, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2012
Downgraded to Ba3 (sf)
Cl. 2A, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2016 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)
Cl. 3-A1, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2016
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)
Cl. 3-A2, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2016
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)
Cl. 3-A3, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2016
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)
Cl. 3-A4, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2016
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)
Cl. 3-A5, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2016
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)
Cl. 4-A, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2016 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)
Cl. 5-A, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jul 18, 2016 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating actions are a result of the recent performance of the
underlying pools and reflect Moody's updated loss expectation on
the pools. The rating upgrades are a result of the improving
performance of the related pools and / or an increase in credit
enhancement available to the bonds. The rating downgraded is due to
the weaker performance of the underlying collateral and the erosion
of enhancement available to the 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 the high level of
macroeconomic uncertainty, and in particular the unemployment rate.
The unemployment rate fell to 4.1% in March 2018 from 4.5% in March
2017. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of 3.5% to
4.5% for the 2018 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 2018. Lower increases
than Moody's expects or decreases could lead to negative rating
actions.

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



[*] Moody's Takes Action on $70.3MM Subprime RMBS Issued 2002-2006
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded ratings of eight tranches
from five US residential mortgage backed transactions (RMBS),
backed by subprime loans, issued by multiple issuers.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Credit Suisse First Boston Mortgage Acceptance Corp. Series
2002-5

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Mar 15, 2011 Downgraded
to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Apr 9, 2012 Confirmed
at Ca (sf)

Issuer: Long Beach Mortgage Loan Trust 2003-4

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Mar 8, 2011 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: Long Beach Mortgage Loan Trust 2004-4

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Mar 8, 2011
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 8, 2011
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors Trust 2006-WMC1

Cl. A-1A, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Mar 4, 2011 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. A-1B, Currently Rated A3 (sf); previously on Jul 5, 2016
Upgraded to A3 (sf)

Underlying Rating: Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Mar 4, 2011
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Financial Guarantor: Assured Guaranty Corp (Affirmed A3 and Outlook
Stable on Aug 8, 2016)

Issuer: Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc. 2004-WMC5

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Aug 11, 2015 Upgraded
to Ca (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

Today's rating actions reflect the recent performance of the
underlying pools and Moody's updated loss expectations on those
pools. Today's rating upgrades are primarily due to an improvement
in the total credit enhancement available to the bonds or the
updated expected losses on the pools.

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 March 2018 from 4.5% in March
2017. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of 3.5% to
4.5% for the 2018 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 2018. Lower increases than Moody's expects or
decreases could lead to negative rating actions. Finally,
performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent on
servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing transfers
or other policy or regulatory change can impact the performance of
these transactions.


[*] Moody's Takes Action on $73MM of Subprime RMBS
--------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of 19 tranches
issued by seven Morgan Stanley RMBS transactions, and downgraded
the rating of Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2004-HE9
class M-1.

Complete list of rating actions is as follows:

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2004-HE9

Cl. M-1, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 5, 2014 Upgraded
to Baa3 (sf)

Issuer: Morgan Stanley ABS Capital I Inc. Trust 2003-NC10

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Mar 15, 2011
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Feb 18, 2016 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on May 24, 2017 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on May 24, 2017 Upgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: Morgan Stanley ABS Capital I Inc. Trust 2003-NC5

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Mar 15, 2011
Downgraded to C (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Oct 9, 2013 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jun 26, 2014 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on May 24, 2017 Upgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: Morgan Stanley ABS Capital I Inc. Trust 2003-NC7

Cl. B-2, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on May 24, 2017 Upgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

Cl. B-3, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 11, 2009
Downgraded to C (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Apr 10, 2012
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Issuer: Morgan Stanley ABS Capital I Inc. Trust 2004-NC3

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Mar 15, 2011
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: Morgan Stanley ABS Capital I Trust 2000-1

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on May 24, 2017 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)

Issuer: Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Capital I Inc. Trust 2001-AM1

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Mar 15, 2011
Downgraded to C (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Jul 11, 2016 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on May 24, 2017 Upgraded
to Caa2 (sf)

Issuer: Morgan Stanley Dean Witter Capital I Inc. Trust 2002-HE2

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on May 24, 2017 Upgraded
to Ca (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Jul 11, 2016 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on May 24, 2017 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The upgrades are primarily due to the increase in total credit
enhancement available to the bonds. The downgrade is primarily due
to outstanding interest shortfalls which are not expected to be
reimbursed. The actions reflect the recent performance of the
underlying pools and Moody's updated loss expectations on the
pools.

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in January 2017. Please see the
Rating Methodologies page on www.moodys.com for a copy of this
methodology.

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 March 2018 from 4.5% in March
2017. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of 3.5% to
4.5% for the 2018 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 2018. Lower increases than Moody's expects or
decreases could lead to negative rating actions. Finally,
performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent on
servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing transfers
or other policy or regulatory change can impact the performance of
these transactions.


[*] Moody's Upgrades Ratings on 27 Tranches from 9 Transactions
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of 27 tranches
from nine transactions, backed by Alt-A and Subprime RMBS loans,
issued by multiple issuers.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Ameriquest Mortgage Securities Inc., Series 2003-12

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 26, 2015 Upgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on May 4, 2012
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: First Franklin Mortgage Loan Trust 2004-FFH4

Cl. M-7, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Sep 18, 2015 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Issuer: Long Beach Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-WL1

Cl. I/II-M4, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Jan 20, 2015
Upgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: New Century Home Equity Loan Trust 2006-1

Cl. A-1, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jun 1, 2010 Downgraded
to Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: Nomura Asset Acceptance Corporation, Alternative Loan
Trust, Series 2003-A3

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jun 15, 2017 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Jun 15, 2017 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jun 15, 2017 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Issuer: Structured Asset Investment Loan Trust 2004-BNC1

Cl. M6, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Jan 13, 2009
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: Structured Asset Securities Corp Trust 2004-17XS

Cl. A3A, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Dec 7, 2016 Upgraded to
Baa2 (sf)

Underlying Rating: Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Dec 7, 2016
Upgraded to Baa2 (sf)

Financial Guarantor: Ambac Assurance Corporation (Segregated
Account - Unrated)

Cl. A3B, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Dec 7, 2016 Upgraded to
Baa2 (sf)

Cl. A4A, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Dec 7, 2016 Upgraded to
Baa1 (sf)

Underlying Rating: Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Dec 7, 2016
Upgraded to Baa1 (sf)

Financial Guarantor: Ambac Assurance Corporation (Segregated
Account - Unrated)

Cl. A4B, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Dec 7, 2016 Upgraded to
Baa1 (sf)

Cl. M1, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 2, 2011 Downgraded
to C (sf)

Issuer: Structured Asset Securities Corp Trust 2004-19XS

Cl. A3A, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Feb 2, 2017 Upgraded
to A1 (sf)

Cl. A3B, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Feb 2, 2017 Upgraded to
Baa1 (sf)

Cl. A3C, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Feb 2, 2017 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

Cl. A5, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Feb 2, 2017 Upgraded to
A2 (sf)

Cl. A6A, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Feb 2, 2017 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

Cl. A6B, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Feb 2, 2017 Upgraded
to A1 (sf)

Cl. A6C, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Feb 2, 2017 Upgraded to
Baa1 (sf)

Issuer: Structured Asset Securities Corp Trust 2004-21XS

Cl. 1-A4, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on May 27, 2015
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. 1-A5, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on May 27, 2015 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2-A5A, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Feb 2, 2017 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. 2-A5B, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Feb 2, 2017 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2-A6A, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Feb 2, 2017 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

Cl. 2-A6B, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Feb 2, 2017 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating actions are a result of the recent performance of the
underlying pools and reflect Moody's updated loss expectation on
the pools. The rating upgrades are a result of the improving
performance of the related pools and/or an increase in credit
enhancement available to the bonds.

The 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 March 2018 from 4.5% in March
2017. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of 3.5% to
4.5% for the 2018 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 2018. Lower increases than Moody's expects or
decreases could lead to negative rating actions. Finally,
performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent on
servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing transfers
or other policy or regulatory change can impact the performance of
these transactions.


[*] Moody's Upgrades Ratings on 54 Tranches From 18 US RMBS Deals
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Investors Service has upgraded the ratings of 54 tranches
from 18 transactions issued by various issuers. The collaterals
backing these transactions consist of Subprime mortgage loans.

Complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2005-HE12

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 21, 2010 Downgraded
to C (sf)
Issuer: Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities I Trust 2007-HE6
Cl. I-A-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on May 28, 2014
Upgraded to B2 (sf)
Cl. II-A, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Aug 7, 2013
Confirmed at Ca (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp. 2005-FLD1

Cl. M-6, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Apr 30, 2017 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)
Cl. M-7, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Mar 12, 2013 Affirmed
C (sf)

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

Cl. AI, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 6, 2017 Upgraded to
Aa1 (sf)
Cl. AII-F-3, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 6, 2017
Upgraded to Aa3 (sf)
Cl. AII-V-3, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 6, 2017
Upgraded to Aa3 (sf)
Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Jul 14, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp. 2005-OPT1

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Feb 27, 2018 Upgraded
to B2 (sf)
Cl. M-5, Upgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Jul 14, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp. 2005-WMC1

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Nov 17, 2017 Upgraded
to Ca (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp. 2006-HE2

Cl. A-1, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to Baa3 (sf)
Cl. A-4, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)
Cl. A-5, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on May 18, 2017 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)
Cl. M-1, Upgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Mar 24, 2009 Downgraded
to C (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp. 2006-RM1

Cl. A-1A, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on May 25, 2017 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp. 2006-WMC1

Cl. A-4, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Mar 10, 2016 Upgraded
to Caa2 (sf)
Cl. A-5, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Mar 10, 2016 Upgraded
to Caa3 (sf)
Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp. 2006-WMC2
Cl. A-1, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jul 14, 2010
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Corp. 2006-WMC3

Cl. A-1SS, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Feb 1, 2017
Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Trust 2006-CH1

Cl. M-5, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 19, 2017 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)
Cl. M-6, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on May 19, 2017 Upgraded
to Ca (sf)
Cl. M-7, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jun 12, 2009
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Trust 2006-CH2

Cl. AV-1, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Jul 14, 2010
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)
Cl. AV-4, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on May 19, 2017 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)
Cl. AV-5, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on May 19, 2017 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Trust 2006-HE3

Cl. A-1, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Jul 14, 2010
Downgraded to Ca (sf)
Cl. A-3, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Jul 14, 2010
Downgraded to Ca (sf)
Cl. A-4, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Jul 14, 2010
Confirmed at Ca (sf)
Cl. A-5, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Jul 14, 2010
Confirmed at Ca (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Trust 2007-CH1,
Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-CH1

Cl. AF-4, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 25, 2017 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)
Cl. AF-5, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Dec 28, 2010 Upgraded
to Caa2 (sf)
Cl. AF-6, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 25, 2017 Upgraded
to B3 (sf)
Cl. MV-7, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 25, 2017 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)
Cl. MV-8, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 25, 2017 Upgraded
to Caa3 (sf)
Cl. MV-9, Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Jun 12, 2009
Downgraded to C (sf)
Cl. MV-10, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Jun 12, 2009
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Trust 2007-CH2,
Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-CH2

Cl. AV-4, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 12, 2016 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)
Cl. AV-5, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 12, 2016 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)
Cl. MV-2, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 9, 2017 Upgraded
to Caa2 (sf)
Cl. MV-3, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jul 14, 2010
Downgraded to C (sf)
Cl. MV-4, Upgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on Jun 12, 2009
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Trust 2007-CH3,
Asset-Backed Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2007-CH3

Cl. A-1A, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 30, 2018 Upgraded
to Aa2 (sf)
Cl. A-1B, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Jan 30, 2018 Upgraded
to Baa3 (sf)
Cl. A-4, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Jan 30, 2018 Upgraded
to Baa3 (sf)
Cl. A-5, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jan 30, 2018 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)
Cl. M-1, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jan 30, 2018 Upgraded
to Caa3 (sf)
Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Caa3 (sf); previously on Jun 12, 2009
Downgraded to C (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Acquisition Trust 2007-CH5

Cl. A-1, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jan 30, 2018 Upgraded
to Baa3 (sf)
Cl. A-4, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Jan 30, 2018 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)
Cl. A-5, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Jan 30, 2018 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)
Cl. M-1, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jan 30, 2018 Upgraded
to Caa1 (sf)
Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Jun 12, 2009 Downgraded
to C (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The upgrades are primarily due to the significant increase in
credit enhancement to the bonds as a result of payments distributed
to the transactions in January 2018 pursuant to a settlement
between J.P.Morgan and certain RMBS investors. The actions further
reflect the recent performance of the underlying pools and Moody's
updated loss expectations on the pools.
The principal methodology used in these ratings was "US RMBS
Surveillance Methodology" published in 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 4.1% in March 2018 from 4.5% in March
2017. Moody's forecasts an unemployment central range of 3.5% to
4.5% for the 2018 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 2018. 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.



[*] S&P Cuts Ratings on 44 Classes From 31 US RMBS Deals to D(sf)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings lowered its ratings to 'D (sf)' on 44 classes of
mortgage pass-through certificates from 31 U.S. residential
mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) transactions issued between 2002
and 2008. S&P also placed one additional rating from one of these
transactions on CreditWatch with negative implications.

The transactions in this review are backed by a mix of fixed- and
adjustable-rate mortgage loans, which are secured primarily by
first liens on one- to four-family residential properties. The
downgrades reflect its assessment of the principal write-downs'
impact on the affected classes during recent remittance periods.

All but one of the downgraded classes were rated either 'CCC (sf)'
or 'CC (sf)' before the rating actions. Class 3-A-1-2 from American
Home Mortgage Assets Trust 2005-1 was rated 'B- (sf)'. As a result
of the write-down on this class, we have placed our 'BB- (sf)'
rating on class 3-A-1-1 from this transaction on CreditWatch
negative while we determine whether the recent performance of the
loans backing this transaction has affected this rating.

Principal-Only Ratings

This review included two ratings on principal-only (PO) classes,
both of which are categorized as a PO strip class.

Class A-PO from RAMP Series 2004-SL3 Trust and class I-PO from
Prime Mortgage Trust 2005-5 are PO strip classes that receive
principal primarily from discount loans within the related
transactions. When a discount loan takes a loss, the PO strip class
is allocated a loan-specific percentage of that loss.

However, because these PO classes are senior classes in the
waterfall, they are reimbursed from cash flows that would otherwise
be paid to the most junior classes. Further, we do not expect any
future reimbursements from the transaction's cash flow because the
balances of the subordinate classes have been reduced to zero.
Therefore, these PO strip classes have incurred a loss on their
principal obligation without the likelihood of future
reimbursement. We are therefore lowering the ratings on these
classes to 'D (sf)'.

The 44 defaulted classes consist of the following:

-- 20 from prime jumbo transactions (44.44%);
-- 13 from alternative-A transactions (29.55%);
-- Six from subprime transactions (13.33%);
-- Three from negative amortization transactions (6.67%);
-- One from a nonperforming transaction; and
-- One from a Federal Housing Administration/Veterans Affairs
transaction.
-- All of the transactions in this review receive credit
enhancement from a combination of subordination, excess spread, and
overcollateralization (where applicable).

A list of Affected Ratings can be viewed at:

            https://bit.ly/2Hp3ZEJ


[*] S&P Takes Various Actions on 195 Classes from 20 US RMBS Deals
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings completed its review of 195 classes from 20 U.S.
residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) transactions issued
between 2003 and 2006. All of these transactions are backed by
prime jumbo, re-performing, and alternative-A collateral. The
review yielded 32 upgrades, 32 downgrades, 127 affirmations, two
discontinuances, and two withdrawals.

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;
-- Expected short duration;
-- Tail risk; 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:

          https://bit.ly/2JIkicx


[*] S&P Takes Various Actions on 65 Classes from 19 US RMBS Deals
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings completed its review of 65 classes from 19 U.S.
residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) transactions issued
between 1998 and 2008. All of these transactions are backed by
subprime, re-performing and small balance commercial collateral.
The review yielded 32 upgrades, five downgrades, 26 affirmations,
and two discontinuances. S&P also removed one of the raised ratings
from CreditWatch with positive implications. This rating was placed
on CreditWatch positive on Feb. 26, 2018.

Analytical Considerations

S&P incorporates various considerations into its 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;
-- Priority of principal payments; 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.

Class A from EMC Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-B received funds related
to a July 2014 settlement regarding the alleged breach of certain
representations and warranties in the governing agreements of 330
JPMorgan Chase & Co. legacy RMBS trusts. Settlement proceeds for
this transaction were distributed during the January 2018
remittance period. The trustee applied the settlement funds as
subsequent recoveries and unscheduled principal payments. S&P said,
"As a result, we raised the rating on this class to 'A+ (sf)' from
'B- (sf)' because its credit support sufficiently increased to
cover our projected losses at higher rating level. We also removed
it from CreditWatch positive, where we placed it on Feb. 26,
2018."

S&P said, "We raised our ratings by five or more notches on nine
ratings from nine transactions due to increased credit support
which is attributed to sequential principal payments because of
failing cumulative loss triggers. As a result, the upgrades on
these classes reflect the classes' ability to withstand a higher
level of projected losses than previously anticipated. We also
raised our rating to 'AAA (sf)' from 'BB+ (sf)' on class A-3 from
Bayview Commercial Asset Trust 2008-1 due to expected short
duration. Based on the payment priority and average principal
payments over the last 12 months, the class is expected to be paid
down in less than six months."

A list of Affected Ratings can be viewed at:

           https://bit.ly/2rdCLX1


[*] S&P Takes Various Actions on 75 Classes From 25 US RMBS Deals
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings completed its review of 75 classes from 25 U.S.
residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) transactions issued
between 1997 and 2007. All of these transactions are backed by
subprime collateral. The review yielded 38 upgrades, two
downgrades, and 35 affirmations.

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;
-- Priority of principal payments; 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 vast majority of the classes with ratings raised have the benefit
of failing cumulative loss triggers. Since these transactions'
cumulative loss triggers are failing (in effect), the most senior
classes in the payment priority are receiving all scheduled and
unscheduled principal allocations. This resulted in locking out
principal to subordinate classes and building credit support for
these classes. Ultimately, S&P believes these classes have credit
support that is sufficient to withstand losses at higher rating
levels.

S&P raised its ratings on two classes by five notches due to
expected short duration. Based on these classes' average recent
principal allocation, they are projected to pay down in a short
time period relative to projected loss timing, limiting their
exposure to potential losses.

A list of Affected Ratings can be viewed at:

          https://bit.ly/2HC4eIS


                            *********

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 2018.  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.

                   *** End of Transmission ***