• 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 Second Half of 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 second half of fiscal 2012, the period from October 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 second half of 2012, amount of issues declined year on year. Total issuance amount was ¥1,325.5 billion, declining 11% from the second half of fiscal 2011, while the number of issues was 52, up 21% year on year (Chart 1).

Ref.: The total issuance amount of corporate straight bonds during the second half of fiscal 2012 was ¥4,112.5 billion (provisional figure).

Chart 1. Securitization Product Issuance Amount and Number of Issues

2.3 2.9 3.4 4.8 4.6 5.2

3.4 3.4

2.3

1.4 1.6 1.3

1.2 1.4 1.9

1.5 1.5 1.3

138 158 145 167 146 168 134 127 110 94 79 67 54 53 48 43 38 52 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

04/1H 04/2H 05/1H 05/2H 06/1H 06/2H 07/1H 07/2H 08/1H 08/2H 09/1H 09/2H 10/1H 10/2H 11/1H 11/2H 12/1H 12/2H (issues)

Issuance amount (left scale)

(2)

II. Issuance Trends by Underlying Assets

Looking at the securitization product issuance amount for the second half of fiscal 2012 by underlying assets, the amount of shopping credits, sales receivables/commercial bills, and others increased. In contrast, RMBS, CMBS, leases, and consumer loans decreased. There were no CDO issues (see Chart 2).

Chart 2. Securitization Product Issuance Amount by Underlying Assets

* YoY change in others is shown as “—“ because there were no issues in the same period last year.

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

Others: Fund receivables, business cash flow, medical fee receivables, and others

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

04/1H 04/2H 05/1H 05/2H 06/1H 06/2H 07/1H 07/2H 08/1H 08/2H 09/1H 09/2H 10/1H 10/2H 11/1H 11/2H 12/1H 12/2H

(¥trillion)

Others

Sales receivables/Commercial bills

Shopping credits

Consumer loans

Leases

CDO

CMBS

RMBS

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 ) 9 ,7 4 1 1 5 3 0 479 1 3 0 2 ,2 0 7 5 2 1 2 5 1 3 ,2 5 5

Ye ar o n ye ar c h an ge ( \ 1 0 0 millio n ) ▲1 ,0 0 1 ▲1 ,1 3 5 ▲1 0 0 ▲2 5 0 ▲5 4 0 +1 ,1 8 5 +1 3 2 +2 5 ▲1 ,6 8 4

Ye ar o n ye ar c h an ge ( % ) ▲9 ▲8 8 ▲1 0 0 ▲3 4 ▲8 1 +1 1 6 +3 4 - ▲1 1

%  Compos ition 7 3 1 0 4 1 1 7 4 0 1 0 0

(3)

RMBS Issuance Trends (i) By Originator

Looking at the RMBS issuance amount (¥ 974.1billion) by originator, the Japan Housing Finance Agency (JHF) accounted for 87% (¥846.3 billion) of the total (Chart 3).

Chart 3. RMBS Issuance Amount by Originator

(ii) Product Type

Looking at the RMBS issuance amount (¥974.1 billion) by product type, public and corporate bonds accounted for 89% (¥871.8 billion) of the total (see Chart 4).

Chart 4. RMBS Issuance Amount by Product Type

0 1 2 3 4

04/1H 04/2H 05/1H 05/2H 06/1H 06/2H 07/1H 07/2H 08/1H 08/2H 09/1H 09/2H 10/1H 10/2H 11/1H 11/2H 12/1H 12/2H

Others

Nonbanks

Regional banks

Commercial /trust banks

Japan Housing Finance Agency

0 1 2 3 4

04/1H 04/2H 05/1H 05/2H 06/1H 06/2H 07/1H 07/2H 08/1H 08/2H 09/1H 09/2H 10/1H 10/2H 11/1H 11/2H 12/1H 12/2H

(¥trillion)

Others

Bonds

(4)

(iii) Repayment Method

Looking at the RMBS issuance amount (¥974.1 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) expanded to February and contracted in March 2013(see Chart 6).

Chart 6. JHF RMBS Launch Spread 0

1 2 3 4

04/1H 04/2H 05/1H 05/2H 06/1H 06/2H 07/1H 07/2H 08/1H 08/2H 09/1H 09/2H 10/1H 10/2H 11/1H 11/2H 12/1H 12/2H

(¥trillion)

Not noted

Installment repayments

Lump sum repayments at maturity

Pass-through repayments

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

10/2H 11/1H 11/2H 12/1H 12/2H

(5)

III. Issuance Trends by Product Type

Looking at the securitization product issuance amount (¥1,325.5 billion) by product type, bonds accounted for 66% (¥871.8 billion), followed by trust beneficiary rights with 27% (¥364.4 billion) (see Chart 7).

Chart 7. Securitization Product Issuance Amount by Product Type

IV. Issuance Trends by Repayment Method

Looking at the securitization issuance amount (¥1,325.5 billion) by repayment method, pass-through repayments accounted for 88% (¥1,168.8 billion) of the total. (see Chart 8).

Chart 8. Securitization Product Issuance Amount by Repayment Method

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

04/1H 04/2H 05/1H 05/2H 06/1H 06/2H 07/1H 07/2H 08/1H 08/2H 09/1H 09/2H 10/1H 10/2H 11/1H 11/2H 12/1H 12/2H

(¥trillion) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6

04/1H 04/2H 05/1H 05/2H 06/1H 06/2H 07/1H 07/2H 08/1H 08/2H 09/1H 09/2H 10/1H 10/2H 11/1H 11/2H 12/1H 12/2H

(¥trillion)

Others

Bonds

Trust beneficiary rights

Not noted

Installment repayments

Lump sum repayments at maturity

(6)

V. Issuance Trends by Planned/Average Term to Maturity

Looking at the securitization issuance amount (¥1,325.5 billion) by planned/average term to maturity, “Not noted” accounted for 93% (¥1,232.0 billion), followed by “1 year to 3 years” with 6% (¥80.5 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 (¥1,325.5 billion) by credit rating, AAA accounted for 92% (¥1,225.3 billion (see Chart 10).

Chart 10. Securitization Product Issuance Amount by Credit Rating 0

1 2 3 4 5 6

04/1H 04/2H 05/1H 05/2H 06/1H 06/2H 07/1H 07/2H 08/1H 08/2H 09/1H 09/2H 10/1H 10/2H 11/1H 11/2H 12/1H 12/2H

(¥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

0 1 2 3 4 5 6

04/1H 04/2H 05/1H 05/2H 06/1H 06/2H 07/1H 07/2H 08/1H 08/2H 09/1H 09/2H 10/1H 10/2H 11/1H 11/2H 12/1H 12/2H

(¥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