FORM 6-K
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington D.C. 20549


Report of Foreign Private Issuer

Pursuant to Rule 13a-16 or 15d-16
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the month of February 2009

Commission File Number: 001-10306

The Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc

RBS, Gogarburn, PO Box 1000
Edinburgh EH12 1HQ

(Address of principal executive offices)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant files or will file annual reports under cover of Form 20-F or Form 40-F.

Form 20-F    X     Form 40-F        

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as permitted by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(1):_________

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is submitting the Form 6-K in paper as permitted by Regulation S-T Rule 101(b)(7):_________

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant by furnishing the information contained in this Form is also thereby furnishing the information to the Commission pursuant to Rule 12g3-2(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

Yes           No    X  

If "Yes" is marked, indicate below the file number assigned to the registrant in connection with Rule 12g3-2(b): 82- ________




The following information was issued as Company announcements, in London, England and is furnished pursuant to General Instruction B to the General Instructions to Form 6-K:



Contents
 

 

 

 

 

Page

 

 

 

 

1

Explanatory note

 

2

 

 

 

 

 

2

Market background

 

2

 

 

 

 

 

3

Asset backed exposures

 

3

 

3.1

 Significant risk concentrations and losses

 

 

 

3.2

 Residential mortgage-backed securities

 

 

 

3.3

 Commercial mortgage-backed securities

 

 

 

3.4

 Asset-backed CDOs and CLOs

 

 

 

3.5

 Other asset backed securities

 

 

 

3.6

 Other mortgage-related exposures

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4

Counterparty valuation adjustments

 

11

 

4.1

 Credit valuation adjustment

 

 

 

4.2

 Monoline insurers

 

 

 

4.3

 CDPCs

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5

Leveraged finance

 

13

 

 

 

 

 

6

Reclassification of financial instruments

 

14

 

 

 

 

 

7

Valuation of financial instruments carried at fair value

 

15

 

7.1

Control environment

 

 

 

7.2

Valuation techniques

 

 

 

7.3

Valuation hierarchy

 

 

 

7.4

Level 3 portfolios

 

 

 

7.5

Own credit

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8

SPEs and conduits

 

21

 

8.1

SPEs

 

 

 

8.2

Conduits

 

 

 

8.3

SIVs

 

 

 

8.4

Investment funds

 

 

 

 

 

 

 




 
 
 

Note: the following acronyms are used in this supplement

ABCP

Asset-backed commercial paper

ABS

Asset-backed securities

CDO

Collateralised debt obligations

CDS

Credit default swap

CLO

Collateralised loan obligations

CP

Commercial paper

CMBS

Commercial mortgage-backed securities

Fannie Mae

Federal National Mortgage Association

Freddie Mac

Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation

Ginnie Mae

Government National Mortgage Association

GSE

Government Sponsored Entity

IASB

International Accounting Standards Board

RMBS

Residential mortgage-backed securities

SIV

Structured investment vehicle

SPE

Special purpose entity

US agencies

Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and similar entities



Credit market and related exposures

1. Explanatory note

These disclosures provide information for certain of the Group's business activities affected by the unprecedented market events of 2008, the majority of which arose within Global Banking and Markets (GBM), and supplement Credit market exposures table on page 47.  The disclosures are focused around GBM's credit markets activities, including the conduit business, which have been particularly affected by the widespread market disruptions, as well as similar exposures in US Retail & Commercial and Group Treasury and, financial instruments where the valuation includes a higher level of subjectivity or complexity.

In preparing these disclosures, the Group took into consideration the leading practice disclosure recommendations of the Financial Stability Forum issued in April 2008 and the report of the IASB Expert Advisory Panel 'Measuring and disclosing fair value of financial instruments in markets that are no longer active' issued in October 2008. All the disclosures in this appendix are audited except for section 2, 3.6, 8.3 and 8.4.

2. Market background 

Overall, 2008 has been characterised by rapid dislocation in financial markets. In many cases, the dramatic liquidity squeeze and rise in funding costs for financial institutions has resulted in reluctance or inability of market participants to transact, and has adversely affected the performance of most financial institutions globally, including the Group. Stock markets have experienced extraordinary falls, and levels of volatility have been at record highs. Commodity prices have reduced sharply in the second half of the year, and credit spreads continued to widen. Market perception of counterparty risk increased and the failure of major credit protection providers caused fair value losses for the Group and other market participants and further increased the costs of mitigating credit exposure. Sustained falls globally in both residential and commercial real estate prices, fund valuations and worsening loan performance combined with a sustained lack of liquidity in the market, resulted in a greater amount of assets being valued at significantly lower prices. 

An indication of the continued decline in the price of asset backed securities (ABS), in particular those collateralised with sub-prime assets, is shown in graph 1 of the attached PDF. While not fully representative of the Group's ABS exposures or pricing basis, the ABX series of indices charted in the graph show, in bond price terms, how differently rated ABS referencing US sub-prime mortgages securitised in 2007 have performed during the year.

http://www.rns-pdf.londonstockexchange.com/rns/9131N_-2009-2-26.pdf
 
 

Graph 2 of the attached PDF provides an indication of the change in credit worthiness of corporate entities to which the Group has significant exposure through its credit products in the form of credit derivatives and bonds. The MarkiT iTraxx Europe graph demonstrates the impact of the movement of credit spreads in price terms for a basket of European corporate entities (prices rebased to 100 at the beginning of the year). 

The first quarter of 2008 saw a continuation of credit and liquidity shortages experienced during 2007, culminating in the collapse of Bear Stearns in March. The centre of the credit issues remained the ABS market with worsening US economic data supporting higher levels of default expectation in the property market. However, these default expectations started to go beyond the sub-prime market with Alt A and other non-conforming classes of loans particularly seeing significant price deterioration. In addition, wider economic concerns led to heavy fair value losses in the commercial mortgage backed securities market, in corporate debt and in leveraged loan exposures. Following this tightening of conditions, the Group incurred significant losses in March [and took steps in April to materially strengthen its capital base through a £12 billion rights issue which was completed in June].

During the second quarter ABS prices initially rallied and steadied, however towards the end of the quarter a negative house price trend in the UK became clear, and in the US, market reaction to sub-prime mortgages extended to prime and near prime lending. Corporate credit spreads followed a similar pattern reacting to rising oil prices, inflationary pressures and continuing high LIBOR despite base rate cuts to 5% in April. 

Credit spreads continued to widen across the market through the third quarter and liquidity levels reduced further, resulting in pressure on banks and economies worldwide. This culminated in the demise of Lehman Brothers in September and further market consolidation and global state intervention to provide support to the banking sector.  

During the fourth quarter there was a continued lack of confidence in the inter-bank market, with demand for stable investments resulting in US treasuries reaching negative spreads. Corporate and ABS prices fell further particularly in the last two months of the year increasing pressure on banks' capital positions. The Group moved to strengthen its capital position through an open offer to raise £15 billion, underwritten by the UK government.  The year concluded with S&P downgrading the credit ratings of eleven global banks, including the Group.

3. Asset-backed exposures

3.1 Significant risk concentrations and losses

The Group's credit markets activities gives rise to risk concentrations that have been particularly affected by the market turmoil experienced since the second half of 2007. The Group structures, originates, distributes and trades debt in the form of loan, bond and derivative instruments in all major currencies and debt capital markets in North America, Western Europe, Asia and major emerging markets. 

During 2008, certain assets identified as being high risk were also transferred to a centrally managed asset unit, set up to provide specific management of this portfolio of higher risk assets. Transferred assets are predominantly ABS and associated protection purchased from monoline insurers and other counterparties.  

The tables below summarise the net exposures and balance sheet carrying values of these securities by measurement classification and references to sections with further information on specific products.  

   

Held-for-trading

Available-for-sale

Loans and receivables

Designated at fair value

All ABS

 

Section

2008

2007

2008

2007

2008

2007

2008

2007

2008

2007

Net exposure

 

£m

£m

£m

£m

£m

£m

£m

£m

£m

£m

RMBS

3.2

24,462

35,105

44,450

27,875

2,578

5

182

90

71,672

63,075

CMBS

3.3

1,178

2,749

918

977

1,437

626

13

47

3,546

4,399

CDOs& CLOs

3.4

2,463

7,288

2,538

2,174

1,282

-

-

23

6,283

9,485

Other ABS

3.5

195

3,479

6,572

5,579

3,621

72

40

186

10,428

9,316

Total

 

28,298

48,621

54,478

36,605

8,918

703

235

346

91,929

86,275

                       

Carrying value

                     

RMBS

3.2

27,849

37,280

44,791

27,880

2,618

5

182

90

75,440

65,255

CMBS

3.3

2,751

3,916

1,126

976

1,437

626

13

37

5,327

5,555

CDOs & CLOs

3.4

7,774

15,477

9,579

2,173

1,284

-

-

26

18,637

17,676

Other ABS

3.5

1,505

5,758

6,572

5,579

3,621

72

41

186

11,739

11,595

Total

 

39,879

62,431

62,068

36,608

8,960

703

236

339

111,143

100,081

                       


Notes:

(1)

Net exposures is carrying value after taking account of hedge protection purchased from monolines and other counterparties but excludes the effect of counterparty credit valuation adjustment. The protection provides credit protection against the notional and interest cash flows due to the holders of debt instruments in the event of default by the debt security counterparty. The value of the protection is based on the underlying instrument being protected.  

(2)

Carrying value is the amount recorded on the balance sheet

(3)

Certain instruments have been reclassified from the held-for-trading category to loans and receivables or available-for-sale categories, as permitted by the amendment to IAS 39 issued in October 2008, therefore affecting comparability by measurement classification. Further information on the reclassifications is provided in section 6.  



Asset backed securities ('ABS') are securities that represent an interest in an underlying pool of referenced assets. The referenced pool can comprise any assets which attract a set of associated cash flows but are commonly pools of residential or commercial mortgages and, in the case of collateralised debt obligations ('CDOs'), the referenced pool may be ABS or other classes of assets. The process by which the risks and rewards of the pool are passed on to investors via the issuance of securities with varying seniority is commonly referred to as securitisation. 

During 2008, as the problems in the sub-prime sector spread to other asset classes on a global basis and credit spreads widened due to concerns over creditworthiness of underlying assets, securitisation volumes continued to be thin. Over the preceding years GBM had established itself as an active arranger of third-party securitisations and a secondary dealer in these securities, and GBM had therefore accumulated assets that became difficult to sell given market conditions. 

The Group has exposures to ABS which are predominantly debt securities but can be held in derivative form. These positions had been acquired primarily through the Group's activities in the US leveraged finance market which were expanded during 2007. These include residential mortgage backed securities ('RMBS'), commercial mortgage backed securities ('CMBS'), ABS CDOs, collateralised loan obligations ('CLOs') and other ABS. In many cases the risk on these assets is hedged via credit derivative protection purchased over the specific asset or relevant ABS indices. The counterparty to some of these hedge transactions are monoline insurers (see section 4).  

The net exposure of the Group's holdings of ABS increased from £86.3 billion at 31 December 2007 to £91.9 billion by 31 December 2008, where underlying reductions have been more than offset by the effect of exchange rates. The net exposure incorporates hedge protection but excludes counterparty credit valuation adjustments. 

Through a sustained de-risking exercise, the Group made reductions to the overall risk through a combination of direct asset sales and switching to lower risk assets through trading activities.  As a large proportion of the ABS are denominated in US dollars, these reductions in exposure were partially offset due to the movement in the exchange rate against sterling. 

The majority of the Group's RMBS portfolio at 31 December 2008, in terms of net exposure, was AAA rated guaranteed or effectively guaranteed securities of £58.8 billion, comprising:


·     

£41.2 billion of US agency securities


·     

£7.6 billion of Dutch government guaranteed RMBS


·     

£10.0 billion of European mortgage covered bonds issued by financial institutions




The tables below analyses carrying values of these debt securities by measurement classification and rating(1)  and fair value hierarchy level(2) .

 

RMBS

 

CMBS

CDOs & CLOs

Other ABS 

Total

 
 

Sub-prime

Non conforming

Prime

           
 

Guaranteed

Other

           

31 December 2008

£m

£m

£m

£m

 

£m

£m

£m

£m

 

AAA rated(1)

                   

Held-for-trading

393

203

18,622

6,226

 

2,306

4,699

380

32,829

 

Available-for-sale

522

1,914

22,546

18,764

 

982

6,458

4,826

56,012

 

Loans and receivables

431

1,415

-

476

 

406

651

1,443

4,822

 

Designated at fair value

16

-

-

166

 

9

-

-

191

 
 

1,362

3,532

41,168

25,632

 

3,703

11,808

6,649

93,854

 

BBB- and above rated(1)

                   

Held-for-trading

564

79

-

985

 

407

1,439

890

4,364

 

Available-for-sale

267

194

-

338

 

144

1,642

1,292

3,877

 

Loans and receivables

105

64

-

94

 

1,031

561

1,296

3,151

 

Designated at fair value

-

-

-

-

 

4

-

41

45

 
 

936

337

-

1,417

 

1,586

3,642

3,519

11,437

 

Non-investment grade(1)

                   

Held-for-trading

636

69

-

59

 

38

1,299

120

2,221

 

Available-for-sale

124

74

-

47

 

-

1,057

50

1,352

 

Loans and receivables

30

3

-

-

 

-

-

73

106

 

Designated at fair value

-

-

-

-

 

-

-

-

-

 
 

790

146

-

106

 

38

2,356

243

3,679

 

Not publicly rated

                   

Held-for-trading

1

1

9

2

 

-

338

115

466

 

Available-for-sale

-

1

-

-

 

-

421

404

826

 

Loans and receivables

-

-

-

-

 

1

71

811

883

 

Designated at fair value

-

-

-

-

 

-

-

-

-

 
 

1

2

9

2

 

1

830

1,330

2,175

 


Total

                   

Held-for-trading

1,594

352

18,631

7,272

 

2,751

7,774

1,505

39,879

 

Available-for-sale

913

2,183

22,546

19,149

 

1,126

9,579

6,572

62,068

 

Loans and receivables

566

1,482

-

570

 

1,437

1,284

3,621

8,960

 

Designated at fair value

16

-

-

166

 

13

-

41

236

 

Total

3,089

4,017

41,177

27,157

 

5,327

18,637

11,739

111,143

 

Of which carried at fair value:

                 

Level 2(2)

2,459

2,485

40,942

26,442

 

3,315

14,643

6,677

96,963

 

Level 3(3)

64

50

235

145

 

574

2,710

1,441

5,220

 
 

2,523

2,535

41,177

26,587

 

3,889

17,353

8,118

102,183

 
         


Notes:

(1)

Credit ratings are based on those from rating agencies Standard & Poor's (S&P), Moody's and Fitch and have been mapped onto S&P scale

(2)

Valuation is based significantly on observable market data. Instruments in this category are valued using:

 

(a)

quoted prices for similar instruments  or identical instruments in markets which are not considered to be active; or 

 

(b)

valuation techniques where all the inputs that have a significant effect on the valuation are directly or indirectly based on observable market data.  

(3)

Instruments in this category have been valued using a valuation technique where at least one input which could have a significant effect on the instrument's valuation



  

 

RMBS

 

CMBS

CDOs & CLOs

Other ABS 

Total

 
 

Sub-prime

Non conforming

Guaranteed

             
       

Other

           

31 December 2007(1)

£m

£m

£m

£m

 

£m

£m

£m

£m

 
                     

AAA rated(2)

                   

Held-for-trading

1,790

2,093

15,502

12,951

 

3,285

12,067

3,495

51,183

 

Available-for-sale

139

865

16,545

10,313

 

964

2,152

5,073

36,051

 

Loans and receivables

-

-

-

-

 

-

-

-

-

 

Designated at fair value

-

-

-

72

 

37

7

-

116

 
 

1,929

2,958

32,047

23,336

 

4,286

14,226

8,568

87,349

 

BBB- and above rated(2)

                   

Held-for-trading

2,476

530

-

557

 

574

1,509

1,077

6,723

 

Available-for-sale

-

-

-

18

 

13

1

206

238

 

Loans and receivables

-

-

-

-

 

626

-

-

626

 

Designated at fair value

2

-

-

-

 

-

17

-

19

 
 

2,478

530

-

575

 

1,213

1,527

1,283

7,606

 

Non-investment grade(2)

                   

Held-for-trading

616

146

-

27

 

35

1,082

91

1,997

 

Available-for-sale

-

-

-

-

 

-

-

14

14

 

Loans and receivables

5

-

-

-

 

-

-

72

77

 

Designated at fair value

16

-

-

-

 

-

-

-

16

 
 

637

146

-

27

 

35

1082

177

2,104

 

Not publicly rated

                   

Held-for-trading

192

144

126

131

 

22

819

1,096

2,530

 

Available-for-sale

-

-

-

-

 

-

20

284

304

 

Loans and receivables

-

-

-

-

 

-

-

-

-

 

Designated at fair value

-

-

-

-

 

-

2

186

188

 
 

192

144

126

131

 

22

841

1,566

3,022

 

Total

                   

Held-for-trading

5,073

2,913

15,627

13,666

 

3,916

15,477

5,758

62,430

 

Available-for-sale

139

865

16,545

10,331

 

976

2,174

5,577

36,607

 

Loans and receivables

5

-

-

-

 

626

-

72

703

 

Designated at fair value

19

-

-

72

 

37

26

186

340

 

Total

5,236

3,778

32,172

24,069

 

5,556

17,677

11,593

100,081

 

Of which:

                   

Level 2(3)

5,171

3,598

32,172

24,069

 

4,929

15,927

11,391

97,258

 

Level 3(4)

59

180

-

-

 

-

1,750

130

2,119

 
 

5,230

3,778

32,173

24,069

 

4,929

17,677

11,520

99,377

 
                     


Notes:

(1)

31 December 2007 includes approximately £19 billion of AAA rated guaranteed, covered bonds and other RMBS relating to ABM AMRO Group Treasury liquidity portfolio, included within Shared assets at that time but which were transferred to RBS in the first half of 2008. Information for 31 December 2007 has been aligned to presentation adopted for 2008 reporting

(2)

Credit ratings are based on those from rating agencies Standard & Poor's (S&P), Moody's and Fitch and have been mapped onto S&P scale

(3)

Valuation is based significantly on observable market data. Instruments in this category are valued using:

 

(a)

quoted prices for similar instruments  or identical instruments in markets which are not considered to be active; or 

 

(b)

valuation techniques where all the inputs that have a significant effect on the valuation are directly or indirectly based on observable market data.  

(4)

Instruments in this category have been valued using a valuation technique where at least one input which could have a significant effect on the instrument's valuation



3.2 Residential  mortgage-backed securities

Residential mortgage backed securities (RMBS) are securities that represent an interest in a portfolio of residential mortgages. Repayments made on the underlying mortgages are used to make payments to holders of the RMBS. The risk of the RMBS will vary primarily depending on the quality and geographic region of the underlying mortgage assets and the credit enhancement of the securitisation structure.

Several tranches of notes are issued, each secured against the same portfolio of mortgages, but providing differing levels of seniority to match the risk appetite of investors. The most junior (or equity) notes will suffer early capital and interest losses experienced by the referenced mortgage collateral, with each more senior note benefiting from the protection provided by the subordinated notes below. Additional credit enhancements may be provided to the holder of senior RMBS notes, including guarantees over the value of the exposures, often provided by monoline insurers. 

The main categories of mortgages that serve as collateral to RMBS held by the Group are described below. As can be seen from the tables below, the Group's RMBS portfolio covers a range of geographic locations and there different categories used to classify the exposures depending on the geographical region of the underlying mortgage. The categories are described below. The US market has more established definitions of differing underlying mortgage quality and these are used as the basis for the Group's RMBS categorisation.  

Sub-prime mortgages: are loans to sub-prime borrowers typically having weakened credit histories that include payment delinquencies, and potentially more severe problems such as court judgements and bankruptcies. They may also display reduced repayment capacity as measured by credit scores, high debt-to-income ratios, or other criteria indicating heightened risk of default. 

Non-conforming mortgages  (or 'Alt-A' used for US exposures) have a higher credit quality than sub-prime mortgages, but lower than those prime borrowers. Within the US mortgage industry, non-conforming mortgages are those that do not meet the lending criteria for US agency mortgages (described below). For non-US mortgages, judgement is applied in identifying loans with similar characteristics to US non-conforming loans and also include self-certified loans. Alt-A  describes a category of mortgages in which lenders consider the risk to be greater than prime mortgages though less than sub-prime. The offered interest rate is usually representative of the associated risk level.

Guaranteed mortgages  are mortgages that form part of a mortgaged backed security issuance by a government agency, or in the US, an entity that benefits from a guarantee provided by the US government. For US RMBS, this category includes, amongst others, RMBS issued by Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae and Ginnie Mae. For European RMBS this includes mortgages guaranteed by the Dutch government.

Other Prime   mortgages  are those of a higher credit quality than non-conforming and sub-prime mortgages, and exclude guaranteed mortgages.

Covered mortgage bonds  ar e debt instruments that have recourse to a pool of mortgage assets, where investors have a preferred claim if a default occurs. These underlying assets are segregated from the other assets held by the issuing entity. These underlying assets are segregated from other assets held by the issuing entity.

The tables below shows the Group's RMBS net exposures and carrying values by measurement classification, underlying asset type, geographical location of the property that the mortgage is secured against, and the year in which the underlying mortgage was originated. 

 

31 December 2008

 

31 December 2007

 
 

Sub-prime

Non conforming

Prime

Total

 

Sub-prime

Non conforming

Prime

Total

 

TOTAL

   

Guaranteed (2)  

Other (3)

       

Guaranteed (2)

Other (3)

   

Net exposure

£m

£m

£m

£m

   

£m

£m

£m

£m

£m

 

Held-for-trading

344

350

18,557

4,859

24,110

 

3,496

2,917

15,627

13,066

34,941

 

Available-for-sale

571

2,184

22,546

19,116

44,417

 

139

865

16,540

10,332

27,876

 

Loans and receivables

526

1,481

-

870

2,877

 

25

-

-

-

25

 

Designated at fair value

16

-

-

166

182

 

18

-

-

72

90

 
 

1,457

4,015

41,103

25,011

71,586

 

3,673

3,776

32,013

23,470

62,932

 
                         

Carrying values

                       

Held-for-trading

1,594

352

18,631

7,272

27,849

 

5,073

2,913

15,627

13,666

37,279

 

Available-for-sale

913

2,184

22,546

19,149

44,792

 

139

865

16,545

10,331

27,880

 

Loans and receivables

566

1,482

-

570

2,618

 

5

-

-

-

5

 

Designated at fair value

16

-

-

166

182

 

18

-

-

72

90

 
 

3,089

4,018

41,177

27,157

75,441

 

5,235

3,778

32,172

24,069

65,254

 
                         

Notes

 

(1)

Net exposures reflect the effect of hedge protection purchased from monolines and other counterparties but excludes the effect of counterparty credit valuation adjustment.

 

(2) 

Prime guaranteed exposures and carrying values include:

 
 

(a)

£7.6 billion (2007 - £6.0 billion) available-for-sale exposures guaranteed by the Dutch government

 
 

(b)

£ 5.7 billion (2007 - £5.0 billion) guaranteed by US government via Ginnie Mae of which £0.5 billion (2007 - £0.3 billion) are held-for-trading

 
 

(c)

£ 27.8 billion (2007 - £ 21.0 million) effectively guaranteed by the US government via its support for Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae of which £17.9 billon (2007 - £15.1 billion) are held-for-trading

 

(3)

Other prime mortgage exposures include £10.0 billion (2007 - £7.8 billion) covered European mortgage bonds

 


 

31 December 2008

 

31 December 2007

 
 

Sub-prime

Alt-A

Prime

Total

 

Sub-prime

Alt-A

Prime

Total

 
 

Guaranteed 

Other

     

Guaranteed 

Other

   

United States

£m

£m

£m

£m

   

£m

£m

£m

£m

£m

 

Net exposure

                       

Held-for-trading

302

346

18,577

968

20,193

 

2,953

2,189

15,502

1,419

22,063

 

Available-for-sale

53

760

14,887

4,409

20,109

 

-

640

10,504

1,359

12,503

 

Loans and receivables

3

-

-

215

218

 

-

-

-

-

-

 
 

358

1,106

33,464

5,592

40,520

 

2,953

2,829

26,006

2,778

35,889

 

Carrying values

                       

Held-for-trading

1,427

351

18,577

1,043

21,398

 

4,277

2,189

15,502

1,419

23,387

 

Available-for-sale

394

760

14,887

4,409

20,450

 

-

640

10,504

1,359

12,503

 

Loans and receivables

3

-

-

215

218

 

-

-

 

-

-

 
 

1,824

1,111

33,464

5,667

42,066

 

4,277

2,829

26,006

2,778

35,890

 

Of which originated in:

                       

- 2004 and earlier

474

122

5,534

709

6,839

 

745

165

2,532

406

3,848

 

 - 2005 

259

718

6,014

2,675

9,666

 

1,065

437

3,209

275

4,987

 

 - 2006

718

115

1,689

614

3,136

 

1,734

1,188

5,557

1,017

9,496

 

 - 2007 and later

373

156

20,227

1,669

22,425

 

732

1,039

14,707

1,080

17,558

 
 

1,824

1,111

33,464

5,667

42,066

 

4,277

2,829

26,005

2,778

35,889

 
                         


 

31 December 2008

 

31 December 2007

 
 

Sub-prime

Non conforming

Prime

 

Total

 

Sub-prime

Non conforming

Prime

 

Total

 

United Kingdom

£m

£m

£m

     

£m

£m

£m

 

£m

 

Net exposure

                       

Held-for-trading

33

-

258

 

291

 

150

724

2,411

 

3,285

 

Available-for-sale

154

1,424

3,446

 

5,024

 

7

157

930

 

1,094

 

Loans and receivables

205

1,482

118

 

1,805

 

5

-

-

 

5

 

Designated at fair value

16

-

166

 

182

 

18

-

72

 

90

 
 

408

2,906

3,988

 

7,303

 

180

881

3,389

 

4,474

 

Carrying values

                       

Held-for-trading

70

-

1,345

 

1,415

 

150

724

2,740

 

3,614

 

Available-for-sale

154

1,424

3,446

 

5,024

 

7

157

935

 

1,100

 

Loans and receivables

205

1,482

118

 

1,805

 

5

-

-

 

5

 

Designated at fair value

16

-

166

 

182

 

18

-

72

 

90

 
 

445

2,906

5,075

 

8,426

 

180

881

3,747

 

4,809

 

Of which originated in:

                       

- 2004 and earlier

72

-

815

 

887

 

13

22

911

 

946

 

 - 2005 

42

653

1,000

 

1,695

 

1

10

512

 

523

 

 - 2006

209

757

2,308

 

3,274

 

49

110

1,256

 

1,415

 

 - 2007 and later

122

1,496

952

 

2,570

 

117

738

1,068

 

1,923

 
 

445

2,906

5,075

 

8,426

 

180

881

3,747

 

4,807

 
                         


 

31 December 2008

 

31 December 2007

 
 

Sub-prime

Prime

Total

 

Sub-prime

Prime

Total

 
   

Guaranteed (1)

Covered (2)  

Other

     

Guaranteed (1)

Covered (2)  

Other

   

Europe

£m

£m

£m

£m

   

£m

£m

£m

£m

£m

 

Net exposure

                       

Held-for-trading

10

-

-

3,897

3,907

 

321

-

-

9,157

9,478

 

Available-for-sale

57

7,642

10,040

1,106

18,845

 

-

6,012

7,822

58

13,892

 

Loans and receivables

313

-

-

208

521

 

-

-

-

-

-

 
 

380

7,642

10,040

5,211

23,273

 

321

6,012

7,822

9,215

23,370

 

Carrying values

 

-

                   

Held-for-trading

30

-

-

4,839

4,889

 

324

-

-

9,429

9,753

 

Available-for-sale

57

7,642

10,040

1,106

18,845

 

-

6,012

7,822

58

13,892

 

Loans and receivables

352

-

-

208

560

 

-

-

-

-

-

 
 

439

7,642

10,040

6,153

24,274

 

324

6,012

7,822

9,486

23,645

 

Of which originated in:

                       

- 2004 and earlier

48

417

702

954

2,121

 

81

367

576

1,396

2.420

 

 - 2005 

17

1,165

2,993

1,090

5,265

 

33

1,117

2,160

1,946

5,257

 

 - 2006

148

2,059

4,466

2,466

9,139

 

63

1,780

3,801

3,897

9,541

 

 - 2007 and later

226

4,000

1,879

1,643

7,748

 

147

2,748

1,284

2,248

6,427

 
 

439

7,642

10,040

6,153

24,275

 

324

6,012

7,822

9,487

23,645

 
                         

Notes

(1)

Guaranteed by the Dutch government

(2) 

Covered bonds referencing primarily Dutch and Spanish mortgages



The Group's largest concentration of RMBS assets relate to a portfolio of US agency asset backed securities comprising mainly of current year vintage positions of £33.4 billion at 31 December 2008 (2007: £26.0 billion). Due to the US government backing implicit in these securities, the counterparty credit risk exposure is low. Financial markets and economic conditions have been extremely difficult in the US throughout 2008, particularly in the last quarter. Credit conditions have deteriorated and financial markets have experienced widespread illiquidity and elevated levels of volatility due to forced de-leveraging. Transaction activity in the securities portfolio has been reduced due to general market illiquidity. Residential mortgages have been affected by the stress that consumers experienced from depreciating house prices, rising unemployment and tighter credit conditions, resulting in higher levels of delinquencies and foreclosures. In particular, the deteriorating economy and financial markets have negatively impacted the valuation, liquidity, and credit quality of private-label securities. 

Citizens maintains an available-for-sale investment securities portfolio to provide high-quality collateral to support cost-advantaged deposits, to provide a liquidity buffer, and to enhance earnings. The size of the portfolio has been relatively stable through 2008, but both the absolute and relative size (% of earning assets) declined in 2006-2007. The portfolio comprises high credit quality mortgage-backed securities, to ensure both pledgeability and liquidity. The U.S. Government guarantees on MBS, whether explicit or implicit, put most of the portfolio in a secure credit position. The non-agency MBS holdings derive credit support in two ways. Firstly, there is senior and subordinated structuring, and Citizens hold only the most senior tranches. Secondly, there is high quality supporting loan collateral. The collateral quality is evidenced (a) by the vintages, with 82% issued in 2005 and earlier, (b) by the borrower's weighted loan to value (LTV) ratio of 65%, and (c) by the borrower's weighted-average FICO score of 734.

A further £10.0 billion (2007: £7.8 billion) of the RMBS exposure consists of available-for-sale portfolio of European RMBS, referencing primarily Dutch and Spanish government-backed loans, and accordingly the quality of these assets has held up relative to other RMBS types.

The Group has other portfolios of RMBS from secondary trading activities, warehoused positions previously acquired with the intention of further securitisation and a portfolio of assets from the unwinding of a securities arbitrage conduit. This conduit was established to benefit from the margin between the assets purchased and the notes issued. The majority of these held-for trading-RMBS have been grouped together for management purposes. 

Some of these assets (£7.0 billion) were reclassified from held-for-trading category to the loans and receivables (£1.8 billion) and available-for-sale categories during the year (£5.2 billion).

Overall, the Group has recognised significant fair value losses on RMBS assets during the year due to reduced market liquidity and deteriorating credit ratings of these assets. The Group has reduced its exposure to RMBS predominantly through fair value hedges and asset sales during the year. These decreases in were partially offset by the weakening of sterling relative to US$ and €.  

3.3 Commercial mortgage-backed securities

Commercial mortgages backed securities ('CMBS') are securities that are secured by mortgage loans on commercial land and buildings.  The securities are structured in the same way as an RMBS but typically the underlying assets referenced will be of greater individual value. The performance of the securities are highly dependent upon the sector of commercial property referenced and the geographical region. 

The Group accumulated CMBS for the purpose of securitisation and secondary trading. The largest holding of CMBS arose as a result of the Group's purchase of senior tranches in mezzanine and high grade CMBS structures from third parties. These securities are predominantly hedged with monoline insurers. As a result, the Group's risk is limited to the counterparty credit risk exposure to the hedge.  The Group also holds CMBS arising from securitisations of European commercial mortgages originated by the Group.

The following table shows the composition of the Groups holdings of CMBS portfolios. 

 

31 December 2008

 

31 December 2007

 

US

UK

Europe

ROW (1)

Total

 

US

UK

Europe

ROW (1)

Total

 

£m

£m

£m

£m

£m

 

£m

£m

£m

£m

£m

Office

435

938

402

-

1,775

 

599

534

-

-

1,133

Mixed use

32

106

1,048

45

1,231

 

-

73

192

-

265

Healthcare

805

143

-

-

948

 

1,210

-

-

-

1,210

Retail

295

43

17

48

403

 

398

13

-

-

411

Industry

24

13

81

-

118

 

61

-

-

100

161

Multi-family

40

-

49

-

89

 

48

-

-

-

48

Leisure

-

76

-

-

76

 

-

-

-

-

-

Hotel

40

35

-

-

75

 

36

-

-

-

36

Other

474

41

49

48

612

 

931

530

765

64

2,293

 

2,145

1,395

1,646

141

5,327

 

3,284

1,153

957

164

5,555

                       


(1) Rest of the world
 

3.4 Asset-backed collateralised debt and loan obligations 

Collateralised debt obligations (CDOs) are securities whose performance is dependant on a portfolio of referenced underlying securitised assets. The referenced assets generally consist of ABS, but may also include other classes of assets.  Collateralised loan obligations represent securities in special purpose entities (SPEs), the assets of which are primarily cash flows from underlying leveraged loans. 

The Group's ABS CDO and CLO net exposures comprised:

         
 

2008

 

2007

 
 

£m

 

£m

 

Super senior CDOs

1,375

 

3,834

 

Other CDOs 

1,465

 

1,569

 

CLOs

3,443

 

4,082

 
 

6,283

 

9,485

 
         


The Group's CDO exposures comprise CDOs structured by the Group from 2003 to 2007 that were unable to be sold to third parties due to prevailing illiquid markets with net exposures of £1.4 billion (2007: £3.8 billion), as well as CDO net exposures of £1.5 billion (2007:£1.6 billion) purchased from third parties some of which are fully hedged through CDS with other banks or monoline insurers.

Super senior CDOs

Super senior CDOs represent the most senior positions in a CDO, having subordination instruments (usually represented by a combination of equity, mezzanine and senior notes) which absorb losses before the super senior note is affected. Losses will only be suffered by the super senior note holders after a certain threshold of defaults of the underlying reference assets has been reached. The threshold is usually referred to in percentage terms of defaults of the remaining pool, and known as the 'attachment point'.  These super senior instruments carry an AAA rating at point of origination or are senior to other AAA rated notes in the same structure.  The level of defaults occurring on recent vintage sub-prime mortgages and other asset classes has been higher than originally expected. This has meant that the subordinate positions have diminished significantly in value, credit quality and rating and, as a result, the super senior tranches of the CDOs have a higher probability of suffering losses than at origination. The ratings of the majority of the underlying collateral are now below investment grade.

Depending on the quality of the underlying reference assets at issuance, the super senior tranches will be either classified as high grade or mezzanine. The majority of the Group's total exposure relates to high grade super senior tranches of ABS CDOs. The table below summarises the carrying amounts and net exposures after hedge protection of the Group's super senior CDOs as at 31 December 2008. The collateral rating is determined with reference to S&P ratings where available. Where S&P ratings are not available the lower of Moody's and Fitch ratings have been used.

 

31 December 2008(1)

31 December 2007

 

High grade 

Mezzanine 

Total 

High grade 

Mezzanine 

Total 

 

£m 

£m 

£m 

£m 

£m 

£m 

Gross exposure

7,673

3,720

11,393

6,420

3,040

9,460

Hedges and protection

(3,423)

(691)

(4,114)

(3,347)

(1,250)

(4,597)

 

4,250

3,029

7,279

3,073

1,790

4,863

Write downs on net open position

(3,019)

(2.885)

(5,904)

(492)

(537)

(1,029)

Net exposure after hedges

1,231

144

1,375

2,581

1,253

3,834

             
 

Average price

29 

21 

84 

70 

79 

Underlying RMBS sub-prime assets (origination)

69 

91 

79 

69 

91 

79 

Of which originated in:

           

2005 and earlier

24 

23 

24 

24 

23 

24 

2006

28 

69 

46 

28 

69 

46 

2007

48 

30 

48 

30 

             

Collateral by rating(2)  at reporting date :

           

AAA

14

-

9

36 

23 

BBB- and above

35

5

24

62 

31 

51 

Non-investment grade

51

95

67

69 

26 

             

Attachment point  (3)

29

46

36

29 

46

35 

Attachment point post write down

77

97

86

40 

62

50 

             

Notes

(1)

The above table contains data for two trades liquidated in the last quarter of 2008. The data for these two trades is reported above to provide consistency with comparatives.

(2)

Credit ratings are based on those from rating agencies Standard & Poor's (S&P), Moody's and Fitch and have been mapped onto S&P scale

(3)

Attachment point is the minimum level of losses in a portfolio which a tranche is exposed to, as a percentage, of the total notional size of the portfolio. For example, a 5 - 10% tranche has an attachment point of 5% and a detachment point of 10%. When the accumulated loss of the reference pool is less than 5% of the total initial notional of the pool, the tranche will not be affected. However, when the loss has exceeded 5%, any further losses will be deducted from the tranche's notional principal until detachment point, 10%, is reached. 



The change in net exposure during the year is analysed in the table below.

 

High grade

Mezzanine

 

Total

 

 

 

£m

 

£m

 

Net exposure at 1 January 2008

2,581

1,253

 

3,834

 

Net income statement

(1,836)

(1,140)

 

(2,976)

 

Foreign exchange and other movements

486

31

 

517

 

Net exposure at 31 December 2008

1,231

144

 

1,375

 
           


High grade super senior exposures

As shown in the table below, the majority of the Group's high grade super senior exposures represent securities retained in CDO structures originated by the Group.  

 

Gross exposures 

 

£m

Group originated deals

  6,776 

Third-party structures 

  897 

Total

     7,673 

   


At origination, the reference assets of the high grade structures predominantly comprised investment grade tranches of sub-prime residential mortgage securitisations along with other senior tranches of some combination of other ABS assets, including Prime and Alt-A RMBS, CMBS, trust preferred ABS, student loan backed ABS and CDO assets. The underlying assets referenced by these super senior securities are primarily more recent vintages (the year the underlying loan was originated), with 48% being 2007. Generally, loans with more recent vintages carry greater discounts, reflecting the market expectation of greater default levels than on earlier loan vintages.

The fair value of these assets has fallen significantly during the period, representing the decline in performance in the underlying reference assets and the lack of an active market for the securities. Some of the Group's holdings (£3.4 billion) have been hedged with monoline counterparties. These exposures are detailed in section 4.

Mezzanine super senior CDOs

The mezzanine super senior tranches of CDOs have suffered a greater level of price decline than high grade tranches, due to the relative credit quality of the underlying assets. As shown in the table below, the majority of the Group's mezzanine super senior exposures represent securities retained in CDO structures originated by the Group.  

 

Gross exposures

 

£m

Group originated deals

  3,565 

Third-party structures 

  155 

Total

     3,720 

   


Other CDOs 

The net exposure of the Group's other senior CDO exposures was £1.5 billion after hedge protection with bank or monoline counterparties. The unhedged exposures comprise CDOs representing smaller positions with various types of underlying collateral, rating and vintage characteristics.

The positions hedged with derivative protection from banks include a number of positions referencing early vintages of RMBS and other ABS assets against which it purchased protection from bank counterparties through CDS. The Group therefore has no net exposure to these certain CDOs before credit valuation adjustment. Due to the early vintage, the assets underlying these structures have not deteriorated to the same degree as the more recently issued securities. The protection purchased is from banks as opposed to monoline insurers and the credit valuation adjustment on banks is less than on monoline insurers. 
 

Additionally, the Group has one exposure that, while not structured as a super senior security, incorporates similar risk characteristics. The exposure results from options sold to a third-party conduit structure on a portfolio of ABS. The Group assumes the risk of these securities only after the first loss protection has been eroded. The Group also has protection purchased against the remainder of this exposure through a CDS purchased from a monoline insurer. 
 

The Group holds other subordinated note positions in CDO vehicles which have experienced significant reductions in value since inception. The majority of these positions are junior notes that have been fully written down by the Group with no ongoing exposure remaining at the balance sheet date. 
 

CLOs

Collateralised loan obligations represent securities in special purpose entities (SPEs), the assets of which are primarily cash flows from underlying leveraged loans. 
 

The Group has CLO exposures resulting from a number of trading activities. They consist of exposures retained by the Group and from notes purchased from third-party structures. The Group holds super senior securities in two CLO structures which were originated by the Group in 2005 and 2007. The underlying collateral of these structures predominantly references leveraged loans.
 

£2.3 billion of these assets were reclassified from the held-for-trading category to the loans and receivables (£0.8 billion) and available-for-sale categories during the year (£1.5 billion). 

3.5 Other asset backed securities

Other assets backed securities are securities issued from securitisation vehicles, similar to those in RMBS and CMBS structures, which reference cash flow generating assets other than mortgages. The wide variety of referenced underlying assets result in diverse asset performance levels. 

The Group has accumulated these assets from a range of trading and funding activities. The carrying value of the Group's other asset-backed securities by underlying asset type and geographical region are shown below.

 

31 December 2008

 

31 December 2007

 

US

UK

Europe

ROW

Total

 

US

UK

Europe

ROW

Total

 

£m

£m

£m

£m

£m

 

£m

£m

£m

£m

£m

Covered bonds

-

-

3,301

-

3,301

 

-

-

2,895

-

2,895

Auto

97

29

466

13

606

 

156

36

108

13

313

Equipment 

15

-

-

16

31

 

60

20

20

7

107

Other consumer

956

428

118

729

2,230

 

384

17

56

6

464

Utilities and energy

47

19

48

143

257

 

99

35

34

13

182

Aircraft leases

459

24

-

273

755

 

287

36

36

141

501

Other leases

1

525

455

-

980

 

378

135

133

50

695

Trade receivables

15

8

-

-

24

 

68

24

24

9

126

Film / entertainment

134

-

-

-

135

 

84

30

29

11

154

Student loans

953

-

-

-

953

 

629

32

32

12

705

Other 

906

587

710

264

2,468

 

2,796

1,014

1,200

337

5,347

 

3,581

1,621

5,098

1,437

11,738

 

4,942

1,379

4,567

601

11,487

                       


The covered bonds comprise asset-backed securities issued by several Spanish financial institutions. These securities benefit from additional credit enhancement provided by the issuing institutions. The other major asset types that increased since 2007 include other consumer loans by £1.8 billion, leases by £0.5 billion and student loans by £0.2 billion. These increases were driven by the weakening of sterling against US$ and €.  

3.6 Other mortgage-related exposures

The Group's whole loans and warehouse facilities collateralised by mortgages are analysed below. These facilities primarily relate to UK and European mortgages with US mortgages representing £260 million of whole loans, of which more than 75% comprised prime mortgages.

 

31 December 2008

 

31 December 2007

 

Whole loans

Warehouse facilities

 

Whole loans

Warehouse facilities

 

 

£m

 

£m

£m

Prime 

1,905

1,731

 

453

575

Commercial 

1,262

409

 

2,200

900

Non-conforming

1,396

1,019

 

57

1,445

Sub-prime

27

-

 

97

-

 

4,590

3,159

 

2,807

2,920

           


4. Counterparty valuation adjustments

4.1 Credit valuation adjustments

Credit valuation adjustments ('CVAs') represent an estimate of the adjustment to fair value that a market participant would make to incorporate the credit risk inherent in counterparty derivative exposures. During 2008, as credit spreads have widened, there has been a significant increase in the CVA as set out in the table below.

 

Section

31 December 2008

 

31 December 2007

   

£m

 

£m

Monoline insurers

4.2

5,988

 

862

CDPCs

4.3

1,311

 

44

Other counterparties 

 

1,738

 

263

Total CVA adjustments

 

9,037

 

1,169



The widening of credit spreads of corporate and financial institution counterparties during the year contributed to a significant increase in the level of CVA adjustments recorded across all counterparties particularly , monoline insurers and credit derivative product companies ('CDPCs'). 

The monoline insurer CVA is calculated on a trade-by-trade basis, and is derived using market observable monoline credit spreads. The majority of the monoline CVA is taken against credit derivatives hedging exposures to ABS. The CDPC CVA is calculated using a similar approach. However, in the absence of market observable credit spreads, the cost of hedging the counterparty risk is estimated by analysing the underlying trades and the cost of hedging expected default losses in excess of the capital available in each vehicle.  

The CVA for all other counterparties, including in respect of derivatives with banks, is calculated either on a trade-by-trade basis, reflecting the estimated cost of hedging the risk through credit derivatives, or on a portfolio basis reflecting an estimate of the amount a third party would charge to assume the risk 

4.2 Monoline insurers

The Group has purchased protection from monoline insurers, mainly against specific ABS, CDOs and CLOs. Monoline insurers are entities which specialise in providing credit protection against the notional and interest cash flows due to the holders of debt instruments in the event of default by the debt security counterparty. This protection is typically held in the form of derivatives such as credit default swaps ('CDS') referencing the underlying exposures held by the Group. 

During the year the market value of securities protected by monoline insurers continued to decline as markets deteriorated. As the fair value of the protected assets declined, the fair value of the CDS protection from monoline insurers increased. As the monoline insurers had concentrated their exposures to credit market risks, their perceived credit quality deteriorated as concerns increased regarding their ability to meet their contractual obligations. This resulted in increased levels of CVA being recorded on the purchased protection.  

The change in the Group's exposure to monoline insurers during the year has been driven by the increased value of purchased derivative protection and the strengthening of the US$ against sterling as significantly all of the exposures are US$ denominated. The combination of greater exposure and widening credit spreads has increased the level of CVA required. Towards the end of the year the Group reached settlement on a group of contracts with one monoline counterparty, thereby reducing the overall exposure. 

The tables below analyse the Group's holdings of CDS with monoline counterparties. 

 

31 December 2008

31 December 2007

 

£m

£m

Gross exposure to monolines

11,581

3,409

Hedges with bank counterparties

(789)

-

Credit valuation adjustment

(5,988)

(862)

Net exposure to monolines

4,804

2,547

     


The change in CVA is analysed in the table below:

     
 

£m

 

At 1 January 2008

862

 

CVA realised during 2008

(1,737)

 

Net benefit on counterparty hedges

304

 

Foreign currency movement

1,086

 

Net benefit on reclassified debt securities

1,917

 

Net income statement effect

3,556

 

Balance at 31 December 2008

5,988

 
     


 

31 December 2008

 

31 December 2007

 

Notional amount: protected assets

Fair value: protected assets

Gross exposure 

Credit valuation adjustment

 

Notional amount: protected assets

Fair value: protected assets

Gross exposure 

Credit valuation adjustment

 

£m

£m

£m

£m

 

£m

£m

£m

£m

AAA / AA rated

                 

CDO of RMBS 

-

-

-

-

 

4,976

3,006

1,970

150

RMBS

3

2

1

-

 

73

73

-

-

CMBS

613

496

117

51

 

3,731

3,421

310

34

CLOs

6,506

4,882

1,624

718

 

9,941

9,702

239

44

Other ABS

1,548

990

558

251

 

4,553

4,388

165

14

Other

267

167

100

47

 

622

516

106

1

 

8,937

6,537

2,400

1,067

 

23,896

21,106

2,790

243

A / BBB rated

                 

CDO of RMBS 

5,385

1,363

4,022

1,938

 

-

-

-

-

RMBS

90

63

27

10

 

-

-

-

-

CMBS

4,236

1,892

2,344

1,378

 

-

-

-

-

CLOs

6,009

4,523

1,486

778

 

-

-

-

-

Other ABS

910

433

477

243

 

-

-

-

-

Other

265

122

143

79

 

-

-

-

-

 

16,895

8.396

8,499

4,426

 

-

-

-

-

Sub-investment grade

                 

CDO of RMBS 

394

32

362

263

 

918

453

465

465

RMBS

-

-

-

-

 

-

-

-

-

CMBS

-

-

-

-

 

-

-

-

-

CLOs

350

268

82

60

 

-

-

-

-

Other ABS

1,208

1,037

171

123

 

-

-

-

-

Other

237

169

68

49

 

154

-

154

154

 

2,189

1,506

683

495

 

1,072

453

619

619

Total

                 

CDO of RMBS 

5,778

1,395

4,383

2,201

 

5,894

3,459

2,435

615

RMBS

93

65

28

10

 

73

73

-

-

CMBS

4,849

2,388

2,461

1,429

 

3,731

3,421

310

34

CLOs

12,865

9,673

3,192

1,557

 

9,941

9,702

239

44

Other ABS

3,666

2,460

1,206

616

 

4,553

4,388

165

14

Other

769

458

311

176

 

776

516

260

155

 

28,020

16,439

11,581

5,989

 

24,968

21,559

3,409

862

                   


The Group also has indirect exposure through wrapped securities and assets which have an intrinsic credit enhancement from a monoline insurer. These securities are traded with the benefit of this credit enhancement and therefore any deterioration in the credit rating of the monoline is reflected in the fair value of these assets. 

4.3 Credit derivative product companies
 

CDPCs are companies that sell protection on credit derivatives, that initially had AAA credit rating, based on models for capital allocation agreed with the rating agencies. CDPCs are similar to monoline insurers. However, unlike monoline insurers, they are not regulated as insurers.

The Group has £4.8 billion of exposures with CDPCs mainly relating to correlation trading activity. Correlation trading transactions are primarily driven by counterparties seeking credit exposure to specific baskets of underlying assets. The bespoke protection purchased from these counterparties by the Group are single name and index CDSs. As CDS spreads have widened and, credit protection has become more valuable during the year, the gross exposure to CDPC counterparties has increased. 

The credit quality of CDPC counterparties has declined during the year, reflecting the negative impact of credit risk concentrations in a declining market. As a result CVA adjustments to fair value taken against these derivatives have increased significantly. 

The tables below present a comparison of the protected assets and the fair value and CVA of the CDPC protection. 

 

31 December 2008

31 December 2007

 

£m

£m

Gross exposure to CDPCs

4,776

863

Credit valuation adjustment

(1,311)

(44)

Net exposure to CDPCs

3,465

819

     


 

31 December 2008

 

31 December 2007

 

Notional amount: protected assets

Fair value: protected reference assets

Gross exposure 

Credit valuation adjustment

 

Notional amount: protected assets

Fair value: protected reference assets

Gross exposure 

Credit valuation adjustment

 

£m

£m

£m

£m

   

£m

£m

£m

AAA / AA rated

19,092

15,466

3,626

908

 

20,605

19,742

863

44

A / BBB rated

6,147

4,997

1,150

403

 

-

-

-

-

 

25,239

20,463

4,776

1,311

 

20,605

19,742

863

44

                   


Significant proportion of the gross exposure at 31 December 2008 comprises CDS tranches with 16% - 53% attachment-detachment points for those hedged by AAA / AA CDPCs and 16% - 38% for those hedged by lower rated CDPCs. The underlying assets are principally investment grade.

The year on year movement in the CDPC CVA is analysed below:

     
 

£m

 

At 1 January 2008

44

 

Net benefit on CVA hedges

533

 

Foreign currency movement

119

 

Net income statement effect

615

 

Balance at 31 December 2008

1,311

 
     


5. Leveraged finance

Leveraged finance is commonly employed to facilitate corporate finance transactions, such as acquisitions or buy-outs. A bank acting as a lead manager will typically underwrite the loan, alone or with others, and then syndicate the loan to other participants.

The Group's syndicated loan book represent amounts retained from underwriting positions where the Group was lead manager or underwriter, in excess of the Group's intended long term participation. 

Since the beginning of the credit market dislocation in the second half of 2007, investor appetite for leveraged loans and similar risky assets has fallen dramatically, with secondary prices falling due to selling pressure and margins increasing, thus also affecting the primary market. There were a small number of deals executed in the first half of 2008 which were much less significant in overall quantum and leverage and which were priced at less than mid-2007 levels. Concerted efforts to sell positions during the first half of 2008 were only partially successful due to the rapid change in market conditions since origination of the loans.  Most of the leveraged finance loans were reclassified from the held-for-trading category to loans and receivables category in the second half of 2008 (see section 6.)

The table below shows the carrying value of leveraged finance exposures by industry and geography. 

 

31 December 2008

 

31 December 2007

 

Americas

UK

Europe

ROW

Total

 

Americas

UK

Europe

ROW

Total

 

£m

£m

£m

£m

£m

 

£m

£m

£m

£m

£m

TMT

1,681

628

402

45

2,756

 

6,924

424

482

25

7,855

Retail

166

550

707

21

1,444

 

542

1,318

800

49

2,709

Industrial

280

391

413

-

1,084

 

249

2,003

1,074

44

3,370

Other

11

552

141

35

739

 

25

339

271

13

648

 

2,138

2,121

1,663

101

6,023

 

7,740

4,084

2,627

131

14,582

Of which:

                     

Held-for-trading

31

31

41

-

103

 

7,607

3,694

689

51

12,041

Loans and receivables

2,107

2,090

1,622

101

5,920

 

133

390

1,938

80

2,541

 

2,138

2,121

1,663

101

6,023

 

7,740

4,084

2,627

131

14,582

Of which:

                     

Drawn

2,081

2,090

1,453

94

5,718

 

2,249

4,025

2,478

122

8,874

Undrawn

57

31

210

7

305

 

5,491

59

149

9

5,708

 

2,138

2,121

1,663

101

6,023

 

7,740

4,084

2,627

131

14,582

                       


Note: Leveraged finance as disclosed above for 31 December 2007 has been aligned with definitions used in 2008 in terms of industry classification and is additionally £76 million higher than previously published.

The table below analyses the amounts reported above
 

 

Held-for-trading

 

Loans and receivables

 
 

Drawn

Undrawn

Total

 

Drawn

Undrawn

Total

 
 

£m

£m

£m

 

£m

£m

£m

 

Balance at 1 January 2008

6,516

5,525

12,041

 

2,358

183

2,541

 

Reclassifications

(3,602)

-

(3,602)

 

3,602

-

3,602

 

Reclassifications - income effect

216

-

216

 

19

-

19

 

Additions

1,171

682

1,853

 

235

-

235

 

Sales

(3,826)

(1,882)

(5,708)

 

(473)

(81)

(554)

 

Realised losses on sale

(298)

-

(298)

 

(197)

-

(197)

 

Funded deals

1,298

(1,298)

-

 

-

-

-

 

Lapsed / collapsed deals

(415)

(3,738)

(4,153)

 

(173)

-

(173)

 

Changes in fair value

(462)

(156)

(618)

 

N/A

N/A

N/A

 

Impairment provisions

N/A

N/A

N/A

 

(1,191)

-

(1,191)

 

Exchange and other movements

211

161

372

 

1,603

35

1,638

 

Presentation changes

(778)

778

-

 

(96)

96

-

 

Balance at 31 December 2008

31

72

103

 

5,687

233

5,920

 
                 


N/A not applicable
 

In addition to the leveraged finance syndicated portfolio discussed above, the Group has £7 billion of portfolio positions, mostly to European companies, that have been classified as loans and receivables since origination. 
 

6. Reclassification of financial instruments 
 

In October 2008, the IASB issued and, the European Union endorsed, amendments to IAS 39 'Financial Instruments: Recognition and

Measurement' (IAS 39) to permit the reclassification of financial assets out of the held-for-trading (HFT) and available-for-sale (AFS) categories.  Transfers must be made at fair value and this fair value becomes the instruments' new cost or amortised cost. The amendments are effective from 1 July 2008. Reclassifications made before 1 November 2008 were backdated to 1 July 2008; subsequent reclassifications were effective from the date the reclassification was made.
 

During 2008 the Group reclassified financial assets from the held-for-trading and available-for-sale categories into the loans and receivables category (as permitted by paragraph 50D of IAS 39 as amended) and from the held-for-trading category into the available-for-sale category (as permitted by paragraph 50B of IAS 39 as amended). The turbulence in the financial markets during the second half of 2008 was regarded by management as rare circumstances in the context of paragraph 50B of IAS 39 as amended.
 

The balance sheet values of these assets, the effect of the reclassification on the income statement for the period from the date of reclassification to 31 December 2008 and the gains / losses relating to these assets recorded in the income statement for the years ended 31 December 2008 and 2007:

     

31 December 2008

 

2008

2007

 

On reclassification

     

Gains/

(losses) - to the date of reclassification

 

After reclassification

 

Amount that would have been recognised

Gains / (losses) recognised in the income statement in prior periods

 

Carrying value

 

Expected cash flows

 

Carrying value

Fair value

     

Income

Impairment losses

Gains/

losses in AFS reserve

     
 

£m

 

    £m

 

£m

£m

 

£m

 

£m

£m

£m

 

£m

£m

Reclassified from HFT to LAR:

                         

Loans

                             

Leveraged finance 

3,602

 

6,083

 

4,304

2,523

 

(457)

 

454

-

N/A

 

(1,206)

(155)

Corporate loans

5,040 

 

7,582

 

5,827

4,940

 

(76)

 

198

-

N/A

 

(681)

(50)

 

8,642 

 

13,665

 

10,131

7,463

 

(533)

 

652

-

N/A

 

(1,887)

(205)

Debt securities

                             

CDO of RMBS

215

 

259

 

236

221

 

4

 

5

-

N/A

 

(11)

5

RMBS

1,765

 

2,136

 

2,011

1,536

 

(115)

 

157

-

N/A

 

(302)

(12)

CMBS

1

 

4

 

1

1

 

1

 

-

-

N/A

 

-

-

CLOs

835

 

1,141

 

952

717

 

(22)

 

104

-

N/A

 

(130)

(14)

Other ABS

2,203

 

3,202

 

2,514

2,028

 

(67)

 

129

-

N/A

 

(338)

3

Other

2,538

 

2,764

 

2,602

2,388

 

72

 

3

-

N/A

 

(166)

94

 

7,557

 

9,506

 

8,316

6,891

 

(127)

 

398

-

N/A

 

(947)

76

Total

16,199

 

23,171

 

18,447

14,354

 

(660)

 

1,050

-

   

(2,834)

(129)

                             

Reclassified from HFT to AFS:

                         

Debt securities:

                             

CDO of RMBS

6,228

 

8,822

 

5,695

5,695

 

(1,330)

 

1,147

(464)

(1,069)

 

(280)

(400)

RMBS

5,205

 

8,890

 

5,171

5,171

 

(530)

 

24

-

(162)

 

(122)

(4)

CMBS

32

 

85

 

31

31

 

(5)

 

5

-

(3)

 

2

(4)

CLOs

1,457

 

1,804

 

1,288

1,288

 

(168)

 

421

-

(383)

 

58

(36)

Other ABS

2,199

 

3,183

 

1,847

1,847

 

(356)

 

(10)

-

(354)

 

(311)

(42)

Other

614

 

1,311

 

698

698

 

-

 

130

-

(166)

 

(5)

(1)

 

15,735

 

24,095

 

14,730

14,730

 

(2,389)

 

1,717

(464)

(2,137)

 

(658)

(487)

                               

Reclassified from AFS to LAR:

                         

Debt securities

704

 

772

 

1,028

968

 

(12)*

 

6

-

-

 

(37)*

-

Total

704

 

772

 

1,028

968

 

(12)

 

6

-

-

 

(37)

-

                               

Total 

32,638

 

48,038

 

34,205

30,052

 

(3,061)

 

2,773

(464)

(2,137)

 

(3,529)

(616)

                               
                               


* Losses recognised in the AFS reserve.

7. Valuation of financial instruments 

7.1 Control environment 

The Group's control environment for the determination of the fair value of financial instruments has been designed to ensure there are formalised review protocols for independent review and validation of fair values separate from those businesses entering into the transactions.  This includes specific controls to ensure consistent pricing policies and procedures, incorporating disciplined price verification for both proprietary and counterparty risk trades.  The Group ensures special attention is given to bespoke transactions, structured products, illiquid products, and other assets which are difficult to price. 

The business entering into the transaction is responsible for the initial determination and recording of the fair value of the transaction. There are daily controls over the profit or loss recorded by trading and treasury front office traders.  

A key element of the control environment, segregated from the recording of the transaction's valuation, is the independent price verification (IPV) process. Valuations are first calculated by the business which entered into the transaction. Such valuations may be direct prices, or may be derived using a model and variable model inputs. These valuations are reviewed, and if necessary amended, by the IPV process. This process involves a team independent of those trading the financial instruments performing a review of valuations in the light of available pricing evidence. IPV is performed at a frequency to match the availability of independent data, and the size of the Group's exposure. For liquid instruments the process is performed daily. The minimum frequency of review is monthly for Regulatory Trading Book positions, and six monthly for Regulatory Banking book positions. The IPV control includes formalised reporting and escalation of any valuation differences in breach of defined thresholds. In addition, within GBM, there is a dedicated team (the Global Pricing Unit) which determines IPV Policy, monitors adherence to policy, and performs additional independent review on highly subjective valuation issues. 
 
When models are used to value products, those models are subject to the Modelled Products Review process. This process requires different levels of model documentation, testing and review, depending on the complexity of the model and the size of the Group's exposure to the model. A key element of the control environment over model use in GBM is the Modelled Product Review Committee, which comprises of valuations experts from several functions within GBM. The committee sets the policy for model documentation, testing and review, and prioritises models with significant exposure for review by 
th e Group's Quantitative Research Centre. This Centre independent of the trading businesses, and assesses the appropriateness of the application of the model to the product, the mathematical robustness of the model, and (where appropriate), considers alternative modelling approaches which may also be appropriate. 

GBM also maintains a Valuation Control Committee that meets formally on a monthly basis to discuss and review escalated items and to consider highly complex and subjective valuation matters. The committee includes valuation specialists representing several independent review functions (including  M arket Risk, Quantitative Research and Finance) and meeting information is also circulated to senior members of the Group's front office trading businesses.  

Certain financial instruments have become more difficult and subjective to value and have therefore been transferred to a centrally managed asset unit, in order to separate them from business as usual activities and to allow dedicated focus on the management and valuation of the exposures. The unit has a Valuation Committee comprising senior representatives of the trading function, Risk Management and the Global Pricing Unit which meets regularly and is responsible for  monitoring, assessing and enhancing the adequacy of the valuation techniques being adopted for these instruments.

   

7.2 Valuation techniques 

The Group uses a number of methodologies to determine the fair values of financial instruments for which observable prices in active markets for identical instruments are not available. These techniques include: relative value methodologies based on observable prices for similar instruments; present value approaches where future cash flows from the asset or liability are estimated and then discounted using a risk-adjusted interest rate; option pricing models (such as Black-Scholes or binomial option pricing models) and simulation models such as Monte-Carlo.

The principal inputs to these valuation techniques are listed below. Values between and beyond available data points are obtained by interpolation and extrapolation. When utilising valuation techniques, the fair value can be significantly impacted by the choice of valuation model and underlying assumptions made concerning factors such as the amounts and timing of cash flows, discount rates and credit risk. 


 

·     

Bond prices - quoted prices are generally available for government bonds, certain corporate securities and some mortgage-related products. 


·     

Credit spreads - where available, these are derived from prices of CDS or other credit based instruments, such as debt securities. For others, credit spreads are obtained from pricing services.


·     

Interest rates - these are principally benchmark interest rates such as the London Inter-Bank Offered Rate (LIBOR) and quoted interest rates in the swap, bond and futures markets.


·     

Foreign currency exchange rates - there are observable markets both for spot and forward contracts and futures in the world's major currencies.


·     

Equity and equity index prices - quoted prices are generally readily available for equity shares listed on the world's major stock exchanges and for major indices on such shares.


·     

Commodity prices - many commodities are actively traded in spot and forward contracts and futures on exchanges in London, New York and other commercial centres.


·     

Price volatilities and correlations - volatility is a measure of the tendency of a price to change with time. Correlation measures the degree to which two or more prices or other variables are observed to move together. If they move in the same direction there is positive correlation; if they move in opposite directions there is negative correlation. Volatility is a key input in valuing options and the valuation of certain products such as derivatives with more than one underlying variable that are correlation-dependent. Volatility and correlation values are obtained from broker quotations, pricing services or derived from option prices.


·     

Prepayment rates - the fair value of a financial instrument that can be prepaid by the issuer or borrower differs from that of an instrument that cannot be prepaid. In valuing prepayable instruments that are not quoted in active markets, the Group considers the value of the prepayment option.


·     

Counterparty credit spreads - adjustments are made to market prices (or parameters) when the creditworthiness of the counterparty differs from that of the assumed counterparty in the market price (or parameters). 


·     

Recovery rates / loss given default -  these are used as an input to valuation models and reserves for ABS and other credit products as an indicator of severity of losses on default. Recovery rates are primarily sourced from market data providers or inferred from observable credit spreads.




The Group refines and modifies its valuation techniques as markets and products develop and as the pricing for individual products becomes more or less readily available. While the Group believes its valuation techniques are appropriate and consistent with other market participants, the use of different methodologies or assumptions could result in different estimates of fair value at the balance sheet date. 

In order to determine a reliable fair value, where appropriate, management applies valuation adjustments to the pricing information derived from the above sources. These adjustments reflect management's assessment of factors that market participants would consider in setting a price, to the extent that these factors have not already been included in the information from the above sources. Furthermore, on an ongoing basis, management assesses the appropriateness of any model used. To the extent that the price provided by internal models does not represent the fair value of the instrument, for instance in highly stressed market conditions, management makes adjustments to the model valuation to calibrate to other available pricing sources. Where unobservable inputs are used, management may determine a range of possible valuations based upon differing and stress scenarios to determine the sensitivity associated with the valuation. When establishing the fair value of a financial instrument using a valuation technique, the Group considers certain adjustments to the modelled price which market participants would make when pricing that instrument.  Such adjustments include the credit quality of the counterparty and adjustments to correct model valuations for any known limitations. In addition, the Group makes adjustments to defer income for financial instruments valued at inception where the valuation of that financial instrument materially depends on one or more unobservable model inputs.  

7.3 Valuation hierarchy

The table below shows the financial instrument carried at fair value at 31 December 2008, by valuation method.

 

31 December 2008

 

31 December 2007

 

 Level 1(1)

Level 2(2)

Level 3(3)

Total

 

 Level 1(1)

Level 2(2)

Level 3(3)

Total

 

£bn

£bn

£bn

£bn

 

£bn

£bn

£bn

£bn

Assets

                 

Fair value through profit or loss

                 

Loans and advances to banks

-

56.2

-

56.2

 

-

71.5

0.1

71.6

Loans and advances to customers

-

50.5

3.1

53.6

 

-

94.4

13.1

107.5

Debt securities

52.8

65.1

3.8

121.7

 

83.1

101.7

11.6

196.4

Equity shares

10.6

7.8

0.8

19.2

 

36.5

8.1

0.8

45.4

Derivatives

3.9

978.4

10.3

992.6

 

1.9

330.3

5.2

337.4

 

67.3

1,158.0

18.0

1,243.3

 

121.5

606.0

30.8

758.3

Available-for-sale

                 

Debt securities

21.1

108.7

3.1

132.9

 

32.1

62.4

1.1

95.6

Equity shares

4.8

2.1

0.3

7.2

 

5.8

1.0

0.8

7.6

 

25.9

110.8

3.4

140.1

 

37.9

63.4

1.9

103.2

                   
 

93.2

1,268.8

21.4

1,383.4

 

159.4

669.4

32.7

861.5

Liabilities

                 

Deposits by banks and customers

-

144.8

0.3

145.1

 

-

131.9

1.5

133.4

Debt securities in issue

-

47.1

4.4

51.5

 

-

42.1

9.2

51.3

Short positions

36.0

6.5

-

42.5

 

63.6

9.9

-

73.5

Derivatives

3.6

963.7

4.0

971.3

 

2.1

325.6

4.4

332.1

Other financial liabilities

-

1.5

0.3

1.8

 

-

0.9

0.2

1.1

 

39.6

1,163.6

9.0

1,212.2

 

65.7

510.4

15.3

591.4

                   

Notes

(1)

Valued using unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical financial instruments. This category includes listed equity shares, certain exchange-traded derivatives, G10 government securities and certain US agency securities.

(2) 

Valued using techniques based significantly on observable market data. Instruments in this category are valued using:

 

(a)

quoted prices for similar instruments  or identical instruments in markets which are not considered to be active; or 

 

(b)

valuation techniques where all the inputs that have a significant effect on the valuation are directly or indirectly based on observable market data.  

 

The type of instruments that trade in markets that are not considered to be active, but are based on quoted market prices, broker dealer quotations, or alternative pricing sources with reasonable levels of price transparency include most government agency securities, investment-grade corporate bonds, certain mortgage products, certain bank and bridge loans, repos and reverse repos, less liquid listed equities, state and municipal obligations, most physical commodities, investment contracts issued by the Group's life assurance businesses and certain money market securities and loan commitments and most OTC derivatives.  

(3)

Instruments in this category have been valued using a valuation technique where at least one input (which could have a significant effect on the instrument's valuation) is not based on observable market data. Where inputs can be observed from market data without undue cost and effort, the observed input is used. Otherwise, management determine a reasonable level for the input. 
 

Financial instruments Certain included within level 3 of the fair value hierarchy primarily include cash instruments which trade infrequently, certain syndicated and commercial mortgage loans, unlisted equity shares,  certain residual interests in securitisations, super senior tranches of high grade and mezzanine collateralised debt obligations (CDOs), and other mortgage-based products and less liquid debt securities, certain structured debt securities in issue and  OTC derivatives where valuation depends upon unobservable inputs such as certain long dated and exotic derivatives. No gain or loss is recognised on the initial recognition of a financial instrument valued using a technique incorporating significant unobservable data.

(4)

Other financial liabilities comprise subordinated liabilities and write downs relating to undrawn syndicated loan facilities.



7.4 Level 3 portfolios

Level 3 loans and advances decreased by £10 billion, reflecting sales of £8 billion, reclassification (from fair value classifications to non-fair value classifications) of certain loans, primarily leveraged finance, partly offset by fair value adjustments on the remaining portfolio at the end of the year.

Debt securities categorised as level 3 at the end of the year include £4.9 billion of mortgage and asset-backed securities and £1.4 billion of corporate debt securities. The decrease during the year reflects termination of a deal (£5 billion) in early 2008 and reclassification of £4.6 billion illiquid MBS from fair value classifications to non-fair value classifications. These decreases are partly offset by fair value changes, including £1.3 billion write down of super senior CDOs, and by the transfer of certain sub-prime MBS from level 3 to level 2 due to improved price transparency at the year end date.

Level 3 derivative assets at 31 December 2008 include credit derivative trades with CDPCs with a fair value of £3.5 billion after credit valuation adjustments of £1.3 billion. At 31 December 2007 these credit derivative trades with CDPCs had a fair value of £0.8 billion after a credit valuation adjustment of £44 million and were included within level 2 of the fair value hierarchy. Other level 3 derivative assets at 31 December 2008 include illiquid CDSs, other credit derivatives, commodity derivatives and illiquid interest rate derivatives.

Debt securities in issue, categorised as level 3 were structured medium term notes and the decrease in the year primarily reflects the termination of a deal (£4.7 billion) in the first half of 2008.

The tables below presents the Level 3 financial instruments carried at fair value as at the balance sheet date, valuation basis, main assumptions used in the valuation of these instruments and reasonably possible increases or decreases in fair value based on reasonably possible alternative assumptions:

Level 3 loans and advances decreased by £10 billion, reflecting sales of £8 billion, reclassification of certain loans, primarily leveraged finance to loans and receivables ('LAR'), partly offset by fair value adjustments on the remaining portfolio at the end of the year.

Debt securities categorised as level 3 at the end of the year include £4.9 billion of mortgage and asset-backed securities and £1.4 billion of corporate debt securities. The decrease during the year reflects termination of a deal (£5 billion) in early 2008, reclassification of £4.6 billion illiquid MBS to LAR partly offset by fair value changes, including £1.3 billion on super senior CDOs and the transfer of certain previous illiquid MBS, primarily sub-prime from level 3 to level 2.

Level 3 derivative assets at 31 December 2008 include credit derivative trades with CDPCs with a fair value of £3.5 billion after credit valuation adjustments of £1.3 billion. At 31 December 2007 these credit derivative trades with CDPCs had a fair value of £0.8 billion after a credit valuation of £44 million and were included within level 2 of the fair value hierarchy. Other level 3 derivative assets at 31 December 2008 includes illiquid CDSs, other credit derivatives, commodity derivatives and illiquid interest rate derivatives.

Debt securities in issue, categorised as level 3 were structured medium term notes and the decrease in the year primarily reflects the [early] termination of a deal (£4.7 billion) in the first half of 2008.

The tables below presents the Level 3 financial instruments carried at fair value as at the balance sheet date, valuation basis, main assumptions used in the valuation of these instruments and reasonably possible increases or decreases in fair value based on reasonably possible alternative assumptions:

Assets

Valuation basis / technique

Main assumptions

Carrying value

Reasonably possible alternative assumptions

     

Increase in fair value

Decrease in fair value

     

£bn

£m

£m

Loans and advances

Proprietary model

Credit spreads, indices

3.1

70

50

Debt securities: 

         

 - RMBS 

Industry standard model

Prepayment rates, probability of default, loss severity and yield

0.5

40

90

 - CMBS

Industry standard model

Prepayment rates, probability of default, loss severity and yield

0.6

30

30

 - CDOs 

Proprietary model

Implied collateral valuation, defaults rates, housing prices, correlation

1.7

410

440

 - CLOs

Industry standard simulation model 

Credit spreads, recovery rates, correlation

1.0

40

40

 - Other 

Proprietary model

Credit spreads

3.1

50

50

Derivatives:

         

- credit 

Proprietary CVA model, industry option models, correlation model

Counterparty credit risk, correlation, volatility

8.0

1,030

1,200

- equity 

Proprietary model

Volatility, correlation, dividends 

0.1

-

10

-    other 

Proprietary model

Volatility, correlation

2.2

130

130

Equity shares 

Private equity - valuation statements 

Fund valuations

1.1

80

160

31 December 2008

   

21.4

1,880

2,200

           

31 December 2007

   

32.7

610

700

           


Liabilities

Valuation basis / technique

Main assumptions

Carrying value

Reasonably possible alternative assumptions

     

Increase in fair value

Decrease in fair value

     

£bn

£m

£m

Debt securities in issue

Proprietary model

Credit spreads

4.4

170

190

Derivatives

         

 - credit 

Proprietary CVA model, industry option models, correlation model

Correlation, volatility

2.6

160

180

 - Other 

Proprietary model

Volatility, correlation

1.4

120

120

Other portfolios

Proprietary model

Credit spreads, correlation

0.6

40

60

31 December 2008

   

9.0

490

550

           

31 December 2007

   

15.3

120

120

           


For each of the portfolio categories shown in the above table, set out below is a description of the types of products that comprise the portfolio and the valuation techniques that are applied in determining fair value, including a description of models used and inputs to those models. Where reasonably possible alternative assumptions of unobservable inputs used in models would change the fair value of the portfolio significantly, the alternative inputs are indicated along with the impact this would have on the fair value. Where there have been significant changes to valuation techniques during the year a discussion of the reasons for this is also included.  

Loans and advances to customers

Loans in level 3 primarily comprise US commercial mortgages and syndicated loans.

Commercial mortgages

These senior and mezzanine commercial mortgages are loans secured on commercial land and buildings that were originated or acquired by GBM for securitisation. Senior commercial mortgages carry a variable interest rate and mezzanine or more junior commercial mortgages may carry a fixed or variable interest rate. Factors affecting the value of these loans may include, but are not limited to, loan type, underlying property type and geographic location, loan interest rate, loan to value ratios, debt service coverage ratios, prepayment rates, cumulative loan loss information, yields, investor demand, market volatility since the last securitisation, and credit enhancement. Where observable market prices for a particular loan are not available, the fair value will typically be determined with reference to observable market transactions in other loans or credit related products including debt securities and credit derivatives. Assumptions are made about the relationship between the loan and the available benchmark data. Using reasonably possible alternative assumptions for credit spreads (taking into account all other applicable factors) would reduce the fair value of these mortgages of £1.1 billion by up to £18 million or increase the fair value by up to £25 million.

Syndicated lending 

The Group's syndicated lending activities are conducted by the syndicate business in conjunction with the various product lines covering corporate, leveraged, real estate and project finance activities. When a commitment to lend is entered into, the Group estimates the proportion of the loan that is intended to be held for trading on draw down, and the proportion it anticipates to retain on its balance sheet as a loan and receivable. Where the commitment is intended to be syndicated, the commitment to lend is marked to market through the income statement. On draw down, the portion of the loan expected to be syndicated is recorded at fair value through profit or loss as a held for trading asset, and the expected hold portion is measured at amortised cost less, where appropriate, impairment.

The Group values the portion of the loan expected to be syndicated at fair value by using market observable syndication prices in the same or similar assets. Where these prices are not available, a discounted cash flow model is used. The model incorporates observable assumptions such as current interest rates and yield curves, the notional and tender amount of the loan and counterparty credit quality where it is derived from credit default swap spreads using market indices. The model also incorporates unobservable assumptions, including expected refinancing periods, and counterparty credit quality where it is derived from the Group's internal risk assessments. Derivatives arising from commitments to lend are measured using the same model, based on proxy notional amounts. 

Using reasonably possible alternative assumptions for expected cash flows to value these assets of £2.0 billion would reduce the fair value by up to £32 million or increase the fair value by up to £45 million. The assumptions to determine these amounts were based on restructuring scenarios and expected margins. 

Debt securities

Residential mortgage backed securities 

RMBS where the underlying assets are US agency-backed mortgages and there is regular trading are generally classified as level 2 in the fair value hierarchy. RMBS are also classified as level 2 when regular trading is not prevalent in the market, but similar executed trades or third-party data including indices, broker quotes and pricing services can be used to substantiate the fair market value. RMBS are classified as Level 3 when trading activity is not available and a model is utilised which incorporates significant unobservable data.  

In determining whether an instrument is similar to that being valued, management considers a range of factors, principally: the lending standards of the brokers and underwriters that originated the mortgages, the lead manager of the security, the issue date of the respective securities, the underlying asset composition (including origination date, loan to value ratios, historic loss information and geographic location of the mortgages), the credit rating of the instrument, and any credit protection that the instrument may benefit from, such as insurance wraps or subordinated tranches. Where there are instances of market observable data for several similar RMBS tranches, management considers the extent of similar characteristics shared with the instrument being valued, together with the frequency, tenor and nature of the trades that have been observed. This method is most frequently used for US and UK RMBS. The RMBS of Dutch and Spanish originated mortgages guaranteed by those governments are valued using the credit spreads of the respective government debt and certain assumptions made by management, or based on observable prices from Bloomberg or consensus pricing services.  

Where there is an absence of trading activity, models are used. The Group primarily uses an industry standard model to project the expected future cash flows to be received from the underlying mortgages and to forecast how these cash flows will be distributed to the various holders of the RMBS. This model utilises data provided by the servicer of the underlying mortgage portfolio, layering on assumptions for mortgage prepayments, probability of default, expected losses, and yield. The Group uses data from third-party sources to calibrate its assumptions, including pricing information from a third party pricing service, independent research, broker quotes, and other independent sources. An assessment is made of the third-party data source to determine its applicability and reliability. Management adjusts the model price with a liquidity premium to reflect the price that the instrument could be traded at in the market. Management may also make adjustments for model deficiencies. 

The weighted average of the key significant inputs utilised in valuing Level 3 RMBS positions are shown in the table below.

 

Non-agency prime

Alt-A

Yield

 11.02% 

 20.69% 

Probability of default

3.0 CDR  (1)

40.00 CDR(1)

Loss severity

45.00%

52.25%

Prepayment

 12.67 CPR(2)

10.65 CPR(2)

     


Notes:

(1) Constant default rate or probability of default

(2) Constant prepayment rate

The fair value of securities within each class of asset changes on a broadly consistent basis in response to changes in given market factors. However, the extent of the change, and therefore the range of reasonably possible alternative assumptions, may be either more or less pronounced, depending on the particular terms and circumstances of the individual security. Through most of 2008, while default rates on sub-prime mortgages generally increased, there was less detailed and transparent market information on defaults available which could be used to predict future defaults on both Alt-A and prime securities. As such, the Group believes that probability of default was the least transparent input into Alt-A and prime RMBS modelled valuations throughout 2008 (and most sensitive to variations). The Group believes that a range of 500 basis points greater than and 500 basis points less than the weighted average constant default rate, and a range of 200 basis points greater than and 200 basis points less than the weighted average constant default rate represents a reasonably possible set of acceptable pricing alternatives for Alt-A and prime RMBS, respectively. These assumptions consider the inherently risky nature of Alt-A over prime securities, as well as declining economic conditions leading to an increased likelihood of default at year-end. While other key inputs may possess characteristics of unobservability in both Alt-A and prime modelled valuations, the impact of utilising reasonably possible alternatives for these respective inputs would have an immaterial impact on the overall valuation. Using these reasonably possible alternative assumptions the fair value of RMBS of £0.5 billion would be £90 million lower or £40 million higher. 

Commercial mortgage backed securities

CMBS are valued using an industry standard model and the inputs, where possible, are corroborated using observable market data.  

For senior CMBS and subordinated tranches respectively, the Group determined that the most sensitive input to reasonably possible alternatives for unobservable inputs is probability of default and yield respectively. Using reasonably possible alternative assumptions for these inputs, the fair value of CMBS of £ 0.6 billion would be £30 million lower or £30 million higher.

Collateralised debt obligations 

CDOs purchased from third parties are valued using independent, third-party quotes or independent lead manager indicative prices. For super senior CDOs which have been originated by the Group no specific third-party information is available. The valuation of these super senior CDOs therefore takes into consideration outputs from a proprietary model, market data and appropriate valuation adjustments. 

The Group's proprietary model calculates the expected cash flows from the underlying mortgages using assumptions derived from publicly available data on future macroeconomic conditions (including house price appreciation and depreciation) and on defaults and delinquencies on these underlying mortgages. The model used by the Group comprises an econometric loan-level model which provides the input to an industry standard ABS model, the output of which feeds a proprietary model generating expected cash flows which are discounted using a risk adjusted rate. 

Due to the subjectivity of the inputs to the pricing model, alternative valuation points are constructed to benchmark the output of the model. These valuation points include determining an ABS index implied collateral valuation, which provides a market calibrated valuation data point. A collateral net asset value methodology is also considered which uses dealer buy side marks to determine an upper bound for super senior CDO valuations. Both the ABS index implied valuation and the collateral net asset value methodology apply an assumed immediate liquidation approach.

Management, using all pricing points available, may make necessary and appropriate valuation adjustments to the pricing information derived from the proprietary model. These adjustments reflect management's assessment of factors that market participants would consider in setting a price, to the extent that these factors that have not already been included in the model and may include adjustments made for liquidity discounts. 

In order to provide disclosures of the valuation of super senior CDOs using reasonably possible alternative assumptions, management has considered macroeconomic conditions, including house price appreciation and depreciation, and the effect of regional variations. The output from using these alternative assumptions has been compared with inferred pricing from other published data. The Group believes that reasonably possible alternative assumptions could reduce or increase valuations by up to 4%. Using these alternative assumptions would reduce the fair value of level 3 CDOs of £1.7 billion by up to £440 million (super senior CDOs: £292 million) and increase the fair value by up to £410 million (super senior CDOs: £292 million).

Collateralised loan obligations 

To determine the fair value of CLOs purchased from third parties, management use third-party broker or lead manager quotes as the primary pricing source. These quotes are benchmarked to consensus pricing sources where they are available. 

For CLOs originated and still held by the Group, the fair value is determined using a correlation model based on a Monte Carlo simulation framework. The main model inputs are credit spreads and recovery rates of the underlying assets and their correlation. A credit curve is assigned to each underlying asset based on prices, from third-party dealer quotes, and cash flow profiles, sourced from an industry standard model. Losses are calculated taking into account the attachment and detachment point of the exposure. As the correlation inputs to this model are not observable CLOs are deemed to be level 3. Using reasonably possible alternative assumption the fair value of CLOs of £1.0 billion would be £40 million lower or £40 million higher.  

Other debt securities

Other level 3 debt securities comprise £1.5 billion of other ABS and £1.6 billion of other debt securities. Where observable market prices for a particular debt security are not available, the fair value will typically be determined with reference to observable market transactions in other related products, such as similar debt securities or credit derivatives. Assumptions are made about the relationship between the individual debt security and the available benchmark data. Where significant management judgement has been applied in identifying the most relevant related product, or in determining the relationship between the related product and the instrument itself, the valuation is shown in level 3. Using differing assumptions about this relationship would result in different fair values for these assets and liabilities. The main assumption made is that of relative creditworthiness. Using reasonably possible alternative credit assumptions, taking into account the underlying currency, tenor, and rating of the debt securities within each portfolio, would reduce the fair value of other debt securities by up to £50 million or increase the fair value by up to £50 million.

Derivatives

Level 3 derivative assets are comprised of credit derivatives of £8.0 billion, equity derivatives of £0.1 billion and interest rate, foreign exchange rate and commodity derivative contracts of £2.2 billion. Derivative liabilities comprise credit derivatives of £2.6 billion, and interest rate, foreign exchange rate and commodity derivatives contracts of £1.4 billion.

Derivatives are priced using quoted prices for the same or similar instruments where these are available. However, the majority of derivatives are valued using pricing models. Inputs for these models are usually observed directly in the market, or derived from observed prices. However, it is not always possible to observe or corroborate all model inputs. Unobservable inputs used are based on estimates taking into account a range of available information including historic analysis, historic traded levels, market practice, comparison to other relevant benchmark observable data and consensus pricing data. 

Credit derivatives

The Group's credit derivatives include vanilla and bespoke portfolio tranches, gap risk products and certain other unique trades. The bespoke portfolio tranches are synthetic tranches referenced to a bespoke portfolio of corporate names on which the Group purchases credit protection. Bespoke portfolio tranches are valued using Gaussian Copula, a standard method which uses observable market inputs (credit spreads, index tranche prices and recovery rates) to generate an output price for the tranche via a mapping methodology. In essence this method takes the expected loss of the tranche expressed as a fraction of the expected loss of the whole underlying portfolio and calculates which detachment point on the liquid index, and hence which correlation level, coincides with this expected loss fraction.  Where the inputs into this valuation technique are observable in the market, bespoke tranches are considered to be level 2 assets. Where inputs are not observable, bespoke tranches are considered to be level 3 assets. However, all transactions executed with a CDPC counterparty are considered level 3 as the counterparty credit risk assessment is a significant component of these valuations.

 

Gap risk products are leveraged trades, with the counterparty's potential loss capped at the amount of the initial principal invested. Gap risk is the probability that the market will move discontinuously too quickly to exit a portfolio and return the principal to the counterparty without incurring losses, should an unwind event be triggered. This optionality is embedded within these portfolio structures and is very rarely traded outright in the market. Gap risk is not observable in the markets and, as such, these structures are deemed to be level 3 instruments.

Other unique trades are valued using a specialised model for each instrument and the same market data inputs as all other trades where applicable. By their nature, the valuation is also driven by a variety of other model inputs, many of which are unobservable in the market. Where these instruments have embedded optionality it is valued using a variation of the Black-Scholes option pricing formula, and where they have correlation exposure it is valued using a variant of the Gaussian Copula model. The volatility or unique correlation inputs required to value these products are generally unobservable and the instruments are therefore deemed to be level 3 instruments.

Other derivatives

Exotic equity, interest rate and commodity options provide a payout (or series of payouts) linked to the performance of one or more underlying, including equities, interest rates, foreign exchange rates and commodities. Included in commodities derivatives are energy contracts entered into by RBS Sempra Commodities. Most of these contracts are valued using models that incorporate observable data. A small number are more complex, structured derivatives which incorporate in their valuation assumptions regarding power price volatilities and correlation between inputs, which are not market observable. These include certain tolling agreements, where power is purchased in return for a given quantity of fuel, and load deals, where a seller agrees to deliver a fixed proportion of power used by a client's utility customers.

Exotic options do not trade in active markets except in a small number of cases. Consequently, the Group uses models to determine fair value using valuation techniques typical for the industry. These techniques can be divided, firstly, into modelling approaches and, secondly, into methods of assessing appropriate levels for model inputs. The Group uses a variety of proprietary models for valuing exotic trades.

Exotic valuation inputs include correlation between equities, interest rates, foreign exchange rates and commodity prices. Correlations for more liquid equity and rate pairs are valued using independently sourced consensus pricing levels. Where a consensus pricing benchmark is unavailable, these instruments are categorised as level 3. 

Reasonably possible alternative assumptions (for all derivative assets)

In determining the effect of reasonably possible alternative assumptions for unobservable inputs, the Group has considered trades with CDPCs separately from all other level 3 derivatives due to the significant element of subjectivity in determining the counterparty credit risk.  

The fair value of credit derivative trades with CDPCs as at 31 December 2008 was £4.8 billion before applying a CVA of £1.3 billion. The Group's credit derivative exposures to CDPCs are valued using pricing models with inputs observed directly in the market. An adjustment is made to the model valuation as the creditworthiness of CDPC counterparties differs from that of the credit risk assumption within the valuation model. The adjustment reflects the estimated cost of hedging the counterparty risk arising from each trade. In the absence of market observable credit spreads of CDPCs, the cost of hedging the counterparty risk is estimated from an analysis of the underlying trades and the cost of hedging expected default losses in excess of the capital available in each vehicle. A reasonably possible alternative approach would be to estimate the cost of hedging the counterparty risk from market observable credit spreads of entities considered similar to CDPCs (for example monoline insurers with similar business or similarly rated entities). These reasonably possible alternative approaches would reduce the fair value credit derivatives with CDPCs by up to £740 million or increase the fair value by up to £600 million.

For all other level 3 derivatives, unobservable inputs are principally comprised of correlations and volatilities. Where a derivative valuation relies significantly on an unobservable input, the valuation is shown in level 3. It is usual for such derivative valuations to depend on several observable, and one or few unobservable model inputs. In determining reasonably possible alternative assumptions, the relative impact of unobservable inputs as compared to those which may be observed was considered. Using reasonably possible alternative assumptions the fair value of all level 3 derivatives (excluding CDPCs) of £4.0 billion would be reduced by up to £600 million or increased by up to £560 million.  Using reasonably possible alternative assumptions, the fair value of all other level 3 derivatives liabilities of £4 billion would be reduced by up to £300 million or increased by up to £280 million.

Equity shares - private equity

Private equity investments include unit holdings and limited partnership interests primarily in corporate private equity funds, debt funds and fund of hedge funds. Externally managed funds are valued using recent prices where available. Where not available, the fair value of investments in externally managed funds is generally determined using statements or other information provided by the fund managers.  

Although such valuations are provided from third parties, the Group recognises that such valuations may rely significantly on the judgements and estimates made by those fund managers, particularly in assessing private equity components. Following the decline in liquidity in world markets, the Group believes that there is now sufficient subjectivity in such valuations to report them in level 3.

Reasonably possible alternative valuations have been determined based on the historic trends in valuations received, and by considering the possible impact of market movements towards the end of the reporting period, which may not be fully reflected in valuations received. Using these reasonably possible alternate assumptions would reduce the fair value of externally managed funds of £1.1 billion by up to £160 million or increase the fair value by up to £80 m. 

Other financial instruments

Other than the portfolios discussed above, there are other financial instruments which are held at fair value determined from data which are not market observable, or incorporating material adjustments to market observed data. Using reasonably possible alternate assumptions appropriate to the financial asset or liability in question, such as credit spreads, derivative inputs and equity correlations, would reduce the fair value of other financial instruments held at fair value of £4.9 billion, primarily debt securities in issue of £4.4 billion, and included in level 3 by up to £250 million or increase the fair value by up to £210 million.  

7.5 Own credit

When valuing financial liabilities recorded at fair value, the Group takes into account the effect of its own credit standing. The categories of financial liabilities on which own credit spread adjustments are made are issued debt, including issued structured notes, and derivatives. An own credit adjustment is applied to positions where it is believed that counterparties would consider the Group's creditworthiness when pricing trades.

For issued debt and structured notes, this adjustment is based on independent quotes from market participants for the debt issuance spreads above average inter-bank rates (at a range of tenors) which the market would demand when purchasing new senior or sub-debt issuances from the Group. Where necessary, these quotes are interpolated using a curve shape derived from CDS prices.

The fair value of the Group's derivative financial liabilities has also been adjusted to reflect the Group's own credit risk. The adjustment takes into account collateral posted by the Group and the effects of master netting agreements. No adjustments were made for own credit risk in relation to derivative liabilities in prior periods as it was not a significant factor in the pricing of derivative transactions by market participants. The change in methodology reflects market turbulence in 2008 which led to participants focussing increased attention on counterparty credit quality.

The table below shows the own credit spread adjustments on liabilities recorded in the income statement during the year.

 

Debt securities in issue

 

Derivatives

 

Total

 
 

Held-for-trading

Designated at fair value through profit and loss

Total

         
 

£m

£m

£m

 

£m

 

£m

 

At 1 January 2008

304

152

456

 

-

 

456

 

Effect of changes to credit spreads 

376

583

959

 

450

 

1,409

 

Benefit of foreign exchange hedges

392

195

587

 

-

 

587

 

New issues

274

97

371

 

-

 

371

 

At 31 December 2008

1,346

1,027

2,373

 

450

 

2,823

 
                 


8. SPEs and conduits 
 

8.1 SPEs
 

The Group arranges securitisations to facilitate client transactions and undertakes securitisations to sell financial assets or to fund specific portfolios of assets. The Group also acts as an underwriter and depositor in securitisation transactions involving both client and proprietary transactions. In a securitisation, assets, or interests in a pool of assets, are transferred generally to a special purpose entity (SPE) which then issues liabilities to third party investors. SPEs are vehicles established for a specific, limited purpose, usually do not carry out a business or trade and typically have no employees. They take a variety of legal forms - trusts, partnerships and companies - and fulfil many different functions. As well as being a key element of securitisations, SPEs are also used in fund management activities to segregate custodial duties from the fund management advice provided by the Group.

It is primarily the extent of risks and rewards assumed that determines whether these entities are consolidated in the Group's financial statements. The following section aims to address the significant exposures which arise from the Group's activities through specific types of SPEs. 

The Group sponsors and arranges own-asset securitisations, whereby the sale of assets or interests in a pool of assets into an SPE is financed by the issuance of securities to investors. The pool of assets held by the SPE may be originated by the Group, or (in the case of whole loan programmes) purchased from third parties, and may be of varying credit quality. Investors in the debt securities issued by the SPE are rewarded through credit-linked returns, according to the credit rating of their securities. The majority of securitisations are supported through liquidity facilities, other credit enhancements and derivative hedges extended by financial institutions, some of which offer protection against initial defaults in the pool of assets. Thereafter, losses are absorbed by investors in the lowest ranking notes in the priority of payments. Investors in the most senior ranking debt securities are typically shielded from loss, since any subsequent losses may trigger repayment of their initial principal. 

The Group also employs synthetic structures, where assets are not sold to the SPE, but credit derivatives are used to transfer the credit risk of the assets to an SPE. Securities may then be issued by the SPE to investors, on the back of the credit protection sold to the Group by the SPE. 

In general residential and commercial mortgages and credit card receivables form the types of assets generally included in cash securitisations, while corporate loans and commercial mortgages typically serve as reference obligations in synthetic securitisations.

The Group sponsors own-asset securitisations as a way of diversifying funding sources, managing specific risk concentrations, and achieving capital efficiency. The Group purchases the securities issued in own-asset securitisations set up for funding purposes. During 2008, the Group was able to pledge AAA-rated asset-backed securities as collateral for repurchase agreements with major central banks under schemes such as the Bank of England's Special Liquidity Scheme, launched in April 2008, which allowed banks to temporarily swap high-quality mortgage-backed and other securities for liquid UK Treasury Bills. This practice has contributed to the Group's sources of funding during 2008 in the face of the contraction in the UK market for inter-bank lending and the investor base for securitisations. 

The Group typically does not retain the majority of risks and rewards of own-asset securitisations set up for the purposes of risk diversification and capital efficiency, where the majority of investors tend to be third parties. Therefore, the Group is typically not required to consolidate the related SPEs.

The Group has also established whole loan securitisation programmes in the US and UK where assets originated by third parties are purchased by the Group for securitisation. The majority of these vehicles are not consolidated by the Group, as it is not exposed to the risks and rewards of ownership. 

The Group consolidates those SPEs where it holds the majority of the risks and rewards. 

8.2 Conduits 

The Group sponsors and administers a number of asset-backed commercial paper ("ABCP") conduits. A conduit is an SPE that issues commercial paper and uses the proceeds to purchase or fund a pool of assets. The commercial paper is secured on the assets and is redeemed either by further commercial paper issuance, repayment of assets or liquidity drawings. Commercial paper is typically short-dated - the length of time from issuance to maturity of the paper is typically up to three months.

The Group's conduits can be divided into multi-seller conduits and own-asset conduits. In line with market practice, the Group consolidates both types of conduit where it is exposed to the majority of risks and rewards of ownership of these entities. The Group also extends liquidity commitments to multi-seller conduits sponsored by other banks, but typically does not consolidate these entities as it is not exposed to the majority of the risks and rewards.

Funding and liquidity
 

The Group's most significant multi-seller conduits have thus far continued to fund the vast majority of their assets solely through ABCP issuance. There were significant disruptions to the liquidity of the financial markets during the year following the bankruptcy filing of Lehman Brothers in September 2008 and this required a small amount of the assets held in certain conduits to be funded by the Group rather than through ABCP issuance. By the end of 2008 there had been an improvement in market conditions, supported by central bank initiatives, which enabled normal ABCP funding to replace this Group funding of the conduits.

The average maturity of ABCP issued by the Group's conduits as at 31 December 2008 was 72.1 days (2007: 60.9 days).

 

The total assets held by the Group's sponsored conduits are £49.9 billion (2007: £48.1 billion). Since these liquidity facilities are sanctioned on the basis of total conduit purchase commitments, the liquidity facility commitments will exceed the level of assets held, with the difference representing undrawn commitments.

The Group values the funding flexibility and liquidity provided by the ABCP market to fund client and Group-originated assets. Whilst there are plans to decrease the multi-seller conduit business in line with the Group's balance sheet, the Group is reviewing the potential for new own-asset conduit structures to add funding diversity.

Multi-seller conduits
 

The multi-seller conduits were established by the Group for the purpose of providing its clients with access to diversified and flexible funding sources. A multi-seller conduit typically purchases or funds assets originated by the banks' clients. The multi-seller conduits form the vast majority of the Group's conduit business (69.4% of the total liquidity and credit enhancements committed by the Group). The Group sponsors six multi-seller conduits which finance assets from Europe, North America and Asia-Pacific.  

Assets purchased or financed by the multi-seller conduits include auto loans, residential mortgages, credit card receivables, consumer loans and trade receivables. All assets held by the conduits are recorded on the Group's balance sheet either as loans and receivables or debt securities.

The third-party assets financed by the conduits are structured with a significant degree of first-loss credit enhancement provided by the originators of the assets. This credit enhancement, which is specific to each transaction, can take the form of over-collateralisation, excess spread or subordinated loan, and typically ensures the conduit asset has a rating equivalent to at least a single-A credit. In addition and in line with general market practice, the Group provides a small second-loss layer of programme-wide protection to the multi-seller conduits. Given the nature and investment grade equivalent quality of the first loss enhancement provided to the structures, the Group has only a minimal risk of loss on its program wide exposure. The issued ABCP is rated P-1 / A1 by Moody's and Standard & Poor's.

The Group provides liquidity back-up facilities to the conduits it sponsors. These facilities can be drawn upon by the conduits in the event of a disruption in the ABCP market, or when certain trigger events occur such that ABCP cannot be issued. For a very small number of transactions within two of the multi-seller conduits sponsored by the Group these liquidity facilities have been provided by third-party banks. This typically occurs on transactions where the third-party bank does not use, or have, its own conduit vehicles. Conduit commercial paper issuance is managed such that the spread of maturity dates of the issued ABCP mitigates the short-term contingent liquidity risk of providing back-up facilities. Group limits sanctioned for such facilities as at 31 December 2008 totalled approximately £42.9 billion (2007: £49.2 billion).

 

The Group's maximum exposure to loss on its multi-seller conduits is £43.2 billion (2007: £49.4 billion), being the total amount of the Group's liquidity commitments plus the extent of programme-wide credit enhancements which relate to conduit assets for whom liquidity facilities were provided by third parties. 

Own-asset conduits
 

The Group also holds three own-asset conduits which fund assets which have been funded at one time by the Group. These vehicles represent 25% of the Group's conduit business (as a percentage of the total liquidity and credit enhancements committed by the Group), with £14.8 billion of ABCP outstanding at 31 December 2008 (2007: £10.4 billion). The Group's maximum exposure to loss on its own-asset conduits is £15.9 billion (2007: £13.5 billion), being the total drawn and undrawn amount of the Group's liquidity commitments to these conduits.

Securitisation arbitrage conduits
 

The Group no longer sponsors any securitisation arbitrage conduits. As part of the integration of ABN AMRO and a strategic review of the conduit business, the sole securitisation arbitrage conduit was dissolved in 2008. All of its assets were transferred to a centrally managed asset unit for run-off or sale.

The Group's exposure from both its consolidated conduits, including those to which the Group is economically exposed and those which are shared with the other consortium members, and its involvement with third-party conduits are set out below.

  

 

31 December 2008

 

31 December 2007(1)

 
 

Sponsored conduits

Third party 

Total

 

Sponsored conduits

Third party 

Total

 
 

£m

£m

£m

 

£m

£m

£m

 

Total assets held by the conduits

49,857

     

48,070

     
                 

Commercial paper issued

48,684

     

46,532

     
                 

Liquidity and credit enhancements:

               

  deal specific liquidity 

               

     - drawn

1,172

3,078

4,250

 

1,537

2,280

3,817

 

     - undrawn

57,929

198

58,127

 

61,347

490

61,837

 

programme-wide liquidity

               

     - drawn

-

102

102

 

-

250

250

 

     - undrawn

-

504

504

 

75

899

974

 

  PWCE  (2)

2,391

-

2,391

 

3,096

-

3,096

 
 

61,492

3,882

65,374

 

   66,055

3,919

69,974

 
                 

Maximum exposure to loss(3)

59,101

3,882

62,983

 

62,959

3,919

66,878

 
                 


Notes

(1)

Total assets held by the conduits and commercial paper issued at 31 December 2007 included:

 

(a)

£5.2 billion assets and commercial paper issued relating to and by the Group's securitisation arbitrage conduit which was dissolved in 2008

 

(b)

£10.7 billion assets (corporate loans) and £10.5 billion commercial paper issued relating to a shared conduit - see below.

 

(c)

£1.3 billion assets relating to reactivated conduits which started to issue commercial paper in the second half of 2008

(2)

Programme-wide credit enhancement

(3) 

Maximum exposure to loss is determined as the Group's total liquidity commitments to the conduits and additionally programme-wide credit support which would absorb first loss on transactions where liquidity support is provided by a third party. 



The Group's exposure from the conduit shared with the other consortium members are set out below:
 

         
 

31 December 2008

 

31 December 2007

 
 

£m

 

£m

 

Total assets held by the conduits

13,286

 

10,650

 
         

Commercial paper issued

13,028

 

10,452

 
         

Liquidity and credit enhancements:

       

  deal specific liquidity 

       

     - drawn

258

 

198

 

     - undrawn

13,566

 

11,868

 

  programme-wide liquidity

-

 

-

 

PWCE

-

 

-

 
 

13,824

 

12,066

 
         

Maximum exposure to loss

13,824

 

12,066

 
         


Collateral analysis, geographic, profile, credit ratings and weighted average lives of the assets in the assets relating to the Group's consolidated conduits and related undrawn commitments are set out in the tables below.

 

31 December 2008

 

31 December 2007

 
 

Funded assets

Undrawn

Liquidity from third parties

Total exposure

 

Funded assets

Undrawn

Liquidity from third parties

Total exposure

   
 

Loans

Securities

Total

       

Loans

Securities

Total

         
                               

Auto loans

9,924

383

10,307

1,871

-

12,178

 

8,066

578

8,644

3,701

(102)

12,243

   

Corporate loans

430

11,042

11,472

534

-

12,006

 

36

8,927

8,963

1,390

-

10,353

   

Credit card receivables

5,844  

-

5,844

922

-

6,766

 

5,104

90

5,194

1,206

-

6,400

   

Trade receivables

2,745

-

2,745

1,432

(71)

4,106

 

3,068

320

3,388

2,386

-

5,774

   

Student loans

2,555

-

2,555

478

(132)

2,901

 

335

262

597

1,082

(132)

1,547

   

Consumer loans

2,371

-

2,371

409

-

2,780

 

1,886

-

1,886

403

-

2,289

   

Mortgages

                             

  Prime

4,416

2,250

6,666

1,188

-

7,854

 

4,424

2,263

6,687

664

-

7,351

   

  Non-conforming 

2,181

-

2,181

727

-

2,908

 

2,343

234

2,577

740

-

3,317

   

  Sub-prime 

-

-

-

-

-

-

 

9

117

126

363

-

489

   

  Commercial

1,228

507

1,735

66

(23)

1,778

 

799

1,094

1,893

168

(23)

2,038

   

  Buy-to-let

-

-

-

-

-

-

 

-

61

61

8

-

69

   

CDOs

-

-

-

-

-

-

 

-

2,129

2,129

268

-

2,397

   

Other

1,851

2,130

3,981

1,615

-

5,596

 

2,976

2,947

5,923

2,433

-

8.356

   
 

33,545

16,312

49,857

9,242

(226)

58,873

 

29,046

19,022

48,068

14,812

(257)

62,623

   
                             


  

   

CP funded assets

 
   

Geographic distribution

Weighted average life

Credit ratings (S&P equivalent)

 
   

UK

Europe

US

ROW

Total

 

AAA

AA 

A

BBB

Below BBB

 

31 December 2008

                         

Auto loans

 

801

1,706

7,402

398

10,307

1.7

6,075

883

3,349

-

-

 

Corporate loans

 

1,714

4,347

3,289

2,122

11,472

4.9

10,767

132

573

-

-

 

Credit card receivables

 

633

-

4,999

212

5,844

0.7

3,465

62

2,171

146

-

 

Trade receivables

 

68

922

1,371

384

2,745

0.7

120

1,025

1,600

-

-

 

Student loans

 

144

-

2,411

-

2,555

0.3

2,296

144

115

-

-

 

Consumer loans

 

708

1,195

468

-

2,371

1.7

387

993

923

68

-

 

Mortgages

                         

  Prime

 

-

2,244

-

4,422

6,666

2.8

2,675

3,876

115

-

-

 

  Non-conforming 

 

960

1,221

-

-

2,181

4.6

351

368

475

987

-

 

  Sub-prime 

 

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

 

  Commercial

 

713

453

74

495

1,735

11.0

274

518

474

469

-

 

  Buy-to-let

 

-

-

-

-

-

 

-

-

-

-

-

 

CDOs

 

-

-

-

-

-

 

-

-

-

-

-

 

Other

 

166

1,198

684

1,993

3,981

1.2

3

958

2,786

234

-

 
   

5,907

13,286

20,698

10,000

49,857

2.8

26,413

8,959

12,581

1,904

-

 
                           


   

Geographic distribution

Weighted average life

Credit ratings (S&P equivalent)

 
   

UK

Europe

US

ROW

Total

 

AAA

AA 

A

BBB

Below BBB

 

31 December 2007

                         

Auto loans

 

2,250

1,259

4,793

341

8,643

1.9

1,457

3,184

3,940

62

-

 

Corporate Loans

 

1,127

1,551

4,658

1,627

8,963

6.5

8,839

15

110

-

-

 

Credit card receivables

 

654

-

4,402

138

5,194

1.0  

1,287

913

2,848

147

-

 

Trade receivables

 

299

816

1,965

309

3,389

0.9

186

732

2,183

236

51

 

Student loans

 

140

-

457

-

597

1.6

270

311

16

-

-

 

Consumer loans

 

648

724

514

-

1,886

1.2

1,018

473

395

-

-

 

Mortgages

                   

-

-

 

  Prime

 

276

565

983

4,863

6,687

3.3

1,897

2,181

2,610

-

-

 

  Non-conforming 

 

1,675

833

-

69

2,577

5.1

268

1,596

713

-

-

 

  Sub-prime 

 

-

-

9

117

126

0.2

117

-

9

-

-

 

  Commercial

 

1,023

233

198

439

1,893

9.6

746

630

401

116

-

 

  Buy-to-let

 

61

-

-

-

61

-

37

24

 

-

-

 

CDOs

 

137

520

1,473

-

2,130

2.7

2,114

15

-

-

-

 

Other

 

579

1,071

1,950

2,323

5,923

2.8

2,363

784

2,652

125

-

 
   

8,869

7,572

21,402

10,226

48,069

3.3

20,599

10,858

15,877

686

51

 
                           


8.3 SIVs

The Group does not sponsor any structured investment vehicles.

8.4 Investment funds set up and managed by the Group
 

The Group's investment funds are managed by RBS Asset Management (RBSAM), which is an integrated asset management business, which manages investments on behalf of third-party institutional and high net worth investors, as well as for the Group. RBSAM is active in most traditional asset classes and employs both fund of funds structures and multi-manager strategies. Its offering includes money market funds, long only funds and alternative investment funds.

Money market funds
 

The Group has established and manages a number of money market funds for its customers. When a new fund is launched, RBS as fund manager typically provides a limited amount of seed capital to the funds. RBS does not have investments in these funds greater than £25 million. As RBS does not have holdings in these funds of significant size and as the risks and rewards of ownership are not with RBS, these funds are not consolidated by RBS.

The funds have been authorised by the Irish Financial Services Regulatory Authority as UCITS pursuant to the UCITS Regulations (UCITS Regulations refer to the European Communities' Undertakings for Collective Investment in Transferable Securities Regulations) and are therefore restricted in the types of investments and borrowings they can make. The structure of the assets within the funds is designed to meet the liabilities of the funds to their investors who have no recourse other than to the assets of the funds. The risks to RBS as a result are restricted to reputational damage if the funds were unable to meet withdrawals when requested on a timely basis or in full.

The RBS money market funds had total assets of £13.6 billion at 31 December 2008 (31 December 2007: £11.2 billion). The sub categories of money market funds are:

·     

£8.0 billion (2007: £5.1 billion) in Money Funds denominated in sterling, US dollars and euro, which invest in short-dated, highly rated money market securities with the objective of providing security, performance and liquidity.


·     

£4.9 billion (2007: £5.5 billion) in multi-manager money market funds denominated in sterling, US dollars and euro, which invest in short dated, highly rated securities.


·     

£0.7 billion (2007: £0.6 billion) in Money Funds Plus denominated in sterling, US dollars and euro, which invest in longer-dated, highly rated securities with the objective of providing security, enhanced performance and liquidity.




   Non-money market funds
 

The Group has also established a number of non-money market funds to enable investors to invest in a range of assets including bonds, equities, hedge funds, private equity and real estate. The Group does not have investments in these funds greater than £200 million. Since it does not have significant holdings in these funds and the risks and rewards of ownership are not retained, these funds are not consolidated by the Group.
 

The non-money market funds had total assets of £18.7 billion at 31 December 2008 (31 December 2007: £19.4 billion). The sub categories of non-money market funds are:

·     

£16.0 billion (2007: £17.0 billion) in multi-manager funds, which offer fund of funds products across bond, equity, hedge fund, private equity and real estate asset classes.


·     

£1.6 billion (2007: £1.3 billion) in committed capital to private equity investments, which invests primarily in equity and debt securities of private companies.


·     

£1.1 billion (2007: £1.1 billion) in credit investments, which invests in various financial instruments.




The structure of the assets within the funds is designed to meet the liabilities of the funds to their investors who have no recourse other than to the assets of the funds. The risks to the Group as a result are restricted to reputational damage if the funds were unable to meet withdrawals when requested on a timely basis or in full, and the Group's own investment in the funds.

The Group's maximum exposure to non-money market funds is represented by the investment in the shares of each fund and was £200 million at 31 December 2008 (2007: £171 million).

 

Signatures



Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.



Date:    26 February 2009

  THE ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND GROUP plc (Registrant)


  By: /s/ A N Taylor

  Name:
Title:
A N Taylor
Head of Group Secretariat