• 検索結果がありません。

証券化市場の動向調査 | 日本証券業協会

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2018

シェア "証券化市場の動向調査 | 日本証券業協会"

Copied!
6
0
0

読み込み中.... (全文を見る)

全文

(1)

May 31, 2013 Japan Securities Dealers Association Japanese Bankers Association

Securitization Market Trends Survey Report —Issuance Trends in the Fiscal 2012—

The following report is a summary of the results of the “Securitization Market Trends Survey” (see JSDA’s website at <http:www.jsda.co.jp>), conducted monthly by the Japan Securities Dealers Association (JSDA) and the Japanese Bankers Association (JBA), for the fiscal 2012, the period from April 1, 2012 to March 31, 2013. For chart data, please see the appendix “Chart Data at a Glance.”

I. Overall Issuance Trends for Securitization Products

Looking at the issuance trends for securitization products in the fiscal 2012, both amount and number of issues declined year on year. Total issuance amount was ¥2,864.1billion, declining 16% from the fiscal 2011, while the number of issues was 90, down 1% year on year, and the lowest figure since the survey started (Chart 1).

Chart 1. Securitization Product Issuance Amount and Number of Issues

Ref.: The total issuance amount of corporate straight bonds

The fiscal 2012 (provisional figure) (¥trillion)

5.3

8.2

9.8

6.8

3.7

2.9 2.6 3.4 2.9

296

312 314 261

204

146

107

91

90

0 40 80 120 160 200 240 280 320

0 2 4 6 8 10 12

FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012

(¥trillion) (issues)

Issuance amount

(left scale) Number of issues(right scale)

FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012

(2)

II. Issuance Trends by Underlying Assets

Looking at the securitization product issuance amount for the fiscal 2012 by underlying assets, the amount of shopping credits increased for the first time in four years, and receivables/commercial bills increased for three consecutive year. In contrast, RMBS, CMBS, leases, consumer loans, and others

decreased. There were no CDO issues (see Chart 2).

Chart 2. Securitization Product Issuance Amount by Underlying Assets

Reference: The specific types of underlying assets for each securitization product category are as follows. RMBS (Residential Mortgage Backed Securities): Housing loans and loans to individuals to build

commercial apartments

CMBS (Commercial Mortgage Backed Securities): Commercial real estate collateralized loans, commercial real estate

CDO (Collateralized Debt Obligations): Corporate loans, corporate bonds, credit default swaps, and others Leases: Lease credits

Consumer loans: Consumer loans, bank card loans

Shopping credits: Shopping loans, credit card loans, automobile loans Sales receivables/Commercial bills: Sales receivables, commercial bills

RMBS CMBS CDO Leases Consumer

loans

Shopping credits

Sales receivables/

Commercial bills

Others Total

Issu an c e amo u n t( \ 1 0 0 millio n ) 20,888 293 0 699 650 3,186 897 2,028 28,641

Ye ar o n ye ar c h an ge ( \ 1 0 0 millio n ) ▲4 ,9 1 7 ▲1 ,5 5 7 ▲1 2 5 ▲2 7 0 ▲2 0 +1,552 +1 8 8 ▲2 7 3 ▲5 ,4 2 2

Ye ar o n ye ar c h an ge ( % ) ▲1 9 ▲84 ▲100 ▲28 ▲3 +95 +2 6 ▲12 ▲16

%  Compos ition 73 1 0 2 2 11 3 7 100

Ref. Number of issues 27 2 0 3 3 21 30 4 90

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 (¥trillion)

Others

Sales receivables/Commercial bills

Shopping credits

Consumer loans

Leases

CDO

CMBS

(3)

RMBS Issuance Trends (i) By Originator

Looking at the RMBS issuance amount (¥2,088.8 billion) by originator, the Japan Housing Finance Agency (JHF) accounted for 85% (¥1,771.7 billion) of the total (Chart 3).

Chart 3. RMBS Issuance Amount by Originator

(ii) Product Type

Looking at the RMBS issuance amount (¥2,088.8 billion) by product type, public and corporate bonds accounted for 87% (¥1,826.7 billion) of the total (see Chart 4).

Chart 4. RMBS Issuance Amount by Product Type

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012

(¥trillion)

Others

Nonbanks

Regional banks

Commercial /trust banks

Japan Housing Finance Agency

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012

(¥trillion)

Others

Bonds

(4)

(iii) Repayment Method

Looking at the RMBS issuance amount (¥2,088.8 billion) by repayment method, all repayments were pass-through repayments (see Chart 5).

Chart 5. RMBS Issuance Amount by Repayment Method

(iv) Spread at Issuance

The launch spread (difference between the RMBS coupon rate and Japanese government bond yield at time of fixing issuing conditions) for JHF RMBS (monthly issuance bonds) contracted to November 2012, expanded to February 2013 and contracted in March.(see Chart 6).

Chart 6. JHF RMBS Launch Spread

*The S Series (The previous housing loan corporation securitized house loan) have not been issued 0

1 2 3 4 5 6

FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012

(¥trillion)

Not noted

Installment repayments

Lump sum repayments at maturity

Pass-through repayments

0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3

└FY 2004 ┘└FY 2005 ┘└FY 2006 ┘└FY 2007 ┘└FY 2008┘└FY 2009┘└FY 2010 ┘└FY 2011 ┘└FY 2012 ┘ (%)

S Series※

(5)

III. Issuance Trends by Product Type

Looking at the securitization product issuance amount (¥2,864.1 billion) by product type, bonds accounted for 71% (¥2,026.7 billion), followed by trust beneficiary rights with 24% (¥ 697.0billion) (see Chart 7).

Chart 7. Securitization Product Issuance Amount by Product Type

IV. Issuance Trends by Repayment Method

Looking at the securitization issuance amount (¥2,864.1 billion) by repayment method, pass-through repayments accounted for 82% (¥2,351.8 billion) (see Chart 8).

Chart 8. Securitization Product Issuance Amount by Repayment Method

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 (¥trillion)

Not noted

Installment repayments

Lump sum repayments at maturity

Pass-through repayments 0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012

(¥trillion)

Others

Bonds

(6)

V. Issuance Trends by Planned/Average Term to Maturity

Looking at the securitization issuance amount (¥2,864.1 billion) by planned/average term to maturity, “Not noted” accounted for 86% (¥2,466.9 billion), followed by “5 years to 7 years” with 7% (¥200.0 billion) and “1 year to 3 years” with 6% (¥168.6 billion) (see Chart 9).

Chart 9. Securitization Product Issuance Amount by Planned/Average Term to Maturity

VI. Issuance Trends by Credit Rating

Looking at the securitization issuance amount (¥2,864.1 billion) by credit rating, AAA accounted for 87% (¥2,481.0 billion) (see Chart 10).

Chart 10. Securitization Product Issuance Amount by Credit Rating

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

FY2004 FY2005 FY2006 FY2007 FY2008 FY2009 FY2010 FY2011 FY2012 (¥trillion)

Not noted

7 years or more

5 years to 7 years

3 years to 5 years

1 year to 3 years

Under 1 year

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

(¥trillion)

Not noted

Short-term rating

CCC

B

BB

BBB

A

AA

参照

関連したドキュメント

The only thing left to observe that (−) ∨ is a functor from the ordinary category of cartesian (respectively, cocartesian) fibrations to the ordinary category of cocartesian

この調査は、健全な証券投資の促進と証券市場のさらなる発展のため、わが国における個人の証券

She reviews the status of a number of interrelated problems on diameters of graphs, including: (i) degree/diameter problem, (ii) order/degree problem, (iii) given n, D, D 0 ,

In particular, we consider a reverse Lee decomposition for the deformation gra- dient and we choose an appropriate state space in which one of the variables, characterizing the

Kilbas; Conditions of the existence of a classical solution of a Cauchy type problem for the diffusion equation with the Riemann-Liouville partial derivative, Differential Equations,

We show that for a uniform co-Lipschitz mapping of the plane, the cardinality of the preimage of a point may be estimated in terms of the characteristic constants of the mapping,

Then it follows immediately from a suitable version of “Hensel’s Lemma” [cf., e.g., the argument of [4], Lemma 2.1] that S may be obtained, as the notation suggests, as the m A

Our method of proof can also be used to recover the rational homotopy of L K(2) S 0 as well as the chromatic splitting conjecture at primes p &gt; 3 [16]; we only need to use the