---

       T R O U B L E D   C O M P A N Y   R E P O R T E R

                          E U R O P E

          Monday, April 6, 2026, Vol. 27, No. 68

                           Headlines



F R A N C E

EOS FINCO: Moody's Upgrades CFR to Caa3, Outlook Stable
FCT PONANT 1: DBRS Hikes Rating on Class F Notes to BB(high)


I R E L A N D

ARES EUROPEAN XIII: S&P Affirms 'B- (sf)' Rating on Class F Notes
AVOCA CLO XXXV: Fitch Assigns 'B-sf' Final Rating on Class F Notes
CROSS OCEAN XII: S&P Assigns B- (sf) Rating to Class F Notes
DRYDEN 73: Fitch Lowers Rating on Class E Notes to 'B+sf'
FIDELITY GRAND 8: Fitch Assigns 'B-sf' Final Rating to Cl. F Notes

GROSVENOR PLACE 10: Fitch Assigns B-sf Final Rating on Cl. F Notes
INVESCO EURO II: Moody's Cuts Rating on EUR12MM F Notes to Caa1
LURA FUNDING: DBRS Gives (P)CCC Rating to Class H Notes
NEWBRIDGE PARK: Fitch Assigns 'B-sf' Final Rating to Class F Notes
PALMER SQUARE 2026-1: Fitch Assigns 'BB-(EXP)sf' Rating on E Notes

PROVIDUS CLO IV: S&P Assigns B- (sf) Rating to Class F-R-R Notes
ST. PAUL'S III-R: Moody's Affirms Ba1 Rating on EUR40.8MM E-R Notes


I T A L Y

BANCA IFIS: Fitch Affirms 'BB+' Long-Term IDR, Outlook Stable
FIBERCOP SPA: S&P Assigns 'BB+' Rating to Senior Secured Notes
ILLIMITY BANK: Fitch Hikes Long-Term IDR to 'BB+', Outlook Stable


L U X E M B O U R G

ESSENDI SA: Moody's Affirms 'B2' CFR, Alters Outlook to Negative


N O R W A Y

B2 IMPACT: S&P Upgrades ICR to 'BB' on Improved Financial Profile


S W I T Z E R L A N D

ARCHROMA HOLDINGS: S&P Affirms 'B-' ICR, Outlook Stable


T U R K E Y

RONESANS HOLDING: S&P Affirms 'B+' Rating on $425MM Sr. Unsec Notes


U N I T E D   K I N G D O M

CASTELL 2026-1: S&P Assigns B- (sf) Rating on Class X1-Dfrd Notes
MARSTON ISSUER SENIOR: Fitch Affirms 'BB+' Rating on 3 Cl. A Notes
[] DBRS Confirms Ratings on NewDay Funding Series 2023-2025 Notes
[] FCA Confirms Motor Finance Redress Scheme

                           - - - - -


===========
F R A N C E
===========

EOS FINCO: Moody's Upgrades CFR to Caa3, Outlook Stable
-------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has upgraded Eos Finco S.a.r.l.'s (Netceed or the
company) corporate family rating to Caa3 from Ca, and probability
of default rating to Caa3-PD from D-PD. Concurrently, Moody's
assigned a new Ca instrument rating to the EUR355 million
equivalent senior secured term loans due in 2032 (the reinstated
term loans) and a new B3 instrument rating to the EUR70 million
super senior secured delayed draw down term loan (DDTL) maturing in
2032, both issued by Eos Finco S.a.r.l. The outlook on Netceed is
stable. This rating action concludes the review for upgrade that
Moody's initiated on March 24, 2026.

"The rating action reflects the company's improved credit quality
under the new capital structure resulting from the credit agreement
executed on January 29, 2026", says Sarah Nicolini, a Moody's
Ratings Vice President-Senior Analyst and lead analyst for Netceed.
Following Eos Finco S.a.r.l.'s debt restructuring, the company
operates with a significantly lower amount of debt and better
liquidity due to long-dated maturities and the presence of the
DDTL.

Corporate governance considerations related to financial strategy
and risk management were a key rating driver for the rating
action.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The Caa3 CFR reflects the improved credit quality of the company
under the new capital structure, which comprises the EUR355 million
equivalent reinstated term loans and a EUR205 million reinstated
subordinated instrument due in 2033 which sits outside of the
senior restricted group, the top entity of which is Eos Finco
S.a.r.l. Moody's excludes the latter instrument from the
calculation of the senior restricted group's metrics. This compares
to debt facilities of around EUR2 billion equivalent which were
outstanding prior to the debt restructuring. In addition the new
credit agreement dated January 2026 includes the DDTL of which
EUR27.8 million was drawn upon the closing of the transaction.

The Caa3 CFR also incorporates uncertainties related to the
sustainability of the business model over the next few years. Under
Moody's base case scenario, Moody's expects a decline in the
company's reported EBITDA in 2026, owing to competitive pressure in
the Belgian and Dutch broadband markets, declining demand in
Southern Europe coming from Altice France Lux 3 (Caa1 stable), and
smaller business in the US. Starting from 2027, Moody's forecasts a
moderate improvement in reported EBITDA, supported by growth
opportunities in broadband and data centers markets, particularly
in the US. As a consequence, Moody's anticipates that Netceed's
Moody's adjusted EBIT margin will progressively increase till
reaching breakeven in 2027 from previously negative.

Moody's also acknowledges that the sustainability of Netceed's
business model over the next few years remains uncertain at
present, owing to the reduced growth opportunities in the broadband
market which is reaching a higher degree of maturity and the
necessity to find additional sources of growth.

In such a context, Moody's believes that there are elevated
execution risks in improving profit, stemming from the fierce
competition in data centers products supply and the necessity of
the company to re-build its track record and new client
relationships, including in the broadband market.

Based on these profit assumptions and on the significant debt
reduction recently implemented, Moody's forecasts that Netceed's
Moody's adjusted debt/EBITDA will decrease to around 11x in 2026,
after having reached a peak that Moody's estimates at above 25x in
2025 and 21.5x in 2024.

The decrease in debt will result in a significant reduction in
interest expenses to around EUR35 million per year, on a Moody's
adjusted basis, compared to EUR248 million in 2024. In Moody's
estimates, this will result in a Moody's adjusted EBITA/ interest
improving to around 0.8x in 2026, from 0.2x in 2025.

Under Moody's base case, Moody's also foresees that Netceed's
Moody's adjusted free cash flow (FCF) will progressively increase
till trending towards breakeven from 2027 owing to a moderate
improvement in underlying EBITDA and decreasing restructuring
charges.

ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL AND GOVERNANCE (ESG) CONSIDERATIONS

Governance considerations related to financial strategy and risk
management were a key rating drivers under Moody's ESG framework.
This reflects the improvements in the company's capital structure
and the significant reduction in debt, which are both captured
under Moody's General Principles for Assessing Environmental,
Social and Governance Risks methodology for assessing ESG risks.

LIQUIDITY

Netceed's liquidity is adequate. The company had EUR45 million of
cash on balance as of the end of December 2025. Since January 29,
2026, the company has also access to a EUR70 million super senior
secured DDTL maturing in 2032, of which EUR42.2 million remain
currently available. The DDTL must comply with two maintenance
covenants, one related to minimum liquidity, which needs to be
maintained above EUR30 million at the end of each month through
November 2027, and the other one related to gross leverage ratio,
which cannot be higher than 8.5x  at each quarter end starting from
December 2027 (this ratio is currently around 4x). Moody's expects
both covenants to be complied with under Moody's base case
scenario.

The credit agreement executed on January 29, 2026 also foresees   
to set up, in principle, an emergency funding of up to EUR30
million, which could be put in place in case of unpredictable
events likely to result in an involuntary insolvency or otherwise
which could put the company into financial difficulties, such as
natural disasters or major customer insolvency.

Moody's expects that the company's Moody's adjusted free cash flow
will remain slightly negative over the next 12-18 months, before
sequentially improving and trending towards break-even by 2027.
Moody's also forecasts that the company will continue to pay all
its interests in cash: interests could be partially paid-in-kind
(PIKed), up to 2% per annum, till January 2028 if the sum of cash
on balance and available DDTL falls below EUR70 million. The
reinstated term loans have a 1% annual amortization requirement.

Following the execution of credit agreement, the company will not
have any debt maturity before 2032.

STRUCTURAL CONSIDERATIONS

The B3 instrument rating on the EUR70 super senior secured DDTL is
three notches above the company's CFR, to reflect its super
seniority status. The EUR355 million equivalent reinstated term
loans are rated Ca, one notch below the CFR, to reflect the
presence of sizeable priority debt. Both the DDTL and the
reinstated loans have a collateral package comprising pledges over
shares, receivables and bank accounts. In addition, both have also
upstream guarantees from material subsidiaries of the group
representing 80% of EBITDA.

RATIONALE FOR THE STABLE OUTLOOK

The stable outlook reflects Moody's expectations that the company's
underlying earnings will stabilize over the coming 12-18 months
before progressively increasing starting from 2027.

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS

Positive pressure on the rating could develop over the next 12-18
months if the company demonstrates that its business model is
sustainable, with consistent improvements in operating performance
and cash flow generation trending towards break even.

Negative pressure on the rating could materialise if operating
performance deteriorates further, resulting in further weakening in
credit metrics and liquidity, which could increase the risk of a
default, with potentially lower recoveries than those assumed in
the current Caa3 rating.

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in these ratings was Distribution
and Supply Chain Services published in November 2025.

The net effect of any adjustments applied to rating factor scores
or scorecard outputs under the primary methodology(ies), if any,
was not material to the ratings addressed in this announcement.

COMPANY PROFILE

Headquartered in France, Netceed is a global distributor of telecom
equipment. Its product offering spans around 90,000 stock-keeping
units across fixed and mobile technologies, and active and passive
equipment. The company generated revenue of around EUR1 billion in
2024. The company is currently owned by its lenders.

FCT PONANT 1: DBRS Hikes Rating on Class F Notes to BB(high)
------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS Ratings GmbH (Morningstar DBRS) took the following rating
actions on the notes (the Rated Notes) issued by FCT Ponant 1 (the
Issuer):

-- Class A Notes confirmed at AAA (sf)
-- Class B Notes upgraded to AAA (sf) from AA (sf)
-- Class C Notes upgraded to AA (high) (sf) from A (high) (sf)
-- Class D Notes upgraded to A (high) (sf) from BBB (sf)
-- Class E Notes upgraded to BBB (low) (sf) from BB (high) (sf)
-- Class F Notes upgraded to BB (high) (sf) from BB (low) (sf)

The credit ratings on the Class A and Class B Notes address the
timely payment of interest and the ultimate repayment of principal
on or before the legal final maturity date in September 2038. The
credit ratings on the Class C, Class D, Class E, and Class F Notes
address the ultimate payment of interest (but timely once most
senior) and the ultimate repayment of principal on or before the
legal final maturity date.

The rating actions follow the annual review of the transaction and
are based on the following analytical considerations:

-- Portfolio performance, in terms of delinquencies, and defaults,

   as of the February 2026 payment date;

-- Updated portfolio default rate (PD), loss given default (LGD),

   and expected loss assumptions on the outstanding collateral
   pool; and

-- The credit enhancement available to the Rated Notes to cover   

   the expected losses at their respective credit rating levels.

The Issuer is a static securitisation of lease receivable
instalments and their ancillary rights (excluding the residual
value component), related to equipment lease contracts granted by
Leasecom mainly to small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in
France. Leasecom also services the portfolio. The transaction
closed in March 2025 with an initial portfolio of 320.0 million.

PORTFOLIO PERFORMANCE

As of the February 2026 payment date, leases 0 to 30 days in
arrears amounted to 0.5% of the outstanding portfolio balance,
leases 30 to 60 days in arrears amounted to 1.2%, while leases 60
to 90 days in arrears also amounted to 0.6%. Cumulative defaults,
defined as receivables more than 90 days in arrears, amounted to
2.3% of the initial collateral balance, with insignificant
recoveries realised to date.

PORTFOLIO ASSUMPTIONS AND KEY DRIVERS

Morningstar DBRS conducted a loan-by-loan analysis on the remaining
pool of receivables, updated its base case cumulative PD assumption
to 7.8% from 9.0%, and maintained its base case LGD assumption at
67.5%.

CREDIT ENHANCEMENT

The subordination of the respective junior obligations provides
credit enhancement to the Rated Notes. As of the February 2026
payment date, credit enhancement to the Class A, Class B, Class C,
Class D, Class E, and Class F Notes increased to 39.2%, 30.7%,
23.0%, 15.4%, 9.2%, and 7.7%, respectively, from 25.5%, 20.0%,
15.0%, 10.0%, 6.0%, and 5.0% at the time of the initial rating
twelve months ago as a result of the sequential amortisation of the
Rated Notes.

The transaction benefits from a reserve fund providing liquidity
support to the Rated Notes, funded at closing to EUR 3.95 million
(equal to 1.3% of the initial Rated Notes balance). The reserve
fund is available to cover senior expenses, net swap payments, and
interest payments on the senior-most class of notes outstanding.
The reserve is amortising with a target balance equal to 1.3% of
the outstanding balance of the Rated Notes, subject to a floor
level of EUR 750,000, and as of the February 2026 payment date was
at its target amount of EUR 2.71 million.

BNP Paribas S.A. acts as the account bank for the transaction.
Based on the account bank reference credit rating of AA on BNP
Paribas S.A. (which is one notch below the Morningstar DBRS Long
Term Critical Obligations Rating (COR) of AA (high)), the downgrade
provisions outlined in the transaction documents, and other
mitigating factors inherent in the transaction's structure,
Morningstar DBRS considers the risk arising from the exposure to
the account bank to be consistent with the credit ratings assigned
to the Rated Notes, as described in Morningstar DBRS' "Legal and
Derivative Criteria for European and Asia-Pacific Structured
Finance Transactions" methodology.

Natixis S.A. acts as the swap counterparty for the transaction.
Morningstar DBRS' private credit rating on Natixis is consistent
with the first rating threshold as described in Morningstar DBRS'
"Legal and Derivative Criteria for European and Asia-Pacific
Structured Finance Transactions" methodology.

Morningstar DBRS' credit ratings on the notes address the credit
risk associated with the identified financial obligations in
accordance with the relevant transaction documents. Where
applicable, a description of these financial obligations can be
found in the transaction press release at issuance.

Morningstar DBRS' long-term credit ratings provide opinions on risk
of default. Morningstar DBRS considers risk of default to be the
risk that an issuer will fail to satisfy the financial obligations
in accordance with the terms under which a long-term obligation has
been issued.

Notes: All figures are in euros unless otherwise noted.




=============
I R E L A N D
=============

ARES EUROPEAN XIII: S&P Affirms 'B- (sf)' Rating on Class F Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its credit ratings on Ares European CLO
XIII DAC's class B-1 and B-2 notes to 'AAA (sf)' from 'AA (sf)',
C-1 and C-2 notes to 'AA+ (sf)' from 'A (sf)', and D notes to 'A-
(sf)' from 'BBB (sf)'. At the same time, S&P affirmed its 'AAA
(sf)' rating on the class A notes, its 'BB- (sf)' rating on the
class E notes, and its 'B- (sf)' rating on the class F notes.

The rating actions follow the application of its global corporate
CLO criteria, and its credit and cash flow analysis of the
transaction based on the February 2026 trustee report. Since S&P
rated this transaction in January 2020:

-- The portfolio's weighted-average rating remains at 'B',
although the weighted-average rating factor has increased.

-- The portfolio is still diversified, with 122 performing
obligors, up from 114 at closing.

-- The portfolio's weighted-average life has decreased to 3.542
years from 5.380 years at closing.

-- The percentage of 'CCC' rated assets in the portfolio is 6.46%,
up from 0.00% at closing (as the transaction deleverages, the more
this percentage will increase).

All classes of notes have benefited from higher credit enhancement
since S&P's previous review due to their deleveraging.

  Table 1

  Credit enhancement

         Current amount
  Class   (mil. EUR)     Current CE (%)  CE at Closing (%)

  A         89.96            63.05            40.00
  B-1       36.00            44.16            28.50
  B-2       10.00            44.16            28.50
  C-1       24.00            30.19            20.00
  C-2       10.00            30.19            20.00
  D         24.00            20.34            14.00
  E         19.00            12.53            9.25
  F         11.00             8.01            6.50
  Sub.      36.00              N/A            N/A

CE--Credit enhancement.
N/A--Not applicable.

The scenario default rates (SDRs) have decreased for all rating
scenarios primarily due to the lower weighted-average life since
closing, which offsets the remaining pool's decreasing credit
quality.

Table 2

  Portfolio benchmarks
                                        Current  At closing (2020)

  S&P Global Ratings' weighted-average
   rating factor                        2994.23     2712.24
  Default rate dispersion                558.66      367.37
  Weighted-average life (years)           3.542       5.380
  Obligor diversity measure               97.33       95.96
  Industry diversity measure              20.91       17.31
  Regional diversity measure              1.244        1.23

Figures do not include defaults.

On the cash flow side:

-- The reinvestment period ended in July 2024.

-- The class A notes have deleveraged by EUR150.04 million since
closing.

-- No tranches are currently deferring interest.

All coverage tests are passing as of the February 2026 payment
report.

  Table 3

  Transaction key metrics
                                           Current

  Total collateral amount (mil. EUR)*      243.47
  Defaulted assets (mil. EUR)                0.00
  Number of performing obligors               122
  Portfolio weighted-average rating             B
  'AAA' SDR (%)                             61.09
  'AAA' WARR (%)                            36.80

*Performing assets plus cash and expected recoveries on defaulted
assets. SDR-Scenario default rate.
WARR-Weighted-average recovery rate.

The portfolio is diversified across obligors, industries, and asset
characteristics.

S&P said, "In our credit and cash flow analysis, we considered the
transaction's available current cash balance of approximately
EUR8.70 million, based on the February 2026 monthly report. We also
considered the level of available principal proceeds from the last
two payment date reports and the amount of principal proceeds used
to deleverage the notes on the last two payment dates (EUR79.16
million). We therefore considered a base-case cash flow scenario
where the full amount of principal cash will be used to redeem the
rated notes.

"Our base-case credit and cash flow analysis indicates the
available credit enhancement for the class A, B-1, and B-2 notes is
sufficient to withstand the credit and cash flow stresses that we
apply at the 'AAA' rating level. We therefore affirmed our 'AAA
(sf)' rating on the class A notes and raised to 'AAA (sf)' from 'AA
(sf)' our ratings on the class B-1 and B-2 notes.

"Our base-case cash flow analysis indicates the available credit
enhancement for the class C, D, and E notes is commensurate with
higher ratings. For these classes, we assumed that the manager will
still deleverage the notes using most of the principal cash and may
reinvest unscheduled proceeds and sale proceeds from credit-risk
and credit-improved assets. We also considered the level of cushion
between our break-even default rates (BDRs) and SDRs for these
notes at their passing rating levels, as well as current
macroeconomic conditions and their relative seniority. We therefore
raised to 'AA+ (sf)' from 'A (sf)' and to 'A- (sf)' from 'BBB (sf)'
our ratings on the class C (C-1 and C-2) and D notes, respectively.
However, the portfolio's high exposure to French domiciled assets,
combined with the class E notes' relatively limited credit
enhancement, introduces credit vulnerability. Considering current
geopolitical uncertainty, the pressure on related industries, and
structural risks, we affirmed our 'BB- (sf)' rating on this class
of notes.

"Our credit and cash flow analysis indicates the class F notes'
available credit enhancement could withstand stresses commensurate
with a lower rating. However, we applied our 'CCC' rating criteria,
resulting in a 'B- (sf)' rating on this class of notes." The
ratings uplift for this tranche reflects several key factors,
including:

-- The notes' available credit enhancement, which is in the same
range as that of other CLOs S&P has rated and that has recently
been issued in Europe.

-- The portfolio's average credit quality is similar to other
recent CLOs.

-- S&P said, "Our model generated BDR at the 'B-' rating level of
19.81% (for a portfolio with a weighted-average life of 3.542
years), versus if we were to consider a long-term sustainable
default rate of 3.2% for 3.542 years, which would result in a
target default rate of 11.33%."

-- S&P does not believe that there is a one-in-two chance of this
tranche defaulting.

-- S&P does not envision this tranche defaulting in the next 12-18
months.

-- Counterparty, operational, and legal risks are adequately
mitigated in line with our relevant criteria.

Ares European CLO XIII DAC is a European cash flow CLO transaction
that securitizes loans granted to primarily speculative-grade
corporate firms. The transaction is managed by Ares European Loan
Management LLP.


AVOCA CLO XXXV: Fitch Assigns 'B-sf' Final Rating on Class F Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned Avoca CLO XXXV DAC final ratings, as
detailed below.

   Entity/Debt               Rating               Prior
   -----------               ------               -----
Avoca CLO XXXV DAC

   A-1 XS3286685642       LT AAAsf  New Rating    AAA(EXP)sf

   A-2 XS3286685725       LT AAAsf  New Rating    AAA(EXP)sf

   B XS3286686020         LT AAsf   New Rating    AA(EXP)sf

   C XS3286686293         LT Asf    New Rating    A(EXP)sf

   D XS3286686376         LT BBB-sf New Rating    BBB-(EXP)sf

   E XS3286686459         LT BB-sf  New Rating    BB-(EXP)sf

   F XS3286686533         LT B-sf   New Rating    B-(EXP)sf
   Subordinated Notes

   XS3286686616           LT NRsf   New Rating    NR(EXP)sf

   Z XS3286686889         LT NRsf   New Rating

Transaction Summary

Avoca CLO XXXV DAC is a securitisation of mainly senior secured
obligations (at least 90%) with a component of senior unsecured,
mezzanine, second-lien loans and high-yield bonds. Note proceeds
have been used to fund a portfolio with a target par of EUR400
million. The portfolio is actively managed by KKR Credit Advisors
(Ireland). The CLO has a 4.6-year reinvestment period, and an
8.5-year weighted average life (WAL) test at closing.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Average Portfolio Credit Quality (Neutral): Fitch assesses the
average credit quality of obligors to be in the 'B' category. The
Fitch weighted average rating factor of the identified portfolio is
23.9.

High Recovery Expectations (Positive): At least 90% of the
portfolio comprises senior secured obligations. Fitch views the
recovery prospects for these assets as more favourable than for
second-lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets. The Fitch weighted
average recovery rate of the identified portfolio is 60.4%.

Portfolio Management (Neutral): The transaction has a reinvestment
period of about 4.6 years and includes reinvestment criteria
similar to those of other European deals. Its analysis is based on
a stressed-case portfolio with the aim of testing the robustness of
the deal structure against its covenants and portfolio guidelines.

The transaction includes four Fitch test matrices. The two closing
matrices correspond to an 8.5-year WAL, top 10 obligor
concentration limit at 20% and fixed-rate obligation limits at 5%
and 10%. The other two forward matrices with the same top 10
obligors and fixed-rate asset limits and a WAL of 7.5 years, will
be effective 12 months after closing, provided that the collateral
principal amount (defaults at Fitch-calculated collateral value) is
at least at the target par.

Diversified Asset Portfolio (Positive): The transaction includes
various concentration limits, including a maximum exposure to the
three largest Fitch-defined industries at 40% and a top 10 obligors
limit at 20%. These covenants ensure the asset portfolio will not
be exposed to excessive concentration.

Cash Flow Modelling (Neutral): The WAL used for the transaction's
Fitch-stressed portfolio and matrices analysis is 12 months less
than the WAL test covenant at the issue date, accounting for strict
reinvestment conditions after the reinvestment period. These
include the satisfaction of the coverage tests and the Fitch 'CCC'
limitation test, together with a WAL test covenant that gradually
reduces. Fitch believes these conditions would reduce the effective
risk horizon of the portfolio during stress periods.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative
Rating Action/Downgrade

A 25% increase of the mean default rate (RDR) across all ratings
and a 25% decrease of the recovery rate (RRR) across all ratings of
the identified portfolio would lead to downgrades of one notch for
the class D and E notes and to below 'B-sf' for the class F notes.
There is no rating impact on the class A-1 to C notes.

Based on the identified portfolio, downgrades may occur if the loss
expectation is larger than initially assumed, due to unexpectedly
high levels of default and portfolio deterioration. Due to the
better metrics and shorter life of the identified portfolio than
the Fitch-stressed portfolio, the class B to F notes have a cushion
of up to three notches and the class A-1 and A-2 notes have no
rating cushion.

Should the cushion between the identified portfolio and the
Fitch-stressed portfolio be eroded due to manager trading or
negative portfolio credit migration, a 25% increase of the mean RDR
across all ratings and a 25% decrease of the RRR across all ratings
of the Fitch-stressed portfolio would lead to downgrades of up to
four notches for the notes.

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive
Rating Action/Upgrade

A 25% reduction of the mean RDR across all ratings and a 25%
increase in the RRR across all ratings of Fitch-stressed portfolio
would lead to upgrades of up to five notches, except for the
'AAAsf' notes, which are at the highest level on Fitch's scale and
cannot be upgraded.

During the reinvestment period, based on the Fitch-stressed
portfolio, upgrades may occur on better-than-expected portfolio
credit quality and a shorter remaining WAL test, meaning the notes
are able to withstand larger-than-expected losses for the
transaction's remaining life. After the end of the reinvestment
period, upgrades may occur on stable portfolio credit quality and
deleveraging, leading to higher credit enhancement and excess
spread available to cover losses in the remaining portfolio.

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

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

DATA ADEQUACY

Avoca CLO XXXV DAC

The majority of the underlying assets or risk presenting entities
have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally
Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations and/or European
Securities and Markets Authority registered rating agencies. Fitch
has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch
and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio
information or information on the risk presenting entities.

Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above,
Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's
rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies
indicates that it is adequately reliable.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores for Avoca CLO XXXV
DAC.

In cases where Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores in
connection with the credit rating of a transaction, programme,
instrument or issuer, Fitch will disclose any ESG factor that is a
key rating driver in the key rating drivers section of the relevant
rating action commentary.

CROSS OCEAN XII: S&P Assigns B- (sf) Rating to Class F Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned credit ratings to Cross Ocean
Bosphorous XII DAC's class A, B, C, D, E, and F European cash flow
CLO notes. At closing, the issuer also issued unrated subordinated
notes.

The reinvestment period will be approximately 5 years, while the
noncall period will be 2 years after closing.

Under the transaction documents, the rated notes will pay quarterly
interest unless there is a frequency switch event. Following this,
the notes will switch to semi-annual payment.

The ratings assigned reflect S&P's assessment of:

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

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

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

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

-- The transaction's counterparty risks, which is in line with
S&P's counterparty rating framework.

  Portfolio benchmarks

  S&P Global Ratings' weighted-average rating factor   2,906.56
  Default rate dispersion                                394.39
  Weighted-average life (years)                            5.26
  Obligor diversity measure                              120.08
  Industry diversity measure                              23.13
  Regional diversity measure                               1.28

  Transaction key metrics

  Portfolio weighted-average rating
  derived from S&P's CDO evaluator                            B
  'CCC' category rated assets (%)                          0.00
  Target 'AAA' weighted-average recovery (%)              36.60
  Target weighted-average spread (net of floors; %)        3.82
  Target weighted-average coupon                           5.94

Rating rationale

S&P said, "Our ratings reflect our assessment of the collateral
portfolio's credit quality, which has a weighted-average rating of
'B'. The portfolio is well diversified, primarily comprising
broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior secured term loans and
bonds. Therefore, we conducted our credit and cash flow analysis by
applying our criteria for corporate cash flow CDOs.

"In our cash flow analysis, we used the EUR400 million target par
amount, the covenanted weighted-average spread (3.75%), the
covenanted weighted-average coupon (4.00%), the covenanted
weighted-average recovery rate for the class A notes, and target
recoveries for other rated notes. We applied various cash flow
stress scenarios, using four different default patterns, in
conjunction with different interest rate stress scenarios for each
liability rating category."

Until the end of the reinvestment period in April 2031, the
collateral manager may substitute assets in the portfolio for so
long as S&P's CDO Monitor test is maintained or improved in
relation to the initial ratings on the notes. This test looks at
the total amount of losses that the transaction can sustain as
established by the initial cash flows for each rating, and it
compares that with the current portfolio's default potential plus
par losses to date.

S&P said, "Under our structured finance sovereign risk criteria,
the transaction's exposure to country risk is sufficiently
mitigated at the assigned ratings.

The transaction's documented counterparty replacement and remedy
mechanisms adequately mitigate its exposure to counterparty risk
under its current counterparty criteria.

The transaction's legal structure and framework is bankruptcy
remote, in line with our legal criteria.

S&P said, "Following our analysis of the credit, cash flow,
counterparty, operational, and legal risks, we believe our ratings
are commensurate with the available credit enhancement for the
class A to F notes.

"Our credit and cash flow analysis indicates that the available
credit enhancement for the class B to E notes could withstand
stresses commensurate with higher ratings than those we have
assigned. However, as the CLO is still in its reinvestment phase,
during which the transaction's credit risk profile could
deteriorate, we have capped our ratings assigned to these notes.

"For the class F notes, our credit and cash flow analysis indicates
that the available credit enhancement could withstand stresses
commensurate with a lower rating. However, we have applied our
'CCC' rating criteria, resulting in a 'B- (sf)' rating on this
class of notes."

The ratings uplift for the class F notes reflects several key
factors, including:

-- The class F notes' available credit enhancement, which is in
the same range as that of other CLOs S&P has rated and that has
recently been issued in Europe.

-- The portfolio's average credit quality, which is similar to
other recent CLOs.

-- S&P's model generated break-even default rate at the 'B-'
rating level of 28.23% (for a portfolio with a weighted-average
life of 5.26 years), versus if we were to consider a long-term
sustainable default rate of 3.2% for 5.26 years, which would result
in a target default rate of 16.832%.

-- S&P does not believe that there is a one-in-two chance of this
note defaulting.

-- S&P does not envision this tranche defaulting in the next 12-18
months.

S&P said, "Following this analysis, we consider that the available
credit enhancement for the class F notes is commensurate with the
assigned 'B- (sf)' rating.

"In addition to our standard analysis, to provide an indication of
how rising pressures among speculative-grade corporates could
affect our ratings on European CLO transactions, we have also
included the sensitivity of the ratings on the class A to E notes
based on four hypothetical scenarios.

"As our ratings analysis makes additional considerations before
assigning ratings in the 'CCC' category, and we would assign a 'B-'
rating if the criteria for assigning a 'CCC' category rating are
not met, we have not included the above scenario analysis results
for the class F notes."

Environmental, social, and governance

S&P said, "We regard the exposure to environmental, social, and
governance (ESG) credit factors in the transaction as being broadly
in line with our benchmark for the sector. Primarily due to the
diversity of the assets within CLOs, the exposure to environmental
credit factors is viewed as below average, social credit factors
are below average, and governance credit factors are average. For
this transaction, the documents prohibit or limit assets from being
related to certain industries. Since the exclusion of assets from
these industries does not result in material differences between
the transaction and our ESG benchmark for the sector, no specific
adjustments have been made in our rating analysis to account for
any ESG-related risks or opportunities."

  Ratings

                    Amount     Credit
  Class  Rating*  (mil. EUR)  enhancement (%)  Interest rate§

  A      AAA (sf)   244.00    39.00    Three/six-month EURIBOR
                                       plus 1.27%

  B      AA (sf)     44.00    28.00    Three/six-month EURIBOR
                                       plus 1.85%

  C      A (sf)      28.00    21.00    Three/six-month EURIBOR
                                       plus 2.20%

  D      BBB- (sf)   28.00    14.00    Three/six-month EURIBOR
                                       plus 3.05%

  E      BB- (sf)    18.00     9.50    Three/six-month EURIBOR
                                       plus 5.50%

  F      B- (sf)     12.00     6.50    Three/six-month EURIBOR
                                       plus 8.43%

  Sub. Notes  NR     34.10      N/A     N/A

*The ratings assigned to the class A and B notes address timely
interest and ultimate principal payments. The ratings assigned to
the class C, D, E, and F notes address ultimate interest and
principal payments.
§The payment frequency switches to semiannual and the index
switches to six-month EURIBOR when a frequency switch event occurs.

EURIBOR--Euro Interbank Offered Rate.
Sub. notes--Subordinated notes.
NR--Not rated.
N/A--Not applicable.


DRYDEN 73: Fitch Lowers Rating on Class E Notes to 'B+sf'
---------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded Dryden 73 Euro CLO 2018 DAC's class B
and C notes, downgraded its class E notes, revised the class F
notes Outlook to Negative from Stable.

   Entity/Debt             Rating              Prior
   -----------             ------              -----
Dryden 73 Euro
CLO 2018 DAC

   A-1 XS2063331974     LT AAAsf  Affirmed     AAAsf
   A-2 XS2063332600     LT AAAsf  Affirmed     AAAsf
   B-1 XS2063333244     LT AA+sf  Upgrade      AAsf
   B-2 XS2063333913     LT AA+sf  Upgrade      AAsf
   C-1 XS2063334481     LT A+sf   Upgrade      Asf
   C-2 XS2063335298     LT A+sf   Upgrade      Asf
   D XS2063335702       LT BBBsf  Affirmed     BBBsf
   E XS2063336429       LT B+sf   Downgrade    BBsf
   F XS2063336346       LT B-sf   Affirmed     B-sf

Transaction Summary

Dryden 73 Euro CLO 2018 DAC is a cash flow CLO mostly comprising
senior secured obligations. The transaction is actively managed by
PGIM Limited and exited its reinvestment period in July 2024.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Amortisation Benefits Senior Notes: As of February 2026, the class
A-1 and A-2 notes have paid down EUR70 million and EUR3.6 million,
respectively, since the last review in May 2025. This amortisation
has increased the credit enhancement of the class A, B and C notes,
outweighing further par losses that have occurred since the
previous review based on the trustee report as of April 2025. This
has resulted in the upgrades of the class B and C notes.

Junior Notes Sensitive to Deterioration: The transaction has
experienced further par losses since the previous review to 3.8%
below par from 1.1% below par as a result of selling distressed
assets. The reported defaults total EUR2.4 million, assets rated
'CCC+' and below (excluding non-rated assets) total 5.9% of the
portfolio and 19.7% of the current portfolio is currently on
Negative Outlook. The over-collateralisation cushion for the class
F notes has also thinned to 0.69% from 2.81%. The deterioration of
the portfolio supports the downgrade of the class E notes and the
revision of the Outlook on the class F notes to Negative.

Transaction Outside Reinvestment Period: The transaction is outside
of its reinvestment period but can continue to reinvest, despite
failing its weighted average life test, as long as the test is on a
maintained/improved basis. Its analysis for upgrade is therefore
based on a Fitch-stressed portfolio, floored at four years under
its applicable criteria. On the other hand, Fitch considers the
current portfolio in its downgrade analysis and has taken into
account the cash in the principal account being used to pay down
the notes in its downgrade analysis. However, the junior notes'
status means the positive impact is limited on them.

'B'/'B-' Portfolio: Fitch assesses the average credit quality of
the underlying obligors at 'B'/'B-'. The weighted average rating
factor of the current portfolio is 25.7 as calculated by Fitch
under its latest criteria.

High Recovery Expectations: Senior secured obligations comprise
92.6% of the portfolio. Fitch views the recovery prospects for
these assets as more favourable than for second-lien, unsecured and
mezzanine assets. The Fitch-calculated weighted average recovery
rate of the current portfolio is 59.5%.

Diversified Portfolio: The portfolio is well-diversified across
obligors, countries and industries. The top 10 obligor
concentration, as calculated by Fitch, is 1.9%, and no obligor
represents more than 2.5% of the portfolio balance. Exposure to the
three largest Fitch-defined industries is 25.5% as calculated by
Fitch. Fixed-rate assets as reported by the trustee are at 17.1%,
complying with the limit of 20%.

Model-Implied Rating Deviation: The class D notes' rating is one
notch below the model-implied rating (MIR) to avoid rating
volatility, reflecting Fitch's view that the default-rate cushion
is not sufficiently robust to support the MIR amid heightened
macro-economic uncertainty. Further amortisation with stable
performance can support an upgrade.

The class E notes' rating is one notch below the MIR, reflecting
its view that the limited default rate cushion at the MIR could be
quickly eroded, considering the deterioration of the transaction
performance, and the high portion of assets on Negative Outlook.
The class F notes rating is currently not passing the current
portfolio analysis; however, a limited margin of safety is still
present, which is the definition of 'B-sf'. The credit quality of
the note is not yet commensurate with the definition of 'CCCsf',
which presents a real possibility of default.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative
Rating Action/Downgrade

Downgrades, which are based on the current portfolio, may occur if
the loss expectation is larger than assumed, due to unexpectedly
high levels of default and portfolio deterioration.

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive
Rating Action/Upgrade

Upgrades may result from stable portfolio credit quality and
deleveraging, leading to higher credit enhancement and excess
spread available to cover losses in the remaining portfolio.

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

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

DATA ADEQUACY

Fitch has checked the consistency and plausibility of the
information it has received about the performance of the asset pool
and the transaction. Fitch has not reviewed the results of any
third-party assessment of the asset portfolio information or
conducted a review of origination files as part of its ongoing
monitoring.

The majority of the underlying assets or risk-presenting entities
have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally
Recognised Statistical Rating Organisations and/or European
Securities and Markets Authority- registered rating agencies. Fitch
has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch
and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio
information or information on the risk-presenting entities.

Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above,
Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the rating
agency's analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies
indicates that it is adequately reliable.

ESG Considerations

Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores for Dryden 73 Euro CLO
2018 DAC.

In cases where Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores in
connection with the credit rating of a transaction, programme,
instrument or issuer, Fitch will disclose any ESG factor that is a
key rating driver in the key rating drivers section of the relevant
rating action commentary.

FIDELITY GRAND 8: Fitch Assigns 'B-sf' Final Rating to Cl. F Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned Fidelity Grand Harbour CLO 8 DAC final
ratings, as detailed below.

   Entity/Debt                   Rating           
   -----------                   ------           
Fidelity Grand
Harbour CLO 8 DAC

   Class A Notes
   XS3282843161               LT AAAsf   New Rating

   Class A-1 Loan             LT AAAsf   New Rating

   Class A-2 Loan             LT AAAsf   New Rating

   Class B XS3282843245       LT AAsf    New Rating

   Class C XS3282843328       LT Asf     New Rating

   Class D XS3282843674       LT BBB-sf  New Rating

   Class E XS3282843757       LT BB-sf   New Rating

   Class F XS3282843831       LT B-sf    New Rating

   Subordinated Notes
   XS3282843914               LT NRsf    New Rating

Transaction Summary

Fidelity Grand Harbour CLO 8 DAC is a securitisation of mainly
senior secured obligations (at least 90%) with a component of
senior unsecured, mezzanine, second-lien loans and high-yield
bonds. Note proceeds were used to fund a portfolio with a target
size of EUR500 million. The portfolio manager is Fidelity CLO
Advisers LP. The collateralised loan obligation (CLO) has a
4.5-year reinvestment period and an 8.5-year weighted average life
(WAL) test covenant at closing.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Average Portfolio Credit Quality (Neutral): Fitch assesses the
average credit quality of obligors in the identified at 'B'/'B-'.
The Fitch-weighted average rating factor (WARF) of the identified
portfolio is 23.7 .

Strong Recovery Expectations (Positive): At least 90% of the
portfolio comprises senior secured obligations. The recovery
prospects for these assets are more favourable than for
second-lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets. The Fitch-weighted
average recovery rate (WARR) of the portfolio is 60.6%.

Diversified Asset Portfolio (Positive): The transaction includes
six Fitch matrices, each based on a top 10 obligor concentration
limit of 20%. Two matrices are effective at closing, corresponding
to fixed-rate asset limits at 5% and 15% and to an 8.5-year WAL
test covenant, and the remaining four matrices are effective 12 and
18 months after closing and correspond to a 7.5-year and seven-year
WAL test covenant, with the same fixed-rate asset limits as the
closing matrices. The two forward matrices can be elected by the
collateral manager if the collateral principal amount (with
defaults carried at Fitch collateral value) is at least equal to
the reinvestment target par balance.

The transaction includes additional covenants, including a maximum
exposure to the three largest Fitch-defined industries in the
portfolio at 40%. These covenants ensure the asset portfolio will
not be exposed to excessive concentration.

Portfolio Management (Neutral): The transaction has a 4.5-year
reinvestment period and includes reinvestment criteria similar to
those of other European transactions. Fitch's analysis is based on
a stressed-case portfolio with the aim of testing the robustness of
the transaction structure against its covenants and portfolio
guidelines.

Cash Flow Modelling (Positive): The WAL used for the transaction's
Fitch-stressed portfolio analysis is 12 months less than the WAL
test covenant, to account for strict reinvestment conditions after
the reinvestment period, including the satisfaction of
overcollateralisation test and Fitch's 'CCC' limit tests, alongside
a linearly decreasing WAL test covenant. These conditions reduce
the effective risk horizon of the portfolio during stress periods.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative
Rating Action/Downgrade

A 25% increase of the mean default rate (RDR) and a 25% decrease of
the recovery rate (RRR) across all ratings of the identified
portfolio would have no impact on the class A notes, and lead to
downgrades of one notch each for the class B to E notes, and to
below 'B-sf' for the class F notes.

Downgrades, which are based on the identified portfolio, may occur
if the loss expectation is larger than assumed, due to unexpectedly
high levels of default and portfolio deterioration. The class B, D,
E and F notes each have a rating cushion of two notches and the
class C notes have a cushion of one notch, due to the better
metrics and shorter life of the identified portfolio than the
Fitch-stressed portfolio.

Should the cushion between the identified portfolio and the
Fitch-stressed portfolio be eroded either due to manager trading or
negative portfolio credit migration, a 25% increase of the mean RDR
and a 25% decrease of the RRR across all ratings of the
Fitch-stressed portfolio would lead to downgrades of up to three
notches each for the class A and D notes, four notches each for the
class B and C notes, and to below 'B-sf' for the class E and F
notes.

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive
Rating Action/Upgrade

A 25% reduction of the mean RDR and a 25% increase in the RRR
across all ratings of the Fitch-stressed portfolio would lead to
upgrades of up to four notches each for the notes, except the
'AAAsf' rated notes.

Upgrades during the reinvestment period, which are based on the
Fitch-stressed portfolio, may occur on better-than-expected
portfolio credit quality and a shorter remaining WAL test, allowing
the notes to withstand larger-than-expected losses for the
remaining life of the transaction. Upgrades after the end of the
reinvestment period may result from stable portfolio credit quality
and deleveraging, leading to higher credit enhancement and excess
spread to cover losses in the remaining portfolio.

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

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

DATA ADEQUACY

The majority of the underlying assets or risk-presenting entities
have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally
Recognised Statistical Rating Organisations and/or European
Securities and Markets Authority- registered rating agencies. Fitch
has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch
and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio
information or information on the risk-presenting entities.

Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above,
Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the rating
agency's analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies
indicates that it is adequately reliable.

ESG Considerations

Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores for Fidelity Grand
Harbour CLO 8 DAC.

In cases where Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores in
connection with the credit rating of a transaction, programme,
instrument or issuer, Fitch will disclose any ESG factor that is a
key rating driver in the key rating drivers section of the relevant
rating action commentary.

GROSVENOR PLACE 10: Fitch Assigns B-sf Final Rating on Cl. F Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned Grosvenor Place CLO 10 DAC's final
ratings, as detailed below.

   Entity/Debt               Rating              Prior
   -----------               ------              -----
Grosvenor Place
CLO 10 DAC

   A XS3289874730         LT AAAsf  New Rating   AAA(EXP)sf

   B XS3289874904         LT AAsf   New Rating   AA(EXP)sf

   C XS3289875208         LT Asf    New Rating   A(EXP)sf

   D XS3289875976         LT BBB-sf New Rating   BBB-(EXP)sf

   E XS3289876271         LT BB-sf  New Rating   BB-(EXP)sf

   F XS3289876438         LT B-sf   New Rating   B-(EXP)sf

   Subordinated Notes
   XS3289876602           LT NRsf   New Rating   NR(EXP)sf

Transaction Summary

Grosvenor Place CLO 10 DAC is a securitisation of mainly senior
secured obligations (at least 90%) with a component of senior
unsecured, mezzanine, second-lien loans and high-yield bonds. Note
proceeds have been used to fund a portfolio with a target par of
EUR400 million. The portfolio is actively managed by CQS (UK) LLP.
The CLO has a five-year reinvestment period and an approximately
nine-year weighted average life (WAL) test.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Average Portfolio Credit Quality (Neutral): Fitch assesses the
average credit quality of obligors at 'B+'/'B'. The Fitch-weighted
average rating factor of the identified portfolio is 22.5.

High Recovery Expectations (Positive): At least 90% of the
portfolio comprises senior secured obligations. Fitch views the
recovery prospects for these assets as more favourable than for
second-lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets. The Fitch-weighted
average recovery rate of the identified portfolio is 61.5%.

Diversified Portfolio (Positive): The transaction includes various
concentration limits in the portfolio, including a fixed-rate
obligation limit at 10%, a top 10 obligor concentration limit at
20%, and a maximum exposure to the three largest Fitch-defined
industries in the portfolio at 40%. These covenants ensure the
asset portfolio will not be exposed to excessive concentration.

Portfolio Management (Neutral): The deal has two sets of matrices,
with each matrix within the same set corresponding to two
fixed-rate asset limits of 5% and 10% and a top 10 obligors limit
of 20%. The first matrix set with a WAL test of nine years is
effective at closing. The second matrix set that corresponds to a
WAL test of eight years will be applicable 12 months from closing.
This is subject to the collateral principal amount (defaults are
carried at Fitch collateral value) being at least at the
reinvestment target par amount.

The transaction has a five-year reinvestment period and includes
reinvestment criteria like those of other European deals. Fitch's
analysis is based on a stressed case portfolio with the aim of
testing the robustness of the transaction structure against its
covenants and portfolio guidelines.

Cash Flow Analysis (Neutral): The WAL Fitch modelled in the
transaction's stress portfolio and matrices analysis is 12 months
less than the WAL covenant. This is to account for the strict
reinvestment conditions envisaged by the transaction after its
reinvestment period. These include passing both the coverage tests
and the Fitch 'CCC' maximum limit, as well as a WAL covenant that
progressively steps down before and after the end of the
reinvestment period. Fitch believes these conditions would reduce
the effective risk horizon of the portfolio during the stress
period.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative
Rating Action/Downgrade

A 25% increase of the mean default rate (RDR) across all ratings
and a 25% decrease of the recovery rate (RRR) across all ratings of
the identified portfolio would have no impact on the class A to C
notes and lead to one-notch downgrades for the class D and E notes
and to below 'B-sf' for the class F notes.

Based on the actual portfolio, downgrades may occur if the loss
expectation is larger than initially assumed, due to unexpectedly
high levels of default and portfolio deterioration. Due to the
better metrics and shorter life of the identified portfolio, the
class B and D to F notes display rating cushions of two notches and
the class C of three notches.

Should the cushion between the identified portfolio and the stress
portfolio be eroded either due to manager trading or negative
portfolio credit migration, a 25% increase of the mean RDR across
all ratings and a 25% decrease of the RRR across all ratings of the
stressed portfolio would lead to downgrades of two notches for the
class A notes, three notches for the class D notes, four notches
for the class B and C notes and to below 'B-sf' for the class E and
F notes.

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive
Rating Action/Upgrade

A 25% reduction of the mean RDR across all ratings and a 25%
increase in the RRR across all ratings of Fitch's stress portfolio
would lead to upgrades of up to two notches for the notes, except
for the 'AAAsf' rated notes, which are at the highest level on
Fitch's scale and cannot be upgraded.

During the reinvestment period, based on Fitch's stress portfolio,
upgrades may occur on better-than-expected portfolio credit quality
and a shorter remaining WAL test, leading to the ability of the
notes to withstand larger than expected losses for the remaining
life of the transaction. After the end of the reinvestment period,
upgrades may occur in case of stable portfolio credit quality and
deleveraging, leading to higher credit enhancement and excess
spread available to cover for losses on the remaining portfolio.

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

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

DATA ADEQUACY

Grosvenor Place CLO 10 DAC

The majority of the underlying assets or risk presenting entities
have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally
Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations and/or European
Securities and Markets Authority registered rating agencies. Fitch
has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch
and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio
information or information on the risk presenting entities.

Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above,
Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's
rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies
indicates that it is adequately reliable.

ESG Considerations

Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores for Grosvenor Place CLO
10 DAC.

In cases where Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores in
connection with the credit rating of a transaction, programme,
instrument or issuer, Fitch will disclose any ESG factor that is a
key rating driver in the key rating drivers section of the relevant
rating action commentary.

INVESCO EURO II: Moody's Cuts Rating on EUR12MM F Notes to Caa1
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has taken a variety of rating actions on the
following notes issued by Invesco Euro CLO II Designated Activity
Company:

EUR28,500,000 Class B-1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2034, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Aug 16, 2021 Definitive
Rating Assigned Aa2 (sf)

EUR11,500,000 Class B-2 Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due 2034,
Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Aug 16, 2021 Definitive Rating
Assigned Aa2 (sf)

EUR12,000,000 Class F Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2034, Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Aug 16, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B2 (sf)

Moody's have also affirmed the ratings on the following notes:

EUR248,000,000 Class A Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2034, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 16, 2021 Definitive
Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

EUR28,000,000 Class C Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2034, Affirmed A2 (sf); previously on Aug 16, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

EUR24,000,000 Class D Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2034, Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Aug 16, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

EUR20,000,000 Class E Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2034, Affirmed Ba2 (sf); previously on Aug 16, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Invesco Euro CLO II Designated Activity Company, issued in July
2019 and refinanced in August 2021, is a collateralised loan
obligation (CLO) backed by a portfolio of mostly high-yield senior
secured European loans. The portfolio is managed by Invesco
European RR L.P. The transaction's reinvestment period ended in
February 2026.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating upgrades on the Class B-1 and B-2 notes are primarily a
result of reaching the end of the reinvestment period. In light of
reinvestment restrictions during the amortisation period, and
therefore the limited ability to effect significant changes to the
current collateral pool, Moody's analysed the deal assuming a
higher likelihood that the collateral pool characteristics would
maintain an adequate buffer relative to certain covenant
requirements.

The rating downgrade on the Class F notes is primarily a result of
the further deterioration in over-collateralisation ratios since
Moody's last review in August 2025.

The over-collateralisation ratios of Classes A/B, C, D, E and F
notes have further deteriorated since the payment date in August
2025. According to the trustee report dated March 2026[1] the Class
A/B, C, D, E and F OC ratios are reported at 133.67%, 121.83%,
113.23%, 106.94% and 103.49% compared to August 2025[2] levels of
135.73%, 123.71%, 114.97%, 108.59% and 105.08%, respectively.

The affirmations on the ratings on the Classes A, C, D and E notes
are primarily a result of the expected losses on the notes
remaining consistent with their current rating levels, after taking
into account the CLO's latest portfolio, its relevant structural
features and its actual over-collateralisation ratios.

The key model inputs Moody's uses in Moody's analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and the weighted
average recovery rate, are based on Moody's published methodology
and could differ from the trustee's reported numbers.

In Moody's base case, Moody's used the following assumptions:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: EUR384.5 million

Defaulted Securities: EUR9.03 million

Diversity Score: 48

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3149

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 3.9 years

Weighted Average Spread (WAS) (before accounting for Euribor
floors): 3.85%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 3.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 44.14%

Par haircut in OC tests and interest diversion test: 0%

The default probability derives from the credit quality of the
collateral pool and Moody's expectations of the remaining life of
the collateral pool. The estimated average recovery rate on future
defaults is based primarily on the seniority of the assets in the
collateral pool. In each case, historical and market performance
and a collateral manager's latitude to trade collateral are also
relevant factors. Moody's incorporates these default and recovery
characteristics of the collateral pool into Moody's cash flow model
analysis, subjecting them to stresses as a function of the target
rating of each CLO liability it is analysing.

Moody's note that the March 2026[1] trustee report was published at
the time Moody's were completing Moody's analysis of the February
2026[2] data. Key portfolio metrics such as WARF, diversity score,
weighted average spread and life, exhibit little or no change
between these dates.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Collateralized
Loan Obligations" published in October 2025.

Counterparty Exposure:

The rating action took into consideration the debt's exposure to
relevant counterparties, such as account bank and swap provider,
using the methodology "Structured Finance Counterparty Risks"
published in May 2025. Moody's concluded the ratings of the debt
are not constrained by these risks.

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

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

Additional uncertainty about performance is due to the following:

-- Portfolio amortisation: The main source of uncertainty in this
transaction is the pace of amortisation of the underlying
portfolio, which can vary significantly depending on market
conditions and have a significant impact on the notes' ratings.
Amortisation could accelerate as a consequence of high loan
prepayment levels or collateral sales by the collateral manager or
be delayed by an increase in loan amend-and-extend restructurings.
Fast amortisation would usually benefit the ratings of the notes
beginning with the notes having the highest prepayment priority.

-- Recovery of defaulted assets: Market value fluctuations in
trustee-reported defaulted assets and those Moody's assumes have
defaulted can result in volatility in the deal's
over-collateralisation levels. Further, the timing of recoveries
and the manager's decision whether to work out or sell defaulted
assets can also result in additional uncertainty.

In addition to the quantitative factors that Moody's explicitly
modelled, qualitative factors are part of the rating committee's
considerations. These qualitative factors include the structural
protections in the transaction, its recent performance given the
market environment, the legal environment, specific documentation
features, the collateral manager's track record and the potential
for selection bias in the portfolio. All information available to
rating committees, including macroeconomic forecasts, input from
Moody's other analytical groups, market factors, and judgments
regarding the nature and severity of credit stress on the
transactions, can influence the final rating decision.

LURA FUNDING: DBRS Gives (P)CCC Rating to Class H Notes
-------------------------------------------------------
DBRS Ratings GmbH (Morningstar DBRS) assigned provisional credit
ratings to the following classes of notes (the Rated Notes) to be
issued by Lura Funding DAC (the Issuer):

-- Class A notes at (P) AAA (sf)
-- Class B notes at (P) AAA (sf)
-- Class C notes at (P) AA (low) (sf)
-- Class D notes at (P) A (low) (sf)
-- Class E notes at (P) BBB (sf)
-- Class F notes at (P) BB (high) (sf)
-- Class G notes at (P) B (sf)
-- Class H notes at (P) CCC (sf)

The credit ratings on the Class A and Class B notes address the
timely payment of interest and the ultimate repayment of principal
on or before the legal final maturity date. The credit ratings on
the Class C, Class D, Class E, Class F, Class G, and Class H notes
address the timely payment of interest once they become the most
senior notes outstanding (with any previously subordinated interest
assessed on an ultimate basis) and the ultimate repayment of
principal on or before the final maturity date. Morningstar DBRS
does not rate the Class Z notes issued by the Issuer (together with
the Rated Notes, the Notes).

CREDIT RATING RATIONALE

The credit ratings are based on the following analytical
considerations:

The transaction entails the issuance of Class A, Class B, Class C,
Class D, Class E, Class F, Class G, Class H, and Class Z notes
ultimately backed by a portfolio of mainly reperforming Spanish
residential mortgage loans originated by CaixaBank, S.A.
(CaixaBank; rated A (high) with a Stable trend by Morningstar
DBRS). The Issuer is a bankruptcy-remote special-purpose vehicle
incorporated in Ireland.

CaixaBank will issue unitranche mortgage certificates
(participaciones hipotecarias or certificados de transmisión de
hipoteca) post-closing, in favour of Vigo Funding 1 Designated
Activity Company (the Seller), representing economic rights under
the mortgage loans. The mortgage certificates will be transferred
from the Seller to Neptuno, Fondo de Titulización (FT Neptuno or
the Fund), a Spanish private securitisation fund (fondo de
titulización privado) with closed-end assets and liabilities
(cerrado por el activo y por el pasivo) incorporated and managed by
Beka Titulización, Sociedad Gestora de Fondos de Titulización,
S.A., through endorsement of the multiple titles in exchange for
the FT Neptuno bonds to be issued. The Issuer will use the proceeds
from the issuance of the Notes to purchase unitranche bonds grouped
in a single series issued by FT Neptuno (the FT Bonds) and
indirectly acquire the securitised portfolio.

CaixaBank will act as the primary servicer of the portfolio as
required by Spanish law, while Pepper Spanish Servicing, S.L.U.
will act as the special servicer, managing loans more than 180 days
in arrears.

Morningstar DBRS calculated credit enhancement for the Class A
notes at 32.50%, provided by the subordination of the Class B to
Class Z notes. Credit enhancement for the Class B notes will be
29.00%, provided by the subordination of the Class C to Class Z
notes. Credit enhancement for the Class C notes will be 23.50%,
provided by the subordination of the Class D to Class Z notes.
Credit enhancement for the Class D notes will be 20.50%, provided
by the subordination of the Class E to Class Z notes. Credit
enhancement for the Class E notes will be 18.00%, provided by the
subordination of the Class F to Class Z notes. Credit enhancement
for the Class F notes will be 16.25%, provided by the subordination
of the Class G to Class Z notes. Credit enhancement for the Class G
notes will be 14.25%, provided by the subordination of the Class H
to Class Z notes. Credit enhancement for the Class H notes will be
12.50%, provided by the subordination of the Class Z notes.

The Rated Notes are paid sequentially according to the priority of
payments. The deferred interest does not become due and payable
immediately when the notes become most senior. Any amounts of
deferred interest in respect of these notes shall accrue interest.

The transaction benefits from a reserve fund (RF) fully funded at
closing at 1.75% of the Notes. It is split into two different RFs:
(1) a liquidity reserve fund (LRF), which will provide liquidity
support to the Class A, Class B, and Class C notes in case of an
interest shortfall; and (2) a general reserve fund (GRF), which
will provide liquidity support to the Rated Notes in case of an
interest shortfall. While the LRF is set up at 1.75% of the Class
A, Class B, and Class C notes, the GRF is calculated as the
difference between the RF and the LRF. Principal amounts can also
be used to cover interest shortfalls on the Class A to Class H
notes, subject to the class being the senior-most class of notes
outstanding. Principal amounts will be used to cover Class C
deferred interest if certain triggers are met.

The Rated Notes will pay interest linked to three-month Euribor on
a quarterly basis. Following the payment date in May 2029 (the
step-up date), the margins payable on the Rated Notes will
increase. Citibank Europe plc (rated AA (low) with a Stable trend
by Morningstar DBRS) provides an interest rate swap with a strike
rate of 2.9% and a notional that varies over time. Morningstar DBRS
concluded that Citibank Europe plc meets its minimum criteria to
act in such capacity. The transaction contains downgrade provisions
relating to the interest rate cap provider. The downgrade
provisions are consistent with Morningstar DBRS' criteria, given
the credit ratings assigned to the Rated Notes.

Mortgage loan collections will be transferred by CaixaBank to an
account in the Fund's name at CaixaBank on a frequent basis. On a
quarterly basis, before each Interest Payment Date, such amounts
will be paid to the Issuer Transaction Account through repayment of
the FT Bonds. Morningstar DBRS' credit rating on CaixaBank and
downgrade provisions are consistent with the threshold for the
account bank as outlined in Morningstar DBRS' "Legal and Derivative
Criteria for European and Asia-Pacific Structured Finance
Transactions" methodology, given the credit ratings assigned to the
Rated Notes.

Citibank N.A./London Branch (Citibank) is the account bank,
custodian, and paying agent for this transaction. Morningstar DBRS'
private credit rating on Citibank and downgrade provisions are
consistent with the threshold for the account bank as outlined in
Morningstar DBRS' "Legal and Derivative Criteria for European and
Asia-Pacific Structured Finance Transactions" methodology, given
the credit ratings assigned to the Rated Notes.

Morningstar DBRS was provided with a mortgage portfolio with a
principal balance equal to EUR 397.8 million as of 31 December 2025
(the cut-off date), which consisted of 6,306 mortgage loans mainly
granted to individuals. Of the portfolio balance, 55.4% of the
loans were restructured while, as of 31 December 2025, about 45.9%
of the balance was in arrears. Out of this arrears balance, on
average, 11.4% were one month in arrears, 5.9% two months in
arrears, 5.0% three months in arrears, and 23.5% were in arrears
for more than three months, while 6.0% of the loans were more than
12 months in arrears. Loans corresponding to 10.2% of the total
amount were under code of good practices, and loans corresponding
to 2.4% of the total amount were in their grace period as of 31
December 2025, with deferred principal payments. The majority of
grace period loans were also under code of good practices.
Morningstar DBRS assessed the historical performance of the
mortgage loans and selected a portfolio score of Low in its
European RMBS Insight Model.

The weighted-average (WA) seasoning of the portfolio as of the
cut-off date was 15.4 years and the WA remaining term was 19.0
years, whereas the WA current loan-to-value ratio was 61.3%.
Moreover, 79.4% of the portfolio comprised floating-rate loans,
mainly linked to 12-month Euribor. The remaining portfolio
comprised fixed-rate loans (20.6%). The Rated Notes are floating
rate and linked to three-month Euribor, and basis risk mismatch
will be hedged through an interest rate swap.

The final maturity of the transaction is in August 2079.

Morningstar DBRS based its credit ratings on a review of the
following analytical considerations:

-- The transaction's capital structure, including the form and
sufficiency of available credit enhancement;

-- The mortgage portfolio's credit quality and the servicer's
ability to perform collection and resolution activities.
Morningstar DBRS estimated stress-level probability of default
(PD), loss given default (LGD), and expected losses (EL) on the
mortgage portfolio. Morningstar DBRS used the PD, LGD, and EL as
inputs into the cash flow engine. Morningstar DBRS analysed the
mortgage portfolio in accordance with its "European RMBS Insight
Methodology";

-- The transaction's ability to withstand stressed cash flow
assumptions and repay the Class A, Class B, Class C, Class D, Class
E, Class F, Class G, and Class H notes according to the terms of
the transaction documents;

-- The structural mitigants in place to avoid potential payment
disruptions caused by operational risk, such as a downgrade, and
replacement language in the transaction documents;

-- Morningstar DBRS' sovereign credit rating on the Kingdom of
Spain at A (high) with a Stable trend as of the date of this press
release; and

-- The expected consistency of the transaction's legal structure
with Morningstar DBRS' "Legal and Derivative Criteria for European
and Asia-Pacific Structured Finance Transactions" methodology and
the presence of legal opinions that address the assignment of the
assets to the Issuer.

Morningstar DBRS' credit ratings on the Rated Notes address the
credit risk associated with the identified financial obligations in
accordance with the relevant transaction documents. The associated
financial obligations are the Interest Payment Amounts and the
related Class Balances.

Morningstar DBRS' credit ratings on the Rated Notes also address
the credit risk associated with the increased rate of interest
applicable to the Rated Notes if the Rated Notes are not redeemed
on the Optional Redemption Date (as defined in and) in accordance
with the applicable transaction documents.

Morningstar DBRS' credit ratings do not address nonpayment risk
associated with contractual payment obligations contemplated in the
applicable transaction documents that are not financial
obligations.

Morningstar DBRS' long-term credit ratings provide opinions on risk
of default. Morningstar DBRS considers risk of default to be the
risk that an issuer will fail to satisfy the financial obligations
in accordance with the terms under which a long-term obligation has
been issued.

Notes: All figures are in euros unless otherwise noted.


NEWBRIDGE PARK: Fitch Assigns 'B-sf' Final Rating to Class F Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned Newbridge Park CLO DAC final ratings, as
detailed below.

   Entity/Debt                  Rating           
   -----------                  ------           
Newbridge Park
CLO DAC

   A XS3272252787            LT AAAsf  New Rating

   B XS3272252860            LT AAsf   New Rating

   C XS3272252944            LT Asf    New Rating

   D XS3272253082            LT BBB-sf New Rating

   E XS3272253165            LT BB-sf  New Rating

   F XS3272253249            LT B-sf   New Rating

   Subordinated Notes
   XS3272253322              LT NRsf   New Rating

   Z XS3289897194            LT NRsf   New Rating

Transaction Summary

Newbridge Park CLO DAC is a securitisation of mainly senior secured
obligations (at least 90%) with a component of senior unsecured,
mezzanine, second-lien loans and high-yield bonds. The transaction
has a target par of EUR400 million. The portfolio is actively
managed by Blackstone Ireland Limited. The CLO has a reinvestment
period of about 5.1 years and an eight-year weighted average life
(WAL) test at closing.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Average Portfolio Credit Quality (Neutral): Fitch assesses the
average credit quality of obligors at 'B'. The Fitch weighted
average rating factor of the identified portfolio is 24.4.

High Recovery Expectations (Positive): At least 90% of the
portfolio comprise seniors secured obligations. Fitch views the
recovery prospects for these assets as more favourable than for
second-lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets. The Fitch weighted
average recovery rate of the identified portfolio is 61.8%.

Diversified Portfolio (Positive): The transaction includes various
concentration limits in the portfolio, including a top 10 obligor
concentration limit at 20% (or a lower percentage in relation to
Fitch test matrices) and a maximum exposure to the three largest
Fitch-defined industries at 40%. These covenants ensure the asset
portfolio will not be exposed to excessive concentration.

WAL Step-Up Feature (Neutral): The transaction can extend the WAL
by one year on or after the WAL test step-up date, which is 12
months after closing. The WAL extension is subject to conditions,
including passing the collateral quality and coverage tests and the
adjusted collateral principal amount being at least equal to the
reinvestment target par balance. The WAL extension can only be
applied 24 months after the issue date if a Fitch test matrix
switch has occurred on or after 12 months from the issue date.

Portfolio Management (Neutral): The transaction includes two matrix
sets, each based on a top 10 obligor limit of 20%. One matrix set
is effective at closing, corresponding to fixed-rate asset limits
of 5% and 10%, and to an eight-year WAL test. The forward matrix
set corresponds to a seven-year WAL test, with the same fixed-rate
asset limits as the closing matrices. The forward matrix set can be
elected by the manager 12 or 24 months after closing (24 months
after closing if the WAL is stepped up), subject to the adjusted
collateral principal amount being at least equal to the
reinvestment target par balance.

The transaction has a 5.1-year reinvestment period and includes
reinvestment criteria similar to those of other European
transactions. Fitch's analysis is based on a stressed-case
portfolio with the aim of testing the robustness of the transaction
structure against its covenants and portfolio guidelines.

Cash Flow Modelling (Positive): The WAL used for the transaction's
Fitch-stressed portfolio and matrices analysis is 12 months less
than the WAL covenant, to account for strict reinvestment
conditions after the reinvestment period, including the
satisfaction of the over-collateralisation test and Fitch's 'CCC'
limit, together with a consistently decreasing WAL covenant. Fitch
believes these conditions reduce the effective risk horizon of the
portfolio during stress periods.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative
Rating Action/Downgrade

A 25% increase of the mean default rate (RDR) and a 25% decrease of
the recovery rate (RRR) across all ratings of the current portfolio
would have no impact on the class A, B and C and F notes and would
lead to downgrades of one notch for the class D and E notes.

Based on the current portfolio, downgrades may occur if the loss
expectation is larger than assumed, due to unexpectedly high levels
of defaults and portfolio deterioration. The class B, D and E notes
have rating cushions of two notches and the class C and F notes of
three notches, due to the better metrics and shorter life of the
current portfolio than the Fitch-stressed portfolio. The class A
notes do not have any rating cushion as they are already at the
highest achievable rating.

Should the cushion between the current portfolio and the
stressed-case portfolio be eroded either due to manager trading or
negative portfolio credit migration, a 25% increase of the mean RDR
and a 25% decrease of the RRR across all ratings of the
stressed-case portfolio would lead to downgrades of two notches for
the class D notes, three notches for the class A and E notes, four
notches for the class B and C notes and to below 'B-sf' for the
class F notes.

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive
Rating Action/Upgrade

A 25% reduction of the RDR and a 25% increase in the RRR across all
ratings of the Fitch-stressed portfolio would lead to upgrades of
up to four notches each for the rated notes, except for the 'AAAsf'
rated notes, which are at the highest level on Fitch's scale and
cannot be upgraded.

During the reinvestment period, based on the Fitch-stressed
portfolio, upgrades may occur on better-than-expected portfolio
credit quality and a shorter remaining WAL test, allowing the notes
to withstand larger-than-expected losses for the remaining life of
the transaction.

Upgrades after the end of the reinvestment period may result from
stable portfolio credit quality and deleveraging, leading to higher
credit enhancement and excess spread available to cover losses in
the remaining portfolio.

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

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

DATA ADEQUACY

The majority of the underlying assets or risk presenting entities
have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally
Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations and/or European
Securities and Markets Authority registered rating agencies. Fitch
has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch
and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio
information or information on the risk presenting entities.

Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above,
Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's
rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies
indicates that it is adequately reliable.

ESG Considerations

Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores for Newbridge Park CLO
DAC.

In cases where Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores in
connection with the credit rating of a transaction, programme,
instrument or issuer, Fitch will disclose any ESG factor that is a
key rating driver in the key rating drivers section of the relevant
rating action commentary.

PALMER SQUARE 2026-1: Fitch Assigns 'BB-(EXP)sf' Rating on E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch has assigned Palmer Square European Loan Funding 2026-1 DAC
notes expected ratings.

The assignment of final ratings is contingent on the receipt of
final documents conforming to information already received.

   Entity/Debt               Rating           
   -----------               ------           
Palmer Square
European Loan
Funding 2026-1 DAC

   A                      LT AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   B                      LT AA(EXP)sf   Expected Rating
   C                      LT A(EXP)sf    Expected Rating
   D                      LT BBB-(EXP)sf Expected Rating
   E                      LT BB-(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   Subordinated Notes     LT NR(EXP)sf   Expected Rating

Transaction Summary

Palmer Square European Loan Funding 2026-1 DAC (the issuer) is a
static cash flow CLO that will be serviced by Palmer Square Europe
Capital Management LLC (Palmer Square). Net proceeds from the notes
will be used to purchase a pool of primarily secured senior loans
and bonds, with a target par of EUR500 million.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

'B+'/'B' Portfolio Credit Quality (Neutral): Fitch places the
average credit quality of obligors to be in the 'B+/B' category.
The Fitch weighted average rating factor (WARF) of the identified
portfolio is 22.9. The portfolio includes 0.6% of 'CCC' obligations
and 7.7% of the ratings are on Negative Outlook, a percentage well
below the average for EMEA CLOs.

High Recovery Expectations (Positive): Senior secured obligations
and first lien loans will make up the majority of the portfolio.
Fitch views the recovery prospects for these assets as more
favourable than for second-lien, unsecured and mezzanine assets.
The Fitch weighted average recovery rate of the current portfolio
is 61.4%.

Diversified Portfolio Composition (Positive): The three largest
industries comprise about 34.0% of the portfolio balance, the top
10 obligors represent 8.6% of the portfolio balance and the largest
five obligors represent 4.5% of the portfolio.

Static Portfolio (Positive): The transaction does not have a
reinvestment period, and while discretionary sales are not
permitted, the manager may sell certain assets such as defaulted
assets and credit impaired assets, which, for example, can be any
floating-rate assets with a price decline of 0.25%. Fitch's
analysis is based on the current portfolio and stressed by applying
a one-notch reduction to all obligors with a Negative Outlook
(floored at 'CCC-'). After the adjustment for Negative Outlooks,
the portfolio WARF would be 23.4.

Deviation from MIR: The minus one-notch deviation from the
model-implied ratings (MIR) for the class B and C notes and the
minus two-notch deviation for the class D and E notes reflect the
insufficient breakeven default rate cushion on the Negative Outlook
portfolio at the MIR, considering the uncertain macro-economic
outlook that increased risk and the risk of excess spread
compression from loan repricings.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative
Rating Action/Downgrade

A 25% increase in the mean default rate (RDR) and a 25% decrease in
the recovery rate (RRR) across all ratings in the current portfolio
would result in one-notch downgrades of the class A, D and E notes
and two-notch downgrades of the class B and C notes.

Based on the current portfolio, downgrades may occur if the loss
expectation is larger than initially assumed, due to unexpectedly
high levels of default and portfolio deterioration. However,
because the current portfolio's WARF is only marginally better than
that of the Negative Outlook portfolio - driven by the very low
share of loans on Negative Outlook and their deviation from their
MIRs - all notes except the class A notes display rating cushions.
The class B and C notes have one-notch cushions, and the class D
and E notes have two-notch cushions.

If the cushion between the current portfolio and the Fitch-stressed
portfolio were to erode due to manager trading or negative credit
migration, a 25% increase in the mean RDR and a 25% decrease in the
RRR across all ratings in the Fitch-stressed portfolio would result
in downgrades of one notch for the class A and D notes and two
notches for the class B, C and E notes.

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive
Rating Action/Upgrade

A 25% reduction in the mean RDR and a 25% increase in the RRR
across all ratings in the Fitch-stressed portfolio would result in
upgrades of two notches for the class B notes, four notches for the
class C notes, and five notches for the class D and E notes. The
class A notes are rated at the highest level on Fitch's scale and
cannot be upgraded.

Upgrades may result from a stable portfolio credit quality and
deleveraging, leading to higher credit enhancement and excess
spread available to cover losses in the remaining portfolio.

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

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

DATA ADEQUACY

The majority of the underlying assets or risk presenting entities
have ratings or credit opinions from Fitch and/or other Nationally
Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations and/or European
Securities and Markets Authority registered rating agencies. Fitch
has relied on the practices of the relevant groups within Fitch
and/or other rating agencies to assess the asset portfolio
information or information on the risk presenting entities.

Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above,
Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the agency's
rating analysis according to its applicable rating methodologies
indicates that it is adequately reliable.

ESG Considerations

Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores for Palmer Square
European Loan Funding 2026-1 DAC.

In cases where Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores in
connection with the credit rating of a transaction, programme,
instrument or issuer, Fitch will disclose any ESG factor that is a
key rating driver in the key rating drivers section of the relevant
rating action commentary.

PROVIDUS CLO IV: S&P Assigns B- (sf) Rating to Class F-R-R Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its credit ratings to Providus CLO IV
DAC's class A-1-R-R, A-2, B-R-R, C-R-R, D-R-R, E-R-R, and F-R-R
notes. At closing, the issuer had EUR39.50 million subordinated
notes outstanding from the previous transaction and issued an
additional EUR15.95 million unrated subordinated notes.

This transaction is a reset of the already existing transaction
that closed in May 2021. The existing notes were fully redeemed
with the proceeds from the issuance of the replacement notes on the
reset date, and the ratings on the original notes have been
withdrawn.

The transaction has a 1.5-year noncall period, and the portfolio's
reinvestment period ends 4.04 years after closing.

Under the transaction documents, the rated notes pay quarterly
interest unless there is a frequency switch event. Following this,
the notes will switch to semiannual payment.

The ratings reflect S&P's assessment of:

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

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

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

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

-- The transaction's counterparty risks, which are in line with
S&P's counterparty rating framework.

  Portfolio benchmarks

  S&P Global Ratings' weighted-average rating factor    2,855.74
  Default rate dispersion                                 500.72
  Weighted-average life (years)                             4.18
  Obligor diversity measure                               165.95
  Industry diversity measure                               16.64
  Regional diversity measure                                1.36

  Transaction key metrics

  Total par amount (mil. EUR)                                400
  CCC rated assets ('CCC+', 'CCC', and 'CCC-') (%)          1.84
  Number of performing obligors                              201
  Portfolio weighted-average rating
  derived from S&P's CDO evaluator                             B
  Actual 'AAA' weighted-average recovery (%)               34.83
  Actual weighted-average coupon (%)                        3.74
  Actual weighted-average spread (no credit to floors) (%)  3.53

S&P said, "The portfolio is well diversified, primarily comprising
broadly syndicated speculative-grade senior secured term loans and
senior secured bonds. Therefore, we have conducted our credit and
cash flow analysis by applying our criteria for corporate cash flow
collateralized debt obligations.

"In our cash flow analysis, we modelled the EUR400 million target
par amount, the target weighted-average spread of 3.53%, the target
average coupon of 3.74%, and the target weighted-average recovery
rate for all rating levels. We applied various cash flow stress
scenarios, using four different default patterns, in conjunction
with different interest rate stress scenarios for each liability
rating category.

"Until the end of the reinvestment period on April 13, 2030, the
collateral manager may substitute assets in the portfolio for so
long as our CDO Monitor test is maintained or improved in relation
to the initial ratings on the notes. This test looks at the total
amount of losses that the transaction can sustain as established by
the initial cash flows for each rating, and it compares that with
the current portfolio's default potential plus par losses to date.
As a result, until the end of the reinvestment period, the
collateral manager may through trading deteriorate the
transaction's current risk profile, as long as the initial ratings
are maintained.

"Following the application of our structured finance sovereign risk
criteria, we consider the transaction's exposure to country risk to
be limited at the assigned ratings, as the exposure to individual
sovereigns does not exceed the diversification thresholds outlined
in our criteria.

"The transaction's documented counterparty replacement and remedy
mechanisms adequately mitigate its exposure to counterparty risk
under our current counterparty criteria.

"The transaction's legal structure is bankruptcy remote, in line
with our legal criteria.

"The operational risk associated with key transaction parties (such
as the collateral manager) that provide an essential service to the
issuer is in line with our operational risk criteria.

"Following our analysis of the credit, cash flow, counterparty,
operational, and legal risks, we believe that our ratings are
commensurate with the available credit enhancement for the class
A-1-R-R to F-R-R notes. Our credit and cash flow analysis indicates
that the class B-R-R to D-R-R notes could withstand stresses
commensurate with higher ratings than those assigned. However, as
the CLO will have a reinvestment period, during which the
transaction's credit risk profile could deteriorate, we have capped
our assigned ratings on these notes.

"Our credit and cash flow analysis indicates that the available
credit enhancement for the class F-R-R notes could withstand
stresses commensurate with a lower rating. However, we have applied
our 'CCC' rating criteria and assigned a 'B- (sf)' rating to this
class of notes."

The ratings uplift for the class F-R-R notes reflects several key
factors, including:

-- The class F-R-R notes' available credit enhancement, which is
in the same range as that of other CLOs we have rated and that have
recently been issued in Europe.

-- The portfolio's average credit quality, which is similar to
other recent CLOs.

-- S&P's model generated break-even default rate at the 'B-'
rating level of 22.15% (for a portfolio with a weighted-average
life of 4.18 years), versus if we were to consider a long-term
sustainable default rate of 3.2% for 4.18 years, which would result
in a target default rate of 13.38%.

-- S&P does not believe that there is a one-in-two chance of this
note defaulting.

-- S&P does not envision this tranche defaulting in the next 12-18
months.

S&P said, "Following this analysis, we consider that the available
credit enhancement for the class F-R-R notes is commensurate with
the assigned 'B- (sf)' rating.

"In addition to our standard analysis, to indicate how rising
pressures among speculative-grade corporates could affect our
ratings on European CLO transactions, we have also included the
sensitivity of the ratings on the class A-1-R-R to E-R-R notes in
four hypothetical scenarios.

"As our ratings analysis makes additional considerations before
assigning ratings in the 'CCC' category, and we would assign a 'B-'
rating if the criteria for assigning a 'CCC' category rating are
not met, we have not included the above scenario analysis results
for the class F-R-R notes."

Environmental, social, and governance

S&P said, "We regard the exposure to environmental, social, and
governance (ESG) credit factors in the transaction as being broadly
in line with our benchmark for the sector. Primarily due to the
diversity of the assets within CLOs, the exposure to environmental
credit factors is viewed as below average, social credit factors
are below average, and governance credit factors are average. For
this transaction, the documents prohibit assets from being related
to certain activities, including, but not limited to weapons or
firearms, illegal drugs or narcotics etc. Accordingly, since the
exclusion of assets from these industries does not result in
material differences between the transaction and our ESG benchmark
for the sector, no specific adjustments have been made in our
rating analysis to account for any ESG-related risks or
opportunities."

Providus CLO IV DAC is a European cash flow CLO securitization of a
revolving pool, comprising primarily euro-denominated senior
secured loans and bonds. Permira European CLO Manager LLP manages
the transaction.

  Ratings
                      Amount                    Credit
  Class    Rating*  (mil. EUR)  Interest rate§  enhancement (%)

  A-1-R-R  AAA (sf)   240.00    3mE +1.23%      40.00
  A-2      AAA (sf)     8.00    3mE +1.65%      38.00
  B-R-R    AA (sf)     38.80    3mE +1.90%      28.30
  C-R-R    A (sf)      24.00    3mE +2.40%      22.30
  D-R-R    BBB- (sf)   30.00    3mE +3.25%      14.80
  E-R-R    BB- (sf)    19.00    3mE +5.75%      10.05
  F-R-R    B- (sf)     14.20    3mE +8.80%       6.50
  Sub      NR         55.452    N/A               N/A

*The ratings assigned to the class A-1-R-R, A-2, and B-R-R notes
address timely interest and ultimate principal payments. The
ratings assigned to the class C-R-R, D-R-R, E-R-R, and F-R-R notes
address ultimate interest and principal payments.
§The payment frequency switches to semiannual and the index
switches to six-month Euro Interbank Offered Rate (EURIBOR) when a
frequency switch event occurs.
Subordinated--Subordinated notes.
3mE--Three-month EURIBOR.
NR--Not rated.
N/A--Not applicable.


ST. PAUL'S III-R: Moody's Affirms Ba1 Rating on EUR40.8MM E-R Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has upgraded the rating on the following notes
issued by St. Paul's CLO III-R Designated Activity Company:

EUR27,500,000 Class D-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2032, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2025
Upgraded to A1 (sf)

Moody's have also affirmed the ratings on the following notes:

EUR330,100,000 (Current outstanding amount EUR39,624,295) Class
A-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2032, Affirmed Aaa (sf);
previously on Jun 20, 2025 Affirmed Aaa (sf)

EUR48,800,000 Class B-1-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2032, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2025 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

EUR18,400,000 Class B-2-R Senior Secured Fixed Rate Notes due
2032, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2025 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

EUR30,800,000 Class C-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2032, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2025
Upgraded to Aaa (sf)

EUR40,800,000 Class E-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2032, Affirmed Ba1 (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2025
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

EUR16,200,000 Class F-R Senior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2032, Affirmed B2 (sf); previously on Jun 20, 2025
Affirmed B2 (sf)

St. Paul's CLO III-R Designated Activity Company, issued in
February 2018, is a collateralised loan obligation (CLO) backed by
a portfolio of mostly high-yield senior secured European loans. The
portfolio is managed by ICG Manager Limited. The transaction's
reinvestment period ended in January 2022.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating upgrade on the Class D-R notes is primarily a result of
the significant deleveraging of the senior notes following
amortization of the underlying portfolio the last rating action in
June 2025.

The affirmations on the ratings on the Class A-R, B-1-R, B-2-R,
C-R, E-R and F-R notes are primarily a result of the expected
losses on the notes remaining consistent with their current rating
levels, after taking into account the CLO's latest portfolio, its
relevant structural features and its actual over-collateralisation
ratios.

The Class A-R notes have paid down by approximately EUR110.7
million (33.5%) since the last rating action in June 2025 and
EUR290.5 million (88.0%) since closing. As a result of the
deleveraging, over-collateralisation (OC) has increased across the
capital structure. According to the trustee report dated February
2026[1] the Class A/B, Class C and Class D OC ratios are reported
at 214.18%, 166.24% and 138.56% compared to June 2025[2] levels of
161.16%, 141.17% and 127.10% respectively.

The key model inputs Moody's uses in Moody's analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score and the weighted
average recovery rate, are based on Moody's published methodology
and could differ from the trustee's reported numbers.

In Moody's base case, Moody's used the following assumptions:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: EUR237.5m

Defaulted Securities: EUR11.6m

Diversity Score: 31

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3643

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 3.17 years

Weighted Average Spread (WAS) (before accounting for Euribor
floors): 4.05%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 4.91%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 43.83%

Par haircut in OC tests and interest diversion test: 1.11%

The default probability derives from the credit quality of the
collateral pool and Moody's expectations of the remaining life of
the collateral pool. The estimated average recovery rate on future
defaults is based primarily on the seniority of the assets in the
collateral pool. In each case, historical and market performance
and a collateral manager's latitude to trade collateral are also
relevant factors. Moody's incorporates these default and recovery
characteristics of the collateral pool into Moody's cash flow model
analysis, subjecting them to stresses as a function of the target
rating of each CLO liability it is analysing.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Collateralized
Loan Obligations" published in October 2025.

Counterparty Exposure:

The rating action took into consideration the notes' exposure to
relevant counterparties, such as account bank, using the
methodology "Structured Finance Counterparty Risks" published in
May 2025. Moody's concluded the ratings of the notes are not
constrained by these risks.

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

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

Additional uncertainty about performance is due to the following:

-- Portfolio amortisation: The main source of uncertainty in this
transaction is the pace of amortisation of the underlying
portfolio, which can vary significantly depending on market
conditions and have a significant impact on the notes' ratings.
Amortisation could accelerate as a consequence of high loan
prepayment levels or collateral sales by the collateral manager or
be delayed by an increase in loan amend-and-extend restructurings.
Fast amortisation would usually benefit the ratings of the notes
beginning with the notes having the highest prepayment priority.

-- Recovery of defaulted assets: Market value fluctuations in
trustee-reported defaulted assets and those Moody's assumes have
defaulted can result in volatility in the deal's
over-collateralisation levels. Further, the timing of recoveries
and the manager's decision whether to work out or sell defaulted
assets can also result in additional uncertainty. Moody's analysed
defaulted recoveries assuming the lower of the market price or the
recovery rate to account for potential volatility in market prices.
Recoveries higher than Moody's expectations would have a positive
impact on the notes' ratings.

In addition to the quantitative factors that Moody's explicitly
modelled, qualitative factors are part of the rating committee's
considerations. These qualitative factors include the structural
protections in the transaction, its recent performance given the
market environment, the legal environment, specific documentation
features, the collateral manager's track record and the potential
for selection bias in the portfolio. All information available to
rating committees, including macroeconomic forecasts, input from
Moody's other analytical groups, market factors, and judgments
regarding the nature and severity of credit stress on the
transactions, can influence the final rating decision.



=========
I T A L Y
=========

BANCA IFIS: Fitch Affirms 'BB+' Long-Term IDR, Outlook Stable
-------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed Banca IFIS S.p.A.'s (IFIS) Long-Term
Issuer Default Rating (IDR) at 'BB+' and Viability Rating (VR) at
'bb+'. The Outlook on the Long-Term IDR is Stable.

Key Rating Drivers

Specialised Domestic Bank: IFIS's ratings primarily reflect its
specialised business model, with an established niche franchise and
adequate through-the-cycle profitability. The ratings also reflect
a moderately higher risk profile and impaired loans ratio,
excluding purchased non-performing loans (NPLs), than the domestic
average, acceptable capital buffers, despite the erosion caused by
the acquisition and clean-up of illimity Bank S.p.A. (BB+/Stable),
and adequately diversified but price-sensitive funding.

Established Niche Franchise, Enlarged Scale: IFIS's business
profile is underpinned by its established domestic franchise in
factoring, leasing and NPL purchasing. The bank has also grown
rapidly in SME lending, including through the acquisition of
illimity, and has just launched a new wealth management offering.
Over time, Fitch expects operational efficiency to benefit from the
group's enlarged scale and from increased revenue diversification.

Above-Average Risk Profile: IFIS's focus on smaller enterprises and
its granular NPL business result in an above-average risk profile.
Collections of NPLs are consistently above the bank's expected
recoveries, underscoring the effectiveness of its underwriting
standards and risk controls, including conservative pricing on
purchased NPLs. IFIS also remains sensitive to movements in
interest rates due mainly to its price-sensitive deposit base and
its short-term factoring business.

Above-Average Impaired Loans: IFIS's reported organic impaired
loans ratio, i.e. excluding impaired loans purchased by the NPL
division or acquired from illimity, of 5.2% at end-2025 is above
the domestic average. Fitch expects it to remain at 5%-6% in the
next three years, given IFIS's focus on smaller firms and Italy's
subdued economic environment. IFIS purchases NPLs at a deep
discount relative to their nominal value and typically recovers
1.5x-2x the price it pays. Fitch expects collections to continue
performing well in 2026, although weaker macroeconomic conditions
remain a key downside.

Recovering Profitability: The operating profitability/risk weighted
assets (RWAs) ratio of 1.3% in 2025 (2024: 2.5%) was affected by
costs related to the acquisition and the clean-up of illimity, and
by its consolidation only in 2H25. Fitch expects the ratio to
return sustainably above 2% within the next three years, driven by
synergies realisation, lower funding costs and business growth.
Revenue diversification should also improve in line with IFIS's
focus on SME lending and the launch of wealth management
activities.

Adequate Capitalisation Despite Erosion: The common equity Tier 1
(CET1) of 13.7% at end-2025 (pro-forma for already announced
disposals of non-core and impaired assets) provides sufficient
cushion over regulatory requirements but has reduced more than
Fitch had expected following the acquisition and clean-up of
illimity. IFIS's internal capital generation and prudent capital
management support its expectation that the bank will maintain its
CET1 ratio at close to its 14% target in the next three years
despite the planned business growth and shareholder remuneration.

Price-Sensitive Deposits, Prudent Liquidity: IFIS's loans to
deposit ratio benefitted from the acquisition of illimity, which
has a larger deposit base, falling to 117% at end-2025 (end-2024:
151%). However, deposits still represent only 57% of funding and
remain more price-sensitive than commercial banks. IFIS manages its
liquidity prudently and has well-matched assets and liabilities by
maturity, providing headroom in case of deposit erosion. Access to
wholesale debt markets is adequate but remains vulnerable to market
sentiment.

Rating Sensitivities

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative
Rating Action/Downgrade

Negative rating pressure could arise from the materialisation of
further integration risks from the acquisition of illimity that
would prevent IFIS from extracting planned synergies, resulting in
capitalisation and earnings stabilising structurally below IFIS's
pre-acquisition levels. Further large impairments or material
operational losses on the integration could also lead to a negative
rating action.

IFIS's ratings have sufficient headroom to absorb a moderately
weaker-than-expected macroeconomic environment that could affect
its business in the short term. However, the ratings could be
downgraded if IFIS's organic impaired loans ratio structurally
increases towards 10% and the CET1 ratio remains well below 14%
without prospects of reversing in the short term. Operating profit
remaining below 1.5% of RWAs on a sustained basis would also put
pressure on the ratings, especially if this resulted from
heightened pressure on funding costs.

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive
Rating Action/Upgrade

Rating upside is primarily contingent on evidence of progress in
IFIS's diversification strategy, notably through the smooth
integration of illimity and diversification into wealth management,
which would ultimately benefit its business profile while
strengthening its risk profile. A successful integration
demonstrated by execution of the announced synergies, the alignment
of risk profiles, and tangible benefits from an increased size in
key operating segments, all within a reasonable timeframe, could
ultimately be positive for the sustainability of IFIS's business
profile, earnings and ratings.

In particular, IFIS would have to sustain higher earnings
generation than its long-term average (e.g. an operating
profit/RWAs ratio sustainably above 2%). This would have to be
accompanied by continued prudent capital management, with a CET1
ratio of about 14%, and asset quality maintained at around current
levels (e.g. organic impaired loans ratio of around 5%).

Fitch notes that ratings of banks operating in developed resolution
regimes could be affected if the 'Exposure Draft: Bank Rating
Criteria' is implemented as proposed upon conversion into final
criteria.

OTHER DEBT AND ISSUER RATINGS: KEY RATING DRIVERS

SHORT-TERM IDR

IFIS's Short-Term IDR of 'B' is the only option mapping to a
Long-Term IDR of 'BB+' under Fitch's correspondence table.

DEPOSITS AND SENIOR DEBT

IFIS's long-term deposit rating of 'BBB-' is one notch above the
bank's Long-Term IDR given full depositor preference in Italy and
the bank's large total debt buffer, which Fitch expects to
sustainably exceed 10% of RWAs. The short-term deposit rating of
'F3' is mapped to IFIS's 'BBB-' long-term deposit rating.

Its senior preferred debt is rated in line with the Long-Term IDR
as the bank is not subject to minimum requirement for own funds and
eligible liabilities in excess of total capital requirements. The
rating also reflects its expectation that the buffer of more junior
instruments is unlikely to sustainably exceed 10% of the bank's
RWAs.

SUBORDINATED DEBT

The Tier 2 debt is rated two notches below IFIS's VR for loss
severity to reflect poor recovery prospects.


GOVERNMENT SUPPORT RATING

IFIS's Government Support Rating of 'no support' reflects Fitch's
view that senior creditors cannot rely on receiving full
extraordinary support from the sovereign if the bank becomes
non-viable. The EU's Bank Recovery and Resolution Directive and the
Single Resolution Mechanism for eurozone banks provide a framework
for resolving banks that requires senior creditors participating in
losses ahead of a bank receiving sovereign support.

OTHER DEBT AND ISSUER RATINGS: RATING SENSITIVITIES

The Short-Term IDR, deposit and senior preferred ratings are
primarily sensitive to changes in the bank's Long-Term IDR, from
which they are notched. In addition, the long-term deposit rating
is also sensitive to a material reduction in the buffers of senior
and junior debt.

The Short-Term IDR could be upgraded to 'F3' if the Long-Term IDR
is upgraded to 'BBB-'. An upgrade of the short-term deposit rating
to 'F2' would require an upgrade of the long-term deposit rating to
'BBB' and a funding and liquidity score of at least 'bbb+'.

The senior preferred debt could be upgraded if IFIS is required to
hold resolution buffers in excess of its total capital requirement
and is expected to meet them exclusively with more junior
instruments, or if Fitch expects resolution buffers represented by
more junior instruments to be at least 10% of RWAs on a sustained
basis, neither of which is currently the case.

The subordinated debt rating is primarily sensitive to changes in
the VR, from which it is notched.

An upgrade of the GSR would be contingent on a positive change in
the sovereign's propensity to support the bank. Fitch believes this
is highly unlikely, although not impossible.

VR ADJUSTMENTS

The operating environment score of 'bbb+' is below the 'a' category
implied score due to the following adjustment reason: sovereign
rating (negative).

The asset quality score of 'bb' is above the 'b & below' category
implied score due to the following adjustment reason: loan
classification policies (positive).

The earnings and profitability score of 'bb+' is below the 'bbb'
category implied score due to the following adjustment reason:
revenue diversification (negative).

ESG Considerations

The highest level of ESG credit relevance is a score of '3', unless
otherwise disclosed in this section. A score of '3' means ESG
issues are credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on
the entity, either due to their nature or the way in which they are
being managed by the entity. Fitch's ESG Relevance Scores are not
inputs in the rating process; they are an observation on the
relevance and materiality of ESG factors in the rating decision.

   Entity/Debt                         Rating            Prior
   -----------                         ------            -----
Banca IFIS S.p.A.    LT IDR             BB+  Affirmed    BB+
                     ST IDR             B    Affirmed    B
                     Viability          bb+  Affirmed    bb+
                     Government Support ns   Affirmed    ns
   Subordinated      LT                 BB-  Affirmed    BB-

   long-term
   deposits          LT                 BBB- Affirmed    BBB-

   Senior
   preferred         LT                 BB+  Affirmed    BB+

   short-term
   deposits          ST                 F3   Affirmed    F3

FIBERCOP SPA: S&P Assigns 'BB+' Rating to Senior Secured Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings has assigned its 'BB+' issue rating to the
proposed benchmark-size senior secured notes to be issued by
FiberCop SpA (BB+/Stable/--).

S&P said, "We understand that FiberCop will use the proceeds of the
issuance to cover general corporate purposes, which may include
financing capital expenditure. Concurrently, the company is in the
process of extending the maturity of a large portion of its term
loan facilities while aiming to keep the current spread. This will
enable it to preemptively manage its maturity profile.

"We understand that the new instrument will rank at the same
seniority as the outstanding senior secured debt issued by FiberCop
SpA. Our 'BB+' issuer credit rating on FiberCop is unchanged
because we view this transaction as credit neutral."


ILLIMITY BANK: Fitch Hikes Long-Term IDR to 'BB+', Outlook Stable
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has upgraded illimity Bank S.p.A.'s Long-Term Issuer
Default Rating (IDR), Shareholder Support Rating (SSR) and
long-term senior preferred debt to 'BB+' from 'BB' and removed them
from Rating Watch Positive (RWP). Fitch has also upgraded by one
notch illimity's long-term deposit and Tier 2 debt ratings. The
Outlook on the Long-Term IDR is Stable.

The upgrade equalises illimity's ratings with those of Banca IFIS
S.p.A (IFIS, BB+/Stable), following the gradual progress in
illimity's integration within IFIS. This is evident in the high
integration already achieved between the two banks, in illimity's
strategic and risk profile realignment with its new parent and
expected capital and funding fungibility between the two banks.

The withdrawal of illimity's Viability Rating (VR) reflects Fitch's
view that the bank no longer has a meaningful standalone franchise
that can be assessed independently from that of IFIS. This follows
the company's reorganisation following the full takeover by IFIS,
the high integration already achieved between the two entities,
strong ordinary support and its expectation that the merger of
illimity into IFIS will likely be completed by end-2026.

Fitch also expects to withdraw illimity's other issuer ratings on
completion of the merger into IFIS as the bank will cease to exist
as a separate legal entity.

Key Rating Drivers

Shareholder Support Drives Ratings: illimity's Long- and Short-Term
IDRs are equalised with IFIS's and factor in Fitch's view of a
moderate probability of support from IFIS - its 100% shareholder -
which is reflected in the 'bb+' SSR. Fitch considers illimity to be
a key and integral part of IFIS, following the former's clear
strategic repositioning, ensuing risk reduction, high operational
integration and capital and funding fungibility.

High Strategic Fit: illimity's strategic repositioning will
strengthen IFIS's position as a leader in specialty finance in
Italy, with a focus on SMEs, and will support the group's plans to
develop its commercial banking and digital retail banking
activities. Both institutions have complementary focuses, which
should generate significant synergies. This includes expanding
product offerings and improving client servicing by integrating
high value-added products, such as factoring and some specialty
lending undertaken in line with IFIS's risk appetite.

The appointment by IFIS of a new senior management team at
illimity, notably a new CEO seconded from IFIS, plus the
replacement of the board of directors underline the alignment of
illimity's strategy and risk profile with those of its new parent,
further supporting the equalisation of their ratings.

Reducing Integration Risks: Fitch expects illimity to be merged
into IFIS by end-2026 and be fully operationally integrated in
2027. Fitch expects integration risks to gradually decline
throughout 2026, following large one-off costs related to IFIS's
acquisition and the clean-up of illimity in 2H25. The run-off and
further risk reduction of large parts of illimity's former
activities will also materially reduce the entity's size relative
to its new parent (from just over 30% of the combined group assets
at end-2025), resulting in manageable financial risks for IFIS.

High Propensity to Support: Fitch believes a default of illimity
would create high reputational risk for IFIS, and that the Italian
authorities would favour support for illimity from IFIS. In
addition, Fitch expects the enlarged group to ultimately adopt a
combined group resolution plan and be subject to consolidated
minimum requirement for own funds and eligible liabilities (MREL).
This would significantly increase IFIS's propensity to support its
subsidiary as Fitch anticipates the group to ultimately operate
under a single point-of-entry resolution strategy following the
merger.

Viability Rating Withdrawn: illimity's VR, prior to the withdrawal,
primarily reflected its specialised business model and small
franchise in SME and asset-based financing, which resulted in
above-average risk appetite, more variable earnings and funding
that is highly-price sensitive. The VR also considered the bank's
operating challenges and the vulnerability of its capitalisation to
execution risks as it exits non-performing loans (NPL) debt
purchasing.

Rating Sensitivities

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative
Rating Action/Downgrade

Illimity's IDRs and SSR would be downgraded if IFIS's Long-Term IDR
was downgraded. They would also likely be downgraded if IFIS
changed its plans to merge with illimity or if the latter ceased to
be a key part of IFIS's upcoming medium-term strategic plan.

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive
Rating Action/Upgrade

An upgrade of the IDRs and SSR would be contingent on an upgrade of
IFIS's Long-Term IDR. Fitch notes that ratings of banks operating
in developed resolution regimes could be affected if the 'Exposure
Draft: Bank Rating Criteria' is implemented as proposed upon
conversion into final criteria.

OTHER DEBT AND ISSUER RATINGS: KEY RATING DRIVERS

The long-term deposit rating of 'BBB-', which is upgraded by one
notch, is one notch above the bank's Long-Term IDR, given full
depositor preference in Italy and the protection offered by large
buffers of lower-ranking senior preferred and Tier 2 debt,
including those raised by IFIS, as Fitch expects the two banks to
ultimately be merged. The short-term deposit rating of 'F3', which
is upgraded from 'B', is mapped to illimity's 'BBB-' long-term
deposit rating.

The senior preferred debt is upgraded by one notch to 'BB+', in
line with the bank's Long-Term IDR. This mainly reflects its
expectation that illimity and IFIS will continue to have a buffer
of subordinated debt and other junior instruments that remains
lower than 10% of risk-weighted assets (RWAs).

Subordinated Tier 2 debt is upgraded by one notch to 'BB-' and is
notched down from illimity's Long-Term IDR because Fitch believes
support from IFIS will extend to illimity's subordinated
bondholders. The subordinated Tier 2 debt is rated two notches
below the Long-Term IDR for loss severity to reflect poor recovery
prospects.

OTHER DEBT AND ISSUER RATINGS: RATING SENSITIVITIES

The debt ratings are sensitive to changes in the bank's IDRs, from
which they are notched. In addition, the long-term deposit rating
is also sensitive to a material reduction in the buffers of senior
and junior debt available at the combined IFIS and illimity.

The senior preferred debt could be upgraded if IFIS is required to
hold resolution buffers in excess of its total capital requirement
and is expected to meet them exclusively with more junior
instruments, or if Fitch expects resolution debt buffers
represented by more junior instruments to be at least 10% of RWAs
on a sustained basis, neither of which is currently the case.

The subordinated debt rating is also sensitive to a change in the
notes' notching, which could result from a change in Fitch's
assessment of their non-performance relative to the risk captured
in the Long-Term IDR.

VR ADJUSTMENTS

Prior to the withdrawal of the VR:

The operating environment score of 'bbb+' was below the 'a'
category implied score due to the following adjustment reason:
sovereign rating (negative)

The asset quality score of 'bb-' was above the 'b & below' category
implied score due to the following adjustment reasons: collateral
and reserves (positive), loan classification (positive)

The capitalisation and leverage score of 'bb-' was below the 'bbb'
category implied score due to the following adjustment reason: risk
profile and business model (negative)

The funding and liquidity score of 'bb-' was below the 'bbb'
category implied score due to the following adjustment reason:
deposit structure (negative)

Public Ratings with Credit Linkage to other ratings

illimity's Long-Term IDR and SSR are linked to IFIS's Long-Term
IDR.

ESG Considerations

The highest level of ESG credit relevance is a score of '3', unless
otherwise disclosed in this section. A score of '3' means ESG
issues are credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on
the entity, either due to their nature or the way in which they are
being managed by the entity. Fitch's ESG Relevance Scores are not
inputs in the rating process; they are an observation on the
relevance and materiality of ESG factors in the rating decision.

   Entity/Debt                       Rating            Prior
   -----------                       ------            -----
illimity Bank
S.p.A.            LT IDR              BB+  Upgrade     BB
                  ST IDR              B    Affirmed    B
                  Viability           bb-  Affirmed    bb-
                  Viability           WD   Withdrawn
                  Shareholder Support bb+  Upgrade     bb

   Subordinated   LT                  BB-  Upgrade     B+

   long-term
   deposits       LT                  BBB- Upgrade     BB+

   Senior
   preferred      LT                  BB+  Upgrade     BB

   short-term
   deposits       ST                  F3   Upgrade     B



===================
L U X E M B O U R G
===================

ESSENDI SA: Moody's Affirms 'B2' CFR, Alters Outlook to Negative
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has affirmed Essendi S.A.'s (Essendi or the
company) B2 corporate family rating, B2-PD probability of default
rating and B2 backed senior secured associated debt ratings. The
outlook has been revised to negative from stable. The outlook
change reflects slower-than-expected progress on asset disposals,
softer than expected operating performance in 2025, and rising
uncertainty following ACCOR S.A. (Accor)'s ongoing disposal of its
stake in the company.

"Execution on Essendi's disposal strategy has lagged original
expectations, with completed proceeds of EUR146 million in 2025
compared with an initially targeted EUR625 million. This slower
pace weighs on Moody's previously expected deleveraging and, to a
lesser degree, on anticipated profitability improvement. While
operations remained broadly resilient in 2025—with like-for-like
RevPAR growth of 0.8%—Essendi remains weakly positioned from a
leverage and coverage standpoint, as operational deleveraging alone
is unlikely to restore metrics commensurate with the B2 rating.
Disposals of margin-dilutive assets are also increasingly difficult
in the current macroeconomic environment, particularly as the
remaining assets for sale are more complex and involve multiple
stakeholders, raising execution risk and increasing the likelihood
of price discounts, despite Essendi's robust disposal track record
prior to 2025" says Elise Savoye, CFA, a Moody's Ratings Vice
President - Senior Analyst and lead analyst for Essendi.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The affirmation of the B2 corporate family rating (CFR) reflects
Essendi's strategic focus on the more resilient economy and
midscale hotel segments—representing 97% of the portfolio at year
end 2025—and continued robust operational performance supported
by stronger than pre pandemic pricing and ongoing operational
efficiency measures. These factors contributed to a gradual
increase in Moody's adjusted EBITA margin to 12.1% as of December
2025. Despite weaker than expected topline especially in France and
Germany in 2025, Essendi delivered resilient like for like RevPAR
growth of 0.8%. The affirmation also reflects that Essendi's
liquidity remains adequate, supported by cautious liquidity
management, sufficient liquidity headroom, and limited refinancing
needs until 2029.

However, Essendi achieved only EUR146 million of disposal proceeds
in 2025, falling materially short of expectations. Disposals were
also intended to support profitability by removing margin-dilutive
assets. While 2025 margin benefited from prior disposals and
earlier cost-cutting measures, margin improvement was weaker than
expected. Although early 2026 trading in January and February was
solid, top line improvement in 2026 is likely to remain modest with
around ~1% like-for-like RevPAR growth amid geopolitical
uncertainty, softening consumer sentiment and heightened price
sensitivity among clients.

As a result of delayed disposals and weaker-than-expected operating
performance, leverage and coverage metrics are at the lower end of
Moody's tolerance for the B2 rating (respectively at 6.5x and 1.3x
on a Moody's adjusted basis). Essendi has already waived its
leverage covenants on its bank facilities for December 2025 and
June 2026, and compliance by year-end 2026 appears unlikely.
However, Moody's expects management to proactively address this
issue.

Governance considerations are also increasingly relevant as Accor
progresses with the sale of its 30.6% stake in Essendi, with
completion expected later in 2026. Essendi's operating model
remains closely intertwined with Accor, which manages all Essendi
hotels under long term management and commercial agreements.
Accor's planned exit as a significant shareholder increases
uncertainty and could slow the execution of Accor-managed asset
disposals, hereby further delaying ongoing transformation
initiatives.

These developments—combined with softer operating results and
heightened macro-uncertainty—support the change in outlook to
negative. This rating action is predicated upon Moody's baseline
scenario which assumes a short-lived conflict in the Middle East,
likely a matter of weeks. Nevertheless, Moody's recognizes that
Essendi operates in an industry that is materially exposed to a
further deterioration in the Middle East conflict, which may have
more consequential impact on its creditworthiness, in a scenario of
a weakening macroeconomic environment in Essendi's core markets.

RATIONALE FOR THE OUTLOOK

The negative outlook reflects Moody's expectations that delayed
asset disposals and soft topline performance will postpone the
deleveraging and improvement in interest coverage previously
anticipated to support the B2 rating. The outlook also incorporates
heightened uncertainty following ACCOR S.A.'s planned exit, which
could further delay Accor-managed asset disposals, hereby further
delaying ongoing transformation measures; however it also
incorporates expectations that liquidity will remain adequate.

FACTORS THAT COULD LEAD TO AN UPGRADE OR DOWNGRADE OF THE RATINGS

Given the negative outlook, upward rating pressure is unlikely in
the near term. However, the rating could be upgraded if Essendi:

-- Accelerates execution of its disposal plan such that
Moody's-adjusted debt/EBITDA reduces sustainably below around
5.0x.

-- Sustains good operating performance, leading to a gradual
improvement in profitability and Moody's-adjusted EBITA/interest
approaching 2.0x on a sustained basis.

-- Generates positive free cash flow on a sustained basis, with
FCF/debt trending towards around 5% over time.

A rating upgrade would also require the company to maintain an
adequate liquidity profile and adopt a prudent financial policy,
and for governance risks associated with the exit of ACCOR S.A. to
be resolved in a manner that preserves creditor protections.

The rating could be downgraded if:

-- Essendi fails to execute at least around 80% of its initial
disposal plan – around EUR350 million of additional
disposals–by year-end 2026, particularly if this is accompanied
by a failure to divest weaker-performing hotels.

-- The company is unable to reduce Moody's-adjusted debt/EBITDA
below around 6.0x or to improve Moody's-adjusted EBITA/interest
towards around 1.5x by year-end 2026.

-- Revenue and EBITDA growth remain slower than expected such that
Essendi's operating performance is structurally weaker, for example
because of prolonged demand weakness in its key markets.

-- Liquidity deteriorates, for instance because Moody's-adjusted
free cash flow turns structurally negative or the company
materially reduces its liquidity buffers.

-- The company adopts a more aggressive financial policy,
including higher tolerance for leverage or significant shareholder
distributions, leading to retained cash flow to net debt falling
below around 10%.

-- Material deterioration of the real estate asset coverage.

LIQUIDITY

Essendi benefits from a sizeable EUR6.2 billion owned real estate
base valued representing around 83% of group Gross Asset Value
(GAV). Of this, approximately EUR3.2 billion is encumbered through
share pledges, leaving around EUR3.0 billion unencumbered, which
provides additional financial flexibility.

The adequate liquidity profile is further supported by the lack of
refinancing need prior to 2029.

STRUCTURAL CONSIDERATION

Essendi's capital structure is primarily based on EUR492 million
term loans, EUR2,650 million bonds, and a EUR400 million revolving
credit facility (RCF) which all rank equally and are secured by
share pledges over certain operating subsidiaries, and intercompany
loan receivables.

In the loss given default (LGD) assessment, Moody's ranks the term
loans, the RCF and the backed senior secured bonds pari passu. The
B2 instrument rating, in line with the CFR, reflects a one notch
LGD override to account for the limited guarantor coverage, at
around 57% of group EBITDA, and the significant portion of gross
asset value not subject to share pledges under the existing debt
structure (approximately EUR3.0 billion as of year end 2025).

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in these ratings was Business and
Consumer Services published in February 2026.



===========
N O R W A Y
===========

B2 IMPACT: S&P Upgrades ICR to 'BB' on Improved Financial Profile
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its long-term issuer credit ratings on
Norway-based debt collector B2 Impact ASA (B2) and its senior
unsecured notes to 'BB' from 'BB-'. The recovery rating on the
notes is unchanged at '4'.

S&P said, "The stable outlook indicates that we anticipate that B2
will maintain its prudent financial policy and sound collection
performance while maintaining its competitive position within
European distressed debt purchasers (DDP) for the next 12 months."

B2 solid cash flow generation and a stable debt stack underpin the
strengthening of its financial profile.

Successful capital management exercises and a disciplined financial
policy have helped the company to lower its interest expense, grow
its investment portfolio sustainably, and expand its collection
revenue and earnings. This has kept its leverage in check.

S&P said, "We think that B2's leverage is contained. Successful
refinancing efforts during the past couple of years have enabled
the company to materially reduce its interest expenses, releasing
cash to fund investment without incurring additional debt. This
reflects the company's clear financial policy in the past 24
months, which has prioritized deleveraging and business
rationalization, creating a clear differentiator compared with
other DDP peers.

"In our view, the group's collections performance has been solid.
Higher investments, a structural shift to prioritize unsecured
portfolios, and collection outperformance (returns have trended
between 105% to 110% of expected recoveries) have resulted in
rising collections. Coupled with sound cost control B2's EBITDA
levels have risen materially. Taken with its stable debt stack,
B2's debt to adjusted EBITDA levels have remained consistently
below 4.0x, with end-2025 leverage of 3.0x. We expect B2's
management to maintain this prudent profile, keeping leverage in
line with their market guidance of below 2.5x of reported leverage,
equivalent to about 3.5x S&P Global Ratings-adjusted leverage.

"We expect B2 to gradually increase its debt stack to fuel
portfolio growth in the next 24 months. B2's dividend policy allows
the company to distribute 100% of its net earnings to shareholders
if its reported leverage ratio is below 2.5x. Under our base case,
we expect management to continue to meet this target, returning
100% of its net income to shareholders across our forecast. As
such, additional growth in its balance sheet will require the
company to gradually increase its debt--drawing on its revolving
credit facility (RCF) without exceeding the 2.5x threshold. This
policy is shareholder friendly to some extent. However, B2's
approach gives the company the ability to decrease or even halt
dividend payments to maintain a broadly consistent financial
profile--either in the case of a material market downturn or asset
underperformance that negatively affects its EBITDA and increases
leverage. Despite a gradual climb in leverage toward 3.5x on an S&P
Global Ratings-adjusted basis through 2026 and 2027, B2 compares
favorably with other industry peers in a sector that has struggled
to deleverage and often lacks the financial flexibility to preserve
its balance sheet through adverse economic conditions.

"We view the group's maturity profile as positive. One of the key
pillars of B2's recent strategy has been to refinance and extend
its maturity profile, improving its cash interest cost by nearly
23% compared to end-2023. Consistent efforts to tap into the market
at improved terms have given the firm funding flexibility. The
group has no material repayments within the next three years and no
maturity concentrations within its capital structure. This allows
the company the ability to manage its cash flow profile and balance
sheet flexibly, managing its shareholder returns and capital
expenditure (capex) to meet short-term liquidity needs and
medium-term funding requirements.

"Continued growth will consolidate B2's position within the
European DDP industry. We expect B2's brisk growth to continue,
using its leverage headroom and the dislocation among industry
peers to gradually increase its market participation, ramping up
its investment volumes in the confines of its risk policy. The
recent acquisition of a DNB loan portfolio in Norway supports our
belief that the company intends to ramp-up its growth efforts in
the coming years, gradually closing the gap with bigger players. We
expect B2 to invest close to Norwegian krone (NOK) 4 billion in
2026 and between NOK3.5 billion-NOK4.0 billion going forward.

"The stable outlook indicates our expectations that B2 will
maintain debt to adjusted EBITDA comfortably below 4.0x in the next
12 months, in line with its prudent financial policy and its solid
financial flexibility. Additionally, we incorporate that B2 will
maintain its collection levels between 105%-110%, adjusted EBITDA
margins of about 60%, and that it will actively manage its
liquidity and debt burden.

"We could lower the rating on B2 if the company's financial policy
loosens and leverage builds up to consistently above 4.0x. This
could happen, for instance, if management were overly aggressive
under adverse economic conditions, weakening its financial profile
and failing to keep its debt to EBITDA contained.

"Although we see an upgrade over the next 12 months as unlikely, we
could raise the rating on B2 if we saw a material reduction in
adjusted leverage to levels sustainably below 3.0x, with interest
coverage above 6.0x. An upgrade would also depend on the company
maintaining well-spread maturities and keeping its weighted-average
maturities above two years."



=====================
S W I T Z E R L A N D
=====================

ARCHROMA HOLDINGS: S&P Affirms 'B-' ICR, Outlook Stable
-------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings affirmed its 'B-' long-term issuer credit rating
on Switzerland-based Archroma Holdings S.a.r.l. (Archroma) and its
'B' issue rating on its proposed $862 million-equivalent remaining
term loan B (TLB).

S&P said, "The stable outlook indicates that we expect a gradual
recovery in EBITDA over the next 12 months, driven by integration
synergies, cost savings measures, and modest volume growth. As a
result, adjusted debt to EBITDA should improve to 10.5x-11.0x
(5.8x-6.3x excluding preferred equity certificates [PECs]), and FFO
interest coverage to 1.5x-1.7x in 2026 before improving further to
1.7x-2.0x in 2027. The stable outlook assumes that Archroma will
timely and successfully complete its amend and extend (A&E)
transaction. We anticipate that the company will maintain
accordingly a comfortable liquidity buffer while free operating
cash flow (FOCF) should remain positive in 2026 and 2027."

First quarter of fiscal 2026 shows early signs of improvement
despite still-soft market conditions. Top-line performance remains
under pressure, with broadly flat volumes and sales declining by
about 4.5% year over year. Both the Textile Effects (TE) and
Packaging Technologies (PT) divisions were affected by weak market
demand and typical first-quarter seasonality in fiscal 2026. The
company reported a gross profit margin of 27.8%, supported by
procurement savings, improved plant utilization, higher yields, and
lower plant spending. Last 12 months EBITDA reached $191.5 million,
gradually recovering from the subdued performance recorded in the
second half of fiscal 2025. S&P expects Archroma to deliver $200
million-$220 million of adjusted EBITDA for fiscal 2026, supported
by higher volumes in TE following its investment in Super System+,
as well as the launch and expansion of new product lines in PT.

S&P said, "We expect the proposed A&E to address the refinancing
risk while reducing senior secured leverage. Archroma plans to
amend and extend its existing TLB, pushing the maturity to June
2030 from June 2027. We understand that current TLB lenders will
contractually have full flexibility to roll into the new capital
structure or exit and receive repayment at par. A second-lien
facility of approximately $200 million will be issued to fund the
partial repayment of the first-lien debt and the RCF. We understand
that the holders of the second-lien debt should be the same
investors that currently hold the yield-producing preferred equity
certificates, and we understand there will be no lender overlap
between the first- and second-lien debts. This proposed
first-/second-lien structure will introduce additional
subordination beneath the first-lien debt and reduce the company's
reported senior secured leverage from 5.0x to about 4.0x. In
addition, a new $135 million RCF due in December 2029 and $45
million due in March 2027 will be established, providing Archroma
with sufficient liquidity we expect. Assuming the successful
completion of the transaction, we will continue to assess
Archroma's liquidity as adequate. In case Archroma does not timely
and successfully complete its transaction, we would likely revise
our liquidity assessment downward which would likely put pressure
on the rating.

"We expect significantly lower exceptional costs as the integration
of Huntsman Corp. nears completion, supporting EBITDA growth in
fiscal 2026. S&P Global Ratings-adjusted credit metrics should
benefit from modest volume growth and margin expansion amid mildly
improving market demand and stronger operating leverage. End-market
demand should remain subdued in 2026, but the leading position in
high-value specialty segment should bolster the performance of the
TE. International brands have a strong emphasis on sustainability,
supply chain visibility, and quality leading to the lower price
elasticity. PT division should also benefit from sustainability
trend given the commitment of global brands to eliminate plastic,
and many customers are increasingly willing to pay a premium for
more sustainable alternatives. We expect Archroma's significant
charges in integration and efficiency gains over the past three
years to begin delivering sustained benefits through recurring
synergy savings. These should include higher capacity utilization,
procurement savings, and reductions in selling, general, and
administrative expenses, while associated one-off integration costs
are expected to continue declining. We understand that 100% of the
targeted run-rate synergies had been realized by the end of fiscal
2025. The company expects exceptional costs to decrease to about
$24 million in fiscal 2026, partly offset by approximately $15
million of land-sale proceeds related to further footprint
optimization measures received in the first quarter of 2026. We
forecast S&P Global Ratings-adjusted EBITDA to increase to about
$200 million–$220 million and FFO interest coverage to improve to
about 1.5x–1.7x in fiscal 2026.

"We forecast that FOCF will be constrained, although positive, in
2026 before increasing from 2027, driven by profitability
improvements, and lower one-off costs. In 2025, FOCF generation was
positive thanks to high working capital cash inflow due to the
company's optimization measures. Net working capital to sales
declined to 21.3% and should remain in this range in the future. We
expect a working capital outflow of about $25 million-$35 million
in 2026 and 2027 mirroring modest growth prospects. We forecast
that capital expenditure (capex) will remain at about $28
million-$32 million in 2026 and 2027, allowing for neutral to
modestly positive FOCF. We view this cash generation as supportive
for the sustainability of the capital structure, although highly
leveraged.

"The stable outlook assumes that Archroma will timely and
successfully complete its A&E transaction. It also indicates that
we expect Archroma to improve its EBITDA over the next 12 months,
driven by integration synergies and modest volume growth. As a
result, adjusted debt to EBITDA should improve to 10.5x-11.0x
(5.8x-6.3x excluding PECs), and FFO interest coverage to 1.5x-1.7x
in 2026 before improving further to 1.7x-2.0x in 2027. Following
the transaction, we expect the company to maintain a comfortable
liquidity buffer, and FOCF to remain positive in 2026-2027."

S&P could lower the rating on Archroma if:

-- Archroma fails to achieve EBITDA and margin growth S&P includes
in its base case,

-- FOCF turned materially negative without any prospect of a swift
recovery, and

-- FFO interest coverage failed to improve in the next 12 months
from 1.0x in 2025.

In case Archroma does not timely and successfully complete its A&E
transaction, S&P would likely revise its liquidity assessment
downward which would likely put pressure on the rating.

Rating upside is constrained by the difficult market conditions and
high leverage. S&P could consider a positive rating action if
Archroma improves its FOCF generation to above $50 million and
strengthens its FFO cash interest coverage ratio to comfortably
above 2.0x, implying S&P Global Ratings-adjusted EBITDA (after
exceptional costs) of above $270 million. This could result from
the realization of synergies, a decline in exceptional costs, and
the EBITDA margin becoming sustainably higher as demand recovers
and plant utilization improves.



===========
T U R K E Y
===========

RONESANS HOLDING: S&P Affirms 'B+' Rating on $425MM Sr. Unsec Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings affirmed its 'B+' long-term ratings on Ronesans
Holding A.S. and its outstanding $425 million senior unsecured
notes.

The change of issuer for its senior unsecured notes has no impact
on our ratings, as the terms remain unchanged, including the scope
of the restricted group, covenants, and debt incurrence baskets.

S&P said, "The stable outlook reflects our expectation that
Ronesans' adjusted debt to EBITDA will peak at about 5.0x in 2026,
driven by higher capital spending related to the company's
investment cycle, and recover to the 4.0x-5.0x in 2027, within the
4.0x-6.0x range we view as commensurate with the 'B+' rating."

Ronesans reported solid operating performance in 2025. The company
delivered improved performance in 2025, ahead of S&P Global
Ratings' expectations. Specifically, Ronesans reported revenue
growth of 22% (on a euro basis) compared with 2024 revenue,
reflecting the ongoing progress on major construction projects,
such as the Nakkas Toll Road in Turkiye. At the same time, its
order book grew by about 20% like for like over the same period (on
a euro basis). The company's S&P Global Ratings-adjusted EBITDA
increased to about Turkish lira (TRY)36.3 billion (about EUR0.8
billion) in 2025, compared with TRY17.9 billion in 2024. The
results were underpinned by improved margins, with the adjusted
EBITDA margin increasing by about four percentage points to 18.2%,
reflecting improvements across all segments. Notably, construction
margins improved to about 11% from 8% in 2024, thanks to margin
expansion in the comparatively lower margin European operations and
growing scale and, therefore, better fixed cost absorption in the
important local Turkish market, where the company enjoys high
margins. The real estate segment also benefited from very high
occupancy levels of about 99%. Consequently, S&P Global
Ratings-adjusted debt to EBITDA remained at 4.4x in 2025, despite
higher gross debt linked to the group's organic investments in its
infrastructure business, the new propane dehydrogenation plant, and
the associated terminal in Ceyhan, Turkiye, and expansion in
renewables capacity, along with inorganic investments in the real
estate segment.

S&P said, "We forecast Ronesans' debt will increase in 2026 as the
company completes major organic investments, but its credit ratios
will remain appropriate for the rating. Our forecast is underpinned
by Ronesans' order backlog, which covers more than 85% of our
construction revenue forecast for 2026-2027. As of Dec. 31, 2025,
the backlog totaled EUR7.8 billion, up about 20% versus the
previous year. We expect growth in the construction
business--benefiting from the ongoing progress on major projects
and new infrastructure project wins in Turkiye. For its real estate
segment, we expect stable like-for-like operating performance,
aided by very strong occupancy rates, but reported revenue and
earnings should grow thanks to the full-year impact of the
acquisitions completed during 2025. Therefore, we forecast revenue
growth of 20%-30% in 2026-2027 (on a reported basis, accounting for
the currency impact), with EBITDA rising to over TRY50 billion by
2027.

"Free operating cash flow (FOCF) is set to remain negative,
influenced by the construction of the Nakkas Toll Road and the
Ceyhan polypropylene plant and its associated terminal. We estimate
that the company would have generated positive FOCF when we exclude
the debt-funded portion of project financing from its capital
expenditure (capex), throughout the construction period. Overall,
we estimate that capex will peak at about TRY45 billion in 2026,
which together with a normalization in working capital leading to a
TRY3 billion-TRY4 billion outflow in 2026, and modest shareholder
remuneration, should absorb operating cash flow."

S&P assesses Rönesans Altyapı Sistemleri A.Ş. (RAS) as a core
subsidiary of Ronesans Holding. Under the planned new corporate
structure, Ronesans will be organized under three main divisions:

-- RAS, which incorporates its Turkish and international
construction businesses, the infrastructure businesses (including
the Turkish Healthcare operations, its renewable energy business,
the Nakkas Toll Road and Kazakhstan hospital, which are both in the
construction phase), and the digital infrastructure segment;

-- The real estate business; and

-- The industrial investments (notably its Ceyhan chemical plant
and terminal, which is currently under development).

S&P views the construction business, and by extension RAS, as
central to Ronesans' ability to implement its business model and
extract synergies. Construction provides capital through its cash
generation for organic growth investments. In turn, these
investments provide a source of revenue for the construction
business.

The change of issuer of the senior unsecured notes has no impact on
S&P's issue rating. RAS will replace Ronesans as the issuing entity
for the senior guaranteed sustainable notes due 2029, with Ronesans
Holding providing a parental guarantee. All the remaining terms of
the notes, including the scope of the restricted group, covenants,
and debt incurrence baskets, remain unchanged. The documentation
includes leverage and fixed-charge covenants, minimum liquidity
requirements, and a loan-to-value cap on the priority debt incurred
by the real estate subsidiaries, set at 45%. It allows Ronesans and
its restricted subsidiaries to incur additional incremental debt
under its credit facilities up to $375 million, including
refinancing; additional debt under a general basket of up to $100
million; and additional debt under other baskets, for example for
finance leases and local lines of credit.

In addition, the documentation allows Ronesans to incur an
"unlimited" amount of acquisition-related debt, subject to meeting
financial covenants, or financial covenant tests being "no worse
than" that immediately before the acquisition. Restricted payments,
such as dividends, share repurchases, or repayment of subordinated
debt are allowed as long as no "event of default" is occurring and
are uncapped subject to certain leverage and fixed-charge
thresholds. These include a builder basket at 50% of the borrower's
cumulative consolidated net income, and additions to the general
basket by the amount of proceeds from equity issuance or
contributions to capital. The documentation also includes
limitations on the sale of certain assets and transactions with
affiliates. It also allows Ronesans to designate unrestricted
subsidiaries, subject to no event of default occurring and pro
forma compliance with the financial covenants, as long as such
designation is deemed an investment, there is sufficient investment
capacity, and it includes reclassification rights.

S&P said, "The stable outlook indicates our expectation that
Ronesans' adjusted debt to EBITDA will peak at about 5.0x in 2026,
driven by elevated capex related to the company's current
investment cycle, but will remain within the 4.0x-6.0x range we
view as commensurate with the 'B+' rating. The group has initiated
a new investment cycle and will use cash and debt to fund its major
projects. These include the Nakkas Toll Road, the public-private
partnership hospital project in Kokshetau, Kazakhstan, and the
greenfield polypropylene plant in in Ceyhan, Turkiye. FOCF is also
likely to remain negative during 2026. However, we forecast that
the company's earnings will increase as it benefits from synergies
between its development activities in petrochemicals,
infrastructure, and renewable energy, and its construction business
line.

"We could lower our rating on Ronesans if any of the group's
projects saw significant delays, cost overruns, or if margins were
eroded, such that debt to EBITDA was forecast to increase above
6.0x without near-term recovery prospects. Materially negative
FOCF, beyond our current forecast, and liquidity pressure would
also weigh on the rating.

"We could consider a higher rating for Ronesans if we assessed that
the group's growth plans and its financial policy supported a
higher rating; and if we assessed that the war in the Middle East
had no material adverse impact on Turkiye's economy and, by
extension, the company's operations." The metrics S&P would
consider commensurate with a higher rating are:

-- Adjusted debt-to-EBITDA ratio approaching 4.0x or better on a
sustainable basis;

-- Sustainably improved FOCF to debt above 5%.



===========================
U N I T E D   K I N G D O M
===========================

CASTELL 2026-1: S&P Assigns B- (sf) Rating on Class X1-Dfrd Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned credit ratings to Castell 2026-1 PLC's
class A, B-Dfrd, C-Dfrd, D-Dfrd, E-Dfrd, F-Dfrd, G-Dfrd, and
X1-Dfrd notes. At closing, Castell 2026-1 also issued unrated
H-Dfrd and X2-Dfrd notes, as well as RC1 and RC2 residual
certificates.

The loans in the pool were originated between 2016 and 2026 by UK
Mortgage Lending Ltd., which is wholly owned by Pepper Money Ltd.
Approximately 61% of the portfolio comprises refinancing from the
Castell 2021-1 and Castell 2022-1 transactions, both of which were
called in February 2026.

Prefunding of loans of up to 18.93% of the collateralized notes
balance will take place until the second interest payment date
(IPD), using prefunding reserves and up to GBP10 million of
principal collections received on the first IPD. If these loans are
not purchased, any unused prefunding amount will pay down the
collateralized notes on a pro rata basis, while any unused
principal collections will pay the class A notes.

The assets backing the notes are second-lien mortgage loans. Most
of the pool is prime, with 85.5% originated under the UK Mortgage
Lending's prime product range. We have also analyzed the nature of
the first-lien holders and consider most to be advances by lenders
operating in the prime mortgage market.

The class A and B-Dfrd notes benefit from liquidity provided by a
liquidity reserve fund, and principal can be used to pay senior
fees and interest on the rated notes, subject to various
conditions.

At closing, the issuer used the issuance proceeds to purchase the
full beneficial interest in the mortgage loans from the seller. The
issuer granted security over all of its assets in the security
trustee's favor.

S&P said, "There are no rating constraints in the transaction under
our counterparty, operational risk, or structured finance sovereign
risk criteria. We consider the issuer to be bankruptcy remote.

"Pepper (UK) Ltd. is the servicer in this transaction. In our view,
it is an experienced servicer in the U.K. market with
well-established and fully integrated servicing systems and
policies.

"In our analysis, we considered our current macroeconomic forecasts
and a forward-looking view of the U.K. residential mortgage market
by incorporating additional cash flow sensitivities."

  Ratings

  Class       Rating      Amount (mil. GBP)

  A           AAA (sf)     304.00
  B-Dfrd*     AA (sf)       23.00
  C-Dfrd*     A (sf)        21.00
  D-Dfrd*     BBB (sf)      17.20
  E-Dfrd*     BB+ (sf)      12.40
  F-Dfrd*     B (sf)        10.40
  G-Dfrd*     B- (sf)        8.00
  H-Dfrd      NR             4.00
  X1-Dfrd*    B- (sf)       16.00
  X2-Dfrd     NR             6.00
  RC1 Residual Certs  NR      N/A
  RC2 Residual Certs  NR      N/A

*S&P said, "Our rating on this class of notes considers the
potential deferral of interest payments. Our ratings also address
timely interest on the rated notes when they become most senior
outstanding, any deferred interest is due immediately (excluding
the X1-Dfrd notes)."
NR--Not rated.
N/A--Not applicable.


MARSTON ISSUER SENIOR: Fitch Affirms 'BB+' Rating on 3 Cl. A Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed Marston's Issuer Plc's class A notes at
'BB+' and class B notes at 'B+'. The Outlooks are Stable.

The ratings affirmation reflects the solid performance on tenanted
and franchise pubs and a stable managed estate.

Under the current Fitch rating case (FRC), the projected free cash
flow (FCF) debt service coverage ratio (DSCR; the lower of average
and median) over FY26-FY32 (year-end September) is about 1.4x for
the class A notes and about 1.2x for the class B notes.

   Entity/Debt                 Rating           Prior
   -----------                 ------           -----
Marston's Issuer PLC

Marston's Issuer
PLC/Project Revenues –
Senior Secured Debt/1 LT    LT

   Class A2 XS0226790748    LT BB+  Affirmed    BB+
   Class A3 XS0226792280    LT BB+  Affirmed    BB+
   Class A4 XS0331071026    LT BB+  Affirmed    BB+

Marston's Issuer
PLC/Project Revenues –
Junior Secured Debt/2 LT   LT

   Class B XS0226897030    LT B+    Affirmed    B+

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Industry Profile - Midrange

Structural Decline; Strong Pub Culture: The UK pub sector has been
in structural decline for the past three decades due to demographic
shifts, greater health awareness and the growing presence of
competing offerings. Exposure to discretionary spending is high,
and revenue is linked to the broader economy. Competition is keen,
including off-trade alternatives, and barriers to entry are low.
The pandemic and its related containment measures had a material
impact on the sector.

Trade volumes are recovering, but cost pressures on pubs and
customers continue to affect demand and profitability. Despite
these challenges, Fitch views the sector as sustainable in the long
term, supported by the strong UK pub culture.

Operating environment - Weaker; Barriers to entry - Midrange;
Sustainability - Midrange

Company Profile - Midrange

Hybrid Managed/Tenanted Model: Marston's is one of several large
operators of pubs and bars in the UK, operating over 1,300 pubs and
bars across the country. The company's securitised scope consisted
of 837 (as of September 2025) tenanted and managed pubs across the
UK. The management team is experienced and has been stable, despite
the recent new appointments of a new CEO in January 2024, a new CFO
in September 2025, and a new chief digital & technology officer in
December 2025. Fitch considers Marston's asset quality to be
adequate and in line with peers'. The company has historically
incurred maintenance capex over its covenant requirements.

Financial performance - Midrange; Company operations - Midrange;
Transparency - Midrange; Dependence on operator - Midrange; Asset
quality - Midrange

Debt Structure - Class A - Stronger; Debt Structure - Class B -
Midrange

Junior Back-Ended Amortisation: Debt is fully amortising,
eliminating refinancing risk. The class A notes benefit from
deferability of the class B notes. Amortisation of the class B
notes is back-ended, and their interest-only period is long. The
notes are fixed rate or fully hedged. The class A notes are the
senior ranking controlling creditor, with class B notes lower
ranking, resulting in a 'Midrange' assessment.

All the standard legal and structural features of wholesale
business securitisation are present, and the covenant package is
comprehensive. The restricted payment condition levels are
standard, with 1.5x EBITDA DSCR and 1.3x FCF DSCR. The liquidity
facility is covenanted at 18 months peak debt service.

Debt profile - Stronger; Security package - Stronger; Structural
features - Stronger

Peer Analysis

Marston's closest peers are hybrid pub company (managed and
tenanted) securitisations, such as Greene King Finance Plc, and
managed pub company securitisations, such as Mitchells & Butlers
Finance Plc.

Marston's managed pubs generated about 60% of EBITDA as of
September 2025, which is less favourable as Fitch considers a
higher proportion of managed pubs to be a stronger feature as they
have greater transparency and control. Hybrid pub company peer
Greene King generates more than 70% through managed pubs. The
average EBITDA contribution per pub in Marston's estates is
slightly lower than peers'.

Greene King's class A notes are rated 'BBB+', with an FCF DSCR of
1.9x, well above the coverage levels of Marston's, justifying the
higher rating for Greene King.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Negative
Rating Action/Downgrade

- Deterioration of the FRC-projected profile FCF DSCRs to
substantially below 1.2x for the class A notes and towards 1.0x for
the class B notes.

Factors that Could, Individually or Collectively, Lead to Positive
Rating Action/Upgrade

- Improvement of the FRC-projected profile FCF DSCRs to
substantially above 1.4x for the class A notes and 1.2x for the
class B notes.

Financial Profile

Over FY26-FY35, the FRC assumes marginally increasing EBITDA by a
CAGR of 0.1% and marginally decreasing FCF by a CAGR of 0.1%,
reflecting cost pressures, changing consumer habits and increasing
maintenance expenditure. This results in an FCF DSCR (the lower of
median and average) of about 1.4x for the class A notes and about
1.2x for the class B notes under the FRC over FY26-FY32.

SECURITY

The security package is strong, with comprehensive first-ranking
fixed and floating charges over borrower assets.

Climate Vulnerability Signals

The results of its Climate.VS screener did not indicate an elevated
risk for Marston's Issuer PLC.

ESG Considerations

The highest level of ESG credit relevance is a score of '3', unless
otherwise disclosed in this section. A score of '3' means ESG
issues are credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on
the entity, either due to their nature or the way in which they are
being managed by the entity. Fitch's ESG Relevance Scores are not
inputs in the rating process; they are an observation on the
relevance and materiality of ESG factors in the rating decision.

[] DBRS Confirms Ratings on NewDay Funding Series 2023-2025 Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
DBRS Ratings Limited (Morningstar DBRS) took credit rating actions
on the following notes issued by NewDay Funding Master Issuer and
NewDay Funding Loan Note Issuer (the Notes):

NewDay Funding Master Issuer:

-- Series 2023-1, Class A1 confirmed at AAA (sf)
-- Series 2023-1, Class A2 confirmed at AAA (sf)
-- Series 2023-1, Class B confirmed at AA (high) (sf)
-- Series 2023-1, Class C confirmed at A (high) (sf)
-- Series 2023-1, Class D confirmed at BBB (high) (sf)
-- Series 2023-1, Class E confirmed at BB (high) (sf)
-- Series 2023-1, Class F confirmed at BB (sf)

-- Series 2024-1, Class A confirmed at AAA (sf)
-- Series 2024-1, Class B confirmed at AA (high) (sf)
-- Series 2024-1, Class C confirmed at A (high) (sf)
-- Series 2024-1, Class D confirmed at BBB (high) (sf)
-- Series 2024-1, Class E confirmed at BB (high) (sf)
-- Series 2024-1, Class F confirmed at BB (sf)

-- Series 2024-2, Class A confirmed at AAA (sf)
-- Series 2024-2, Class B confirmed at AA (high) (sf)
-- Series 2024-2, Class C confirmed at A (high) (sf)
-- Series 2024-2, Class D confirmed at BBB (high) (sf)
-- Series 2024-2, Class E confirmed at BB (high) (sf)
-- Series 2024-2, Class F confirmed at BB (sf)

-- Series 2024-3, Class A confirmed at AAA (sf)
-- Series 2024-3, Class B confirmed at AA (high) (sf)
-- Series 2024-3, Class C confirmed at A (high) (sf)
-- Series 2024-3, Class D confirmed at BBB (high) (sf)
-- Series 2024-3, Class E confirmed at BB (high) (sf)
-- Series 2024-3, Class F confirmed at BB (sf)

-- Series 2025-1, Class A confirmed at AAA (sf)
-- Series 2025-1, Class B confirmed at AA (sf)
-- Series 2025-1, Class C confirmed at A (sf)
-- Series 2025-1, Class D confirmed at BBB (sf)
-- Series 2025-1, Class E confirmed at BB (high) (sf)
-- Series 2025-1, Class F confirmed at BB (sf)

-- Series 2025-2, Class A confirmed at AAA (sf)
-- Series 2025-2, Class B confirmed at AA (sf)
-- Series 2025-2, Class C confirmed at A (sf)
-- Series 2025-2, Class D confirmed at BBB (sf)
-- Series 2025-2, Class E confirmed at BB (sf)

NewDay Funding Loan Note Issuer:

-- VFN- F1 V1, Class A Loan Note confirmed at BBB (high) (sf)
-- VFN- F1 V1, Class E Loan Note confirmed at BB (high) (sf)
-- VFN- F1 V1, Class F Loan Note confirmed at BB (sf)

The credit ratings of the Notes address the timely payment of
scheduled interest and the ultimate repayment of principal by the
legal final maturity date.

Each transaction is a securitisation of near-prime credit cards
granted to individuals domiciled in the UK by NewDay Ltd. (NewDay)
as part of NewDay Funding-related master issuance structure under
the same requirements regarding servicing, amortisation events,
priority of distributions and eligible investments. NewDay Cards
Ltd. (NewDay Cards) is the initial servicer with Lenvi Servicing
Limited (Lenvi) in place as the backup servicer for each
transaction.

CREDIT RATING RATIONALE

Morningstar DBRS based its credit ratings of the Notes on the
following analytical considerations:

-- The transaction's structure, including the form and sufficiency
of available credit enhancement to withstand stressed cash flow
assumptions and repay the issuer's financial obligations according
to the terms under which the Notes are issued

-- The credit quality of NewDay's portfolio, the characteristics of
the collateral, its historical performance and Morningstar DBRS'
expectation of the charge-off rate, monthly principal payment rate
(MPPR), and yield rate under various stress scenarios

-- Morningstar DBRS' operational risk review of NewDay and NewDay
Cards' capabilities regarding origination, underwriting, servicing,
position in the market and financial strength

-- Morningstar DBRS' operational risk review of NewDay Cards and
Lenvi regarding servicing

-- The transaction parties' financial strength regarding their
respective roles

-- The expected consistency of the transaction's legal structure
with Morningstar DBRS' "Legal and Derivative Criteria for European
and Asia-Pacific Structured Finance Transactions" methodology

-- Morningstar DBRS' Long-Term Foreign and Local Currency - Issuer
Ratings on United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland,
currently AA with a Stable trend

TRANSACTION STRUCTURE

Each transaction includes a scheduled revolving period. During this
period, additional receivables may be purchased and transferred to
the securitised pool, provided that the eligibility criteria set
out in the transaction documents are satisfied. The revolving
period may end earlier than scheduled if certain events occur, such
as the breach of performance triggers or servicer termination. The
servicer may extend the scheduled revolving period by up to 12
months. If the Notes are not fully redeemed at the end of the
scheduled revolving period, the transaction will enter into a rapid
amortisation.

Each transaction includes a series-specific liquidity reserve that
is replenished to the target amount in the transaction's interest
waterfalls. The liquidity reserves are available to cover
shortfalls in senior expenses, senior swap payments (if applicable)
and interest on the Class A, Class B, Class C and Class D Notes (if
applicable), subject to a floor of GBP 250,000.

The Class A2 Notes of Series 2023-1 are denominated in U.S. dollars
(USD) and bear interest indexed to SOFR. These Notes benefit from a
balance-guaranteed cross-currency swap that fully hedges the
currency and interest rate mismatch between the GBP-denominated
receivables and the USD liabilities. All other classes of Notes
across the NewDay Funding master issuance programme are denominated
in GBP with floating-rate coupons based on the daily compounded
Sterling Overnight Index Average (Sonia). Although the underlying
receivables generate predominantly fixed-rate finance charge
collections, the interest rate mismatch between the fixed-rate
collateral and the Sonia-based coupon rates is to a certain degree
mitigated by excess spread and NewDay's ability to increase the
credit card annual percentage contractual rates.

COUNTERPARTIES

HSBC Bank plc is the account bank for all the transactions. Based
on Morningstar DBRS' private credit rating on HSBC Bank plc and the
downgrade provisions outlined in the transaction documents,
Morningstar DBRS considers the risk arising from the exposure to
the account bank to be commensurate with the credit ratings
assigned.

PORTFOLIO ASSUMPTIONS

The most recent yield rate from the February 2026 investor report
of the NewDay Funding-related eligible portfolio was 31.3%.
Although the Bank of England base rate (BBR) has been declining
since August 2024 and portfolio yields may follow this trend, the
reported yields continued to increase, aside from a temporary dip
in April 2025. Considering the recent performance in light of the
potential BBR downward trend, Morningstar DBRS elected to maintain
the expected yield assumption at 27%.

For the charge-off rates, the eligible portfolio reported 12.4% in
February 2026 after reaching a record high of 17.6% in April 2020
and the levels have since remained below 18%, albeit with some
volatility. Morningstar DBRS therefore also elected to maintain the
expected charge-off rate at 16%.

The eligible portfolio has reported estimated monthly principal
payment rates (MPPRs) in the range between 10% and 13% since
mid-2022, with the latest MPPR estimated at around 12% in February
2026. Morningstar DBRS also maintained the expected MPPR unchanged
at 9%.

FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS

Morningstar DBRS' credit ratings on the Notes address the credit
risk associated with the identified financial obligations in
accordance with the relevant transaction documents. Where
applicable, a description of these financial obligations can be
found in the transactions' respective press releases at issuance.

Morningstar DBRS' credit ratings on the Notes also addresses the
credit risk associated with the increased rate of interest
applicable to the Notes if the Notes are not redeemed on the
Optional Redemption Date as defined in and in accordance with the
applicable transaction documents.

Morningstar DBRS' credit ratings do not address non-payment risk
associated with contractual payment obligations contemplated in the
applicable transaction document(s) that are not financial
obligations.

Morningstar DBRS' long-term credit ratings provide opinions on risk
of default. Morningstar DBRS considers risk of default to be the
risk that an issuer will fail to satisfy the financial obligations
in accordance with the terms under which a long-term obligation has
been issued.

Notes: All figures are in British pound sterling or USD unless
otherwise noted.


[] FCA Confirms Motor Finance Redress Scheme
--------------------------------------------
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) issued a statement on March
30, 2026, noting that it is going ahead with a scheme to compensate
motor finance customers who were treated unfairly.

The FCA statement declared:

Courts have found that firms broke the law by failing to disclose
important information to customers. An industry-wide scheme is the
quickest and most cost effective way to deliver fair compensation.

We had over 1,000 consultation responses and engaged extensively
with consumer groups, professional representatives, firms,
manufacturers, investors and industry bodies. While most
respondents supported a scheme, we received much conflicting
feedback on its details.

We have listened and made several changes, set out in detail below,
to design a final scheme which strikes the balance between
sometimes competing principles such as simplicity and cost
effectiveness, comprehensiveness and fairness.

Our final approach is fair for consumers and proportionate for
firms.

We have tightened eligibility so only those treated unfairly
receive compensation. Agreements involving minimal commission or
zero APRs will not receive redress. Where a lender can prove there
were visible links with a manufacturer and dealer, a contractual
tie alone will not trigger compensation. The threshold for high
commission cases has been modestly raised. These and other changes
mean 12.1m agreements are now eligible for compensation, down from
14.2m at consultation.

We have adjusted how compensation is calculated to better reflect
greater loss between 2007-2014. We have also ensured that consumers
are not put back in a better position than they would have been had
they been treated fairly, so in around 1 in 3 cases compensation
will be capped. Firms are expected to pay out around GBP7.5 billion
in redress, down from GBP8.2 billion at consultation.

We have also streamlined the scheme so consumers are compensated
quickly and it is cost effective for firms to deliver. Millions of
consumers will be compensated this year, most of the rest by the
end of 2027. Lenders will only need to contact complainants or
those due compensation and recorded delivery will not be required,
helping to cut the cost to firms of delivering the scheme by over
40%.

The estimated total bill to firms is down from GBP11 billion to
GBP9.1 billion.

We want to provide certainty for consumers and finality for firms
and investors, supporting the ongoing availability of competitively
priced motor finance. Our approach is the best way to resolve this
issue in the interests of consumers, firms, investors and the
market. We estimate the cost of dealing with complaints would be
over £6bn more without a scheme.

We expect everyone to get behind the scheme, and lenders to put
things right promptly for their customers. We need to draw a line
under the past and support a healthy motor finance market for the
future.

Scope

Motor finance agreements taken out between April 2007 and November
1, 2024 where commission was payable by the lender to the broker
will be considered for compensation.

Firms owe liabilities from 2007. If complaints from that date were
not covered they would need to be dealt with individually by firms,
the Financial Ombudsman Service and through the courts, resulting
in higher costs, lengthy delays and greater uncertainty.

We have the powers to include agreements before 2014. However, this
was questioned by some consultation respondents. So, we will
implement two schemes, one covering 6 April 2007 - 31 March 2014
and one from April 1, 2014 - November 1, 2024. If the earlier
period is subject to legal challenge on these grounds, redress for
consumers with agreements from April 2014 shouldn't be delayed.

Eligibility

Consumers will only be considered for compensation if they weren't
told details of at least one of 3 arrangements between the lender
and the broker (usually the dealer):

- A discretionary commission arrangement (DCA), which allowed the

   broker to adjust the interest rate the customer would pay to
   obtain a higher commission.

- A high commission arrangement (at least 39% of the total cost of

   credit and 10% of the loan).

- Contractual ties that gave a lender exclusivity or a right of
   first refusal, except where the lender can prove there were
   visible links with the manufacturer and dealer.

There will be some exceptions, with cases considered fair, if:

- The commission was GBP120 or less for agreements beginning
before
  April 1, 2014 and GBP150 or less from that date. Commission  
  amounts below those levels are unlikely to have influenced the
  consumer's decision or broker's behaviour.

- The borrower wasn't charged interest.

- The DCA wasn't used to earn discretionary commission.

- The lender can prove, in certain limited circumstances, it was
  fair not to disclose one of the arrangements above or that the
  consumer did not suffer any loss. This includes if a tie wasn’t

  operated in practice or no better deal was available.

Consumers who have successfully complained to the Financial
Ombudsman, had their claim determined by a court or accepted
redress will be excluded from the scheme.

Claims for high value loans - higher than 99.5% of other loans that
year - are also excluded, as they are not suitable for a
mass-market redress scheme. These consumers can still complain to
their lender and the Financial Ombudsman.

Consumers generally have 6 years to bring a claim, but that may be
extended where information about commission or a tie was
deliberately concealed. We do not expect lenders to routinely find
that cases are out of time to be considered for the scheme, given
how poor disclosure was.

However, firms can exclude cases only involving high commission and
ending before March 26, 2020 if they can show that the fact
commission was payable was clearly and prominently disclosed. If
firms rule consumers out of the scheme on this basis, they must
inform them and explain why. The consumer will have the right to
challenge this with the Financial Ombudsman.

Consumers whose arrangement is deemed fair under the scheme can ask
the Financial Ombudsman to review whether the scheme rules were
followed. They could still make a claim in court.

Calculating redress

Approximately 90,000 consumers whose cases align closely with the
Johnson case considered by the Supreme Court will receive redress
of all commission plus interest. We define these as cases involving
an undisclosed contractual tie and/or DCA and very high commission
of at least 50% of the total cost of credit and 22.5% of the loan.

For all other cases, consumers will receive the average of
estimated loss and the commission paid, plus interest (the hybrid
remedy). The estimated loss is based on economic analysis that
shows there was a difference in the APR on DCA loans compared to
those with flat fee arrangements.

Following feedback, we have enhanced our analysis, incorporating
more agreement data and covering a longer period of 2017-2021. We
estimate average loss to be equivalent to an APR adjustment of 17%
for this period and apply it to agreements from 1 April 2014.

Firms have advised that the availability of pre-2014 data is
limited. Collecting such data risks delaying compensation for
consumers and certainty for firms with no guarantee it would
materially improve any estimate of loss.

Feedback and supporting evidence from respondents indicate that
more harmful forms of DCA were more prevalent in earlier years.
Differences between average DCA and non-DCA APRs were also larger
during this period, indicating greater financial loss.

To reflect that, we have set an APR adjustment of 21% for pre 2014
cases. This sits at the mid-point between a 17% and 26% APR
adjustment. The latter figure is, on average, equivalent to being
repaid commission, which is the remedy reserved for those who
suffered the most unfairness. The difference between APR-17% and
APR-21% results in an increase to average redress of £31 for pre
2014 cases.

We are also using these APR adjustments for the relatively small
number of cases that didn’t involve a DCA, but involved high
commission or a tie.

Consumers should not be compensated more than if they had been
treated fairly or than those who suffered the most unfairness. So
in around 1 in 3 cases receiving the hybrid remedy, compensation
will be capped at the lowest of:

- 90% of commission plus interest.

- The total cost of credit, adjusted to account for a minimal cost

  offered to only 5% of the market at the time, excluding 0% APR
  deals.

- The actual total cost of credit, calculated on a simpler basis.
  This may be the lower figure if the adjusted cost of credit
  can’t be accurately calculated, for example, if the lender
  doesn’t have the payment schedule.

This means that about 64,000 agreements, where the APR was in the
lowest 5% offered in the market at the time, excluding 0% deals,
will not get compensation.

Simple interest will be paid on compensation, based on the annual
average Bank of England base rate per year plus 1% from the date of
overpayment to the date compensation is paid. We have introduced a
floor so the minimum interest rate consumers will receive for any
year is 3%. Consumers will no longer be able to challenge the rate
they get.

How the scheme will operate

There will be a short implementation period so firms can prepare.
This will be up to:

- June 30, 2026 for loans taken out from April 1, 2014.

- August 31, 2026 for those agreed earlier.

People who have already complained or complain before the end of
the relevant implementation period will be compensated sooner.
Lenders will have 3 months from the end of the implementation
period to let complainants know whether they’re owed compensation
and how much.

Firms will only have to contact people who haven’t complained if
they are potentially owed money or those who are timed out of the
scheme, avoiding unnecessary and costly communication with
customers who are not owed redress. Firms have 6 months from the
end of the relevant implementation period to do so. Consumers must
respond within 6 months if they wish to join the scheme. Consumers
who are not contacted can still complain to their firm by 31 August
2027.

Lenders can use a range of communication channels that best meet
consumers' needs, with appropriate safeguards to prevent fraud.

Cost of redress

Based on further analysis, we now estimate 75% of eligible
consumers will take part, resulting in firms paying redress of
GBP7.5 billion. Non redress costs are estimated to be GBP1.6
billion, taking the likely total bill to firms to GBP9.1 billion.

Our consultation set out indicative cost estimates. We have since
refined our methodology to fully align with our consultation
proposals and incorporated further lender data into our modelling.
We have updated estimated redress liabilities and non redress costs
under our proposals, compared to under our final rules, below.

                    Consultation  Consultation          Final
                    proposals     proposals, updated    Policy
                    ------------  ------------------ -------------
Redress at
estimated uptake    GBP 8.2-Bil.   GBP 9.3-Bil.       GBP 7.5-Bil.
                    (85% uptake)*  (75% uptake)       GBP 1.6-Bil.

Non redress costs   GBP 2.8-Bil.   GBP 2.5-Bil.       GBP 1.6-Bil.
                    ------------  ------------------ -------------
TOTAL              GBP 11-Bil.    GBP 11.8-Bil.      GBP 9.1-Bil.
(at estimated
  uptake)

Redress liabilities GBP 9.7-Bil.   GBP 12.5-Bil.      GBP 10-Bil.

(100% uptake)

Eligible            14.2m          16.8m              12.1m
agreements

Average redress     GBP695         GBP775             GBP829
per agreement

*At 75% uptake this would have been GBP 7.3 billion

Ensuring compliance with the scheme

We have established a dedicated supervisory team, led by a
Director. We will supervise firms closely to make sure they follow
the rules, including assessing whether any exclusions of agreements
have been applied appropriately. Firms’ senior managers will be
required to attest to responsibility for their firm’s overall
oversight and delivery of the scheme.

We will intervene if firms fail to comply, including using
enforcement powers if necessary. Firms will have to report
regularly so we can closely monitor compliance, and we will publish
updates on the scheme’s progress.

We have set up a taskforce with the Solicitors Regulation
Authority, Advertising Standards Authority and the Information
Commissioner’s Office to tackle the poor handling of motor
finance claims by some claims management companies (CMCs) and law
firms.

Market impact

The motor finance market has continued to attract investment and
function well since we announced our intention to introduce a
compensation scheme.

Share prices of affected UK listed lenders increased by a range of
2.1% to 29.7% in the two weeks following the Supreme Court judgment
and continued to rise steadily until the recent conflict in the
Middle East. There have been 5 public securitisations of UK
automotive loans since September 2025. New car sales in February
reached a 22-year high and a record £41bn was lent on motor
finance in 2025, 6% up on 2024.

We have updated our analysis of the scheme’s potential market
impact. We conclude there will be limited impact on the new car
finance market.

Changes we have made to how the scheme operates, such as removing
the need to write to all customers, will benefit sub-prime and
smaller lenders by ensuring the scheme is cost-effective to
deliver. While there may be some short-term effects in the used and
subprime segments, these are expected to be modest, with any
affected lending volumes replaced over time.

Overall, we anticipate continued availability of motor finance and
strong competition between lenders. Without a scheme, the impact on
access to motor finance and prices for consumers could be
significantly higher with uncertainty continuing for many more
years.

          Kroll Responds to FCA's motor finance redress scheme

Following the publication of the Financial Conduct Authority's
motor finance redress scheme, Paul Jennings, Managing Director,
Regulatory Consulting, Kroll, stated:

"It looks like extra time is finally over for banks, financial
institutions, car makers and captive lenders regarding the motor
finance mis-selling review. This is set to be the UK's largest
consumer redress scheme since PPI, with GBP9 billion covering more
than 12 million motor finance agreements estimated to be in scope.
It is clear from what has been published that strong lessons have
been learnt from PPI. Firstly, this process will not drag on but
crucially, companies need to deliver and the regulator will be
watching closely.

"The immediate test now for firms is operational – identifying
customers, accessing historic data, compliance with the Consumer
Duty and delivering compensation payments at scale. The FCA has
strongly indicated that the onus is on the firms. Boards should
treat this as a major incident response, as they would a
significant cyber-attack or class action settlement administration,
where execution, governance, compliance and fraud will all be
critical to meet FCA requirements.  The risk of failure to comply
with the redress scheme will continue to keep many people awake at
night, especially small and mid-sized firms."

                        About Kroll

As an independent provider of global financial and risk advisory
solutions, Kroll leverages our unique insights, data and technology
to help clients stay ahead of complex demands. Kroll’s team of
more than 6,500 professionals worldwide continues the firm’s
nearly 100-year history of trusted expertise spanning risk,
governance, transactions and valuation.



                           *********


S U B S C R I P T I O N   I N F O R M A T I O N

Troubled Company Reporter-Europe is a daily newsletter co-
published by Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA.
Marites O. Claro, Rousel Elaine T. Fernandez, Joy A. Agravante,
Julie Anne L. Toledo, Ivy B. Magdadaro, and Peter A. Chapman,
Editors.

Copyright 2026.  All rights reserved.  ISSN 1529-2754.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior
written permission of the publishers.

Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to
be reliable, but is not guaranteed.

The TCR Europe subscription rate is US$775 per half-year,
delivered via e-mail.  Additional e-mail subscriptions for
members of the same firm for the term of the initial subscription
or balance thereof are US$25 each.  For subscription information,
contact Peter Chapman at 215-945-7000.


                * * * End of Transmission * * *