---

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

              Sunday, April 14, 2024, Vol. 28, No. 104

                            Headlines

245 PARK AVENUE 2017-245P: Fitch Affirms 'BB' Rating on HRR Certs
ACC TRUST 2021-1: Moody's Lowers Rating on Class D Notes to Ca
ALLEGRO CLO XI: S&P Affirms BB- (sf) Rating on Class E-2 Notes
BALBOA BAY 2023-1: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on E-R Notes
BAYOU INTERMEDIATE II: Fitch Lowers IDR to 'B', Outlook Negative

BAYVIEW OPPORTUNITY 2024-CAR1: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating to F Notes
BROOKHAVEN PARK: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on Cl. E Notes
CG-CCRE 2014-FL2: S&P Lowers Class COL2 Certs Rating to 'D (sf')
CIFC FUNDING 2024-I: Fitch Assigns 'BB-sf' Rating on Class E Notes
CITIGROUP MORTGAGE 2024-RP2: Fitch Gives B(EXP) Rating on B2 Notes

COMM 2016-667M: S&P Lowers Class E Certs Rating to 'B (sf)'
CONNECTICUT AVENUE 2024-R03: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba1 to 3 Tranches
ELMWOOD CLO 27: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on Cl. E Notes
EXETER AUTOMOBILE 2024-2: Fitch Assigns BB-sf Rating on Cl. E Notes
FLATIRON CLO 20: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on E-R Notes

GREAT LAKES VII: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E Notes
GS MORTGAGE 2022-PJ6: Moody's Ups Rating on Cl. B-4 Certs to Ba2
HALCYON LOAN 2015-1: Moody's Lowers Rating on 2 Tranches to C
HARBOURVIEW CLO VII-R: Moody's Ups $17.91MM E Notes Rating to B2
HILTON GRAND 2024-1B: Fitch Assigns 'BB-(EXP)' Rating on D Notes

HPS LOAN 2013-2: S&P Affirms Class D-R Notes Rating to 'BB- (sf)'
KRR CLO 45A: Fitch Assigns 'BB-(EXP)sf' Rating on Class E Notes
LCM 41: S&P Assigns BB+ (sf) Rating on $6MM Class E Notes
MADISON PARK LXIX: Fitch Assigns 'BB+(EXP)' Rating on Cl. E Notes
MADISON PARK LXIX: Moody's Assigns (P)B3 Rating to $250,000 F Notes

MADISON PARK LXVII: Fitch Assigns 'BB+sf' Rating on Class F Notes
MADISON PARK LXVII: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating to $250,000 F Notes
MADISON PARK XXIX: S&P Affirms B- (sf) Rating on Class F Notes
MORGAN STANLEY 2024-INV2: Fitch Gives B-(EXP) Rating on B-5 Debt
NAVESINK CLO 2: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on $10MM Class E Notes

OCP CLO 2020-20: S&P Assigns BB (sf) Rating on Class E-R Notes
OHA CREDIT 11: Fitch Affirms 'BB-sf' Rating on Class E Notes
OHA CREDIT 1: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E-R Notes
PPM CLO 2018-1: Moody's Cuts Rating on $6.8MM Cl. F Notes to Caa2
SBALR COMMERCIAL 2020-RR1: Moody's Cuts Cl. C Certs Rating to Caa1

SCULPTOR CLO XXXII: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on E Notes
SDAL 2024-DAL: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on Cl. HRR Certs
SILGAN HOLDINGS: Fitch Affirms 'BB+' LongTerm IDR, Outlook Stable
SIXTH STREET XXIV: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E Notes
TICP CLO XI: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on $14MM Class E-R Notes

TOWD POINT 2024-1: Moody's Assigns (P)B3 Rating to Cl. B2 Certs
TRICOLOR AUTO 2023-1: Moody's Ups Rating on Class E Notes from Ba2
VENTURE CLO XIII: Moody's Cuts Rating on $39.5MM E-R Notes to B1
VERUS  SECURITIZATION 2024-3: S&P Assigns Prelim 'B-' on B-2 Notes
[*] Moody's Upgrades Rating on $129MM of US RMBS Issued 2021-2022


                            *********

245 PARK AVENUE 2017-245P: Fitch Affirms 'BB' Rating on HRR Certs
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed seven classes of 245 Park Avenue Trust
2017-245P (245 Park Avenue Trust 2017-245P) Commercial Mortgage
Trust Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates. The Rating
Outlooks for all classes remain Negative.

   Entity/Debt         Rating           Prior
   -----------         ------           -----
245 Park Avenue
2017-245P

   A 90187LAA7     LT AAAsf  Affirmed   AAAsf
   B 90187LAG4     LT AA-sf  Affirmed   AA-sf
   C 90187LAJ8     LT A-sf   Affirmed   A-sf
   D 90187LAL3     LT BBB-sf Affirmed   BBB-sf
   E 90187LAN9     LT BBsf   Affirmed   BBsf
   HRR 90187LAQ2   LT BBsf   Affirmed   BBsf
   X-A 90187LAC3   LT AAAsf  Affirmed   AAAsf

KEY RATING DRIVERS

The affirmations reflect the improved occupancy and positive
leasing momentum since Fitch's last rating action. Additionally,
there is further clarity on the business plan of the new
ownership/property manager, SL Green Realty Corp. (SL Green), to
enhance and stabilize the property, which includes incorporating
additional amenities, such as a fitness club and wellness center,
restaurant, and rooftop bar and restaurant.

The Negative Outlooks reflect the potential for downgrades of up to
one category should net cash flow (NCF) deteriorate beyond Fitch's
view of sustainable performance. This could occur with limited to
no leasing progress, if new leasing occurs at rates significantly
below recent property activity or the new ownership/property
manager is unable to execute on their business plan. As the
property is currently in a state of transition, Fitch will continue
to monitor leasing activity.

The servicer-reported YE 2023 NCF debt service coverage ratio
(DSCR) was 1.58x, compared with 2.09x in 2022 and 2.08x in 2021 for
the interest-only loan. The NCF decline in 2023 can be attributed
to the significant drop in expense reimbursements from JPMorgan
Chase Bank (previously 45% of NRA) not renewing its space at lease
expiration in October 2022 and several tenants, including Societe
Generale and Houlihan Lokey, executing direct leases which have
reset base years for expenses.

Improving Occupancy: Property occupancy, which has improved to an
estimated 83.3% from 74.7% at YE 2023, is largely attributed to the
signing of two new leases. Stone Peak Partners (4.3% NRA) and EQT
Partners (4.3%) signed 15-year leases at well-above submarket rates
on the 31st through 34th floors.

Fitch Net Cash Flow: Fitch's updated sustainable property NCF of
$91.5 million is 5.1% below Fitch's NCF of $96.4 million at the
last rating action and 11.6% below Fitch's issuance NCF of $103.5
million, largely due to higher expenses, particularly real estate
taxes and increased leasing cost assumptions. Fitch's analysis
incorporates leases in place per the YE 2023 rent roll, with credit
for near-term contractual rent steps and tenants expected to take
occupancy. Fitch's NCF also assumed a lease-up of the office
portion to an 87.5% occupancy at rents in line with recent leasing
at the property, reflecting high asset quality and location and
sponsorship investment into the property.

Experienced Sponsorship and Property Management: The sponsorship is
a joint venture between SL Green (50.1%; BB+/Negative) and a U.S.
affiliate of Mori Trust Co., Ltd. (49.9%). SL Green sold a minority
interest of the property in June 2023 at a gross asset valuation of
$2.0 billion. SL Green is also managing the property.

The loan previously transferred to special servicing in November
2021 after the loan's borrower, which was controlled by HNA of
China, filed for bankruptcy in October 2021. After litigation with
the previous sponsor surrounding the bankruptcy, SL Green, which
held a preferred equity position, assumed a controlling interest in
the property. The loan returned to the master servicer in November
2022.

High-Quality Tenancy: Creditworthy tenants account for a large
portion of the property's tenancy, including Societe Generale
(29.3% of NRA through October 2032; A-/F1/Positive), Ares (11.9%
through May 2026, A-/Stable) and Rabobank (6.2% through September
2026; A+/F1/Stable). The property serves as the U.S. headquarters
for Societe Generale and Rabobank. Other major tenants include
Houlihan Lokey (10.3% through June 2034) and Angelo Gordon (8.4%
through February 2031).

Loan and Transaction Structure: The certificates follow a
sequential-pay structure. The 245 Park Avenue Trust 2017-245P
interests consist of a pari passu $380 million A-note (of an entire
$1.08 billion A-note) and $120 million in subordinate B-notes. The
trust loan has a debt of $676 per square foot (psf). The total debt
package includes mezzanine financing in the amount of $568 million
that is not included in the trust.

There are significant reserves totaling $45.2 million available
(excluding tax and insurance escrows) as of the March 2024 servicer
reporting.

Full Term, Interest-Only Loan: The loan is interest only for the
10-year term, maturing June 2027, with a fixed rate coupon of
3.67%. In its analysis, Fitch applied an upward loan-to-value (LTV)
hurdle adjustment due to the low coupon.

Fitch Leverage: The $1.2 billion mortgage loan ($676 psf) has a
Fitch DSCR and a LTV ratio of 0.90x and 98.3%, respectively,
compared to the Fitch DSCR and LTV of 1.08x and 81.1% at issuance
and 0.95x and 93.3% at the last rating action in 2023. Fitch
maintained a cap rate of 7.5% from the last rating action, compared
to 7.00% at issuance.

High Quality Asset; Prime Office and Retail Location: The loan is
secured by a 44-story class A, LEED-Gold certified office building
located on an entire block bound by Park Avenue, Lexington Avenue
and 46th and 47th Streets in the Grand Central office submarket of
Midtown Manhattan. Fitch Ratings assigned a property quality grade
of 'A-' at issuance. The building holds a LEED-Gold designation,
which has a positive impact on the ESG score for Waste & Hazardous
Materials Management; Ecological Impacts.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

Downgrades of up to one category to classes may occur should
property NCF, occupancy, and/or market conditions deteriorate
beyond Fitch's view of sustainable performance. This could happen
if SL Green is not able to continue to execute its business plan,
evidenced by limited leasing progress and/or new leases that are
signed at rates significantly below market rates.

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

Upgrades are not considered likely given the single-event risk and
the current ratings reflect Fitch's view of sustainable
performance, but is possible with significant and sustained leasing
that contributes to stabilize performance, and the prospect for
refinance is more certain.

The Negative Outlooks could be revised to Stable if property
performance and market conditions stabilize.

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.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

245 Park Avenue 2017-245P has an ESG Relevance Score of '4' [+] for
Waste & Hazardous Materials Management; Ecological Impacts due to
the collateral's sustainable building practices including Green
building certificate credentials, which has a positive impact on
the credit profile, and is relevant to the ratings in conjunction
with other factors.

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.


ACC TRUST 2021-1: Moody's Lowers Rating on Class D Notes to Ca
--------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has downgraded the ratings of seven classes of
notes from two ACC Trust and two U.S. Auto Funding Trust (USAUT)
asset-backed securitizations. For ACC Trusts, the notes are backed
by pools of closed-end retail automobile leases to non-prime
borrowers originated by RAC King, LLC, the parent company of
American Car Center and serviced by Westlake Portfolio Management,
LLC (WPM). For U.S. Auto Funding Trusts, the securitizations are
backed by non-prime retail automobile loan contracts originated by
U.S. Auto Sales, Inc., an affiliate of U.S. Auto Finance Inc. and
serviced by WPM.

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: ACC Trust 2021-1

Class D Notes, Downgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Dec 14, 2023
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

Issuer: ACC Trust 2022-1

Class B Notes, Downgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Sep 26, 2023
Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Class C Notes, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Dec 14, 2023
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: U.S. Auto Funding Trust 2021-1

Class C Notes, Downgraded to B3 (sf); previously on Sep 7, 2023
Confirmed at Ba1 (sf)

Class D Notes, Downgraded to C (sf); previously on Dec 14, 2023
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Issuer: U.S. Auto Funding Trust 2022-1

Class A Notes, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Sep 7, 2023
Downgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Class B Notes, Downgraded to Ca (sf); previously on Dec 14, 2023
Downgraded to B2 (sf)

A comprehensive review of all credit ratings for the respective
transaction(s) has been conducted during a rating committee.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The actions on the Class B notes in ACC Trust 2022-1 and the Class
A notes in U.S. Auto Funding Trust 2022-1 (USAUT 2022-1) are driven
by the continued slowdown in noteholder principal payments due to
high loss rates and increased servicing expenses, which increases
the risk of the notes not fully paying down by their respective
legal final maturity dates. The legal final maturity dates for the
ACC Trust 2022-1 Class B notes  and the USAUT 2022-1 Class A notes
are February 20, 2025 and April 15, 2025 respectively. The
remaining downgrade actions are primarily driven by material
declines in credit enhancement available for the affected notes as
a result of weak pool performance and increases in servicing
expenses charged to the trusts.

In the U.S. Auto Funding Trusts, with approval from the majority of
noteholders, the servicing fee has increased starting in December
2023 to 8% and further to 10% in February 2024, compared to
servicing fees of 4.10% prior to December 2023. In ACC Trusts, WPM
is reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses as part of the monthly
servicing compensation. Furthermore, WPM expects to recoup
previously unrecognized servicing expenses incurred for ACC Trusts
between March 2023 and December 2023 over 12 periods beginning in
February 2024. As a result, the total effective servicing fee in
February 2024 exceeded 15% for ACC Trust 2021-1 and 12% for ACC
Trust 2022-1. Moody's rating actions consider the effect these
higher servicing expenses have on excess spread and principal
payments to the notes, and the potential for expenses to remain
elevated in future periods. WPM has attributed the increase in
servicing expenses to increases in repossession expenses.

The actions also consider continually high net loss rates for the
underlying pools. Cumulative net loss-to-liquidation remains high
for these deals, reaching 39% for ACC Trust 2021-1 in February, and
to 59% for ACC Trust 2022-1 in the same period. Cumulative net
loss-to-liquidation increased to 46% in February for U.S. Auto
Funding Trust 2021-1 (USAUT 2021-1) and to 65% for USAUT 2022-1 in
the same period.

Credit enhancement levels continue to decline for these
securitizations. Overcollateralization  levels in ACC Trust 2021-1
declined to 0.0% of the current pool balance as of the March
payment date, with the reserve account being used to maintain
parity in the deal. ACC Trust 2022-1, USAUT 2021-1 and USAUT 2022-1
are currently undercollateralized, with the total note balances
exceeding the pool balances by 89.75%, 28.01%, and 67.21%,
respectively.

No actions were taken on the other rated classes in these deals
because their expected losses remain commensurate with their
current ratings, after taking into account the updated performance
information, structural features, credit enhancement and other
qualitative considerations.

Moody's lifetime cumulative net loss expectations are noted below
for the transaction pools. The loss expectations reflect updated
performance trends on the underlying pools.

ACC Trust 2021-1: 39%

ACC Trust 2022-1: 57%

U.S. Auto Funding Trust 2021-1: 46%

U.S. Auto Funding Trust 2022-1: 60%

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Auto Loan- and Lease-Backed ABS" published in
November 2023.

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

Up

Levels of credit protection that are greater than necessary to
protect investors against current expectations of loss could lead
to an upgrade of the ratings. Losses could decline from Moody's
original expectations as a result of a lower number of obligor
defaults or greater recoveries from the value of the vehicles
securing the obligors promise of payment. The US job market and the
market for used vehicles are also primary drivers of the
transaction's performance. Other reasons for better-than-expected
performance include changes in servicing practices to maximize
collections on the loans or refinancing opportunities that result
in a prepayment of the loan.

Down

Levels of credit protection that are insufficient to protect
investors against current expectations of loss could lead to a
downgrade of the ratings. Losses could increase from Moody's
original expectations as a result of a higher number of obligor
defaults or a deterioration in the value of the vehicles securing
the obligors promise of payment. The US job market and the market
for used vehicles are also primary drivers of the transaction's
performance. Other reasons for worse-than-expected performance
include poor servicing, error on the part of transaction parties
including further restatement of performance data, lack of
transactional governance and fraud.


ALLEGRO CLO XI: S&P Affirms BB- (sf) Rating on Class E-2 Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A-1a-R,
A-2a-R, B-R, C-R, D-R, and E-1-R replacement debt from Allegro CLO
XI Ltd./Allegro CLO XI LLC, a CLO originally issued in January 2020
that is managed by AXA Investment Managers US Inc. At the same
time, S&P withdrew its ratings on the class A-1a, B, C, D, and E-1
debt following payment in full on the April 9, 2024, refinancing
date. S&P also affirmed its ratings on the class A-1b and E-2 debt,
which was not refinanced.

The replacement debt was issued via a supplemental indenture, which
outlines the terms of the replacement debt. According to the
supplemental indenture, the non-call period for the class A-1a-R
and B-R debt was set to April 9, 2025; non-call period for the
class A-2a-R, C-R, D-R, and E-1-R debt was set to Oct. 9, 2024.

Replacement And Original Debt Issuances

Replacement debt

-- Class A-1a-R, $228.20 million: Three-month term SOFR + 1.25%
-- Class A-2a-R, $4.00 million: Three-month term SOFR + 1.45%
-- Class B-R, $46.00 million: Three-month term SOFR + 1.90%
-- Class C-R, $24.00 million: Three-month term SOFR + 2.53%
-- Class D-R, $20.00 million: Three-month term SOFR + 3.70%
-- Class E-1-R, $9.00 million: Three-month term SOFR + 6.50%

Original debt

-- Class A-1a, $228.20 million: Three-month term SOFR + 1.65%
-- Class A-2a, $4.00 million: Three-month term SOFR + 2.11%
-- Class B, $46.00 million: Three-month term SOFR + 2.26%
-- Class C, $24.00 million: Three-month term SOFR + 3.26%
-- Class D, $20.00 million: Three-month term SOFR + 4.21%
-- Class E-1, $9.00 million: Three-month term SOFR + 7.26%

S&P said, "Our review of this transaction included a cash flow
analysis, based on the portfolio and transaction data in the
trustee report, to estimate future performance. In line with our
criteria, our cash flow scenarios applied forward-looking
assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of defaults and the
recoveries upon default under various interest rate and
macroeconomic scenarios. Our analysis also considered the
transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or ultimate
principal to each of the rated tranches. The results of the cash
flow analysis (and other qualitative factors, as applicable)
demonstrated, in our view, that the outstanding rated classes all
have adequate credit enhancement available at the rating levels
associated with the rating actions.

"On a standalone basis, the results of the cash flow analysis
indicated a lower rating on the class E-2 debt. Given the overall
credit quality of the portfolio and the passing coverage tests, we
affirmed our rating on the class E-2 debt.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the debt remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and we will take rating actions as we
deem necessary."

  Ratings Assigned

  Allegro CLO XI, Ltd./Allegro CLO XI, LLC

  Class A-1a-R, $228.20 million: 'AAA (sf)'
  Class A-2a-R, $4.00 million: 'AAA (sf)'
  Class B-R, $46.00 million: 'AA (sf)'
  Class C-R, $24.00 million: 'A (sf)'
  Class D-R, $20.00 million: 'BBB- (sf)'
  Class E-1-R, $9.00 million: 'BB- (sf)'

  Ratings Affirmed

  Allegro CLO XI Ltd./Allegro CLO XI LLC

  Class A-1b: AAA (sf)
  Class E-2: BB- (sf)

  Rating Withdrawn

  Allegro CLO XI Ltd./Allegro CLO XI LLC

  Class A-1a to NR from 'AAA (sf)'
  Class B to NR from 'AA (sf)'
  Class C to NR from 'A (sf)'
  Class D to NR from 'BBB- (sf)'
  Class E-1 to NR from 'BB- (sf)'

  Other Outstanding Debt

  Allegro CLO XI Ltd./Allegro CLO XI LLC

  Class A-2b: NR
  Subordinated notes: NR

  NR--Not rated.



BALBOA BAY 2023-1: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on E-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to the class
A-R, B-R, C-R, D-R-1, D-R-2, and E-R replacement debt from Balboa
Bay Loan Funding 2023-1 Ltd./Balboa Bay Loan Funding 2023-1 LLC, a
CLO originally issued in March 2023 that is managed by Pacific
Investment Management Co. LLC.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of April 8,
2024. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

On the April 20, 2024, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
replacement debt will be used to redeem the original debt. At that
time, we expect to withdraw our ratings on the original debt and
assign ratings to the replacement debt. However, if the refinancing
doesn't occur, S&P may affirm its ratings on the original debt and
withdraw its preliminary ratings on the replacement debt.

The replacement debt will be issued via a proposed supplemental
indenture, which outlines the terms of the replacement debt.
According to the proposed supplemental indenture:

-- The replacement class A-R, B-R, C-R, D-R-1, D-R-2, and E-R
notes are expected to be issued at a lower spread than the original
notes.

-- The replacement class D-R-1 and D-R-2 notes are expected to
replace the existing class D notes and be rated 'BBB+ (sf)' and
'BBB (sf)', respectively.

-- The non-call period will be extended one year.

-- The reinvestment period will be extended one years.

-- The stated maturity dates (for the replacement debt and the
existing subordinated notes) will be extended one years.

-- No additional subordinated notes will be issued on the
refinancing date.

Replacement And Original Debt Issuances

Replacement debt

-- Class A-R, $256.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.42%

-- Class B-R, $48.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 2.05%

-- Class C-R (deferrable), $24.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 2.55%

-- Class D-R-1 (deferrable), $24.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 3.80%

-- Class D-R-2 (deferrable), $24.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 5.15%

-- Class E-R (deferrable), $12.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 6.90%

Original debt

-- Class A, $248.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.90%
-- Class B, $56.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 2.55%
-- Class C, $22.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 3.25%
-- Class D, $24.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 5.50%
-- Class E, $12.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 7.85%
-- Subordinated notes, $38.40 million: Not applicable

S&P said, "Our review of this transaction included a cash flow
analysis, based on the portfolio and transaction data in the
trustee report, to estimate future performance. In line with our
criteria, our cash flow scenarios applied forward-looking
assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of defaults and the
recoveries upon default under various interest rate and
macroeconomic scenarios. Our analysis also considered the
transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or ultimate
principal to each of the rated tranches.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the debt remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them and take rating actions as we deem
necessary."

  Preliminary Ratings Assigned

  Balboa Bay Loan Funding 2023-1 Ltd./
  Balboa Bay Loan Funding 2023-1 LLC

  Class A-R, $256.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B-R, $48.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C-R (deferrable), $24.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D-R-1 (deferrable), $24.00 million: BBB+ (sf)
  Class D-R-2 (deferrable), $4.00 million: BBB (sf)
  Class E-R (deferrable), $12.00 million: BB- (sf)

  Other Outstanding Debt

  Balboa Bay Loan Funding 2023-1 Ltd./
  Balboa Bay Loan Funding 2023-1 LLC

  Subordinated notes, $38.40 million: Not rated



BAYOU INTERMEDIATE II: Fitch Lowers IDR to 'B', Outlook Negative
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded Bayou Intermediate II, LLC's (dba:
Cordis) Long-Term Issuer Default Rating (IDR) to 'B' from 'B+' and
first-lien revolving credit facility and first-lien term loan to
'BB-'/'RR2' from 'BB'/'RR2'. The Rating Outlook remains Negative.

The downgrade and Negative Outlook reflect more adversely impacted
leverage and free cash flow in recent periods above Fitch's
previous expectation. This is mostly due to FX headwinds,
significant working capital requirements, and a slower realization
of cost savings. The company completed its separation on July 1,
2023, and Fitch anticipates FCF to improve as Cordis begins to
operate as an independent entity.

However, due to current modest levels of profitability and ongoing
stand up related expenses, Fitch expects limited free cash flow
generation over the rating horizon and expects (CFO-capex)/debt to
remain below Fitch's previous negative sensitivity of 5.0% until FY
2027. Additionally, the rating action reflects execution risks
associated with the company's margin expansion initiatives, which
are critical to its long-term financial performance.

The 'B' rating is supported by Cordis' stable revenue base and
leading market position in percutaneous solutions.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Medium to Long-term Business Outlook: Fitch expects Cordis'
revenues to be stable in the medium term, supported by healthy end
market demand, global brand recognition for the company's quality
products, a portfolio of percutaneous solutions covering the entire
procedure continuum, and physician preference of its products
evidenced by over 90% in annual retention. However, these positives
are partially offset by a broad tightening of healthcare
expenditures, particularly with regard to volume-based procurement
program in China, to which the company has a meaningful exposure.

Over the longer term, Fitch views underinvestment in R&D prior to
separation as a risk to Cordis' long-term success. Fitch expects
Cordis, as an independent company, to prioritize capital deployment
towards reinvigorating product portfolio. Fitch also believes new
product introductions are vital to the company's long-term growth,
as they could offset potential pricing pressures or market share
erosion due to competitions.

Optimization Initiatives in Focus Post-Separation: After the
separation from Cardinal Health, Inc., Fitch anticipates Cordis
will begin to more materially realize cost savings previously
identified. The vast majority of the company's Transition Service
Agreement expenses incurred during the separation process are
expected to be eliminated. Fitch expects the company will be better
positioned to enhance profitability through various initiatives.

Initiatives include the rationalization of geographies and
products, which includes reducing SKUs; withdrawing direct presence
in select markets; implementing pricing improvements in certain
countries; and rightsizing SG&A expenses. Whether and to what
extent Cordis is able to realize the identified cost savings and
synergies as an independent company will be integral to its
ratings.

Stressed FCF; Material Sponsor Support: Fitch's rating action
reflects that FCF generation has been adversely stressed by
material and labor inflation, increased freight costs,
pandemic-related regional disruptions, foreign exchange headwinds,
carveout related costs, and material working capital requirements,
driven by industry-wide supply shortage and separation-related
accounts payable reduction. Fitch expects it will improve
sequentially but remain limited due to current modest levels of
profitability and the ongoing stand up related expenses.

Fitch's projections assume stabilization of working capital and a
meaningful decline in carveout costs beginning in 2H2024. Fitch
views Cordis' sponsors' actions favorably with their willingness to
provide meaningful additional equity support.

Deleveraging Predominantly Dependent on Margin Expansion: Fitch
expects EBITDA leverage to remain above 6x at FYE 2024 and decline
to between 5x-5.5x by FYE 2025. The ratios for the forecast periods
are meaningfully higher than Fitch's earlier expectations.. Fitch
expects the company to deleverage primarily through EBITDA growth
rather than through voluntary debt repayment.

DERIVATION SUMMARY

Cordis has leading global market positions in the interventional
cardiology and endovascular device markets, but has a narrower
focus and weaker R&D pipeline versus its competitors. Cordis'
largest competitors include Boston Scientific Corp. (BBB+/Stable),
which has larger scale and breadth, a focus in highly innovative
products, and a more conservative financial profile.

Fitch has also considered the company's other 'B' to 'BB' rated
peers in its analysis. ICU Medical, Inc. (BB/Stable) is an infusion
system and consumables focused device issuer with relatively larger
scale but less diversification. Tenet Health Corp. (B+/Positive) is
a large for-profit operators of acute care hospitals and ASCs in
the U.S. that operates with an EBITDA leverage level similar to
that of Cordis.

KEY ASSUMPTIONS

- Organic revenue growth in low single digits driven by stable
market demand, partially offset by meaningful exposure to China
where VBP is creating pricing headwinds in the medical device
industry, and limited revenue contribution assumed from new product
introductions in the near term;

- EBITDA margin expected to expand by roughly 200bps between FY
2024 and 2027 driven primarily by cost saving initiatives;

- FCF expected to remain negative in FY 2024 and 2025 due largely
to stand up related costs, and turn positive thereafter;

- No acquisitions or shareholder returns are assumed over the
rating horizon.

RECOVERY ANALYSIS

The recovery analysis that is the basis for the instruments ratings
assumes that Cordis would be considered a going concern in
bankruptcy and that the company would be reorganized rather than
liquidated. Fitch estimates a going concern enterprise value (EV)
of $358 million for Cordis and assumes that administrative claims
consume 10% of this value in the recovery analysis. The going
concern EV is based upon estimates of a post-reorganization EBITDA
of $55 million and an EV/EBITDA multiple of 6.5x.

Fitch revised the estimate of Cordis' going concern EBITDA from $63
million to $55 million due to a decrease in confidence regarding
the company's rate and degree of margin improvement, and cash flow
generations. The current estimated going concern EBITDA of $55
million is 17% lower than Fitch's forecasted EBITDA for FY 2024.

The assumed going concern EBITDA reflects a scenario in which 1)
revenue growth modestly decline or remain flat driven by loss of
market share as a result of competition, slow new product
introductions, or pricing pressures due to general reimbursement
environment, and 2) profitability initiatives do not materialize
and EBITDA margins sustain at or below current level.

Fitch assumes a recovery EV/EBITDA multiple of 6.5x for Cordis.
This is generally in line with the 6.0x-7.0x Fitch typically
assigns to medical device/specialty pharmaceutical manufacturers.

Fitch applies a waterfall analysis to the going concern EV and
assumes that the company would fully draw the revolvers in a
bankruptcy scenario. The analysis applies to $438 million in total
first-lien secured debt including the fully drawn revolving
facility and term loan. The first-lien secured debt is expected to
recover in the range of 71%-90%, and therefore, is rated at
'BB-'/'RR2', two notches above the IDR.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive
rating action/upgrade:

- EBITDA Leverage expected to sustain below 5.0x;

- Operational strength and success standing up business that
results in (cash flow from operations - capex)/total debt around or
above 5%.

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative
rating action/downgrade:

- Integration issues, pressures to profitability or increased
expenses that result in (cash flow from operations - capex)/total
debt sustained below 2.5%;

- EBITDA/Interest coverage sustained at or below 1.5x;

- EBITDA Leverage expected to sustain above 6.0x;

- Inability to successfully introduce new products to support
growth over the long term.

LIQUIDITY AND DEBT STRUCTURE

Adequate Liquidity: Liquidity includes a significant amount of cash
on the balance sheet and modest availability on the company's $80
million first-lien secured revolver due 2026 at Dec. 31, 2023.
Fitch expects FCF to remain negative in fiscal 2024 and 2025 due
largely to stand up associated costs, and turn positive
thereafter.

Maturities Manageable: Maturities consist of outstanding balances
under the first lien revolver due 2026 and annual amortization of
$4 million on the $375 million first lien term loan due 2028. The
company will only be subject to a springing financial maintenance
covenant of 8.3x first-lien net leverage if 35% or more of the
revolver is drawn.

ISSUER PROFILE

Bayou Intermediate II, LLC (Cordis) develops, manufactures and
commercializes interventional cardiovascular, endovascular and
closure devices globally, and provides a full suite of products
used by interventional cardiologists, vascular surgeons and
interventional radiologists in minimally invasive procedures.

SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL ADJUSTMENTS

Adjustments made for separation related on-time, duplicative, and
non-cash charges, and stock-based compensation. Fitch has assumed
that the higher amount of taxes, interest and depreciation and
amortization disclosed on the compliance certificate calculations
as compared to the financial statements is attributable to some of
those expenses being embedded in other lines on the income
statement and cashflow statement.

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          Recovery   Prior
   -----------             ------          --------   -----
Bayou Intermediate
II, LLC               LT IDR B   Downgrade            B+

   senior secured     LT     BB- Downgrade   RR2      BB


BAYVIEW OPPORTUNITY 2024-CAR1: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating to F Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned definitive ratings to the notes issued
by Bayview Opportunity Master Fund VII 2024-CAR1, LLC (BVCLN
2024-CAR1). The credit-linked notes reference a pool of fixed rate
auto installment contracts with prime-quality borrowers originated
and serviced by The Huntington National Bank (HNB, senior unsecured
A3).

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Bayview Opportunity Master Fund VII 2024-CAR1, LLC

Class A Notes, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Class B Notes, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Class C Notes, Definitive Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

Class D Notes, Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Class E Notes, Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Class F Notes, Definitive Rating Assigned B3 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rated notes are floating-rate obligations secured by a cash
collateral account. Payments on the notes are linked to a tranched
credit default swap (CDS) transaction entered into with respect to
the reference pool between HNB and the issuer, with HNB as the
protection buyer. HNB pays a monthly fixed CDS premium and receives
compensation for losses incurred on the reference pool. This deal
is unique in that the source of principal payments for the notes
will be a cash collateral account held by a third party with a
rating of at least A2 or P-1 by Moody's. The transaction also
benefits from a Letter of Credit covering five months of fixed
premium amount provided by a third party with a rating of at least
A2 or P-1 by Moody's.  As a result, the rated notes are not limited
by the long-term senior unsecured rating of HNB.

The credit risk exposure of the notes depends on the actual
realized losses incurred by the reference pool. This transaction
has a pro-rata structure, which is more beneficial to the
subordinate bondholders than the typical sequential-pay structure
for US auto loan transactions. However, the subordinate bondholders
will not receive any principal unless performance tests are
satisfied.

The ratings are based on the quality of the reference pool and its
expected performance, the strength of the capital structure, and
the experience of HNB as the servicer.

Moody's median cumulative net loss expectation for the BVCLN
2024-CAR1 reference pool is 0.50% and loss at a Aaa stress of
4.50%. Moody's based its cumulative net loss expectation on an
analysis of the credit quality of the reference pool; the
historical performance of similar collateral, including
securitization performance and managed portfolio performance; the
ability of HNB to perform the servicing functions; and current
expectations for the macroeconomic environment during the life of
the transaction.

At closing, the Class A notes, Class B notes, Class C notes, Class
D notes, Class E notes and Class F notes benefit from 5.70%, 4.20%,
2.60%, 2.00%, 1.10% and 0.60% of hard credit enhancement,
respectively. Hard credit enhancement for the notes consists of
subordination. The notes may also benefit from excess spread.

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Auto Loan- and Lease-Backed ABS" published in
November 2023.

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

Up

Moody's could upgrade the Class B, Class C, Class D, Class E, and
Class F notes if levels of credit enhancement are higher than
necessary to protect investors against current expectations of
portfolio losses. Losses could decline from Moody's original
expectations as a result of a lower number of obligor defaults or
appreciation in the value of the vehicles securing an obligor's
promise of payment. Portfolio losses also depend greatly on the US
job market and the market for used vehicles. Other reasons for
better-than-expected performance include changes to servicing
practices that enhance collections or refinancing opportunities
that result in prepayments.

Down

Moody's could downgrade the notes if given current expectations of
portfolio losses, levels of credit enhancement are consistent with
lower ratings. Credit enhancement could decline if realized losses
reduce available subordination. Moody's expectation of pool losses
could rise as a result of a higher number of obligor defaults or
deterioration in the value of the vehicles securing an obligor's
promise of payment. Portfolio losses also depend greatly on the US
job market, the market for used vehicles, and poor servicing. Other
reasons for worse-than-expected performance include error on the
part of transaction parties, inadequate transaction governance, and
fraud.


BROOKHAVEN PARK: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on Cl. E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Brookhaven
Park CLO Ltd./Brookhaven Park CLO LLC's fixed- and floating-rate
debt.

The debt issuance is a CLO securitization governed by investment
criteria and backed primarily by broadly syndicated
speculative-grade (rated 'BB+' or lower) senior secured term loans.
The transaction is managed by Blackstone Liquid Credit Strategies
LLC.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of April 10,
2024. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect S&P's view of:

-- The diversification of the collateral pool;

-- The credit enhancement provided through subordination, excess
spread, and overcollateralization;

-- The experience of the collateral manager's team, which can
affe

carlo_editor
ct the performance of the rated debt through portfolio
identification and ongoing management; and

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

  Preliminary Ratings Assigned

  Brookhaven Park CLO Ltd./Brookhaven Park CLO LLC

  Class A, $320.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B-1, $42.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class B-2, $18.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C (deferrable), $30.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D (deferrable), $30.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $20.00 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $43.85 million: Not rated



CG-CCRE 2014-FL2: S&P Lowers Class COL2 Certs Rating to 'D (sf')
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings lowered its ratings on 11 classes of commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates from five U.S. CMBS
transactions.

The downgrades on eight classes from four U.S. CMBS transactions
reflect material accumulated interest shortfalls that have been
outstanding for at least two consecutive months. S&P said,
"Specifically, our downgrades on seven of these principal- and
interest-paying certificate classes from four U.S. CMBS
transactions to 'D (sf)' are due to accumulated interest shortfalls
that we expect to remain outstanding for the foreseeable future as
well as our assessment that some of these classes may also incur
principal losses upon the eventual liquidation of the specially
serviced assets in the respective transactions."

The downgrade on the class COL2 raked certificates from CG-CCRE
Commercial Mortgage Trust 2014-FL2 to 'D (sf)' is due to principal
losses reflected in the March 2024 trustee remittance report.

The downgrades on the class X-A interest-only (IO) certificates to
'D (sf)' from DBJPM 2016-SFC Mortgage Trust and on the class X-B IO
certificates to 'CCC- (sf)' from J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial
Mortgage Securities Trust 2013-LC11 reflect our criteria for rating
IO securities.

The interest shortfalls are primarily due to one or more factors:

-- The appraisal subordinate entitlement reduction (ASER) amounts
in effect for specially serviced assets,

-- The workout fees related to corrected mortgage loans,

-- The special servicing fees, or

-- The recovery of prior servicing advances.

S&P said, "Our analysis primarily considered ASER amounts based on
appraisal reduction amounts (ARAs) calculated using recent Member
of the Appraisal Institute (MAI) appraisals. We also considered
servicer-nonrecoverable advance determinations and special
servicing fees, which are likely, in our view, to cause recurring
interest shortfalls."

The servicer implements ARAs and resulting ASER amounts according
to each transaction's terms. Typically, these terms call for an ARA
equal to 25% of the loan's stated principal balance to be
implemented when it is 60 days past due and an appraisal or other
valuation is not available within a specified time frame. S&P
primarily considered ASER amounts based on ARAs calculated from MAI
appraisals when deciding which classes from the affected
transactions to downgrade to 'D (sf)'. This is because ARAs based
on a principal balance haircut are highly subject to change, or
even reversal once the special servicer obtains the MAI
appraisals.

Servicer-nonrecoverable advance determinations can prompt
shortfalls due to a lack of debt-service advancing, the recovery of
previously made advances after an asset was deemed nonrecoverable,
or the failure to advance trust expenses when nonrecoverability has
been determined. Trust expenses may include, but are not limited
to, property operating expenses, property taxes, insurance
payments, and legal expenses.

BWAY 2015-1740 Mortgage Trust

S&P said, "We lowered our rating on class A to 'D (sf)' from BWAY
2015-1740 Mortgage Trust, U.S. stand-alone (single-borrower) CMBS
transaction, due to accumulated interest shortfalls that we expect
to be outstanding for the foreseeable future until the eventual
resolution of the specially serviced loan. Based on our analysis,
we also expect this class to incur principal losses upon the
eventual resolution of the specially serviced 1740 Broadway loan."

According to the March 12, 2024, trustee remittance report, the
trust incurred monthly interest shortfalls of $952,747 due to a
nonrecoverable determination made by the master servicer, Wells
Fargo Bank N.A., in August 2023. As a result, all classes,
including class A, have experienced interest shortfalls for at
least eight consecutive months.

DBJPM 2016-SFC Mortgage Trust

S&P said, "We lowered our ratings on classes A, B, C, and D to 'D
(sf)' from DBJPM 2016-SFC Mortgage Trust, a U.S. stand-alone
(single-borrower) CMBS transaction, due to accumulated interest
shortfalls that we expect to be outstanding for the foreseeable
future until the eventual resolution of the specially serviced
loan. Based on our analysis, we also expect these classes to incur
principal losses upon the eventual resolution of the specially
serviced Westfield San Francisco Centre loan.

"We lowered our rating on the class X-A IO certificates to 'D (sf)'
based on our criteria for rating IO securities, in which the
ratings on the IO securities would not be higher than that of the
lowest-rated referenced class. Class X-A references classes A and
B."

According to the March 12, 2024, trustee remittance report, the
current monthly interest shortfalls incurred by the trust totaled
$613,430 due to an ASER amount of $551,615 based on an ARA that was
implemented in January 2024 and special servicing fees of $61,815.
All classes have experienced interest shortfalls for three
consecutive months.

GS Mortgage Securities Corp. Trust 2018-TWR

S&P said, "We lowered our rating to 'D (sf)' on class F from GS
Mortgage Securities Corp. Trust 2018-TWR, a U.S. stand-alone
(single-borrower) CMBS transaction, due to accumulated interest
shortfalls that we expect will remain outstanding for the
foreseeable future until the specially serviced loan's eventual
resolution. Based on our analysis, we also expect this class to
incur principal losses upon the eventual resolution of the
specially serviced Tower Place loan."

Per the March 15, 2024, trustee remittance report, the monthly
interest shortfalls affecting the trust totaled $260,031 due to an
ASER amount based on an ARA that was implemented in December 2023.
Classes F, G, and RRI have incurred interest shortfalls for at
least three consecutive months. Classes G and RRI are not rated by
S&P Global Ratings.

J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2013-LC11

S&P said, "We lowered our ratings on class C to 'CCC- (sf)' and D
to 'D (sf)' from J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities
Trust 2013-LC11, a U.S. CMBS conduit transaction, due to
accumulated interest shortfalls. Specifically, we lowered our
rating on class D to 'D (sf)' because we believe that the
accumulated interest shortfalls will remain outstanding for the
foreseeabl55e future. In addition, based on our analysis, we
assessed that class D may experience principal losses upon the
eventual resolution of the specially serviced assets.

"We lowered our rating on the class X-B IO certificates to 'CCC-
(sf)' based on our criteria for rating IO securities, in which the
ratings on the IO securities would not be higher than that of the
lowest-rated referenced class. Class X-B references classes B and
C."

According to the March 15, 2024, trustee remittance report, the
trust experienced current monthly interest shortfalls totalling
$445,052 due primarily to special servicing fees of $50,415, ASER
amounts of $57,996, and interest reduction due to a
nonrecoverability determination of $331,321. Classes C, D, E, F,
and NR have experienced interest shortfalls between one and 15
consecutive months, respectively. S&P currently rates class E at 'D
(sf)' and do not rate classes F and NR.

Class C currently experienced one month of interest shortfalls;
however, if the accumulated interest shortfalls remain outstanding
for a prolonged time, S&P may further lower our rating to 'D
(sf)'.

CG-CCRE Commercial Mortgage Trust 2014-FL2

S&P lowered its rating to 'D (sf)' on the class COL2 raked
certificates from CG-CCRE Commercial Mortgage Trust 2014-FL2, a
U.S. CMBS large loan transaction, due to principal losses as
reflected in the March 15, 2024, trustee remittance report.

Class COL2 derives 100% of its cash flow from a subordinate
component of the Colonie Center whole loan. The loan transferred to
special servicing on Dec. 19, 2023, due to maturity default. The
borrower failed to pay off the whole loan upon its Dec. 9, 2023,
maturity date.

Per the March 15, 2024, trustee remittance report, because of the
specially serviced Colonie Center loan, the trust incurred monthly
interest shortfalls totalling $293,467 due primarily to special
servicing fees of $20,762 and an ASER amount of $265,466 based on
an ARA implemented in March 2024.

Since the Colonie Center whole loan currently amortizes, a portion
of the principal amount advanced by the servicer was applied to
repay interest shortfalls on class COL2, resulting in a realized
principal loss of $24,517 in February 2024 and $24,517 in March
2024, as reflected in the respective periods' trustee remittance
reports. The aggregate realized losses of $49,034 represented about
35 basis points of class COL2's original balance. Class COL2, which
incurred two consecutive months of interest shortfalls, had
$120,061 of accumulated interest shortfalls outstanding as of the
March 2024 trustee remittance report.

  Ratings Lowered

  BWAY 2015-1740 Mortgage Trust

  Class A to 'D (sf)' from 'CCC- (sf)'

  DBJPM 2016-SFC Mortgage Trust

  Class A to 'D (sf)' from 'B+ (sf)'
  Class B to 'D (sf)' from 'CCC (sf)'
  Class C to 'D (sf)' from 'CCC (sf)'
  Class D to 'D (sf)' from 'CCC- (sf)'
  Class X-A to 'D (sf)' from 'CCC (sf)'

  GS Mortgage Securities Corp. Trust 2018-TWR

  Class F to 'D (sf') from 'CCC- (sf)'

  J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage Securities Trust 2013-LC11

  Class C to 'CCC- (sf') from 'B- (sf)'
  Class D to 'D (sf') from 'CCC- (sf)'
  Class X-B to 'CCC- (sf) from 'B- (sf)'

  CG-CCRE Commercial Mortgage Trust 2014-FL2

  Class COL2 to 'D (sf') from 'CCC- (sf)'



CIFC FUNDING 2024-I: Fitch Assigns 'BB-sf' Rating on Class E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned ratings and Rating Outlooks to CIFC
Funding 2024-I, Ltd.

   Entity/Debt              Rating           
   -----------              ------           
CIFC Funding
2024-I, Ltd.

   A                    LT  NRsf   New Rating
   A-L                  LT  NRsf   New Rating
   B                    LT  AAsf   New Rating
   C                    LT  Asf    New Rating
   D                    LT  BBB-sf New Rating
   E                    LT  BB-sf  New Rating
   Subordinated Notes   LT  NRsf   New Rating

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

CIFC Funding 2024-I, Ltd. (the issuer) is an arbitrage cash flow
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) that will be managed by CIFC
Asset Management LLC. Net proceeds from the issuance of the secured
and subordinated notes will provide financing on a portfolio of
approximately $500 million of primarily first lien senior secured
leveraged loans.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Asset Credit Quality (Negative): The average credit quality of the
indicative portfolio is 'B', which is in line with that of recent
CLOs. The weighted average rating factor (WARF) of the indicative
portfolio is 23.66, versus a maximum covenant, in accordance with
the initial expected matrix point of 26.55. Issuers rated in the
'B' rating category denote a highly speculative credit quality;
however, the notes benefit from appropriate credit enhancement and
standard U.S. CLO structural features.

Asset Security (Positive): The indicative portfolio consists of
99.05% first-lien senior secured loans. The weighted average
recovery rate (WARR) of the indicative portfolio is 74.31% versus a
minimum covenant, in accordance with the initial expected matrix
point of 72%.

Portfolio Composition (Positive): The largest three industries may
comprise up to 45% of the portfolio balance in aggregate while the
top five obligors can represent up to 12.5% of the portfolio
balance in aggregate. The level of diversity resulting from the
industry, obligor and geographic concentrations is in line with
other recent CLOs.

Portfolio Management (Neutral): The transaction has a five-year
reinvestment period and reinvestment criteria similar to other
CLOs. Fitch's analysis was based on a stressed portfolio created by
adjusting to the indicative portfolio to reflect permissible
concentration limits and collateral quality test levels.

Cash Flow Analysis (Positive): Fitch used a customized proprietary
cash flow model to replicate the principal and interest waterfalls
and assess the effectiveness of various structural features of the
transaction. In Fitch's stress scenarios, the rated notes can
withstand default and recovery assumptions consistent with their
assigned ratings. The WAL used for the transaction stress portfolio
and matrices analysis is 12 months less than the WAL covenant to
account for structural and reinvestment conditions after the
reinvestment period. In Fitch's opinion, 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

Variability in key model assumptions, such as decreases in recovery
rates and increases in default rates, could result in a downgrade.
Fitch evaluated the notes' sensitivity to potential changes in such
a metric. The results under these sensitivity scenarios are as
severe as between 'BB+sf' and 'A+sf' for class B, between 'B+sf'
and 'BBB+sf' for class C, between less than 'B-sf' and 'BB+sf' for
class D, and between less than 'B-sf' and 'B+sf' for class E.

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

Variability in key model assumptions, such as increases in recovery
rates and decreases in default rates, could result in an upgrade.
Fitch evaluated the notes' sensitivity to potential changes in such
metrics; the minimum rating results under these sensitivity
scenarios are 'AAAsf' for class B, 'AAsf' for class C, 'Asf' for
class D, and 'BBB+sf' for class E.

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. Overall, Fitch's assessment of the asset pool
information relied upon for its rating analysis according to its
applicable rating methodologies indicates that it is adequately
reliable.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores for CIFC Funding
2024-I, Ltd. 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 in the key
rating drivers any ESG factor which has a significant impact on the
rating on an individual basis.


CITIGROUP MORTGAGE 2024-RP2: Fitch Gives B(EXP) Rating on B2 Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned expected ratings to the residential
mortgage-backed notes to be issued by Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust
2024-RP2 (CMLTI 2024-RP2).

   Entity/Debt       Rating           
   -----------       ------           
CMLTI 2024-RP2

   A1            LT AAA(EXP)sf Expected Rating
   A2            LT AA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   M1            LT A(EXP)sf   Expected Rating
   M2            LT BBB(EXP)sf Expected Rating
   B1            LT BB(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   B2            LT B(EXP)sf   Expected Rating
   B3            LT NR(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   B4            LT NR(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   X             LT NR(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   SA            LT NR(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   PT            LT NR(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   PT-1          LT NR(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   R             LT NR(EXP)sf  Expected Rating

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Fitch expects to rate the residential mortgage-backed notes to be
issued by Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust 2024-RP2 (CMLTI 2024-RP2)
as indicated above. The transaction is expected to close on April
11, 2024. The notes are supported by 1,197 seasoned performing
loans (SPLs) and reperforming loans (RPLs) with a total balance of
about $242.7 million, including $14.4 million, or 6.0% of the
aggregate pool balance, in noninterest-bearing deferred principal
amounts as of the cutoff date.

Distributions of principal and interest (P&I) and loss allocations
are based on a traditional, senior-subordinate, sequential
structure. The sequential-pay structure locks out principal to the
subordinated notes until the most senior notes outstanding are paid
in full. The servicer will not advance delinquent monthly payments
of P&I.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Updated Sustainable Home Prices (Negative): Due to Fitch's updated
view on sustainable home prices, Fitch views the home price values
of this pool as 11.8% above a long-term sustainable level (versus
11.1% on a national level as of 3Q23, up 1.7% qoq). Housing
affordability is at its worst levels in decades, driven by both
high interest rates and elevated home prices. Home prices have
increased 5.5% yoy nationally as of December 2023, notwithstanding
modest regional declines, but are still being supported by limited
inventory.

Distressed Performance History and RPL Credit Quality (Negative):
The collateral pool primarily consists of peak-vintage SPLs and
RPLs. The collateral is seasoned at approximately 137 months in
aggregate as calculated by Fitch with 52.8% of the pool by unpaid
principal balance (UPB) being originated before 2010. The remaining
47.2% of loans were originated between 2010 and 2022.

Of the pool, no loans are delinquent as of the cut-off date and
28.7% are current but have had delinquencies within the past 24
months. Fitch increased its loss expectations to account for the
delinquent loans and loans with prior delinquencies. Additionally,
60.5% of the loans have a prior modification.

Borrowers have a moderate credit profile (705 FICO, as calculated
by Fitch, based on updated FICO scores provided on the loan level
and a 41.5% debt-to-income [DTI] ratio).

Low Leverage (Positive): All loans seasoned over 24 months received
updated property values, translating to a Fitch-derived, weighted
average (WA), current mark-to-market (MtM) combined loan-to-value
ratio (cLTV) of 56.1% and a sustainable LTV (sLTV) of 64.0% at the
base case. Updated broker price opinions (BPOs), ARBPOs, exterior
appraisals and automated valuation models (AVMs) were provided on
all loans seasoned at more than two years in the pool and used to
calculate the Fitch-derived LTVs. Fitch treated ARBPOs and exterior
appraisals as BPOs. This reflects low-leverage borrowers and is
stronger than in recently rated SPL/RPL transactions.

Sequential-Pay Structure and No Servicer P&I Advances (Mixed): The
transaction's cash flow is based on a sequential-pay structure
whereby the subordinated classes do not receive principal until the
senior classes are repaid in full. Losses are allocated in
reverse-sequential order. Furthermore, the provision to reallocate
principal to pay interest on the 'AAAsf' and 'AAsf' rated notes
prior to other principal distributions is highly supportive of
timely interest payments to those classes in the absence of
servicer advancing. Interest and interest shortfalls are paid
sequentially.

The servicer will not advance delinquent monthly payments of P&I,
which reduces liquidity to the trust. P&I advances made on behalf
of loans that become delinquent and eventually liquidate reduce
liquidation proceeds to the trust. Due to the lack of P&I
advancing, the loan-level loss severity (LS) is less for this
transaction than for those where the servicer is obligated to
advance P&I. Structural provisions and cash flow priorities,
together with increased subordination, provide for timely payments
of interest to the 'AAAsf' and 'AAsf' rated classes. Under Fitch's
updated criteria approach, Fitch only expects timely interest for
'AAAsf' rated classes (Global Structured Finance Rating Criteria).

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

Fitch incorporates a sensitivity analysis to demonstrate how the
ratings would react to steeper market value declines (MVDs) than
assumed at the MSA level. Sensitivity analysis was conducted at the
state and national levels to assess the effect of higher MVDs for
the subject pool as well as lower MVDs, illustrated by a gain in
home prices.

This defined negative rating sensitivity analysis demonstrates how
ratings would react to steeper MVDs at the national level. The
analysis assumes MVDs of 10.0%, 20.0% and 30.0%, in addition to the
model-projected 42.7%, at 'AAA'. The analysis indicates there is
some potential rating migration, with higher MVDs for all rated
classes compared with the model projection. Specifically, a 10%
additional decline in home prices would lower all rated classes by
one full category.

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

The defined positive rating sensitivity analysis demonstrates how
the ratings would react to positive home price growth of 10.0% with
no assumed overvaluation. Excluding the senior class, which is
already rated 'AAAsf', the analysis indicates there is potential
for positive rating migration for all of the rated classes.
Specifically, a 10.0% gain in home prices would result in a full
category upgrade for the rated classes excluding those being
assigned ratings of 'AAAsf'.

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

Fitch was provided with Form ABS Due Diligence-15E (Form 15E) as
prepared by SitusAMC. The third-party due diligence review was
completed on 100% of the loans in this transaction. The scope of
the due diligence review was consistent with Fitch criteria for
seasoned collateral. Fitch considered this information in its
analysis and, as a result, Fitch made the following adjustments:
increased the LS due to HUD-1 issues, missing modification
agreements, as well as delinquent taxes and outstanding liens.
These adjustments resulted in an increase in the 'AAAsf' expected
loss of approximately 27bps.


COMM 2016-667M: S&P Lowers Class E Certs Rating to 'B (sf)'
-----------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings lowered its ratings on four classes of
commercial mortgage pass-through certificates from COMM 2016-667M
Mortgage Trust, a U.S. CMBS transaction. At the same time, S&P
affirmed its 'AAA (sf)' ratings on two other classes from the
transaction.

This U.S. stand-alone (single-borrower) CMBS transaction is backed
by a portion of a 10-year, fixed-rate, interest-only (IO) mortgage
whole loan secured by the borrower's fee-simple interest in 667
Madison Avenue, a 25-story, 273,983-sq.-ft. class A office property
located within Midtown Manhattan's Plaza District office
submarket.

Rating Actions

The downgrades on classes B, C, D, and E reflect:

-- S&P's revised expected-case valuation, which is 8.8% lower than
the valuation it derived in its last review in May 2022, due
primarily to reported decreases in occupancy and net cash flow
(NCF) at the property.

-- S&P's view that, due to weakened office submarket fundamentals,
the borrower may face challenges re-tenanting vacant space in a
timely manner.

-- S&P's concerns with the borrower's ability to make timely debt
service payments and refinance the whole loan by its October 2026
maturity date if the property's occupancy rate and NCF do not
improve. The loan is on the master servicer's watchlist because a
cash management provision was triggered due to a low reported debt
service coverage (DSC) of 1.00x as of year-end 2023.

-- The affirmation on class A reflects its senior position in the
payment waterfall, among other factors.

-- The affirmation on the class X-A IO certificates reflects S&P's
criteria for rating IO securities, in which the rating on the IO
securities would not be higher than that of the lowest-rated
reference class. The notional amount of the class X-A certificates
references class A.

S&P said, "In our May 10, 2022, review, the property was 96.7%
occupied. However, we assumed a 15.0% vacancy rate (on par with the
office submarket vacancy rate at that time) to account for high
rollover risk during the remaining loan term, a $170.91-per-sq.-ft.
gross rent, as calculated by S&P Global Ratings, and a 48.1%
operating expense ratio to derive an S&P Global Ratings long-term
sustainable NCF of $19.3 million. Using an S&P Global Ratings
capitalization rate of 6.25%, we arrived at an S&P Global Ratings
expected-case value of $309.1 million, or $1,128 per sq. ft.

"Since our last review, the property's reported NCF for year-end
2023 declined sharply after occupancy fell to 78.6%, according to
the Dec. 31, 2023, rent roll. The drop in occupancy is mainly
attributable to nine tenants, comprising 15.6% of the net rentable
area (NRA), as well as major tenants Loews Corporation (15.5% of
NRA) and the coworking tenant Servcorp Madison LLC (11.6%),
vacating their spaces in 2023."

The sponsor, Hartz Financial Corp., was able to partly lease up the
vacant space at significantly higher-than-market rents; however,
the property's occupancy rate is currently still around 80.0%.

S&P said, "As a result, in our current analysis, we assumed an
overall vacancy rate of 17.5% (in line with CoStar's projected
submarket vacancy rates in 2025 through 2027), a
$162.65-per-sq.-ft. S&P Global Ratings gross rent, and a 45.8%
operating expense ratio to arrive at an S&P Global Ratings
long-term sustainable NCF of $17.6 million, 8.8% lower than the NCF
in our last review. Using the same 6.25% S&P Global Ratings
capitalization rate as in the last review, we derived an S&P Global
Ratings expected-case value of $281.9 million, or $1,029 per sq.
ft., which is 8.8% lower than the value in our last review and
61.9% below the issuance appraisal value of $740.0 million. This
yielded an S&P Global Ratings loan-to-value (LTV) ratio of 90.1% on
the whole loan balance, up from 82.2% in our last review."

Although the model-indicated ratings were lower than the current or
revised ratings on classes A, B, C, and D, S&P tempered its
downgrades on classes B, C, and D and affirmed our rating on class
A because of certain qualitative considerations. These include:

-- The property's class A quality, relatively smaller average
floorplates, and desirable location within the Plaza District
office submarket of Manhattan.

-- The potential that the property's operating performance could
improve above our revised expectations. In addition, there is $4.4
million in lender-controlled reserve accounts, a majority of which
is earmarked for tenant leasing.

-- The high 2016 appraised land value of $240.0 million.

-- The significant market value decline that would need to occur
before these classes experience principal losses.

-- The temporary liquidity support provided in the form of
servicer advancing.

-- The relative position of these classes in the payment
waterfall.

S&P said, "We will continue to monitor the property's tenancy and
performance. If the borrower is unable to improve performance at
the property, or if we receive information that differs materially
from our expectations, such as reported declines in the performance
beyond what we already considered, or if the loan transfers to
special servicing and the workout strategy negatively affects the
transaction's liquidity and recovery, we may revisit our analysis
and take further rating actions as we determine appropriate."

Property-Level Analysis

The collateral property, located at 667 Madison Avenue, is a
25-story, 273,983-sq.-ft. class A boutique office building with
ground floor and basement retail space located within the Plaza
District office submarket of Midtown Manhattan on Madison Avenue
and 61st street. The property, built in 1985 by an affiliate of the
sponsor, Hartz Financial Corp., features Central Park views and
includes a fitness center and golf simulator accessible from the
concourse level. The property's unique location near Central Park
and various New York City subway stations, as well as its higher
build quality and assorted amenities, has allowed the office
building to command rents at a premium to other class A properties
in Midtown Manhattan.

The property sustained flood damage to the electrical and elevator
systems when a large water main broke outside the premises in July
2019. According to the master servicer, KeyBank Real Estate
Capital, all restoration work, including relocating the building's
electrical systems to a higher floor, was completed by October
2023.

The reported occupancy and NCF were 93.7% and $19.8 million,
respectively, in 2021, and 96.7% and $22.9 million in 2022. As we
previously mentioned, occupancy and NCF decreased to 78.6% and $8.2
million, respectively, in 2023, after several tenants, totaling
42.8% of NRA, vacated. As we previously discussed, the sponsor was
able to backfill some of the vacant spaces by signing a lease with
a new coworking tenant to replace Servcorp Madison LLC, as well as
with three other new tenants totaling 17.3% of NRA at an average
base rent of $157.04 per sq. ft., as calculated by S&P Global
Ratings. In addition, two tenants, Michael Kors and Redbird Capital
Partners Management LLC, expanded their footprints at the property,
in aggregate, by 6.9% of NRA. After considering the known tenant
movements subsequent to the December 2023 rent roll, we expect the
property's occupancy to slightly increase to 79.6%.

The five largest tenants comprise 39.6% of NRA and include:

-- Redbird Capital Partners Management LLC (12.0% of NRA; 15.3% of
gross rent, as calculated by S&P Global Ratings; July 2034 lease
expiration). According to the master servicer, KeyBank, the tenant
recently relocated and expanded its footprint at the property to
12.0% from 6.6% of NRA. S&P assumed a $162-per-sq.-ft. base rental
rate based on the current rental rate because KeyBank has not yet
provided the tenant's new rate.

-- Bevmax Office Centers 667 Madison Avenue LLC (11.8%; 8.7%;
October 2028). Since the tenant pays a rental rate based on net
income of its co-working operations, S&P assumed a $90-per-sq.-ft.
base rent, which is on par with the base rent assumption of former
co-working tenant ServCorp Madison LLC and the servicer-provided
borrower's 2024 budget.

-- Sciens Management LLC (5.8%; 5.1%; July 2029). According to
KeyBank, the tenant recently renewed its lease for five years.

-- Corvex Management LP (5.6%; 7.3%; September 2025).

-- SPG Partners LLC (4.4%; 4.4%; May 2027). KeyBank indicated that
the tenant has subleased its space to Poseidon Services Inc.
through its lease term.

-- The property faces elevated tenant rollover risk in 2025 (10.8%
of NRA; 13.9% of S&P Global Ratings' in-place gross rent), 2026
(12.8%; 12.3%), 2027 (8.7%; 9.6%), 2028 (14.9%; 13.1%) and 2034
(19.3%; 31.9%).

Per CoStar, the Plaza District office submarket continues to
experience elevated vacancy and availability rates, flat rent
growth, and generous concessions packages as office utilization
remains well below pre-pandemic levels. This is mainly driven by
lower demand for office space due to the widespread adoption of
hybrid work arrangements. As of year-to-date April 2024, the four-
and five-star office properties in the submarket had a 14.8%
vacancy rate, 15.2% availability rate, and $94.53-per-sq.-ft.
asking rent. This compares with the property's 20.4% vacancy rate
and $162.65-per-sq.-ft. gross rent, as calculated by S&P Global
Ratings. CoStar projects vacancy to increase to 17.6% in 2025,
17.8% in 2026, and 17.2% in 2027 and asking rent to contract to
$90.88 per sq. ft., $91.60 per sq. ft., and $93.58 per sq. ft. for
the same periods.

  Table 1

  Reported collateral performance by servicer

                                    2023(I)   2022(I)   2021(I)

  Occupancy rate (%)                 78.6      96.7       93.7

  Net cash flow ($ mil.)              8.2      22.9       19.8

  Debt service coverage (x)          1.00      2.78       2.40

  Appraisal value ($ mil.)          740.0     740.0      740.0

(i)Reporting period.


  Table 2

  S&P Global Ratings' key assumptions

                        CURRENT      LAST REVIEW   AT ISSUANCE
                    (APRIL 2024)(I) (MAY 2022)(I)(OCTOBER 2016)(I)

  Vacancy rate (%)          17.5        15.0         14.0

  Net cash flow ($ mil.)    17.6        19.3         19.3

  Capitalization rate (%)   6.25        6.25         6.25

  Add to value ($ mil.)      0.0         0.0         22.7 (ii)

  Value ($ mil.)           281.9       309.1        331.8

  Value per sq. ft. ($)    1,029       1,128        1,211

  Loan-to-value ratio (%)   90.1        82.2         76.6

(i)Review period.
(ii)Present value of the incremental value using a stabilization
approach, assuming an 86.0% stabilized occupancy rate versus an
80.3% economic occupancy rate after considering known tenant
movements and deducting tenant improvements and leasing commission
costs to lease up the assumed additional vacant space.

Transaction Summary

The 10-year, IO mortgage whole loan has an initial and current
balance of $254.0 million, pays an annual fixed interest rate of
3.20%, and matures on Oct. 6, 2026. The whole loan is split into
two senior A notes and a subordinate junior B note. The $214.0
million trust balance (according to the March 12, 2024, trustee
remittance report) comprises the $143.0 million senior note A-1 and
$71.0 million subordinate note B. The $40.0 million senior note A-2
is in CD 2016-CD2 Mortgage Trust, a U.S. CMBS transaction. The
senior A notes are pari passu to each other and senior to the B
note.

The borrower is permitted to incur up to $100.0 million in
mezzanine debt, subject to certain conditions, including combined
LTV ratio less than 34.3%, combined DSC greater than 3.15x, and
combined debt yield of no less than 10.2%. KeyBank confirmed there
is no additional debt.

The borrower has been current on its debt service payments through
March 2024. The loan is currently on KeyBank's watchlist because
the cash management provision as specified in the loan documents
was triggered due to a low reported DSC, which was 1.00x as of
year-end 2023, versus 2.78x as of year-end 2022. To date, the trust
has not incurred any principal losses.

  Ratings Lowered

  COMM 2016-667M Mortgage Trust

  Class B to 'A+ (sf)' from 'AA- (sf)'
  Class C to 'BBB (sf)' from 'A- (sf)'
  Class D to 'BB (sf)' from 'BBB- (sf)'
  Class E to 'B (sf)' from 'BB- (sf)'

  Ratings Affirmed

  COMM 2016-667M Mortgage Trust

  Class A: AAA (sf)
  Class X-A: AAA (sf)



CONNECTICUT AVENUE 2024-R03: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba1 to 3 Tranches
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned provisional ratings to 62 classes of
credit risk transfer (CRT) residential mortgage-backed securities
(RMBS) to be issued by Connecticut Avenue Securities Trust
2024-R03, and sponsored by Federal National Mortgage Association
(Fannie Mae).

The securities reference a pool of mortgage loans acquired by
Fannie Mae, and originated and serviced by multiple entities.

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Connecticut Avenue Securities Trust 2024-R03

Cl. 2M-1, Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

Cl. 2M-2A, Assigned (P)A3 (sf)

Cl. 2M-2B, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2M-2C, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2M-2, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2B-1A, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2B-1B, Assigned (P)Ba2 (sf)

Cl. 2B-1, Assigned (P)Ba1 (sf)

Cl. 2E-A1, Assigned (P)A3 (sf)

Cl. 2A-I1*, Assigned (P)A3 (sf)

Cl. 2E-A2, Assigned (P)A3 (sf)

Cl. 2A-I2*, Assigned (P)A3 (sf)

Cl. 2E-A3, Assigned (P)A3 (sf)

Cl. 2A-I3*, Assigned (P)A3 (sf)

Cl. 2E-A4, Assigned (P)A3 (sf)

Cl. 2A-I4*, Assigned (P)A3 (sf)

Cl. 2E-B1, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2B-I1*, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2E-B2, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2B-I2*, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2E-B3, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2B-I3*, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2E-B4, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2B-I4*, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2E-C1, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2C-I1*, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2E-C2, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2C-I2*, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2E-C3, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2C-I3*, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2E-C4, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2C-I4*, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2E-D1, Assigned (P)Baa1 (sf)

Cl. 2E-D2, Assigned (P)Baa1 (sf)

Cl. 2E-D3, Assigned (P)Baa1(sf)

Cl. 2E-D4, Assigned (P)Baa1 (sf)

Cl. 2E-D5, Assigned (P)Baa1 (sf)

Cl. 2E-F1, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2E-F2, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2E-F3, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2E-F4, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2E-F5, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2-X1*, Assigned (P)Baa1 (sf)

Cl. 2-X2*, Assigned (P)Baa1 (sf)

Cl. 2-X3*, Assigned (P)Baa1 (sf)

Cl. 2-X4*, Assigned (P)Baa1 (sf)

Cl. 2-Y1*, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2-Y2*, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2-Y3*, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2-Y4*, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2-J1, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2-J2, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2-J3, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2-J4, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. 2-K1, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2-K2, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2-K3, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2-K4, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2M-2Y, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2M-2X*, Assigned (P)Baa2 (sf)

Cl. 2B-1Y, Assigned (P)Ba1 (sf)

Cl. 2B-1X*, Assigned (P)Ba1 (sf)

*Reflects Interest-Only Classes

RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings are based on the credit quality of the mortgage loans,
the structural features of the transaction, the GSE's oversight of
originators and servicers, and the third-party review.

Moody's expected loss for this pool in a baseline scenario-mean is
0.98%, in a baseline scenario-median is 0.77% and reaches 4.59% at
a stress level consistent with Moody's Aaa ratings.

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in rating all classes except
interest-only classes was "Moody's Approach to Rating US RMBS Using
the MILAN Framework" published in August 2023.

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

Up

Levels of credit protection that are higher than necessary to
protect investors against current expectations of loss could drive
the ratings up. Losses could decline from Moody's original
expectations as a result of a lower number of obligor defaults or
appreciation in the value of the mortgaged property securing an
obligor's promise of payment. Transaction performance also depends
greatly on the US macro economy and housing market.

Down

Levels of credit protection that are insufficient to protect
investors against current expectations of loss could drive the
ratings down. Losses could rise above Moody's original expectations
as a result of a higher number of obligor defaults or deterioration
in the value of the mortgaged property securing an obligor's
promise of payment. Transaction performance also depends greatly on
the US macro economy and housing market. Other reasons for
worse-than-expected performance include poor servicing, error on
the part of transaction parties, inadequate transaction governance
and fraud.

Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent
on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing
transfers or other policy or regulatory change can impact the
performance of these transactions. In addition, improvements in
reporting formats and data availability across deals and trustees
may provide better insight into certain performance metrics such as
the level of collateral modifications.


ELMWOOD CLO 27: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on Cl. E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Elmwood CLO
27 Ltd./Elmwood CLO 27 LLC's floating-rate debt.

The debt issuance is a CLO securitization governed by investment
criteria and backed primarily by broadly syndicated
speculative-grade (rated 'BB+' or lower) senior secured term loans.
The transaction is managed by Elmwood Asset Management LLC.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of April 4,
2024. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect S&P's view of:

-- The diversification of the collateral pool;

-- The credit enhancement provided through subordination, excess
spread, and overcollateralization;

-- The experience of the collateral manager's team, which can
affect the performance of the rated notes through portfolio
identification and ongoing management; and

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

  Preliminary Ratings Assigned

  Elmwood CLO 27 Ltd./Elmwood CLO 27 LLC

  Class A, $320.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B, $60.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C (deferrable), $30.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D (deferrable), $30.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $20.00 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $52.25 million: Not rated



EXETER AUTOMOBILE 2024-2: Fitch Assigns BB-sf Rating on Cl. E Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned final ratings and Rating Outlooks to
Exeter Automobile Receivables Trust (EART) 2024-2.

   Entity/Debt          Rating             Prior
   -----------          ------             -----
Exeter Automobile
Receivables
Trust 2024-2

   A-1              ST  F1+sf   New Rating   F1+(EXP)sf
   A-2              LT  AAAsf   New Rating   AAA(EXP)sf
   A-3              LT  AAAsf   New Rating   AAA(EXP)sf
   B                LT  AAsf    New Rating   AA(EXP)sf
   C                LT  Asf     New Rating   A(EXP)sf
   D                LT  BBBsf   New Rating   BBB(EXP)sf
   E                LT  BB-sf   New Rating   BB-(EXP)sf

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Collateral Performance — Subprime Credit Quality: EART 2024-2 is
backed by collateral with subprime credit attributes, including a
weighted average (WA) FICO score of 572, a WA loan-to-value (LTV)
ratio of 114.01% and WA APR of 22.62%. In addition, 97.59% of the
pool is backed by used vehicles and the WA payment-to-income (PTI)
ratio is 11.60%. The pool is consistent with those in recent EART
series transactions.

Forward-Looking Approach to Derive Rating Case Proxy: Fitch
considered economic conditions and future expectations by assessing
key macroeconomic and wholesale market conditions to derive the
series loss proxy. In recognition of continued weak performance for
the 2022 and 2023 securitizations, Fitch adjusted the vintage
ranges to derive the rating case loss proxy for 2024-2 from those
used for 2024-1. Fitch utilized 2006-2008 data from Santander
Consumer — as proxy recessionary static-managed portfolio data
— and 2015-2017 vintage data from Exeter to arrive at a
forward-looking rating case cumulative net loss (CNL) proxy of
22.00% compared with 20.00% in 2024-1.

Payment Structure — Sufficient Credit Enhancement: Initial hard
credit enhancement (CE) levels are 68.65%, 50.85%, 33.20%, 18.75%
and 8.55% for classes A, B, C, D and E, respectively. The class A,
B, C, D and E CE levels are up from the CE levels for prior
transactions. Excess spread is expected to be 13.27%, down from
13.73% per annum in 2024-1. Loss coverage for each class of notes
is sufficient to cover the respective multiples of Fitch's rating
case CNL proxy of 22.00%.

Seller/Servicer Operational Review — Adequate
Origination/Underwriting/Servicing: Exeter demonstrates adequate
abilities as the originator, underwriter and servicer, as evidenced
by historical portfolio and securitization performance. Fitch does
not rate Exeter but deems the company as capable to service this
transaction. In addition, Citibank, N.A., which Fitch rates
'A+'/'F1'/Stable, has been contracted as backup servicer for this
transaction.

Fitch's base-case loss expectation, which does not include a margin
of safety and is not used in Fitch's quantitative analysis to
assign ratings, is 21.00%, based on its Global Economic Outlook and
transaction-based forecast loss projections.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

Unanticipated increases in the frequency of defaults could produce
CNL levels that are higher than the rating case and would likely
result in declines of CE and remaining net loss coverage levels
available to the notes. Additionally, unanticipated declines in
recoveries could also result in lower net loss coverage, which may
make certain note ratings susceptible to potential negative rating
actions, depending on the extent of the decline in coverage.

Fitch therefore conducts sensitivity analyses by stressing both a
transaction's initial rating case CNL and recovery rate
assumptions, as well as by examining the rating implications on all
classes of issued notes. The CNL sensitivity stresses the CNL proxy
to the level necessary to reduce each rating by one full category,
to non-investment grade (BBsf) and to 'CCCsf' based on the
break-even loss coverage provided by the CE structure.

Fitch also conducts 1.5x and 2.0x increases to the CNL proxy,
representing both moderate and severe stresses. Fitch also
evaluates the impact of stressed recovery rates on an auto loan ABS
structure and rating impact with a 50% haircut. These analyses are
intended to provide an indication of the rating sensitivity of the
notes to unexpected deterioration of a trust's performance.

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

Stable to improved asset performance driven by stable delinquencies
and defaults would lead to rising CE levels and consideration for
potential upgrades. If CNL is 20% less than the projected proxy,
the expected subordinate note ratings could be upgraded by up to
one category.

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

Fitch was provided with Form ABS Due Diligence-15E (Form 15E) as
prepared by Ernst & Young LLP. The third-party due diligence
described in Form 15E focused on comparing or recomputing certain
information with respect to 150 loans from the statistical data
file. Fitch considered this information in its analysis and it did
not have an effect on Fitch's analysis or conclusions.

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.


FLATIRON CLO 20: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on E-R Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to the class
A-R, B-R, C-R, D-R, and E-R replacement debt from Flatiron CLO 20
Ltd./Flatiron CLO 20 LLC, a CLO originally issued in November 2020
that is managed by NYL Investors LLC.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of April 10,
2024. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

On the April 11, 2024, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
replacement debt will be used to redeem the original debt. S&P
said, "At that time, we expect to withdraw our ratings on the
original assign ratings to the replacement debt. However, if the
refinancing doesn't occur, we may affirm our ratings on the
original debt and withdraw our preliminary ratings on the
replacement debt."

The replacement debt will be issued via a proposed supplemental
indenture, which outlines the terms of the replacement debt.
According to the proposed supplemental indenture:

-- The replacement class A-R, B-R, C-R, D-R, and E-R debt is
expected to be issued at a lower spread over three-month SOFR than
the original debt.

-- The replacement class A-R, B-R, C-R, D-R, and E-R debt is
expected to be issued at a floating spread, replacing the current
floating spread.

-- The stated maturity will be extended 2.5 years, and the
reinvestment period will be extended by 1.5 years.

-- Of the identified underlying collateral obligations, 100% have
credit ratings (which may include confidential ratings, private
ratings, and credit estimates) assigned by S&P Global Ratings.

-- Of the identified underlying collateral obligations, 97.89%
have recovery ratings (which may include confidential and private
ratings) assigned by S&P Global Ratings.

Replacement And Original Debt Issuances

Replacement debt

-- Class A-R, $256.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.38%

-- Class B-R, $48.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.92%

-- Class C-R (deferrable), $24.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 2.35%

-- Class D-R (deferrable), $24.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 3.45%

-- Class E-R (deferrable), $16.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 6.45%

Original debt

-- Class A, $252.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.30% +
CSA(i)

-- Class B, $52.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.75% +
CSA(i)

-- Class C (deferrable), $24.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR
+ 2.45% + CSA(i)

-- Class D (deferrable), $24.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR
+ 3.79% + CSA(i)

-- Class E (deferrable), $14.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR
+ 7.85% + CSA(i)

-- Subordinated notes, $38.475 million: Not applicable

(i)The CSA is 0.26161%.
CSA--Credit spread adjustment.

S&P said, "Our review of this transaction included a cash flow
analysis, based on the portfolio and transaction data in the
trustee report, to estimate future performance. In line with our
criteria, our cash flow scenarios applied forward-looking
assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of defaults and the
recoveries upon default under various interest rate and
macroeconomic scenarios. Our analysis also considered the
transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or ultimate
principal to each of the rated tranches. The results of the cash
flow analysis (and other qualitative factors, as applicable)
demonstrated, in our view, that the outstanding rated classes all
have adequate credit enhancement available at the rating levels
associated with the rating actions.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the debt remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them and take rating actions as we deem
necessary."

  Preliminary Ratings Assigned

  Flatiron CLO 20 Ltd./Flatiron CLO 20 LLC

  Class A-R, $256.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B-R, $48.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C-R (deferrable), $24.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D-R (deferrable), $24.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E-R (deferrable), $16.00 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $38.475 million: Not rated



GREAT LAKES VII: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Great Lakes CLO VII
Ltd./Great Lakes CLO VII LLC's floating-rate debt.

The debt issuance is a CLO securitization governed by investment
criteria and backed primarily by middle market speculative-grade
(rated 'BB+' or lower) senior secured term loans. The transaction
is managed by BMO Asset Management Corp.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of:

-- The diversification of the collateral pool;

-- The credit enhancement provided through subordination, excess
spread, and overcollateralization;

-- The experience of the collateral manager's team, which can
affect the performance of the rated debt through portfolio
identification and ongoing management; and

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

  Ratings Assigned

  Great Lakes CLO VII Ltd./Great Lakes CLO VII LLC

  Class X, $4.000 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A, $232.000 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B, $40.000 million: AA (sf)
  Class C (deferrable), $32.000 million: A (sf)
  Class D (deferrable), $24.000 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $24.000 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $48.865 million: Not rated



GS MORTGAGE 2022-PJ6: Moody's Ups Rating on Cl. B-4 Certs to Ba2
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has upgraded the ratings of 26 bonds from five US
residential mortgage-backed transactions (RMBS), backed by prime
jumbo mortgage loans.

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: GS Mortgage-Backed Securities Trust 2019-PJ1

Cl. B-3, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 19, 2023 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Mar 29, 2019 Definitive
Rating Assigned Ba1 (sf)

Cl. B-5, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Oct 30, 2019 Upgraded
to B1 (sf)

Issuer: GS Mortgage-Backed Securities Trust 2019-PJ2

Cl. B-2, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 19, 2023 Upgraded
to Aa2 (sf)

Cl. B-3, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jul 19, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jul 26, 2019 Definitive
Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Issuer: GS Mortgage-Backed Securities Trust 2019-PJ3

Cl. B-2, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jul 19, 2023 Upgraded
to Aa2 (sf)

Cl. B-3, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Jul 19, 2023 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jul 19, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. B-5, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Oct 31, 2019
Definitive Rating Assigned B2 (sf)

Issuer: GS MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES TRUST 2020-PJ4

Cl. B, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Sep 22, 2022 Upgraded to
Aa2 (sf)

Cl. B-2, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Sep 22, 2022 Upgraded
to Aa1 (sf)

Cl. B-2-A, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Sep 22, 2022
Upgraded to Aa1 (sf)

Cl. B-3, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Sep 22, 2022 Upgraded
to A1 (sf)

Cl. B-3-A, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Sep 22, 2022
Upgraded to A1 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Sep 22, 2022 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. B-5, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 29, 2021 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Issuer: GS Mortgage-Backed Securities Trust 2022-PJ6

Cl. A-1-X*, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Sep 30, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-23, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Sep 30, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-23-X*, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Sep 30, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-24, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Sep 30, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-X*, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Sep 30, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Sep 30, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-2, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Sep 30, 2022 Definitive
Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

Cl. B-3, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Sep 30, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Sep 30, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

* Reflects Interest-Only Classes

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating upgrades reflect the increased levels of credit
enhancement available to the bonds, the recent performance, and
Moody's Ratings updated loss expectations on the underlying pool.

In Moody's analysis Moody's considered the additional risk of
default on modified loans. Generally, Moody's apply a 7x multiple
to the Probability of Default (PD) for private label modified
mortgage loans and an 8x multiple to the PD for agency-eligible
modified mortgage loans. However, Moody's may apply a lower
multiple to the PD for loans that were granted short-term payment
relief as long as there were no other changes to the loan terms,
such as a reduced interest rate or an extended loan term, which can
be used to lower the monthly payment on the loan. For loans granted
short-term payment relief, servicers will generally defer the
missed payments, which could be added as a non-interest-bearing
balloon payment due at the end of the loan term.

Alternatively, servicers could extend the maturity on the loan to
match the number of missed payments.

Moody's updated loss expectations on the pools incorporate, amongst
other factors, Moody's assessment of the representations and
warranties frameworks of the transactions, the due diligence
findings of the third-party reviews received at the time of
issuance, and the strength of the transaction's originators and
servicer.

No actions were taken on the other rated classes in these deals
because their expected losses remain commensurate with their
current ratings, after taking into account the updated performance
information, structural features, credit enhancement and other
qualitative considerations.  For the vast majority of the
transactions, no actions were taken on the remaining rated classes
as those classes are already at the highest achievable levels
within Moody's rating scale.  In one instance, the analysis
considered interest risk from current or potential missed interest
that remains unreimbursed.

Principal Methodologies

The principal methodology used in rating all classes except
interest-only classes was "Moody's Approach to Rating US RMBS Using
the MILAN Framework" published in August 2023.

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

Up

Levels of credit protection that are higher than necessary to
protect investors against current expectations of loss could drive
the ratings of the subordinate bonds up. Losses could decline from
Moody's Ratings original expectations as a result of a lower number
of obligor defaults or appreciation in the value of the mortgaged
property securing an obligor's promise of payment. Transaction
performance also depends greatly on the US macro economy and
housing market.

Down

Levels of credit protection that are insufficient to protect
investors against current expectations of loss could drive the
ratings down. Losses could rise above Moody's Ratings expectations
as a result of a higher number of obligor defaults or deterioration
in the value of the mortgaged property securing an obligor's
promise of payment. Transaction performance also depends greatly on
the US macro economy and housing market. Other reasons for
worse-than-expected performance include poor servicing, error on
the part of transaction parties, inadequate transaction governance
and fraud.

An IO bond may be upgraded or downgraded, within the constraints
and provisions of the IO methodology, based on lower or higher
realized and expected loss due to an overall improvement or decline
in the credit quality of the reference bonds and/or pools.

Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent
on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing
transfers or other policy or regulatory change can impact the
performance of these transactions. In addition, improvements in
reporting formats and data availability across deals and trustees
may provide better insight into certain performance metrics such as
the level of collateral modifications.


HALCYON LOAN 2015-1: Moody's Lowers Rating on 2 Tranches to C
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has downgraded the ratings on the following notes
issued by Halcyon Loan Advisors Funding 2015-1 Ltd.:

US$30,000,000 Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2027 (the "Class D Notes") (current outstanding balance
of $26,543,893.98), Downgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on August
17, 2022 Upgraded to Baa3 (sf)

US$25,000,000 Class E Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2027 (the "Class E Notes") (current outstanding balance of
$30,679,613.31), Downgraded to C (sf); previously on May 18, 2021
Downgraded to Caa3 (sf)

US$10,000,000 Class F Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2027 (the "Class F Notes") (current outstanding balance of
$14,369,412.88), Downgraded to C (sf); previously on July 31, 2020
Downgraded to Ca (sf)

Halcyon Loan Advisors Funding 2015-1 Ltd., originally issued in
April 2015 and partially refinanced in October 2017, is a managed
cashflow CLO. The notes are collateralized primarily by a portfolio
of broadly syndicated senior secured corporate loans. The
transaction's reinvestment period ended in April 2019.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The downgrade rating actions on the Class D, E and F notes reflect
the specific risks to the notes posed by par loss and credit
deterioration observed in the underlying CLO portfolio. Based on
the trustee's March 2024 report [1], the OC ratios for the Class D
and E notes are reported at 100.94% and 46.82% versus March 2023
[2] levels of 110.68% and 77.56%, respectively. Moody's notes that
due to OC ratio failures, the Class E and F notes have been
deferring interest for more than a year, and are unlikely to
receive interest payments anytime soon. Currently, the Class E and
F notes are owed approximately $5.7 million and $4.4 million in
deferred interest, respectively. Furthermore, the trustee-reported
weighted average rating factor (WARF) has deteriorated, with a
trustee March 2024 [1] reported level of 5278, compared to 4410 in
March 2023 [2], and failing the current trigger of 2861.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations."

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score, weighted average
spread, and weighted average recovery rate, are based on its
published methodology and could differ from the trustee's reported
numbers. For modeling purposes, Moody's used the following
base-case assumptions:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: $28,298,644

Defaulted par:  $2,700,914

Diversity Score: 11

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 4350

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.65%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 49.18%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 1.84 years

Par haircut in OC tests and interest diversion test:  14.1%

In addition to base case analysis, Moody's ran additional scenarios
where outcomes could diverge from the base case. The additional
scenarios consider one or more factors individually or in
combination, and include: defaults by obligors whose low ratings or
debt prices suggest distress, defaults by obligors with potential
refinancing risk, deterioration in the credit quality of the
underlying portfolio, decrease in overall WAS or net interest
income, lower recoveries on defaulted assets.

Methodology Used for the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
December 2021.            

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

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


HARBOURVIEW CLO VII-R: Moody's Ups $17.91MM E Notes Rating to B2
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has upgraded the ratings on the following notes
issued by HarbourView CLO VII-R, Ltd.:

US$43,940,000 Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2031
(the "Class B Notes"), Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on July 7,
2023 Upgraded to Aa1 (sf)

US$21,920,000 Class C Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class C Notes"), Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on
July 7, 2023 Upgraded to A2 (sf)

US$24,020,000 Class D Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class D Notes"), Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on
July 7, 2023 Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

US$17,910,000 Class E Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class E Notes"), Upgraded to B2 (sf); previously on
August 6, 2020 Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

HarbourView CLO VII-R, Ltd., issued in June 2018 is a managed
cashflow CLO. The notes are collateralized primarily by a portfolio
of broadly syndicated senior secured corporate loans. The
transaction's reinvestment period ended in July 2023.

A comprehensive review of all credit ratings for the respective
transaction has been conducted during a rating committee.

RATINGS RATIONALE

These rating actions are primarily a result of deleveraging of the
senior notes and an increase in the transaction's
over-collateralization (OC) ratios since June 2023. The Class A-1
notes have been paid down by approximately 21% or $50.6 million
since June 2023. Based on Moody's Ratings' calculation, the OC
ratios for the Class A-1/B, Class C, Class D and Class E notes are
currently 133.32%, 121.82%, 111.38% and 104.68%, respectively,
versus June 2023 levels of 126.71%, 117.66%, 109.11% and 103.51%,
respectively.  

Nevertheless, the credit quality of the portfolio has deteriorated
since June 2023. Based on Moody's Ratings' calculation, the
weighted average rating factor (WARF) is currently 2791 compared to
2672 in June 2023.

No actions were taken on the Class A-1 and Class F notes because
their expected losses remain commensurate with their current
ratings after taking into account the CLO's latest portfolio
information, its relevant structural features and its actual
over-collateralization and interest coverage levels.

Moody's Ratings modeled the transaction using a cash flow model
based on the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in "Moody's
Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations."

The key model inputs Moody's Ratings used in its analysis, such as
par, weighted average rating factor, diversity score, weighted
average spread, and weighted average recovery rate, are based on
its published methodology and could differ from the trustee's
reported numbers. For modeling purposes, Moody's Ratings used the
following base-case assumptions:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: $314,106,025

Defaulted par:  $1,749,290

Diversity Score: 64

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2791

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.40%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 8.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 46.70%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 3.91 years

Par haircut in OC tests and interest diversion test: 1%

In addition to base case analysis, Moody's Ratings ran additional
scenarios where outcomes could diverge from the base case. The
additional scenarios consider one or more factors individually or
in combination, and include: defaults by obligors whose low ratings
or debt prices suggest distress, defaults by obligors with
potential refinancing risk, deterioration in the credit quality of
the underlying portfolio, decrease in overall WAS or net interest
income, lower recoveries on defaulted assets.

Methodology Used for the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
December 2021.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

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


HILTON GRAND 2024-1B: Fitch Assigns 'BB-(EXP)' Rating on D Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned expected ratings and Rating Outlooks to
notes to be issued by Hilton Grand Vacations Trust 2024-1B (HGVT
2024-1B).

   Entity/Debt        Rating           
   -----------        ------           
Hilton Grand
Vacations Trust
2024-1B
  
   A              LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   B              LT  A(EXP)sf    Expected Rating
   C              LT  BBB(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   D              LT  BB-(EXP)sf  Expected Rating

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

The notes are backed by a pool of fixed-rate timeshare loans
originated by Bluegreen Vacations Corporation (Bluegreen), which is
a wholly owned subsidiary of Hilton Grand Vacations Inc. (HGV) This
is HGV's 10th term securitization and the first to include
timeshare loans originated by Bluegreen following HGV's acquisition
of Bluegreen on Jan. 17, 2024. HGV is currently in the process of
integrating Bluegreen and its business and operations, although
Bluegreen and its properties will continue to operate as a separate
business for the foreseeable future pending such integration.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Borrower Risk — Stronger Collateral: The HGVT 2024-1B pool has a
weighted average (WA) Fair Isaac Corp. (FICO) score of 741, up from
735 in BXG Receivables Note Trust (BXG) 2023-A. The upgrade loans
from existing owners have increased to 70.7%, from 60.5% in BXG
2023-A and 52.0% in BXG 2022-A. This is considered a credit
positive as these upgrade loans have shown better default
performance relative to the non-upgrade loans originated to the new
borrowers. Additionally, the pool does not have loans made to
foreign obligors, consistent with BXG 2023-A. The WA original term
of 120 months and seasoning of nine months are generally in line
with BXG 2023-A.

Forward-Looking Approach on CGD Proxy — Weakening Performance:
The Bluegreen managed portfolio performance showed notable
increases in cumulative gross defaults (CGDs) in the recent
2015-2022 vintages, which are outpacing those of the 2009-2014
vintages. Similarly, recent ABS transactions (since BXG 2015-A) are
performing weaker than earlier transactions (issued since 2010).
Fitch's base case CGD proxy is 22.50% for HGVT 2024-1B.

Payment Structure — Higher Credit Enhancement Structure: Initial
hard credit enhancement (CE) is 66.75%, 44.75%, 27.50% and 14.50%
for class A, B, C and D notes, respectively. CE is higher for class
A, B and C notes relative to BXG 2023-A. Hard CE comprises
overcollateralization (OC), a reserve account and subordination.
Soft CE is also provided by excess spread and is expected to be
6.3% per annum. Available CE is sufficient to support stressed
'AAAsf', 'Asf', 'BBBsf' and 'BB-sf' multiples of Fitch's CGD proxy
of 22.50%.

Similar to the BXG 2023-A transaction, HGVT 2024-1B has a
prefunding account that is expected to hold roughly 5.2% of the
aggregated collateral balance to buy eligible subsequent timeshare
loans that conform to specified requirements.

Originator/Seller/Servicer Operational Review — Adequate
Origination/Servicing: Bluegreen has demonstrated sufficient
abilities as an originator and servicer of timeshare loans, as
evidenced by the historical delinquency and loss performance of the
managed portfolio and prior securitizations.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

Unanticipated increases in the frequency of defaults could produce
CGD levels that are higher than the base case and would likely
result in declines of CE and remaining default coverage available
to the notes. Additionally, unanticipated increases in prepayment
activity could also result in a decline in coverage. Decreased
default coverage may make certain note ratings susceptible to
potential negative rating actions depending on the extent of the
decline in coverage.

Therefore, Fitch conducts sensitivity analysis by stressing both a
transaction's initial base case CGD and prepayment assumptions and
examining the rating implications on all classes of issued notes.
The CGD sensitivity stresses the CGD proxy to the level necessary
to reduce each rating by one full category, to non-investment grade
(BBsf) and to 'CCCsf' based on the break-even loss coverage
provided by the CE structure. The prepayment sensitivity includes
1.5x and 2.0x increases to prepayment assumptions, representing
moderate and severe stresses, respectively. These analyses are
intended to provide an indication of the rating sensitivity of
notes to unexpected deterioration of a trust's performance.

Additionally, Fitch conducts increases of 1.5x and 2.0x to the CGD
proxy, which represents moderate and severe stresses, respectively.
These analyses are intended to provide an indication of the rating
sensitivity of notes to unexpected deterioration of a trust's
performance.

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

Conversely, stable to improved asset performance driven by stable
delinquencies and defaults would lead to increasing CE levels and
consideration for potential upgrades. If the CGD is 20% less than
the projected proxy, the expected ratings would be maintained for
class A notes at a stronger rating multiple. For class B, C and D
notes the multiples would increase, resulting in potential upgrades
of one rating category, two notches and four notches,
respectively.

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

Fitch was provided with due diligence information from Ernst &
Young LLP. The due diligence information was provided on Form ABS
Due Diligence-15E and focused on a comparison and recalculation of
certain characteristics with respect to 150 sample loans. Fitch
considered this information in its analysis, and the findings did
not have an impact on its analysis.

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.


HPS LOAN 2013-2: S&P Affirms Class D-R Notes Rating to 'BB- (sf)'
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings took various rating actions on four classes of
notes from HPS Loan Management 2013-2 Ltd. (HPS 2013-2) and HPS
3-2014.

The transactions are U.S. CLO transactions managed by HPS
Investment Partners LLC.

The rating actions follow S&P's review of the transactions'
performance using data from the February 2024 trustee reports.

HPS 2013-2

The transaction has paid down $150.66 million to the class A-1AR
notes since S&P's October 2021 rating action. The reported
overcollateralization (O/C) ratios have changed since the August
2021 trustee report, which S&P used for its previous rating
actions:

-- The class A O/C ratio increased to 143.21% from 129.43%,
-- The class B O/C ratio increased to 126.05% from 119.69%,
-- The class C O/C ratio increased to 111.97% from 110.92%, and
-- The class D O/C ratio declined to 105.52% from 106.65%.

While the senior O/C ratios experienced a positive movement due to
the lower balances of the senior note, the junior-most O/C ratio
declined due to a combination of par losses and increased haircuts
following an increase in the portfolio's exposure to 'CCC' assets.
The 'CCC' rated and defaulted collateral obligations increased to
10.8% and 1.6% of the total collateral, respectively, from 4.5% and
0.0% of the August 2021 trustee report.

The upgraded ratings reflects the improved credit support available
to the notes at the prior rating levels.

The lowered rating on the class E-R notes reflects deteriorated
credit quality of the underlying portfolio and the decrease in
credit support available to the notes at its prior rating. S&P
said, "We believe the E-R notes are now in line with 'CCC' credit
risk and depend on favorable market conditions to pay interest and
ultimate principal. As a result, we lowered our rating on the class
C notes one notch to 'CCC+ (sf)'."

The affirmed ratings reflect adequate credit support at the current
rating levels, though any further deterioration in the credit
support available to the notes could results in further ratings
changes.

S&P said, "Although our cash flow analysis indicated higher ratings
for the class B-R and C-R notes, our rating actions consider the
increase in the defaults and 'CCC' rated assets and the overall
decline in the portfolio's credit quality. In addition, our rating
actions reflect additional sensitivity runs that considered the
exposure to lower quality assets and distressed prices we noticed
in the portfolio."

HPS 3-2014

The transaction has paid down $192.77 million to the class A-1R
notes since S&P's August 2020 rating action. Some of the reported
O/C ratios have changed since the June 2020 trustee report, which
S&P used for its previous rating actions:

-- The class A O/C ratio increased to 151.60% from 127.90%,
-- The class B O/C ratio increased to 129.30% from 117.90%,
-- The class C O/C ratio increased to 113.60% from 109.9%, and
-- The class D O/C ratio remained constant at 105.10%.

While the senior O/C ratios experienced a positive movement due to
the lower balances of the senior note, the junior-most O/C ratio
remained stable due to due to a combination of par losses and
increased haircuts following an increase in the portfolio's
exposure to 'CCC' assets. The 'CCC' rated and defaulted collateral
obligations increased to 10.2% and 1.7% of the total collateral,
respectively, from 4.7% and 0.0% of the June 2020 trustee report.

The upgraded ratings reflects the improved credit support available
to the notes at the prior rating levels.

The affirmed ratings reflect adequate credit support at the current
rating levels, though any further deterioration in the credit
support available to the notes could results in further ratings
changes.

S&P said, "Although our cash flow analysis indicated higher ratings
for the class B-R and C-R notes, our rating actions consider the
the elevated portion of 'CCC' and defaulted obligors in the
portfolio and decline in the portfolio's credit quality. In
addition, our rating actions reflect additional sensitivity runs
that considered the exposure to lower quality assets and distressed
prices we noticed in the portfolio.

"In line with our criteria, our cash flow scenarios applied
forward-looking assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of
defaults, and recoveries upon default, under various interest rate
and macroeconomic scenarios. In addition, our analysis considered
the transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or ultimate
principal to each of the rated tranches. The results of the cash
flow analysis--and other qualitative factors as
applicable--demonstrated, in our view, that all of the rated
outstanding classes have adequate credit enhancement available at
the rating levels associated with these rating actions.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and will take rating actions as we deem
necessary."

  Ratings Lowered And Removed From CreditWatch

  HPS Loan Management 2013-2 Ltd.

  Class E-R to 'CCC+ (sf)' from 'B- (sf)/Watch Neg'

  Ratings Raised And Removed From CreditWatch

  HPS Loan Management 2013-2 Ltd.
  
  Class A-2R to 'AAA (sf)' from 'AA(sf)/Watch Pos'

  HPS Loan Management 3-2014 Ltd.

  Class A-2R to 'AAA (sf)' from 'AA(sf)/Watch Pos'
  Class B-R to 'AA (sf)' from 'A(sf)/Watch Pos'

  Rating Raised

  HPS Loan Management 2013-2 Ltd.

  Class B-R to 'AA (sf)' from 'A(sf)'

  Ratings Affirmed And Removed From CreditWatch

  HPS Loan Management 2013-2 Ltd.

  Class D-R to 'BB- (sf)' from 'BB- (sf)/Watch Neg'

  HPS Loan Management 3-2014 Ltd.

  Class D-R to 'B+ (sf)' from 'B+ (sf)/Watch Neg'
  Class E-R to 'B- (sf)' from 'B- (sf)/Watch Neg'

  Ratings Affirmed

  HPS Loan Management 2013-2 Ltd.

  Class A-1AR: AAA (sf)
  Class C-R: BBB- (sf)

  HPS Loan Management 3-2014 Ltd.

  Class A-1R: AAA (sf)
  Class C-R: BBB (sf)



KRR CLO 45A: Fitch Assigns 'BB-(EXP)sf' Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned expected ratings and Rating Outlooks to
KKR CLO 45a Ltd.

   Entity/Debt              Rating           
   -----------              ------           
KKR CLO 45A Ltd.

   A-L                  LT  NR(EXP)sf   Expected Rating
   B-1                  LT  AA(EXP)sf   Expected Rating
   B-2                  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

KKR CLO 45a Ltd. (the issuer) is an arbitrage cash flow
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) that will be managed by KKR
Financial Advisors II, LLC. Net proceeds from the issuance of the
secured and subordinated notes will provide financing on a
portfolio of approximately $400 million of primarily first- lien
senior secured leveraged loans.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Asset Credit Quality (Negative): The average credit quality of the
indicative portfolio is 'B'/'B-', which is in line with that of
recent CLOs. The weighted average rating factor (WARF) of the
indicative portfolio is 25.16, versus a maximum covenant, in
accordance with the initial expected matrix point of 28.5. Issuers
rated in the 'B' rating category denote a highly speculative credit
quality; however, the notes benefit from appropriate credit
enhancement and standard U.S. CLO structural features.

Asset Security (Positive): The indicative portfolio consists of
97.2% first-lien senior secured loans. The weighted average
recovery rate (WARR) of the indicative portfolio is 74.45% versus a
minimum covenant, in accordance with the initial expected matrix
point of 69.2%.

Portfolio Composition (Positive): The largest three industries may
comprise up to 40% of the portfolio balance in aggregate while the
top five obligors can represent up to 11.5% of the portfolio
balance in aggregate. The level of diversity resulting from the
industry, obligor and geographic concentrations is in line with
other recent CLOs.

Portfolio Management (Neutral): The transaction has a two-year
reinvestment period and reinvestment criteria similar to other
CLOs. Fitch's analysis was based on a stressed portfolio created by
adjusting to the indicative portfolio to reflect permissible
concentration limits and collateral quality test levels.

Cash Flow Analysis (Positive): Fitch used a customized proprietary
cash flow model to replicate the principal and interest waterfalls
and assess the effectiveness of various structural features of the
transaction. In Fitch's stress scenarios, the rated notes can
withstand default and recovery assumptions consistent with their
assigned ratings.

The WAL used for the transaction stress portfolio and matrices
analysis is 12 months less than the WAL covenant to account for
structural and reinvestment conditions after the reinvestment
period. 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

Variability in key model assumptions, such as decreases in recovery
rates and increases in default rates, could result in a downgrade.
Fitch evaluated the notes' sensitivity to potential changes in such
a metric. The results under these sensitivity scenarios are as
severe as between 'BB+sf' and 'A+sf' for class B, between 'B+sf'
and 'BBB+sf' for class C, between less than 'B-sf' and 'BB+sf' for
class D; and between less than 'B-sf' and 'BB-sf' for class E.

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

Variability in key model assumptions, such as increases in recovery
rates and decreases in default rates, could result in an upgrade.
Fitch evaluated the notes' sensitivity to potential changes in such
metrics; the minimum rating results under these sensitivity
scenarios are 'AAAsf' for class B, 'AAsf' for class C, 'Asf' for
class D; and 'BBB+sf' for class E.

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.

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 KKR CLO 45a Ltd. In
cases where Fitch does not provide ESG relevance scores in
connection with the credit rating of a transaction, program,
instrument or issuer, Fitch will disclose in the key rating drivers
any ESG factor which has a significant impact on the rating on an
individual basis.


LCM 41: S&P Assigns BB+ (sf) Rating on $6MM Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to LCM 41 Ltd./LCM 41 LLC's
floating-rate debt.

The debt issuance is a CLO securitization governed by investment
criteria and backed primarily by broadly syndicated
speculative-grade (rated 'BB+' or lower) senior secured term loans.
The transaction is managed by LCM Asset Management LLC, a
subsidiary of Tetragon Financial Group Ltd.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of:

-- The diversification of the collateral pool;

-- The credit enhancement provided through subordination, excess
spread, and overcollateralization;

-- The experience of the collateral manager's team, which can
affect the performance of the rated debt through portfolio
identification and ongoing management; and

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

  Ratings Assigned

  LCM 41 Ltd./LCM 41 LLC

  Class A-1, $195.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2, $6.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B, $27.00 million: AA+ (sf)
  Class C (deferrable), $18.00 million: A+ (sf)
  Class D-1 (deferrable), $18.00 million: BBB+ (sf)
  Class D-2 (deferrable), $4.50 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $6.00 million: BB+ (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $28.40 million: Not rated



MADISON PARK LXIX: Fitch Assigns 'BB+(EXP)' Rating on Cl. E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned expected ratings and Rating Outlooks to
Madison Park Funding LXIX, Ltd.

   Entity/Debt             Rating           
   -----------             ------           
Madison Park
Funding LXIX, Ltd.

   A-1                  LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-2                  LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   B                    LT  AA+(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   C                    LT  A+(EXP)sf   Expected Rating
   D-1                  LT  BBB(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   D-2                  LT  BBB-(EXP)sf Expected Rating
   E                    LT  BB+(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   F                    LT  NR(EXP)sf   Expected Rating
   Subordinated Notes   LT  NR(EXP)sf   Expected Rating

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Madison Park Funding LXIX, Ltd. (the issuer) is an arbitrage cash
flow collateralized loan obligation (CLO) that will be managed by
Credit Suisse Asset Management, LLC. Net proceeds from the issuance
of the secured and subordinated notes will provide financing on a
portfolio of approximately $500 million of primarily first-lien
senior secured leveraged loans.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Asset Credit Quality (Negative): The average credit quality of the
indicative portfolio is 'B'/'B-', which is in line with that of
recent CLOs. Issuers rated in the 'B' rating category denote a
highly speculative credit quality; however, the notes benefit from
appropriate credit enhancement and standard CLO structural
features.

Asset Security (Positive): The indicative portfolio consists of
96.05% first-lien senior secured loans and has a weighted average
recovery assumption of 73.99%. Fitch stressed the indicative
portfolio by assuming a higher portfolio concentration of assets
with lower recovery prospects and further reduced recovery
assumptions for higher rating stresses.

Portfolio Composition (Positive): The largest three industries may
comprise up to 37% of the portfolio balance in aggregate while the
top five obligors can represent up to 12.5% of the portfolio
balance in aggregate. The level of diversity required by industry,
obligor and geographic concentrations is in line with other recent
CLOs.

Portfolio Management (Neutral): The transaction has a 5.2-year
reinvestment period and reinvestment criteria similar to other
CLOs. Fitch's analysis was based on a stressed portfolio created by
adjusting to the indicative portfolio to reflect permissible
concentration limits and collateral quality test levels.

Cash Flow Analysis (Positive): Fitch used a customized proprietary
cash flow model to replicate the principal and interest waterfalls
and assess the effectiveness of various structural features of the
transaction. In Fitch's stress scenarios, the rated notes can
withstand default and recovery assumptions consistent with their
assigned ratings.

The WAL used for the transaction stress portfolio is 12 months less
than the WAL covenant to account for structural and reinvestment
conditions after the reinvestment period. 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

Variability in key model assumptions, such as decreases in recovery
rates and increases in default rates, could result in a downgrade.
Fitch evaluated the notes' sensitivity to potential changes in such
a metric. The results under these sensitivity scenarios are as
severe as between 'A-sf' and 'AA+sf' for class A-1, between
'BBB+sf' and 'AA+sf' for class A-2, between 'BB+sf' and 'AA-sf' for
class B, between 'B+sf' and 'BBB+sf' for class C, between less than
'B-sf' and 'BB+sf' for class D-1, between less than 'B-sf' and
'BB+sf' for class D-2; and between less than 'B-sf' and 'BBsf' for
class E.

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

Upgrade scenarios are not applicable to the class A-1 and class A-2
notes; and as these notes are in the highest rating category of
'AAAsf'.

Variability in key model assumptions, such as increases in recovery
rates and decreases in default rates, could result in an upgrade.
Fitch evaluated the notes' sensitivity to potential changes in such
metrics; the minimum rating results under these sensitivity
scenarios are 'AAAsf' for class B, 'AA+sf' for class C, 'A+sf' for
class D-1, 'Asf' for class D-2; and 'BBB+sf' for class E.

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.

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 Madison Park
Funding LXIX, Ltd. In cases where Fitch does not provide ESG
relevance scores in connection with the credit rating of a
transaction, program, instrument or issuer, Fitch will disclose in
the key rating drivers any ESG factor which has a significant
impact on the rating on an individual basis.


MADISON PARK LXIX: Moody's Assigns (P)B3 Rating to $250,000 F Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned provisional ratings to two classes of
notes to be issued by Madison Park Funding LXIX, Ltd. (the "Issuer"
or "Madison Park Funding LXIX").

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$306,750,000 Class A-1 Floating Rate Senior Notes due 2036,
Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$250,000 Class F Deferrable Floating Rate Junior Notes due 2037,
Assigned (P)B3 (sf)

The notes listed are referred to herein, collectively, as the
"Rated Notes."

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rationale for the ratings is based on Moody's methodology and
considers all relevant risks, particularly those associated with
the CLO's portfolio and structure.

Madison Park Funding LXIX is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued
notes will be collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated senior
secured corporate loans. At least 96% of the portfolio must consist
of first lien senior secured loans, cash and eligible investments,
and up to 4% of the portfolio may consist of loans that are not
senior secured. Moody's expect the portfolio to be approximately
70% ramped as of the closing date.

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

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer will issue six other
classes of secured notes and one class of subordinated notes.

The transaction incorporates interest and par coverage tests which,
if triggered, divert interest and principal proceeds to pay down
the notes in order of seniority.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3.2.1
of the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in December 2021.

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

Par amount: $500,000,000

Diversity Score: 65

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3100

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.55%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 46.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8.0 years

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
December 2021.

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

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


MADISON PARK LXVII: Fitch Assigns 'BB+sf' Rating on Class F Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned ratings and Rating Outlooks to Madison
Park Funding LXVII, Ltd.

   Entity/Debt              Rating           
   -----------              ------           
Madison Park
Funding LXVII, Ltd.

   A1                   LT  NRsf    New Rating
   A1L                  LT  NRsf    New Rating
   A2                   LT  AAAsf   New Rating
   B                    LT  AAsf    New Rating
   C                    LT  Asf     New Rating
   D-1                  LT  BBBsf   New Rating
   D-2                  LT  BBB-sf  New Rating
   E                    LT  BB+sf   New Rating
   F                    LT  NRsf    New Rating
   Subordinated Notes   LT  NRsf    New Rating

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Madison Park Funding LXVII, Ltd. (the issuer) is an arbitrage cash
flow collateralized loan obligation (CLO) that will be managed by
Credit Suisse Asset Management, LLC. Net proceeds from the issuance
of the secured and subordinated notes will provide financing on a
portfolio of approximately $500 million of primarily first-lien
senior secured leveraged loans.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Asset Credit Quality (Negative): The average credit quality of the
indicative portfolio is 'B'/'B-', which is in line with that of
recent CLOs. Issuers rated in the 'B' rating category denote a
highly speculative credit quality; however, the notes benefit from
appropriate credit enhancement and standard CLO structural
features.

Asset Security (Positive): The indicative portfolio consists of
96.1% first-lien senior secured loans and has a weighted average
recovery assumption of 73.17%. Fitch stressed the indicative
portfolio by assuming a higher portfolio concentration of assets
with lower recovery prospects and further reduced recovery
assumptions for higher rating stresses.

Portfolio Composition (Positive): The largest three industries may
comprise up to 41% of the portfolio balance in aggregate while the
top five obligors can represent up to 12.5% of the portfolio
balance in aggregate. The level of diversity required by industry,
obligor and geographic concentrations is in line with other recent
CLOs.

Portfolio Management (Neutral): The transaction has a five-year
reinvestment period and reinvestment criteria similar to other
CLOs. Fitch's analysis was based on a stressed portfolio created by
adjusting to the indicative portfolio to reflect permissible
concentration limits and collateral quality test levels.

Cash Flow Analysis (Positive): Fitch used a customized proprietary
cash flow model to replicate the principal and interest waterfalls
and assess the effectiveness of various structural features of the
transaction. In Fitch's stress scenarios, the rated notes can
withstand default and recovery assumptions consistent with their
assigned ratings.

The WAL used for the transaction stress portfolio is 12 months less
than the WAL covenant to account for structural and reinvestment
conditions after the reinvestment period. 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

Variability in key model assumptions, such as decreases in recovery
rates and increases in default rates, could result in a downgrade.
Fitch evaluated the notes' sensitivity to potential changes in such
a metric. The results under these sensitivity scenarios are as
severe as between 'BBB+sf' and 'AA+sf' for class A-2, between
'BB+sf' and 'A+sf' for class B, between 'B+sf' and 'BBB+sf' for
class C, between less than 'B-sf' and 'BB+sf' for class D-1,
between less than 'B-sf' and 'BB+sf' for class D-2; and between
less than 'B-sf' and 'B+sf' for class E.

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

Upgrade scenarios are not applicable to the class A-2 notes; and as
these notes are in the highest rating category of 'AAAsf'.

Variability in key model assumptions, such as increases in recovery
rates and decreases in default rates, could result in an upgrade.
Fitch evaluated the notes' sensitivity to potential changes in such
metrics; the minimum rating results under these sensitivity
scenarios are 'AAAsf' for class B, 'AAsf' for class C, 'A+sf' for
class D-1, 'A-sf' for class D-2; and 'BBB+sf' for class E.

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.

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 Madison Park
Funding LXVII, Ltd. In cases where Fitch does not provide ESG
relevance scores in connection with the credit rating of a
transaction, program, instrument or issuer, Fitch will disclose in
the key rating drivers any ESG factor which has a significant
impact on the rating on an individual basis.


MADISON PARK LXVII: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating to $250,000 F Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned ratings to two classes of notes issued
and one class of loans incurred by Madison Park Funding LXVII, Ltd.
(the "Issuer" or "Madison Park Funding LXVII").

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$290,000,000 Class A-1 Floating Rate Senior Notes due 2037,
Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$25,000,000 Class A-L Loans Notes maturing 2037, Assigned Aaa
(sf)

US$250,000 Class F Deferrable Floating Rate Junior Notes due 2037,
Assigned B3 (sf)

The notes and loans listed are referred to herein, collectively, as
the "Rated Debt".

The outstanding principal amount of Class A-1 Notes will be
$290,000,000 on the closing date and may be increased up to
$315,000,000 upon the exercise of the conversion option of the
Class A-L Loans into the Class A-1 Notes.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rationale for the ratings is based on Moody's methodology and
considers all relevant risks, particularly those associated with
the CLO's portfolio and structure.

Madison Park Funding LXVII is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued
debt will be collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated senior
secured corporate loans. At least 90.0% of the portfolio must
consist of first lien senior secured loans and eligible
investments, and up to 10.0% of the portfolio may consist of loans
that are not senior secured. The portfolio is approximately 40%
ramped as of the closing date.

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

In addition to the Rated Debt, the Issuer issued six other classes
of secured notes and subordinated notes.

The transaction incorporates interest and par coverage tests which,
if triggered, divert interest and principal proceeds to pay down
the debt in order of seniority.

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in Section 2.3.2.1
of the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan
Obligations" rating methodology published in December 2021.

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

Par amount: $500,000,000

Diversity Score: 55

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3100

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.7%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 7.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 46.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8.0 years

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
December 2021.


MADISON PARK XXIX: S&P Affirms B- (sf) Rating on Class F Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A-R, B-R, and
C-R replacement debt from Madison Park Funding XXIX Ltd./Madison
Park Funding XXIX LLC, a CLO originally issued in November 2018
that is managed by Credit Suisse Asset Management LLC. At the same
time, S&P withdrew its ratings on the class A-1, B, and C debt
following payment in full on the April 5, 2024, refinancing date
(S&P did not rate the refinanced class A-2 debt). S&P also affirmed
its ratings on the class D, E and F debt, which were not
refinanced.

The replacement debt were issued via a supplemental indenture,
which outlines the terms of the replacement debt.

Replacement And Outstanding Debt Issuances

Replacement debt

-- Class A-R, $504.083 million: Three-month term SOFR + 1.18%
-- Class B-R, $96.00 million: Three-month term SOFR + 1.80%
-- Class C-R, $46.00 million: Three-month term SOFR + 2.25%

Outstanding debt

-- Class A-1, $450.083 million: Three-month term SOFR + 1.40%
-- Class A-2, $54.00 million: Three-month term SOFR + 1.71%
-- Class B, $96.00 million: Three-month term SOFR + 2.01%
-- Class C, $46.00 million: Three-month term SOFR + 2.46%

S&P said, "Our review of this transaction included a cash flow
analysis, based on the portfolio and transaction data in the
trustee report, to estimate future performance. In line with our
criteria, our cash flow scenarios applied forward-looking
assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of defaults and the
recoveries upon default under various interest rate and
macroeconomic scenarios. Our analysis also considered the
transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or ultimate
principal to each of the rated tranches. The results of the cash
flow analysis (and other qualitative factors, as applicable)
demonstrated, in our view, that the outstanding rated classes all
have adequate credit enhancement available at the rating levels
associated with the rating actions.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the debt remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them, and we will take rating actions as we
deem necessary."

  Ratings Assigned

  Madison Park Funding XXIX Ltd./Madison Park Funding XXIX LLC

  Class A-R, $504.083 million: 'AAA (sf)'
  Class B-R, $96.00 million: 'AA (sf)'
  Class C-R, $46.00 million: 'A (sf)'

  Ratings Affirmed

  Madison Park Funding XXIX Ltd./Madison Park Funding XXIX LLC

  Class D: BBB- (sf)
  Class E: BB- (sf)
  Class F: B- (sf)

  Ratings Withdrawn

  Madison Park Funding XXIX Ltd./Madison Park Funding XXIX LLC

  Class A-1 to NR from 'AAA (sf)'
  Class B to NR from 'AA (sf)'
  Class C to NR from 'A (sf)'

  Other Outstanding Debt

  Madison Park Funding XXIX Ltd./Madison Park Funding XXIX LLC

  Subordinated notes: NR
  Class A-2: NR
  
  NR--Not rated.



MORGAN STANLEY 2024-INV2: Fitch Gives B-(EXP) Rating on B-5 Debt
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned expected ratings to Morgan Stanley
Residential Mortgage Loan Trust 2024-INV2 (MSRM 2024-INV2).

   Entity/Debt         Rating           
   -----------         ------           
MSRM 2024-INV2

   A-1            LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-1-IO         LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-X-IO1        LT  AA+(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-2            LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-2-IO         LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-3            LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-3-IO         LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-4            LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-4-IO         LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-5            LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-5-IO         LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-6            LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-6-IO         LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-7            LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-7-IO         LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-8            LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-8-IO         LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-9            LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-9-IO         LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-10           LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-10-IO        LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-11           LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-11-IO        LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-12           LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-12-IO        LT  AAA(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-13           LT  AA+(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-13-IO        LT  AA+(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-14           LT  AA+(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-14-IO        LT  AA+(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-15           LT  AA+(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   A-15-IO        LT  AA+(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   B-1            LT  AA-(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   B-1-A          LT  AA-(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   B-1-X          LT  AA-(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   B-2            LT  A-(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   B-2-A          LT  A-(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   B-2-X          LT  A-(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   B-3            LT  BBB-(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   B-4            LT  BB-(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   B-5            LT  B-(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   B-6            LT  NR(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   PT             LT  NR(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   R              LT  NR(EXP)sf  Expected Rating

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Fitch expects to rate the RMBS issued by Morgan Stanley Residential
Mortgage Loan Trust 2024-INV2 (MSRM 2024-INV2) as indicated above.

MSRM 2024-INV2 is the 18th post-financial crisis transaction off
the Morgan Stanley Residential Mortgage Loan Trust shelf; the first
transaction was issued in 2014. This is the fourth 100%
non-owner-occupied MSRM transaction and the 16th MSRM transaction
that comprises loans from various sellers and is acquired by Morgan
Stanley in its prime-jumbo and agency investor aggregation
process.

The certificates are supported by 899 prime-quality loans with a
total balance of approximately $306.85 million as of the cut-off
date. The pool consists of 100% fixed-rate mortgages (FRMs) from
various mortgage originators. The servicers for this transaction
are Newrez LLC/Shellpoint Mortgage (RPS2), PennyMac Loan Services,
LLC, PennyMac Corp (RPS3+), and Specialized Loan Servicing, LLC
(SLS) (RPS2+). Nationstar Mortgage LLC (Nationstar (RMS2+)) will be
the master servicer. Of the loans, 2.5% qualify as Safe Harbor QM
Average Prime Offer Rate (APOR). The remaining 97.5% of loans are
exempt from the QM rule.

There is no exposure to Libor in this transaction. The collateral
comprises 100% fixed-rate loans, and the certificates are fixed
rate and capped at the net weighted average coupon (WAC).

Like other prime transactions, this transaction utilizes a
senior-subordinate, shifting-interest structure with subordination
floors to protect against tail risk.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Updated Sustainable Home Prices (Negative): Due to Fitch's updated
view on sustainable home prices, Fitch views the home price values
of this pool as 12.0% above a long-term sustainable level (vs.
11.1% on a national level as of 3Q23, up 1.68% since last quarter).
Housing affordability is the worst it has been in decades driven by
both high interest rates and elevated home prices. Home prices have
increased 5.5% yoy nationally as of December 2023 despite modest
regional declines, but are still being supported by limited
inventory.

Prime Credit Quality (Positive): The collateral consists of 899
loans totaling $306.85 million and seasoned at approximately seven
months in aggregate. The borrowers have a strong credit profile,
with a 764 FICO and a 37.0% debt-to-income ratio (DTI), coupled
with high leverage, as reflected by an 81.4% sustainable
loan-to-value ratio (sLTV).

Fitch viewed the pool as having 1.1% nonconforming loans while the
remaining 98.9% are agency conforming loans (per the transaction
documents, 98.9% are agency conforming loans and 1.1% are
nonconforming). The majority of the loans (97.5%) are exempt from
QM rule standards, as they are loans on investor occupied homes
that serve business purposes. The remaining 2.5% qualify as Safe
Harbor (APOR) loans. Roughly 32.3% of the pool is originated by a
retail channel.

The pool consists of 100% investor properties. Single-family homes
make up 67.6% of the pool, condos make up 10.2% and multifamily
homes make up 22.2%. Cashouts comprise only 9.6% of the pool while
purchases comprise 86.3%, and rate refinances comprise 4.1% (as
determined by Fitch). Based on the information provided, there are
no foreign nationals in the pool. Three loans in the pool are over
$1.0 million, and the largest loan is $1.49 million.

Approximately 20.5% of the pool is concentrated in California. The
largest MSA concentration is in the New York-Northern New
Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA MSA (6.6%), followed by the Los
Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA MSA (4.1%) and the Dallas-Fort
Worth-Arlington, TX MSA (3.4%). The top three MSAs account for 14%
of the pool. As a result, there was no probability of default (PD)
penalty for geographic concentration.

Non-Owner-Occupied Loans (Negative): Of the pool, 100% of loans
were made to investors and 98.9% are conforming loans, which were
underwritten to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac guidelines and approved
per Desktop Underwriter (DU) or Loan Product Advisor (LPA), the
automated underwriting systems for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac,
respectively. The remaining 1.1% of loans were underwritten to the
underlying sellers' guidelines and were full documentation loans.
All loans were underwritten to the borrower's credit risk; this
differs from investor cash flow loans, which are underwritten to
the property's income. Fitch applies a 1.25x PD penalty for agency
investor loans and a 1.60x PD penalty for investor loans
underwritten to the borrower's credit risk.

For the loss analysis of this pool, Fitch used a customized version
of the U.S. RMBS Loan Loss model that has a 1.25x PD penalty for
agency investor loans and a 1.60x PD penalty for investor loans
underwritten to the borrower's credit risk. The 1.25x PD penalty
was used only for agency eligible loans (98.9%), with the remaining
loans receiving a 1.60x PD penalty for being investor occupied.

Post-crisis performance indicates that loans underwritten to DU/LPA
guidelines have relatively lower default rates compared to normal
investor loans used in regression data with all other attributes
controlled. The implied penalty has been reduced to approximately
25% for agency investor loans in the customized model, down from
approximately 60% for regular investor loans in the production
model.

Multifamily Loans (Negative): Of the pool, 22.2% of loans are for
multifamily homes. Fitch views these as riskier than single-family
homes since the borrower may be relying upon rental income to fund
mortgage payment on the property. To account for this risk, Fitch
adjusts the PD upward by 25% from the baseline for multifamily
homes.

Shifting-Interest Structure with Full Advancing (Mixed): The
mortgage cash flow and loss allocation are based on a
senior-subordinate, shifting-interest structure whereby the
subordinate classes receive only scheduled principal and are locked
out from receiving unscheduled principal or prepayments for five
years. This lockout feature helps to maintain subordination for a
longer period should losses occur later in the life of the
transaction.

The applicable credit support percentage feature redirects
subordinate principal to classes of higher seniority if specified
credit enhancement (CE) levels are not maintained. Due to the
leakage to the subordinate bonds, the shifting-interest structure
requires more CE.

The servicers will provide full advancing (until deemed
non-recoverable) for the life of the transaction. While this helps
the liquidity of the structure, it also increases the expected loss
due to unpaid servicer advances. If the servicers are unable to
advance, the master servicer will provide advancing. If the master
servicer is unable to advance, the securities administrator will
ultimately be responsible for advancing.

Subordination Floor (Positive): A CE or senior subordination floor
of 1.70% has been considered to mitigate potential tail end risk
and loss exposure for senior tranches as the pool size declines and
performance volatility increases due to adverse loan selection and
small loan count concentration. Additionally, a junior
subordination floor of 1.20% has been considered to mitigate
potential tail end risk and loss exposure for subordinate tranches
as the pool size declines and performance volatility increases due
to adverse loan selection and small loan count concentration.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

Fitch incorporates a sensitivity analysis to demonstrate how the
ratings would react to steeper market value declines (MVDs) than
assumed at the MSA level. Sensitivity analyses were conducted at
the state and national levels to assess the effect of higher MVDs
for the subject pool as well as lower MVDs, illustrated by a gain
in home prices.

This defined stress sensitivity analysis demonstrates how the
ratings would react to steeper MVDs at the national level. The
analysis assumes MVDs of 10%, 20% and 30%, in addition to the model
projected MVD, which is 42.8% in the 'AAAsf' stress. The analysis
indicates that there is some potential rating migration with higher
MVDs, compared with the model projection. Specifically, a 10%
additional decline in home prices would lower all rated classes by
one full category.

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

This defined positive rating sensitivity analysis demonstrates how
the ratings would react to positive home price growth of 10% with
no assumed overvaluation. Excluding the senior class, which is
already rated 'AAAsf', the analysis indicates there is potential
positive rating migration for all of the rated classes.
Specifically, a 10% gain in home prices would result in a full
category upgrade for the rated class excluding those being assigned
ratings of 'AAAsf'.

This section provides insight into the model-implied sensitivities
the transaction faces when one assumption is modified, while
holding others equal. The modelling process uses the modification
of these variables to reflect asset performance in up- and down
environments. The results should only be considered as one
potential outcome, as the transaction is exposed to multiple
dynamic risk factors. It should not be used as an indicator of
possible future performance.

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

Fitch was provided with Form ABS Due Diligence-15E (Form 15E) as
prepared by SitusAMC and Consolidated Analytics. The third-party
due diligence described in Form 15E focused on four areas:
compliance review, credit review, valuation review and data
integrity. Fitch considered this information in its analysis and,
as a result, Fitch did not make any adjustments to its analysis
based on the findings. Due to the fact that there was 100% due
diligence provided and there were no material findings, Fitch
reduced the 'AAAsf' expected loss by 0.62%.

DATA ADEQUACY

Fitch relied on an independent third-party due diligence review
performed on 100% of the pool. The third-party due diligence was
generally consistent with Fitch's "U.S. RMBS Rating Criteria."
SitusAMC and Consolidated Analytics were engaged to perform the
review. Loans reviewed under this engagement were given compliance,
credit and valuation grades, and assigned initial grades for each
subcategory. Minimal exceptions and waivers were noted in the due
diligence reports. Refer to the Third-Party Due Diligence section
of the presale report for more detail.

Fitch also utilized data files that were made available by the
issuer on its SEC Rule 17g-5 designated website. Fitch received
loan-level information based on the American Securitization Forum's
(ASF) data layout format, and the data are considered to be
comprehensive. The ASF data tape layout was established with input
from various industry participants, including rating agencies,
issuers, originators, investors and others to produce an industry
standard for the pool-level data in support of the U.S. RMBS
securitization market. The data contained in the ASF layout data
tape were reviewed by the due diligence companies, and no material
discrepancies were noted.
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.


NAVESINK CLO 2: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on $10MM Class E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Navesink CLO 2
Ltd./Navesink CLO 2 LLC's floating-rate debt.

The debt issuance is a CLO securitization governed by investment
criteria and backed primarily by broadly syndicated
speculative-grade (rated 'BB+' or lower) senior secured term loans.
The transaction is managed by ZAIS Leveraged Loan Master Manager
LLC.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of:

-- The collateral pool's diversification;

-- The credit enhancement provided through subordination, excess
spread, and overcollateralization;

-- The experience of the collateral manager's team, which can
affect the performance of the rated notes through portfolio
identification and ongoing management; and

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

  Ratings Assigned

  Navesink CLO 2 Ltd./Navesink CLO 2 LLC

  Class A-1, $168.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2, $100.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B, $40.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C (deferrable), $24.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D-1 (deferrable), $14.00 million: BBB (sf)
  Class D-J (deferrable), $10.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $10.00 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $32.00 million: Not rated.



OCP CLO 2020-20: S&P Assigns BB (sf) Rating on Class E-R Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A-1R, A-1
loans, A-2R, B-1R, B-2R, C-R, D-1R, D-2R, and E-R replacement debt
and the new class X debt from OCP CLO 2020-20 Ltd./OCP CLO 2020-20
LLC, a CLO originally issued in December 2020 that is managed by
Onex Credit Partners LLC. At the same time, S&P withdrew its
ratings on the original class A-1, B-1, B-2, C, D-1, D-2, and E
debt following payment in full on the April 9, 2024, refinancing
date.

The replacement debt was issued via a supplemental indenture, which
outlines the terms of the replacement debt. According to the
supplemental indenture:

-- The replacement class A-1R, A-2R, B-1R, B-2R, C-R, D-1R, D-2R,
and E-R debt were issued at a spread over three-month CME term
SOFR, whereas the original debt was issued at a spread over
three-month LIBOR.

-- The replacement class A-1R, A-2R, B-1R, C-R, D-1R, D-2R, and
E-R debt were issued at a floating spread, replacing the current
floating spread.

-- The replacement class B-2R debt was issued at a fixed coupon,
replacing the current fixed coupon.

-- The class A-1 debt was split into a class A-1R notes and a
class A-1 loans tranche.

-- Class X debt was issued in connection with this refinancing.
These notes are expected to be paid down using interest proceeds
during the first 11 payment dates beginning with the payment date
in October 2024.

-- The stated maturity was extended 3.525 years, and the
reinvestment period and non-call date were extended 3.275 years.

Replacement And Original Debt Issuances

Replacement debt

-- Class X, $1.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.100%

-- Class A-1R, $122.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR +
1.530%

-- Class A-1 loans, $130.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR +
1.530%

-- Class A-2R, $16.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.730%

-- Class B-1R, $28.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.950%

-- Class B-2R, $8.00 million: 5.845%

-- Class C-R, $24.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 2.450%

-- Class D-1R, $24.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 3.600%

-- Class D-2R, $4.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 5.480%

-- Class E-R, $11.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 6.650%

Subordinated notes, $35.95 million: Not applicable

Original debt

-- Class A-1, $240.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.40% +
CSA(i)

-- Class A-2, $16.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.65% +
CSA(i)

-- Class B-1, $39.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.90% +
CSA(i)

-- Class B-2, $9.00 million: 2.60%

-- Class C, $24.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 2.70% +
CSA(i)

-- Class D-1, $16.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 3.95% +
CSA(i)

-- Class D-2, $8.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 4.74% +
CSA(i))

-- Class E, $12.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 7.66% +
CSA(i)

-- Subordinated notes, $35.95 million: Not applicable

(i)The CSA is 0.26161%.
CSA--Credit spread adjustment.

S&P said, "Our review of this transaction included a cash flow
analysis, based on the portfolio and transaction data in the
trustee report, to estimate future performance. In line with our
criteria, our cash flow scenarios applied forward-looking
assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of defaults and the
recoveries upon default under various interest rate and
macroeconomic scenarios. Our analysis also considered the
transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or ultimate
principal to each of the rated tranches. The results of the cash
flow analysis (and other qualitative factors, as applicable)
demonstrated, in our view, that the outstanding rated classes all
have adequate credit enhancement available at the rating levels
associated with the rating actions.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them and take rating actions as we deem
necessary."

  Ratings Assigned

  OCP CLO 2020-20 Ltd./OCP CLO 2020-20 LLC

  Class X, $1.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-1R, $122.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-1 loans, $130.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2R, $16.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B-1R, $28.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class B-2R, $8.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C-R (deferrable), $24.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D-1R (deferrable), $24.00 million: BBB (sf)
  Class D-2R (deferrable), $4.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E-R (deferrable), $11.00 million: BB (sf)

  Ratings Withdrawn

  OCP CLO 2020-20 Ltd./OCP CLO 2020-20 LLC

  Class A-1: to NR from 'AAA (sf)'
  Class B-1: to NR from 'AA (sf)'
  Class B-2: to NR from 'AA (sf)'
  Class C (deferrable): to NR from 'A (sf)'
  Class D-1 (deferrable): to NR from 'BBB (sf)'
  Class D-2 (deferrable): to NR from 'BBB- (sf)'
  Class E (deferrable): to NR from 'BB- (sf)'

  Other Outstanding Debt

  OCP CLO 2020-20 Ltd./OCP CLO 2020-20 LLC

  Subordinated notes, $35.95 million: NR

  NR--Not rated.




OHA CREDIT 11: Fitch Affirms 'BB-sf' Rating on Class E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed the ratings for the class B, C, D-1, and
D-2 notes of OHA Credit Funding 10, Ltd. (OHA 10) and the class B,
C, D and E notes of OHA Credit Funding 11, Ltd. (OHA 11). The
Rating Outlook on all rated tranches remains Stable.

   Entity/Debt           Rating           Prior
   -----------           ------           -----
OHA Credit
Funding 11, Ltd.

   B 67115VAC6       LT AAsf   Affirmed   AAsf
   C 67115VAE2       LT Asf    Affirmed   Asf
   D 67115VAG7       LT BBB-sf Affirmed   BBB-sf
   E 67116BAA3       LT BB-sf  Affirmed   BB-sf

OHA Credit
Funding 10, Ltd.

   B 67707LAG3       LT AAsf   Affirmed   AAsf
   C 67707LAJ7       LT Asf    Affirmed   Asf
   D-1 67707LAL2     LT BBBsf  Affirmed   BBBsf    
   D-2 67707LAE8     LT BBB-sf Affirmed   BBB-sf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

OHA 10 and 11 are broadly syndicated collateralized loan
obligations (CLOs) managed by Oak Hill Advisors, L.P. OHA 10 closed
in December 2021 while OHA 11 closed in May 2022. OHA 10 and OHA 11
will exit their reinvestment period in January 2027 and July 2025,
respectively. The CLOs are secured primarily by first-lien, senior
secured leveraged loans.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Stable Portfolio Performance

The affirmations are driven by the stable performance of the
portfolios since their last respective reviews. The credit quality
of the portfolios as of the latest trustee reporting has remained
at the 'B'/'B-' level, with the Fitch weighted average rating
factor (WARF) for these portfolios averaging 24.6, compared to 25.4
at the time of last review.

The average obligor count for the three portfolios is 290, and the
largest 10 obligors represent 11.3% of the portfolios on average.
The average exposure to issuers with a Negative Outlook and Fitch's
watchlist is 11.1% and 5.3%, respectively. First lien loans, cash
and eligible investments comprise 99.1% of the portfolios. Fitch's
weighted average recovery rate (WARR) of the portfolios is 76.4%,
compared to an average of 76.6% at last review.

All coverage tests, collateral quality tests (CQTs), and
concentration limitations are in compliance for all transactions.

Updated Cash Flow Analysis

Fitch conducted updated cash flow analyses based on newly run Fitch
Stressed Portfolio (FSP) since each transaction is still in their
reinvestment period. The FSP analysis stressed the current
portfolios to account for permissible concentration and CQT limits.
The FSP analysis assumed weighted average lives of 6.75 and 6.00
years for OHA 10 and OHA 11, respectively. Fixed rate assets were
stressed to 5.0% for both OHA 10 and OHA 11. Other FSP assumptions
for the CLOs include 6% non-senior secured assets for OHA 10 and
8.5% for OHA 11 and 7.5% CCC assets.

The rating actions on the notes are in line with their respective
model-implied ratings (MIRs), as defined in Fitch's "CLOs and
Corporate CDOs Rating Criteria," except for class B, C , and D-1
notes of OHA 10 and class C and D notes of OHA 11 which were
affirmed one notch below their MIR. Fitch affirmed the ratings with
Stable Outlooks due to the remaining reinvestment period and
limited positive cushions at the respective MIR rating levels.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

- Downgrades may occur if realized and projected losses of the
portfolio are higher than what was assumed at closing and if the
notes' credit enhancement does not compensate for the higher loss
expectation than initially assumed.

- A 25% increase of the mean default rate across all ratings, along
with a 25% decrease of the recovery rate at all rating levels for
the current portfolio, would lead to downgrades of up to two rating
notches, based on the MIRs.

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

- Except for tranches already at the highest 'AAAsf' rating,
upgrades may occur in the event of better-than-expected portfolio
credit quality and transaction performance.

- A 25% reduction of the mean default rate across all ratings,
along with a 25% increase of the recovery rate at all rating levels
for the current portfolio, would lead to upgrades of up to five
rating notches, based on the MIRs.

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
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.


OHA CREDIT 1: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class X-R, A-1-R,
B-1-R, B-2-R, C-R, D-1-R, D-2-R, and E-R replacement debt from OHA
Credit Funding 1 Ltd./OHA Credit Funding 1 LLC, a CLO originally
issued in August 2018 that is managed by Oak Hill Advisors L.P. At
the same time, S&P withdrew its ratings on the original class A-1,
A-2, B, C, D, and E debt following payment in full on the April 10,
2024 refinancing date.

The replacement debt was issued via a supplemental indenture, which
outlines the terms of the replacement debt. According to the
supplemental indenture:

-- The replacement class notes X-R, A-1-R, A-2-R, B-1-R, C-R,
D-1-R, D-2-R, and E-R were issued at a higher spread over
three-month SOFR than the original debt.

-- The replacement class X-R, A-1-R, A-2-R, B-1-R, C-R, D-1-R,
D-2-R, and E-R debt were issued at a floating spread, replacing the
current floating spread, and the class B-2-R debt was issued at a
fixed coupon.

-- The stated maturity and reinvestment periods was extended by
5.5 years.

-- The class X-R debt was issued on the refinancing date and is
expected to be paid down using interest proceeds during the first
four payment dates beginning with the payment date in July 2024.

Replacement And Original Debt Issuances

Replacement debt

-- Class X-R, $5.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.00%

-- Class A-1-R, $306.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR +
1.50%

-- Class A-2-R, $34.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.70%

-- Class B-1-R, $27.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 2.00%

-- Class B-2-R, $13.00 million: 5.94182%

-- Class C-R (deferrable), $30.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 2.45%

-- Class D-1-R (deferrable), $30.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 3.60%

-- Class D-2-R (deferrable), $5.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 4.90%

-- Class E-R (deferrable), 15.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 6.50%

-- Subordinated notes, $41.00 million: Not applicable

Original debt

-- Class X, $2.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 0.65% +
CSA(i)

-- Class A-1, $292.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.12% +
CSA(i)

-- Class A-2, $30.50 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.45% +
CSA(i)

-- Class B, $57.50 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.65% +
CSA(i)

-- Class C, $30.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 2.15% +
CSA(i)

-- Class D, $30.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 3.05% +
CSA(i)

-- Class E, $18.75 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 5.75% +
CSA(i)

-- Subordinated notes, $41.00 million: Not applicable

(i)The CSA is 0.26161%.
CSA--Credit spread adjustment.

S&P said, "Our review of this transaction included a cash flow
analysis, based on the portfolio and transaction data in the
trustee report, to estimate future performance. In line with our
criteria, our cash flow scenarios applied forward-looking
assumptions on the expected timing and pattern of defaults and the
recoveries upon default under various interest rate and
macroeconomic scenarios. Our analysis also considered the
transaction's ability to pay timely interest and/or ultimate
principal to each of the rated tranches. The results of the cash
flow analysis (and other qualitative factors, as applicable)
demonstrated, in our view, that the outstanding rated classes all
have adequate credit enhancement available at the rating levels
associated with the rating actions.

"We will continue to review whether, in our view, the ratings
assigned to the notes remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them and take rating actions as we deem
necessary."

  Ratings Assigned

OHA Credit Funding 1 Ltd./OHA Credit Funding 1 LLC

  Class X-R, $5.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-1-R, $306.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2-R, $34.00 million: NR
  Class B-1-R, $27.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class B-2-R, $13.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C-R (deferrable), $30.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D-1-R (deferrable), $30.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class D-2-R (deferrable), $5.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E-R (deferrable), $15.00 million: BB- (sf)

  Ratings Withdrawn

  OHA Credit Funding 1 Ltd./OHA Credit Funding 1 LLC

  Class A-1: to NR from AAA (sf)
  Class B: to NR from AA (sf)
  Class C (deferrable): to NR from A (sf)
  Class D (deferrable): to NR from BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable): to NR from BB- (sf)

  Other Outstanding Debt

  OHA Credit Funding 1 Ltd./OHA Credit Funding 1 LLC

  Subordinated notes, $41.00 million: NR

  NR--Not rated.



PPM CLO 2018-1: Moody's Cuts Rating on $6.8MM Cl. F Notes to Caa2
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has upgraded the ratings on the following notes
issued by PPM CLO 2018-1 Ltd.:

US$20,800,000 Class C Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the
"Class C Notes"), Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on June 12, 2023
Upgraded to A1 (sf)

US$22,800,000 Class D Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the
"Class D Notes"), Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on September 2,
2020 Confirmed at Baa3 (sf)

Moody's Ratings has also downgraded the rating on the following
notes:

US$6,800,000 Class F Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due 2031 (the
"Class F Notes"), Downgraded to Caa2 (sf); previously on September
2, 2020 Downgraded to Caa1 (sf)

PPM CLO 2018-1 Ltd., issued in August 2018, is a managed cashflow
CLO. The notes are collateralized primarily by a portfolio of
broadly syndicated senior secured corporate loans. The
transaction's reinvestment period ended in July 2023.

A comprehensive review of all credit ratings for the respective
transaction has been conducted during a rating committee.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The upgrade rating actions are primarily a result of deleveraging
of the senior notes since June 2023. The Class A notes have been
paid down by approximately 17% or $44.3 million since June 2023.
The deal has also benefited from a shortening of the portfolio's
weighted average life since that time.

The downgrade rating action on the Class F notes reflects the
specific risks to the junior notes posed by par loss and credit
deterioration observed in the underlying CLO portfolio. Based on
Moody's Ratings calculation, the total collateral par balance,
including expected recoveries from defaulted securities, is $340
million, or $15.6 million less than the $400 million initial par
amount targeted during the deal's ramp-up after accounting for
amounts repaid to the notes. Furthermore, the deal's weighted
average rating factor (WARF) is failing its test as of the February
2024 report date, with a reported WARF of 3050 [1] versus the test
level of 2908. Moody's notes that the curently reported WARF has
deteriorated as well, compared to the reported level of 2949 in
April 2023 [2].

No actions were taken on the Class A, Class B-1, Class B-2, and
Class E notes because their expected losses remain commensurate
with their current ratings, after taking into account the CLO's
latest portfolio information, its relevant structural features and
its actual over-collateralization and interest coverage levels.

Moody's Ratings modeled the transaction using a cash flow model
based on the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in "Moody's
Global Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations."

The key model inputs Moody's Ratings used in its analysis, such as
par, weighted average rating factor, diversity score, weighted
average spread, and weighted average recovery rate, are based on
its published methodology and could differ from the trustee's
reported numbers. For modeling purposes, Moody's used the following
base-case assumptions:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: $338,701,335

Defaulted par:  $3,813,285

Diversity Score: 68

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2851

Weighted Average Spread (WAS) (before accounting for reference rate
floors): 3.59%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 46.63%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 4 years

In addition to base case analysis, Moody's Ratings ran additional
scenarios where outcomes could diverge from the base case. The
additional scenarios consider one or more factors individually or
in combination, and include: defaults by obligors whose low ratings
or debt prices suggest distress, defaults by obligors with
potential refinancing risk, deterioration in the credit quality of
the underlying portfolio, decrease in overall WAS or net interest
income, lower recoveries on defaulted assets.

Methodology Used for the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
December 2021.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

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


SBALR COMMERCIAL 2020-RR1: Moody's Cuts Cl. C Certs Rating to Caa1
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has downgraded six classes in SBALR Commercial
Mortgage 2020-RR1 Trust, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2020-RR1:

Cl. A-3, Downgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Sep 13, 2023
Affirmed Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-AB, Downgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Sep 13, 2023
Affirmed Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-S, Downgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Sep 13, 2023 Affirmed
Aa2 (sf)

Cl. B, Downgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Sep 13, 2023
Downgraded to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. C, Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on Sep 13, 2023
Downgraded to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. X-A*, Downgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Sep 13, 2023
Affirmed Aaa (sf)

* Reflects Interest-Only Classes

RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings on five P&I classes were downgraded primarily due to
the higher anticipated losses, increased risk of interest
shortfalls and continued delinquency from the nine loans in special
servicing, representing 34.3% of the pool balance. Eight of the
specially serviced loans (30.7% of the pool balance) are secured by
multifamily portfolios in the Bronx borough of New York that
consist of primarily Class B/C walk-up buildings with rent
stabilized residential units. The performance of these portfolios
have been impacted by a combination of non-paying tenants and
higher operating expenses which have outpaced the permitted rental
increases for rent stabilized apartments and led to declines in
both cash flow and value since securitization. The eight rent
stabilized multifamily loans transferred to special servicing
between May and November of 2023 and special servicer commentary
initially indicated they were working on some form of forbearance
to correct the performance issues at the properties, however, the
special servicer subsequently indicated they no longer believed
forbearance would be a viable option and commenced filing Receiver
applications and foreclosure motions with the courts.

All of the specially serviced loans were more than 90 days
delinquent as of the March 2024 remittance statement and updated
appraisals have been reported between the August 2023 and March
2024 remittance statements valuing the multifamily properties well
below the outstanding loan balances. As of the March 2024
remittance statement, the master servicer has utilized a 25%
appraisal reduction amount for the eight multifamily loans causing
the interest shortfalls to impact up to Cl. E. Due to the
significant exposure to specially serviced and delinquent loans,
Moody's expects interest shortfalls to continue and likely increase
based on the most recent reported appraisal values. While Classes
A-3, A-AB, A-S and B benefit from significant credit support, the
significant exposure to specially serviced loans classified as
either "in foreclosure" or REO may cause interest shortfalls to
increase if the loans remain delinquent on debt service payments or
the credit support of certain classes may decline upon ultimate
liquidation of the distressed loans.

The rating on the IO class was downgraded due to a decline in the
credit quality of its referenced classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 16.1% of the
current pooled balance, compared to 11.9% at the last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 14.7% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 11.1% at the last review.

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

The performance expectations for a given variable indicate Moody's
forward-looking view of the likely range of performance over the
medium term. Performance that falls outside the given range can
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously expected. Additionally, significant
changes in the 5-year rolling average of 10-year US Treasury rates
will impact the magnitude of the interest rate adjustment and may
lead to future rating actions.

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

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

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The principal methodology used in rating all classes except
interest-only classes was "US and Canadian Conduit/Fusion
Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securitizations Methodology" published
in July 2022.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the March 15, 2024 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 10.3% to $358.7
million from $400.1 million at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 52 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 5.8% of the pool, with the top ten loans (excluding
defeasance) constituting 40.3% of the pool.

Moody's uses a variation of Herf to measure the diversity of loan
sizes, where a higher number represents greater diversity. Loan
concentration has an important bearing on potential rating
volatility, including the risk of multiple notch downgrades under
adverse circumstances. The credit neutral Herf score is 40. The
pool has a Herf of 35, compared to 36 at Moody's last review.

As of the March 2023 remittance report, loans representing 65.7%
were current or within their grace period on their debt service
payments, and 34.3% were 90+ days delinquent, in foreclosure or
REO.

Nineteen loans, constituting 25.5% of the pool, are on the master
servicer's watchlist. The watchlist includes loans that meet
certain portfolio review guidelines established as part of the CRE
Finance Council (CREFC) monthly reporting package. As part of
Moody's ongoing monitoring of a transaction, the agency reviews the
watchlist to assess which loans have material issues that could
affect performance.

One loan has been liquidated from the pool, resulting in a realized
loss of $1.1 million (for a loss severity of 23.5%).  Nine loans,
constituting 34.3% of the pool, are currently in special servicing.
Eight of the specially serviced loans, representing 30.7% of the
pool, have the same sponsor (the "Emerald Bronx Multifamily
Portfolios") and have transferred to special servicing since May
2023 due to payment default. The Emerald Bronx Multifamily
Portfolios are secured by eight multifamily portfolios that include
primarily rent stabilized residential units and are located in the
Bronx borough of New York, NY. Property performance across these
portfolios has generally declined in recent years due to non-paying
tenants and higher operating expenses which have outpaced the
permitted rental increases for rent stabilized apartments. The
loans are all classified as in foreclosure and the most recently
reported appraisals as of the March 2024 remittance date
represented declines between 40% and 64% from the valuation at
securitization. Furthermore, the updated appraisal values are now
well below the outstanding loan balance for each loan. Due to the
combination of loan performance, the trends of increasing property
operating expenses and the New York State revision of its rent
regulation laws in 2019 which reversed key provisions in the
previous law that allowed landlords to increase rents or deregulate
units over time, Moody's anticipated a material loss on these
loans. The one other loan in special servicing, Clarion Suites
Anchorage (3.7% of the pool), is reported as REO and is also
expected to be liquidated from the pool at a loss.

The credit risk of loans is determined primarily by two factors: 1)
Moody's assessment of the probability of default, which is largely
driven by each loan's DSCR, and 2) Moody's assessment of the
severity of loss upon a default, which is largely driven by each
loan's loan-to-value ratio, referred to as the Moody's LTV or MLTV.
As described in the CMBS methodology used to rate this
transaction, Moody's make various adjustments to the MLTV.
https://urlcurt.com/u?l=6QQ6lf adjust the MLTV for each loan using
a value that reflects capitalization (cap) rates that are between
Moody's sustainable cap rates and market cap rates. Moody's also
use an adjusted loan balance that reflects each loan's amortization
profile. The MLTV reported in this publication reflects the MLTV
before the adjustments described in the methodology.

Moody's received full year 2022 operating results for 100% of the
pool, and full/partial year 2023 operating results for 70% of the
pool (excluding specially serviced). Moody's weighted average
conduit LTV is 115%, compared to 114% at Moody's last review.
Moody's conduit component excludes specially serviced and troubled
loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF) reflects a weighted average
haircut of 20% to the most recently available net operating income
(NOI). Moody's value reflects a weighted average capitalization
rate of 9.6%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.50X and 0.94X,
respectively, compared to 1.53X and 0.94X at securitization.
Moody's actual DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and the loan's actual
debt service. Moody's stressed DSCR is based on Moody's NCF and a
9.25% stress rate the agency applied to the loan balance.

The top three conduit loans represent 12.5% of the pool balance.
The largest loan is the Winner's Circle at Saratoga Apartments Loan
($20.7 million -- 5.8% of the pool), which is secured by a 187-unit
multifamily apartment complex located in Saratoga County, New York.
The property is part of a larger multi-phased apartment community
known as Winner's Circle at Saratoga (Phases I, II, III & IV),
which offer a total of 604 apartment units. The property was 95%
leased as of September 2023, compared to 96% as of December 2020
and 92% at securitization. Property performance has been stable in
recent years. The loan has amortized 1.5% since securitization
after its initial interest only period and Moody's LTV and stressed
DSCR are 102% and 0.98X,  compared to 103% and 0.97X at last
review.

The second largest loan is the Gutman and Hoffman Multifamily
Portfolio - Pool A Loan ($12.3 million -- 3.4% of the pool), which
is secured by two multifamily properties totaling 86-units and
located in the Bronx borough of New York City, NY. Between the two
properties there are 84 rent stabilized  units, one rent controlled
unit, and one market rate unit. The properties were 93% leased as
of February 2023, compared to 100% at securitization. Portfolio
performance has slightly declined since securitization due to
higher operating expenses. The loan is interest only for its entire
term and Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 128% and 0.70X,
respectively, essentially the same as at last review.

The third largest loan is the Hurstbourne Landings and Oak Run
Apartments Loan ($11.7 million -- 3.3% of the pool), which is
secured by two multifamily properties, located in Louisville, KY
with a total units of 244. The properties were 100% leased as of
September 2023, compared to 97.5% at securitization. Property
performance has been stable in recent years. The loan has amortized
approximately 7.4% since securitization and Moody's LTV and
stressed DSCR are 71% and 1.41X, respectively, compared to 72% and
1.39X at last review.


SCULPTOR CLO XXXII: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Sculptor CLO
XXXII Ltd./Sculptor CLO XXXII LLC's fixed- and floating-rate debt.

The debt issuance is a CLO securitization governed by investment
criteria and backed primarily by broadly syndicated
speculative-grade (rated 'BB+' or lower) senior secured term loans.
The transaction is managed by Sculptor Loan Advisors LLC.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of April 10,
2024. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect S&P's view of:

-- The collateral pool's diversification;

-- The credit enhancement provided through subordination, excess
spread, and overcollateralization;

-- The experience of the collateral manager's team, which can
affect the performance of the rated notes through portfolio
identification and ongoing management; and

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

  Preliminary Ratings Assigned

  Sculptor CLO XXXII Ltd./Sculptor CLO XXXII LLC

  Class A-1, $252.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2, $4.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B-1, $28.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class B-2, $20.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C (deferrable), $22.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D-1 (deferrable), $20.00 million: BBB+ (sf)
  Class D-2 (deferrable), $4.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $14.00 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $42.39 million: Not rated



SDAL 2024-DAL: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on Cl. HRR Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to SDAL
2024-DAL's commercial mortgage pass-through certificates.

The certificate issuance is a U.S. CMBS transaction backed by the
borrower's fee simple and leasehold interest in the 1,841-guestroom
Sheraton Dallas, a full-service convention hotel in Dallas.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of April 8,
2024. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

S&P said, "The preliminary ratings reflect our view of the
collateral's historical and projected performance, the sponsors'
and manager's experience, the trustee-provided liquidity, the
loan's terms, and the transaction's structure. We determined that
the loan has a beginning and ending loan-to-value ratio of 74.6%,
based on our value of the property backing the transaction."

  Preliminary Ratings Assigned

  SDAL 2024-DAL(i)

  Class A, $112,200,000(ii): AAA (sf)
  Class B, $40,900,000(ii): AA- (sf)
  Class C, $30,400,000(ii): A- (sf)
  Class D, $40,200,000(ii): BBB- (sf)
  Class E, $11,300,000(ii): BB+ (sf)
  Class F, $21,400,000(ii)(iii): BB (sf)
  Class HRR, $13,600,000(ii)(iii): BB- (sf)

(i)The issuer will issue the certificates to qualified
institutional buyers in line with Rule 144A of the Securities Act
of 1933, to institutional accredited investors under Rule
501(a)(1)(2)(3) or Regulation D, and to non-U.S. persons under
Securities Act, Regulation S.

(ii)Approximate; subject to a variance of plus or minus 5.0%.

(iii)The initial certificate balance of each of the class F and HRR
certificates is subject to change, based on final pricing of all
regular certificates and the final determination of the class HRR
certificates that will be retained by the retaining third-party
purchaser for the retaining sponsor to satisfy its U.S. risk
retention requirements.

HRR--Horizontal risk retention.





SILGAN HOLDINGS: Fitch Affirms 'BB+' LongTerm IDR, Outlook Stable
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed Silgan Holdings Inc.'s Long-Term Issuer
Default Rating (IDR) at 'BB+'. In addition, Fitch has affirmed
Silgan's senior unsecured notes at 'BB+'/'RR4' and senior secured
notes at 'BBB-'/'RR1'. The Rating Outlook is Stable.

The 'BB+' rating reflects the company's leading positions within
the North American metal food and rigid plastic container markets.
The ratings also reflect Silgan's growing closures segment, serving
stable end markets, history of positive FCF and adherence to a
2.5x-3.5x net debt leverage policy following acquisitions.

Fitch expects Silgan to generate annual FCF after dividends of
around $300 million over the next several years. This will allow
maintenance of EBITDA leverage below 4.0x through the forecast
period. Credit issues include management's strategy to fund
acquisitions with cash and debt and the potential for shareholder
pressure to increase returns. However, the credit is supported by
management's longstanding conservative financial policies, which
Fitch expects will continue to accommodate modestly sized M&A and
shareholder return activity.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Resilient Operating Performance: While Silgan's performance ebbed
slightly in 2023 versus the prior year, Fitch expect volumes to
normalize during 2024 as the effects of inventory destocking and
inflation wane. Silgan's metal containers segment saw volumes fall
5% yoy in 2023 as high inventories, related to post-pandemic supply
chain disruptions, declined and inflation pressures weakened
consumer demand during the year.

Similarly, Dispensing and Specialty Closures segment volumes were
down 4% yoy as destocking and weakness in higher priced, and more
discretionary food and beverage items impacted sales. The impact on
EBITDA was modest. Fitch calculated fiscal 2023 EBITDA of $887
million fell approximately 3% from 2022, with resulting EBITDA
leverage of 3.8x up fractionally from YE 2022's level of 3.7x.

Fitch expects organic volume growth to normalize in the low
single-digits across most segments through the forecast period, as
inventory destocking and inflation issues fade. Additionally,
increased at home consumption, new business wins, and a growing
canned pet food category should also support results.

Acquisitions Add Diversification and Margin: Acquisitions remain a
strategic priority for Silgan. The company has completed five
acquisitions since 2020, mostly cash- and debt-funded, of up to
$900 million in purchase price. The added businesses are focused in
the specialty closures and dispensing segments, and generally
provide Silgan with higher margins than existing businesses. They
also provide strong niche positions in stable and growing end
markets such as healthcare, pharmaceuticals and consumer products.

Fitch believes future closures and dispensing acquisitions will
likely be modest given Silgan's increasing scale, as the size of
companies in the universe of targets are comparatively smaller.
Fitch expects Silgan will be able to execute on its M&A strategy
while operating within its targeted leverage range.

Leadership in Core Markets: Silgan's ratings are supported by its
large scale and dominant positions in stable end markets. The
company has the No. 1 share of the North American metal food
container segment at more than half of the market, and leading
positions in the rigid plastic container and closures markets.
Annual revenue is above $6 billion, placing Silgan among the
largest global packaging companies. Silgan's core customers include
leaders in the food and consumer industries, including Campbell
Soup Company, Del Monte Foods Inc., Kraft Heinz Foods Company,
Nestle S.A. and Procter & Gamble Co.

Silgan has co-located facilities with most major customers,
creating barriers to prospective new entrants. Long-term
arrangements covering approximately 90% of metal containers and
most of closures and plastic containers sales provide a measure of
visibility to Silgan's businesses. However, the company is exposed
to low underlying growth trends across much of the cans and plastic
containers segments. Silgan has historically experienced minimal
customer turnover.

Consistent FCF: Silgan generates consistently positive FCF,
averaging 5% of revenue, supported by stable EBITDA margins of
14%-15% and by the non-discretionary and predictable nature of
end-market demand in food, beverage and home and personal care.
Margin risk stemming from raw materials costs, predominately steel
and resins, are mitigated by pass-through agreements with long-term
customers.

Capex requirements are modest at 4%-5% of sales, supporting FCF.
Due to seasonality in the metal can business, FCF is concentrated
in the fourth quarter, although Fitch expects Silgan to maintain
sufficient liquidity through availability under a committed $1.5
billion revolving credit facility.

Commitment to Conservative Credit Metrics: Silgan management
maintains a clear and longstanding net debt leverage target of
2.5x-3.5x, which Fitch believes is credible and accommodated by
stable cash flows and modest cash payouts to equity investors.
Silgan has operated within this range for almost 20 years, through
multiple acquisitions and economic cycles. Fitch expects Silgan
will maintain a modest dividend payout throughout the forecast
period, representing less than 10% of EBITDA, and will continue to
use share buybacks in a disciplined manner.

Additional borrowing stemming from acquisitions may occasionally
breach the upper limit of the leverage target, although Fitch
expects the company will return to the stated range within 18-24
months. Fitch estimates that Silgan's total debt to EBITDA at YE
2024 will be around 3.6x. Fitch believes capital allocation will
remain skewed toward M&A over cash shareholder returns through the
forecast period.

DERIVATION SUMMARY

'BBB' Peers: AptarGroup Inc. (BBB/Stable) is a leading manufacturer
of pharmaceutical and specialty consumer closures, sealing and
dispensing mechanisms. Silgan is larger than AptarGroup, with
nearly twice the revenue. However, AptarGroup has higher margins,
in the low 20% vicinity, reflecting the weight of its business in
the highly specialized and regulated pharmaceutical industry. It
also maintains total leverage below 2.0x, significantly lower than
Silgan's. AptarGroup also has a largely unencumbered balance sheet,
as compared with Silgan's significant usage of secured debt.

'BB+' Peers: Berry Global, Inc. (BB+/Stable) is leading global
provider of consumer packaging and materials for consumer and
healthcare markets. Berry is larger, more diversified by end market
and geography, and has higher margins than Silgan. Silgan's
leverage is equivalent to that of Berry, but Silgan is more active
in meaningful M&A. Fitch expects both companies to operate within
their Fitch sensitivities over the forecast period.

Non-Rated Peers: Ball Corporation, Crown Holdings, and Sealed Air
Corp. all have leading positions within their packaging markets,
similar to Silgan. Each operates in stable and low-cyclicality end
markets, and has a high ability to pass through variable input
costs to customers. Like these peers, Silgan has modest capex and
M&A needs, which can be contained within the leverage bands. For
this group, it is tightly grouped in the 3.0x-4.0x range.

Pactiv Evergreen Inc. is slightly smaller than Silgan, with lower
margins in the low teens and meaningfully higher leverage of 6.0x
trending toward 5.0x due to recent leveraging transactions. Pactiv
also has higher customer concentration than higher-rated peers,
including Silgan, and has more exposure to economic cyclicality
stemming from exposure to the away from home food segment. Pactiv
also has a less clearly defined capital allocation strategy and
leverage policy than peers.

KEY ASSUMPTIONS

- Normalization in volumes in 2024 and beyond as pandemic-related
market distortions and inflationary impacts abate;

- Broadly stable margins in existing businesses, reflecting high
ability to pass through elevated raw materials costs;

- Dividend payout ratio maintained at current levels;

- Excess cash flow applied to modest share repurchases in outer
years of the forecast.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

- Demonstrated commitment to maintaining EBITDA leverage below 3.5x
on a sustained basis, supported by a clear and credible financial
policy;

- Credit-conscious implementation of the company's M&A strategy
while maintaining or enhancing cash flow consistency;

- Transition to a less encumbered balance sheet;

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

- EBITDA leverage above 4.0x on a sustained basis, or a weakening
of existing leverage targeting;

- A debt-funded acquisition that is not accommodated within
existing financial policies, does not have a clear deleveraging
path within 24 months, or which materially changes the
predictability of cash flows;

- A change in capital allocation policies that prioritizes
shareholder returns over deleveraging.

LIQUIDITY AND DEBT STRUCTURE

Adequate Liquidity: Fitch expects Silgan to have adequate liquidity
to meet its financial commitments over the forecast period. Fitch
expects Silgan to generate over $600 million in FFO annually, which
comfortably covers annual capex of around $250 million, annual
common dividends of around $80 million and debt amortization
obligations of around $100 million.

The revolving credit facility, which was increased to $1.5 billion
from $1.2 billion on Nov. 9 2021, was fully available as of YE
2023, in addition to cash of $643 million. The revolving credit
facility typically provides sufficient liquidity to cover seasonal
working capital requirements.

Silgan's seasonal usage of the facility can be significant during
the third quarter, driven by the fruit and vegetable canning
business. Typically, Silgan averages $550 million drawn on its
facility during this time, which is usually paid down by the end of
year. Liquidity during peak borrowing season is usually over $500
million, with approximately $1 billion of capacity within the
revolver and an additional $100 million or more in cash.

Manageable Debt Maturities: The amended credit extends the
company's revolving credit facility to November 2026, and the
senior secured credit facility until November 2027. Fitch expects
mandatory amortization payments for credit facilities will be
manageable, given expected positive FCF generation. There is a Euro
650 million bond maturity in March 2025, for which Fitch expects
either new Dollar or Euro issuance to be used to refinance this
obligation. Fitch does not view refinancing risk as a material risk
to the credit, given demonstrated lender support for the company
and strong FCF generation.

ISSUER PROFILE

Silgan Holdings Inc. is a leading supplier of rigid packaging for a
range of food, beverage and consumer products companies with EBITDA
of approximately $900 million on revenue of over $6 billion. Silgan
operates 107 manufacturing facilities in North and South America,
Europe and Asia.

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          Recovery   Prior
   -----------               ------          --------   -----
Silgan Holdings Inc.   LT IDR BB+  Affirmed             BB+

   senior unsecured    LT     BB+  Affirmed    RR4      BB+

   senior secured      LT     BBB- Affirmed    RR1      BBB-


SIXTH STREET XXIV: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Sixth Street CLO XXIV
Ltd./Sixth Street CLO XXIV LLC's floating-rate debt.

The debt issuance is a CLO securitization governed by investment
criteria and backed primarily by broadly syndicated
speculative-grade (rated 'BB+' or lower) senior secured term loans.
The transaction is managed by Sixth Street CLO XXIV Management
LLC.

The ratings reflect S&P's view of:

-- The diversification of the collateral pool;

-- The credit enhancement provided through subordination, excess
spread, and overcollateralization;

-- The experience of the collateral manager's team, which can
affect the performance of the rated debt through portfolio
identification and ongoing management; and

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

  Ratings Assigned

  Sixth Street CLO XXIV Ltd./Sixth Street CLO XXIV LLC

  Class A, $310.00 million: Not rated
  Class B, $70.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C (deferrable), $30.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D (deferrable), $30.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $18.75 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $50.00 million: Not rated



TICP CLO XI: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on $14MM Class E-R Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A-R, B-R, C-R,
D-R, and E-R replacement debt and new class X debt from TICP CLO XI
Ltd./TICP CLO XI LLC, a CLO originally issued in 2018 that is
managed by TICP CLO XI Management LLC. The previous transaction was
not rated by S&P Global Ratings.

The ratings reflect S&P's assessment of:

-- The diversification of the collateral pool;

-- The credit enhancement provided through subordination, excess
spread, and overcollateralization;

-- The experience of the collateral manager's team, which can
affect the performance of the rated debt through portfolio
identification and ongoing management; and

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

  Ratings Assigned

  TICP CLO XI Ltd./TICP CLO XI LLC

  Class X, $4.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-R, $248.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B-R, $52.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C-R (deferrable), $28.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D-R (deferrable), $24.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E-R (deferrable), $14.00 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $47.35 million: Not rated



TOWD POINT 2024-1: Moody's Assigns (P)B3 Rating to Cl. B2 Certs
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned provisional ratings to 7 classes of
residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) to be issued by Towd
Point Mortgage Trust 2024-1, and sponsored by FirstKey Mortgage,
LLC.

The securities are backed by a pool of first-lien, fixed-rate
mortgages (14.9% by balance) and hybrid ARM (85.1% by balance)
residential mortgages originated by MUFG Union Bank, N.A. and
serviced by Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc.

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Towd Point Mortgage Trust 2024-1

Cl. A1, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A2, Assigned (P)Aa3 (sf)

Cl. M1, Assigned (P)A3 (sf)

Cl. M2, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. B1, Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

Cl. B2, Assigned (P)B3 (sf)

Cl. A1 Loans, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings are based on the credit quality of the mortgage loans,
the structural features of the transaction, the origination quality
and the servicing arrangement, the third-party review, and the
representations and warranties framework.

Moody's expected loss for this pool in a baseline scenario-mean is
0.53%, in a baseline scenario-median is 0.28% and reaches 7.81% at
a stress level consistent with Moody's Aaa ratings.

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating US RMBS Using the MILAN Framework" published in
August 2023.

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

Up

Levels of credit protection that are higher than necessary to
protect investors against current expectations of loss could drive
the ratings up. Losses could decline from Moody's original
expectations as a result of a lower number of obligor defaults or
appreciation in the value of the mortgaged property securing an
obligor's promise of payment. Transaction performance also depends
greatly on the US macro economy and housing market.

Down

Levels of credit protection that are insufficient to protect
investors against current expectations of loss could drive the
ratings down. Losses could rise above Moody's original expectations
as a result of a higher number of obligor defaults or deterioration
in the value of the mortgaged property securing an obligor's
promise of payment. Transaction performance also depends greatly on
the US macro economy and housing market. Other reasons for
worse-than-expected performance include poor servicing, error on
the part of transaction parties, inadequate transaction governance
and fraud.

Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent
on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing
transfers or other policy or regulatory change can impact the
performance of these transactions. In addition, improvements in
reporting formats and data availability across deals and trustees
may provide better insight into certain performance metrics such as
the level of collateral modifications.


TRICOLOR AUTO 2023-1: Moody's Ups Rating on Class E Notes from Ba2
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings upgrades three classes of notes issued from two
auto loan securitizations. The bonds are backed by pools of retail
automobile loan contracts originated and serviced by multiple
parties.

A comprehensive review of all credit ratings for the respective
transactions has been conducted during a rating committee.

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Lendbuzz Securitization Trust 2023-1

Class B Notes, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Feb 23, 2023
Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Issuer: Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2023-1

Class D Asset Backed Notes, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Feb
15, 2023 Definitive Rating Assigned Baa1 (sf)

Class E Asset Backed Notes, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on
Feb 15, 2023 Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The upgrade actions are primarily driven by the buildup of credit
enhancement due to structural features including a sequential pay
structure, non-declining reserve account and
overcollateralization.

Moody's lifetime cumulative net loss expectations are noted below
for the transaction pools. The loss expectations reflect updated
performance trends on the underlying pools.

Lendbuzz Securitization Trust 2023-1: 6.00%

Tricolor Auto Securitization Trust 2023-1: 23.00%

No actions were taken on the other rated classes in these deals
because their expected losses remain commensurate with their
current ratings, after taking into account the updated performance
information, structural features, credit enhancement and other
qualitative considerations.

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Auto Loan- and Lease-Backed ABS" published in
November 2023.

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

Up

Levels of credit protection that are greater than necessary to
protect investors against current expectations of loss could lead
to an upgrade of the ratings. Losses could decline from Moody's
Ratings original expectations as a result of a lower number of
obligor defaults or greater recoveries from the value of the
vehicles securing the obligors promise of payment. The US job
market and the market for used vehicles are also primary drivers of
the transaction's performance. Other reasons for
better-than-expected performance include changes in servicing
practices to maximize collections on the loans or refinancing
opportunities that result in a prepayment of the loan.

Down

Levels of credit protection that are insufficient to protect
investors against current expectations of loss could lead to a
downgrade of the ratings. Losses could increase from Moody's
Ratings original expectations as a result of a higher number of
obligor defaults or a deterioration in the value of the vehicles
securing the obligors promise of payment. The US job market and the
market for used vehicles are also primary drivers of the
transaction's performance. Other reasons for worse-than-expected
performance include poor servicing, error on the part of
transaction parties including further restatement of performance
data, lack of transactional governance and fraud.


VENTURE CLO XIII: Moody's Cuts Rating on $39.5MM E-R Notes to B1
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has upgraded the ratings on the following notes
issued by Venture XIII CLO, Limited:

US$34,000,000 Class C-R Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2029 (the "Class C-R Notes"), Upgraded to Aaa (sf);
previously on August 13, 2021 Upgraded to Aa2 (sf)

US$34,000,000 Class D-R Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2029 (the "Class D-R Notes"), Upgraded to A1 (sf);
previously on August 13, 2021 Upgraded to A3 (sf)

Moody's has also downgraded the rating on the following notes:

US$39,500,000 Class E-R Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2029 (the "Class E-R Notes"), Downgraded to B1 (sf);
previously on August 13, 2021 Upgraded to Ba3 (sf)

Venture XIII CLO, Limited, originally issued in March 2013,
refinanced in September 2017 and partially refinanced in March 2020
is a managed cashflow CLO. The notes are collateralized primarily
by a portfolio of broadly syndicated senior secured corporate
loans. The transaction's reinvestment period ended in September
2021.

A comprehensive review of all credit ratings for the respective
transaction has been conducted during a rating committee.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The upgrade rating action is primarily a result of deleveraging of
the senior notes and an increase in the transaction's
over-collateralization (OC) ratios since March 2023. The Class A-R2
notes have been paid down by approximately 64.7% or $196.5 million
since that time. Based on Moody's calculation, the OC ratio for the
Class D-R notes is reported at 117.33% versus March 2023 level[1]
of 113.23%.

The downgrade rating action on the Class E-R notes reflects the
specific risks to the junior notes posed by par loss observed in
the underlying CLO portfolio. Based on Moody's calculation, the OC
ratio for the Class E-R notes is reported at 100.51% compared to
the March 2023 level[2] of 104.31%. Moody's also notes that the
Class E-R OC test is currently failing.

No actions were taken on the Class A-R2 and Class B-R notes
because their expected losses remain commensurate with their
current ratings, after taking into account the CLO's latest
portfolio information, its relevant structural features and its
actual over-collateralization and interest coverage levels

Moody's modeled the transaction using a cash flow model based on
the Binomial Expansion Technique, as described in "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations."

The key model inputs Moody's used in its analysis, such as par,
weighted average rating factor, diversity score, weighted average
spread, and weighted average recovery rate, are based on its
published methodology and could differ from the trustee's reported
numbers. For modeling purposes, Moody's used the following
base-case assumptions:

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: $276,666,304

Defaulted par: $12,598,323

Diversity Score: 63

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2521

Weighted Average Spread (WAS) (before accounting for reference rate
floors): 3.56%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 12.30%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 46.45%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 2.8 years

Par haircut in OC tests and interest diversion test: 1.7%

In addition to base case analysis, Moody's ran additional scenarios
where outcomes could diverge from the base case. The additional
scenarios consider one or more factors individually or in
combination, and include: defaults by obligors whose low ratings or
debt prices suggest distress, defaults by obligors with potential
refinancing risk, deterioration in the credit quality of the
underlying portfolio, decrease in overall WAS or net interest
income, lower recoveries on defaulted assets.

Methodology Used for the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
December 2021.

Factors that Would Lead to an Upgrade or Downgrade of the Ratings:

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


VERUS  SECURITIZATION 2024-3: S&P Assigns Prelim 'B-' on B-2 Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Verus
Securitization Trust 2024-3's mortgage-backed notes.

The note issuance is an RMBS transaction backed by primarily newly
originated first- and second-lien, fixed- and adjustable-rate
residential mortgage loans, including mortgage loans with initial
interest-only periods, to both prime and non-prime borrowers. The
loans are secured by single-family residences, planned-unit
developments, two- to four-family residential properties,
condominiums, condotels, townhouses, mixed-use properties, and
five- to 10-unit multifamily residences. The pool has 1,346 loans
backed by 1,374 properties, which are qualified mortgage
(QM)/non-higher-priced mortgage loans (safe harbor), QM rebuttable
presumption, non-QM/ability-to-repay (ATR)-compliant, and
ATR-exempt loans. Of the 1,346 loans, seven are
cross-collateralized loan backed by 35 properties.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of April 10,
2024. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final
ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings.

The preliminary ratings reflect S&P's view of:

-- The pool's collateral composition;

-- The transaction's credit enhancement, associated structural
mechanics, representations and warranties framework, prior credit
events, and geographic concentration;

-- The mortgage aggregator, Invictus Capital Partners; and

-- The potential impact current and near-term macroeconomic
conditions may have on the performance of the mortgage borrowers in
the pool. S&P said, "On Oct. 13, 2023, we updated our market
outlook as it relates to the 'B' projected archetypal loss level,
and therefore revised and lowered our 'B' foreclosure frequency to
2.50% from 3.25%, which reflects the level prior to April 2020,
preceding the COVID-19 pandemic. The update reflects our benign
view of the mortgage and housing markets as demonstrated through
general national-level home price behavior, unemployment rates,
mortgage performance, and underwriting. Per our latest
macroeconomic update, the U.S. economy continues to outperform
expectations following consecutive quarters of contraction in the
first half of 2022."

  Preliminary Ratings Assigned

  Verus Securitization Trust 2024-3(i)

  Class A-1, $425,367,000: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2, $51,664,000: AA (sf)
  Class A-3, $91,273,000: A (sf)
  Class M-1, $51,664,000: BBB- (sf)
  Class B-1, $27,898,000: BB- (sf)
  Class B-2, $25,143,000: B- (sf)
  Class B-3, $15,844,550: Not rated
  Class A-IO-S, notional(ii): Not rated
  Class XS, notional(ii): Not rated
  Class R, not applicable: Not rated

(i)The collateral and structural information reflect the term sheet
dated April 5, 2024; the preliminary ratings address the ultimate
payment of interest and principal. They do not address the payment
of the cap carryover amounts.
(ii)The notional amount will equal the aggregate stated principal
balance of the mortgage loans as of the first day of the related
due period.



[*] Moody's Upgrades Rating on $129MM of US RMBS Issued 2021-2022
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has upgraded the ratings of 26 bonds from four US
residential mortgage-backed transactions (RMBS), backed by almost
entirely agency eligible investor (INV) mortgage loans.

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Bayview MSR Opportunity Master Fund Trust 2022-INV2

Cl. A-19, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 28, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-20, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 28, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-21, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 28, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-IO20*, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 28, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-IO21*, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 28, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-IO22*, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 28, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-IO23*, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 28, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-IO24*, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jan 28, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Jan 28, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-2, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jan 28, 2022 Definitive
Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

Cl. B-3A, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jan 28, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Issuer: Bayview Opportunity Master Fund VI Trust 2021-INV6

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Nov 29, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-2, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Nov 29, 2021 Definitive
Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

Cl. B-3A, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Nov 29, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Issuer: Bayview Opportunity Master Fund VIa Trust 2022-INV3

Cl. B-2, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Feb 25, 2022 Definitive
Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

Issuer: OBX 2021-INV3 Trust

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Nov 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-1A, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Nov 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-2, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Nov 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

Cl. B-2A, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Nov 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

Cl. B-3, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Nov 22, 2021 Definitive
Rating Assigned Baa2 (sf)

Cl. B-3A, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Nov 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Baa2 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Nov 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. B-5, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Nov 22, 2021 Definitive
Rating Assigned B3 (sf)

Cl. B-IO1*, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Nov 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-IO2*, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Nov 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

Cl. B-IO3*, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Nov 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Baa2 (sf)

* Reflects Interest-Only Classes

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating upgrades reflect the increased levels of credit
enhancement available to the bonds, the recent performance, and
Moody's Ratings' updated loss expectations on the underlying
pools.

In Moody's analysis Moody's considered the additional risk of
default on modified loans. Generally, Moody's apply a 7x multiple
to the Probability of Default (PD) for private label modified
mortgage loans and an 8x multiple to the PD for agency-eligible
modified mortgage loans. However, Moody's may apply a lower
multiple to the PD for loans that were granted short-term payment
relief as long as there were no other changes to the loan terms,
such as a reduced interest rate or an extended loan term, which can
be used to lower the monthly payment on the loan. For loans granted
short-term payment relief, servicers will generally defer the
missed payments, which could be added as a non-interest-bearing
balloon payment due at the end of the loan term. Alternatively,
servicers could extend the maturity on the loan to match the number
of missed payments.

OBX 2021-INV3 Trust features a structural deal mechanism that the
servicer and the securities administrator will not advance
principal and interest to loans that are 120 days or more
delinquent. The interest distribution amount will be reduced by the
interest accrued on the stop advance mortgage loans (SAML) and this
interest reduction will be allocated reverse sequentially first to
the subordinate bonds, then to the senior support bond, and then
pro-rata among senior bonds. Once a SAML is liquidated, the net
recovery from that loan's liquidation is included in available
funds and thus follows the transaction's priority of payment. The
recovered accrued interest on the loan is used to repay the
interest reduction incurred by the bonds that resulted from that
SAML. Elevated delinquency levels in this transaction will increase
the risk of interest shortfalls due to stop advancing.

Moody's updated loss expectations on the pools incorporate, amongst
other factors, Moody's assessment of the representations and
warranties frameworks of the transactions, the due diligence
findings of the third-party reviews received at the time of
issuance, and the strength of the transaction's originators and
servicer.

No actions were taken on the other rated classes in these deals
because their expected losses remain commensurate with their
current ratings, after taking into account the updated performance
information, structural features, and credit enhancement.

Principal Methodologies

The principal methodology used in rating all classes except
interest-only classes was "Moody's Approach to Rating US RMBS Using
the MILAN Framework" published in August 2023.

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

Up

Levels of credit protection that are higher than necessary to
protect investors against current expectations of loss could drive
the ratings of the subordinate bonds up. Losses could decline from
Moody's Ratings' original expectations as a result of a lower
number of obligor defaults or appreciation in the value of the
mortgaged property securing an obligor's promise of payment.
Transaction performance also depends greatly on the US macro
economy and housing market.

Down

Levels of credit protection that are insufficient to protect
investors against current expectations of loss could drive the
ratings down. Losses could rise above Moody's Ratings' expectations
as a result of a higher number of obligor defaults or deterioration
in the value of the mortgaged property securing an obligor's
promise of payment. Transaction performance also depends greatly on
the US macro economy and housing market. Other reasons for
worse-than-expected performance include poor servicing, error on
the part of transaction parties, inadequate transaction governance
and fraud.

An IO bond may be upgraded or downgraded, within the constraints
and provisions of the IO methodology, based on lower or higher
realized and expected loss due to an overall improvement or decline
in the credit quality of the reference bonds and/or pools.

Finally, performance of RMBS continues to remain highly dependent
on servicer procedures. Any change resulting from servicing
transfers or other policy or regulatory change can impact the
performance of these transactions. In addition, improvements in
reporting formats and data availability across deals and trustees
may provide better insight into certain performance metrics such as
the level of collateral modifications.


                            *********

Monday's edition of the TCR delivers a list of indicative prices
for bond issues that reportedly trade well below par.  Prices are
obtained by TCR editors from a variety of outside sources during
the prior week we think are reliable.  Those sources may not,
however, be complete or accurate.  The Monday Bond Pricing table
is compiled on the Friday prior to publication.  Prices reported
are not intended to reflect actual trades.  Prices for actual
trades are probably different.  Our objective is to share
information, not make markets in publicly traded securities.
Nothing in the TCR constitutes an offer or solicitation to buy or
sell any security of any kind.  It is likely that some entity
affiliated with a TCR editor holds some position in the issuers
public debt and equity securities about which we report.

Each Tuesday edition of the TCR contains a list of companies with
insolvent balance sheets whose shares trade higher than $3 per
share in public markets.  At first glance, this list may look like
the definitive compilation of stocks that are ideal to sell short.
Don't be fooled.  Assets, for example, reported at historical cost
net of depreciation may understate the true value of a firm's
assets.  A company may establish reserves on its balance sheet for
liabilities that may never materialize.  The prices at which
equity securities trade in public market are determined by more
than a balance sheet solvency test.

On Thursdays, the TCR delivers a list of recently filed
Chapter 11 cases involving less than $1,000,000 in assets and
liabilities delivered to nation's bankruptcy courts.  The list
includes links to freely downloadable images of these small-dollar
petitions in Acrobat PDF format.

Each Friday's edition of the TCR includes a review about a book of
interest to troubled company professionals.  All titles are
available at your local bookstore or through Amazon.com.  Go to
http://www.bankrupt.com/books/to order any title today.

Monthly Operating Reports are summarized in every Saturday edition
of the TCR.

The Sunday TCR delivers securitization rating news from the week
then-ending.

TCR subscribers have free access to our on-line news archive.
Point your Web browser to http://TCRresources.bankrupt.com/and use
the e-mail address to which your TCR is delivered to login.

                            *********

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

Troubled Company Reporter is a daily newsletter co-published
by Bankruptcy Creditors Service, Inc., Fairless Hills,
Pennsylvania, USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Philadelphia, Pa., USA.
Randy Antoni, Jhonas Dampog, Marites Claro, Joy Agravante,
Rousel Elaine Tumanda, Joel Anthony G. Lopez, Psyche A. Castillon,
Ivy B. Magdadaro, Carlo Fernandez, Christopher G. Patalinghug, and
Peter A. Chapman, Editors.

Copyright 2024.  All rights reserved.  ISSN: 1520-9474.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior
written permission of the publishers.  Information contained
herein is obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but is
not guaranteed.

The TCR subscription rate is $975 for 6 months delivered via
e-mail.  Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same
firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof
are $25 each.  For subscription information, contact Peter A.
Chapman at 215-945-7000.

                   *** End of Transmission ***