---

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

              Sunday, June 9, 2024, Vol. 28, No. 160

                            Headlines

720 EAST V: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on Class E Notes
ABPCI DIRECT XVII: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E Notes
AIMCO CLO 10: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on Cl. E-RR Notes
ALM 2020: S&P Affirms BB- (sf) Rating on Class D Notes
ANCHORAGE CAPITAL 7: Fitch Assigns 'B-sf' Rating on Cl. F-R3 Notes

APEX CREDIT 2020: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class ERR Notes
BALBOA BAY 2024-1: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on E Notes
BALLYROCK CLO 26: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class D Notes
BANK 2024-BNK47: Fitch Gives 'B-(EXP)sf' Rating on Class J-RR Certs
BENCHMARK 2024-V7: Fitch Assigns 'B-sf' Rating on Class J-RR Certs

BENEFIT STREET V-B: Fitch Assigns 'BB+(EXP)sf' Rating on E-R Notes
BLACK DIAMOND 2019-2: S&P Affirms BB- (sf) Rating on Class D Notes
BMP COMMERCIAL 2023-MF23: Fitch Assigns 'B+sf' Rating on HRR Certs
BX COMMERCIAL 2024-KING: Fitch Assigns B+sf Rating on Cl. HRR Certs
BX TRUST 2024-LNK1: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba2 Rating to Cl. E Certs

CARLYLE US 2024-4: Fitch Assigns 'BB-(EXP)sf' Rating on Cl. E Notes
CARVANA AUTO 2024-P2: S&P Assigns Prelim 'BB+' Rating on N Notes
CBAM 2018-8: Fitch Assigns 'BB-sf' Rating on Two Tranches
CD 2017-CD3 MORTGAGE: Fitch Lowers Rating on Two Tranches to 'BBsf'
CHASE HOME 2024-RPL2: Fitch Assigns 'Bsf' Rating on Class B-2 Certs

CHASE MORTGAGE 2021-CL1: Moody's Hikes Cl. M-4 Certs Rating to Ba1
CIFC FUNDING 2013-IV: Moody's Lowers Rating on F-RR Notes to Caa1
CITIGROUP 2024-INV2: Moody's Assigns (P)B3 Rating to Cl. B-5 Certs
COLT 2024-3: Fitch Assigns 'Bsf' Rating on Class B2 Certificates
COMM 2015-CCRE27: Fitch Affirms 'CCC' Rating on Class F Debt

CSAIL 2019-C15: FItch Lowers Rating on Class F-RR Debt to CCC
DRYDEN 36: S&P Affirms 'B+ (sf) Rating on Class E-R2 Notes
DRYDEN 83 CLO: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E-R Notes
EATON VANCE 2019-1: Fitch Assigns 'B-sf' Rating on Class F-R2 Notes
ELLINGTON CLO IV: Moody's Lowers Rating on 2 Tranches to Caa1

ELMWOOD CLO 28: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E Notes
EMPOWER CLO 2024-2: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on E Notes
FANNIE MAE 2024-R04: S&P Assigns BB (sf) Rating on Cl. 1B-1X Notes
FLATIRON CLO 28: Fitch Assigns 'BB-sf' Rating on Class E Notes
FORTRESS CREDIT XXV: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on E Notes

FREDDIE MAC 2021-HQA2: Moody's Hikes Rating on 3 Tranches to Ba1
FRONTIER ISSUER 2024-1: Fitch Gives 'BB-(EXP)sf' Rating on C Notes
GCAT 2024-NQM2: Fitch Assigns 'B-sf' Final Rating on Cl. B-2 Certs
GCAT TRUST 2024-INV2: Moody's Assigns B2 Rating to Cl. B-5 Certs
GOLDENTREE LOAN 2: Moody's Ups Rating on $44.708MM E Notes to Ba2

GOLUB CAPITAL 60(B): Moody's Gives Ba3 Rating to $17.8MM E-R Notes
GOODLEAP SUSTAINABLE 2023-2: Fitch Affirms 'BBsf' Rating on C Notes
GS MORTGAGE 2018-GS10: Fitch Lowers Rating on G-RR Debt to CCC
HAYFIN KINGSLAND VIII: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on $30MM E Notes
HAYFIN US XV: Fitch Assigns 'BB-sf' Rating on Class E Notes

HILDENE TRUPS A10BC: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating to $15.65MM B Notes
HILDENE TRUPS A11BC: Moody's Gives (P)B3 Rating to $6.25MM B Notes
HORIZON AIRCRAFT I: Fitch Affirms CCC Rating on Class C Debt
HOTWIRE FUNDING 2024-1: Fitch Assigns BBsf Final Rating on C Notes
INVESCO U.S. 2024-3: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on E Notes

JP MORGAN 2018-MINN: Moody's Lowers Rating on Cl. D Certs to B2
JP MORGAN 2020-INV1: Moody's Hikes Rating on 2 Tranches from Ba2
JP MORGAN 2020-LTV1: Moody's Raises Rating on 2 Tranches From Ba1
JP MORGAN 2024-HE2: Fitch Assigns Bsf Final Rating on Cl. B-2 Certs
LBA TRUST 2024-BOLT: Fitch Assigns 'Bsf' Rating on Class HRR Certs

MADISON PARK LIX: Fitch Assigns 'BB+sf' Rating on Class E-R Notes
MADISON PARK LXIX: Fitch Assigns BB+sf Final Rating on Cl. E Notes
MADISON PARK LXIX: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating to $250,000 F Notes
MCR 2024-TWA: Moody's Assigns (P)B3 Rating to Cl. F Certs
OAKTREE CLO 2024-26: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E Notes

OHA LOAN 2016-1: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E-R2 Notes
ORION CLO 2024-3: S&P Assigns Prelim BB-(sf) Rating on Cl. E Notes
PMT LOAN 2021-INV2: Moody's Hikes Rating on Cl. B-5 Certs to Ba3
RIN LLC VIII: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba3 Rating to $7.5MM Cl. E Notes
SANDSTONE PEAK III: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E Notes

SLM STUDENT 2014-1: Fitch Affirms 'Bsf' Rating on Two Tranches
STRATS TRUST 2004-6: Moody's Puts 'Ba2' on Review for Downgrade
VENTURE 49 CLO: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba3 Rating to $16MM Cl. E Notes
VENTURE 49 CLO: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to $16MM Class E Notes
VERUS SECURITIZATION 2024-5: S&P Assigns Prelim B-(sf) on B-2 Notes

VIBRANT CLO XII: Fitch Assigns 'BB-sf' Rating on Class D-R Notes
VIBRANT CLO XII: S&P Withdraws 'BB- (sf)' Rating on Class D Notes
WELLFLEET CLO 2024-1: S&P Assigns Prelim BB-(sf) Rating on E Notes
WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2014-C24: Moody's Cuts Cl. C Certs Rating to B1
[*] S&P Places 31 Ratings from 26 US CLO Deals on Watch Negative

[*] S&P Takes Various Actions on 249 Classes From Nine US RMBS Deal

                            *********

720 EAST V: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to 720 East CLO
V Ltd./720 East CLO V 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 Northwestern Mutual Investment
Management Co. LLC.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of June 3,
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

  720 East CLO V Ltd./720 East CLO V LLC

  Class A-1, $138.50 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-1L loans, $145.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-1N, $0.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2, $31.50 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B, $27.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C (deferrable), $27.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D (deferrable), $27.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $18.00 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $39.70 million: Not rated



ABPCI DIRECT XVII: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E Notes
---------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to ABPCI Direct Lending
Fund CLO XVII 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 AB Private Credit Investors 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

  ABPCI Direct Lending Fund CLO XVII LLC

  Class A-1(i), $222.800 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-1L-A(i), $120.000 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-1L-B(i), $40.000 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2, $19.800 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B, $46.200 million: AA (sf)
  Class C (deferrable), $52.800 million: A (sf)
  Class D (deferrable), $39.600 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $39.600 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $80.375 million: Not rated

(i)The class A-1 notes and class A-1L-A and A-1L-B loans will be
issued pari passu. The class A-1L-A loans are convertible into
class A-1 notes at any time, while the class A-1L-B loans and class
A-1 notes are not convertible into any other class.



AIMCO CLO 10: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on Cl. E-RR Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to the class
A-RR, B-RR, C-RR, D-1-RR, D-2-RR, and E-RR replacement debt from
AIMCO CLO 10 Ltd./AIMCO CLO 10 LLC, a CLO managed by Allstate
Investment Management Co., an indirect subsidiary of The Allstate
Corp., that was originally issued in June 2019 and underwent a
refinancing in August 2021.

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

On the June 12, 2024, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
replacement debt will be used to redeem the August 2021 debt. S&P
said, "At that time, we expect to withdraw our ratings on the
August 2021 debt and assign ratings to the replacement debt.
However, if the refinancing doesn't occur, we may affirm our
ratings on the August 2021 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-RR, B-RR, C-RR, D-1-RR, D-2-RR, and
E-RR debt is expected to be issued at a floating spread over the
three-month term SOFR.

-- Both the stated maturity and the reinvestment period will be
extended five years.

-- The non-call period will be extended to June 2026.

-- Of the identified underlying collateral obligations, 99.21%
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, 92.12%
have recovery ratings (which may include confidential and private
ratings) assigned by S&P Global Ratings.

Replacement And August 2021 Debt Issuances

Replacement debt

-- Class A-RR, $288.02 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.41%

-- Class B-RR, $54.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.75%

-- Class C-RR (deferrable), $27.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 2.05%

-- Class D-1-RR (deferrable), $27.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 3.00%

-- Class D-2-RR (deferrable), $4.50 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 4.25%

-- Class E-RR (deferrable), $13.50 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 5.65%

-- Subordinated notes, $61.45 million: Not applicable

August 2021 debt

-- Class A-R, $292.50 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.06% +
CSA(i)

-- Class B-R, $49.50 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.60% +
CSA(i)

-- Class C-R (deferrable), $28.10 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 1.90% + CSA(i)

-- Class D-R (deferrable), $24.20 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 2.90% + CSA(i)

-- Class E-R (deferrable), $19.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 5.95% + CSA(i)

-- Subordinated notes, $42.70 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

  AIMCO CLO 10 Ltd./AIMCO CLO 10 LLC

  Class A-RR, $288.02 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B-RR, $54.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C-RR (deferrable), $27.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D-1-RR (deferrable), $27.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class D-2-RR (deferrable), $4.50 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E-RR (deferrable), $13.50 million: BB- (sf)

  Other Debt

  AIMCO CLO 10 Ltd./AIMCO CLO 10 LLC

  Subordinated notes, $61.45 million: Not rated



ALM 2020: S&P Affirms BB- (sf) Rating on Class D Notes
------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its ratings on the class A-2 and B notes
from ALM 2020 Ltd. S&P also removed these ratings from CreditWatch,
where it placed them with positive implications in April 2024. At
the same time, S&P raised its rating on the class C notes and
affirmed its ratings on the class A-1a-1, A-1a-2, A-1a-3 and D
notes from the same transaction.

The rating actions follow its review of the transaction's
performance using data from the April 2024 trustee report.

The transaction has made $839.86 million in collective paydowns to
the class A-1a-1 notes since our August 2020 rating actions. These
paydowns resulted in improved reported overcollateralization (O/C)
ratios since the July 2020 trustee report, which S&P used for its
previous rating actions:

-- The class A-1 O/C ratio improved to 173.15% from 141.76%.
-- The class A-2 O/C ratio improved to 143.43% from 127.10%.
-- The class B O/C ratio improved to 127.90% from 118.43%.
-- The class C O/C ratio improved to 115.78% from 111.10%.
-- The class D O/C ratio improved to 108.24% from 106.27%.

All the O/C ratios experienced an increase due to the paydowns on
the senior note, which resulted in an increase in the credit
support available.

Collateral obligations with ratings in the 'CCC' category, as a
percentage of the total portfolio, have decreased to 6.4% ($91.00
million) from 14.7% ($315.12 million). Over the same period,
defaulted collateral has decreased to $7.34 million from $18.10
million. The transaction, especially with regard to the senior
tranches, has benefited from a drop in the weighted average life
due to underlying collateral's seasoning, with 3.47 years reported
as of the April 2024 trustee report, compared with 4.31 years
reported at the time of the July 2020 trustee report.

The upgraded ratings reflect 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 deterioration in the credit support
available to the notes could results in further ratings changes.

On a standalone basis, the results of the cash flow analysis
indicated a higher rating on the class B notes. However, because
the transaction currently has some exposure to 'CCC' rated
collateral obligations and defaulted assets, S&P limited the
upgrade on some classes to offset future potential credit migration
in the underlying collateral.

S&P said, "Our rating actions also reflect additional sensitivity
runs that considered the exposure to lower-quality assets and
distressed prices we noticed in the portfolio.

"Although the cash flow results indicated a lower rating for the
class D notes, we view the overall credit seasoning as an
improvement to the transaction, and we also considered the
relatively stable O/C ratios, which currently have a significant
cushion over their minimum requirements. However, any increase in
defaults or par losses could lead to negative rating actions on the
class D notes in the future.

"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.

"ALM 2020 Ltd. has transitioned its liabilities to three-month CME
term SOFR as its underlying index with the Alternative Reference
Rates Committee's recommended credit spread adjustment. Our cash
flow analysis reflects this change and assumes that the underlying
assets have also transitioned to a term SOFR as their respective
underlying index. If the trustee reports indicated a credit spread
adjustment in any asset, our cash flow analysis considered the
same."

  Ratings Raised And Removed From CreditWatch

  ALM 2020 Ltd.

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

  Rating Raised

  ALM 2020 Ltd.

  Class C to 'BBB+ (sf)' from 'BBB- (sf)'

  Ratings Affirmed

  ALM 2020 Ltd.

  Class A-1a-1: AAA (sf)
  Class A-1a-2: AAA (sf)
  Class A-1a-3: AAA (sf)
  Class D: BB- (sf)



ANCHORAGE CAPITAL 7: Fitch Assigns 'B-sf' Rating on Cl. F-R3 Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned ratings and Rating Outlooks to Anchorage
Capital CLO 7, Ltd. Reset Transaction.

   Entity/Debt              Rating           
   -----------              ------           
Anchorage Capital
CLO 7, Ltd.

   A-R3                 LT NRsf   New Rating
   B-R3                 LT AAsf   New Rating
   C-R3                 LT Asf    New Rating
   D-R3                 LT BBB-sf New Rating
   E-R3                 LT BB-sf  New Rating
   F-R3                 LT B-sf   New Rating
   Subordinated Notes   LT NRsf   New Rating
   X-R3                 LT NRsf   New Rating

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Anchorage Capital CLO 7, Ltd. (the issuer) is an arbitrage cash
flow collateralized loan obligation (CLO) that will be managed by
Anchorage Collateral Management, L.L.C. that originally closed in
September 2015 and refinanced in October 2017 and March 2020. The
CLO's secured notes will be refinanced on June 6, 2024 from
proceeds of the new secured notes. Net proceeds from the issuance
of the secured and subordinated notes will provide financing on a
portfolio of approximately $449 million (excluding defaults) 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 26.39, versus a maximum covenant, in
accordance with the initial expected matrix point of 26.75. 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
99.02% first-lien senior secured loans. The weighted average
recovery rate (WARR) of the indicative portfolio is 75.72% versus a
minimum covenant, in accordance with the initial expected matrix
point of 70.15%.

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 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 4.9-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 13 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 'AA-sf' for class B-R3, between
'B+sf' and 'A-sf' for class C-R3, between less than 'B-sf' and
'BBB-sf' for class D-R3 given the DIP sensitivity, between less
than 'B-sf' and 'BB-sf' for class E-R3 given the DIP sensitivity,
and between less than 'B-sf' and 'B+sf' for class F-R3.

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-R3, 'AAsf' for class C-R3, 'Asf'
for class D-R3, 'BBB+sf' for class E-R3, and between 'BBB-sf' and
'Bsf' for class F-R3.

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 Anchorage Capital
CLO 7, 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.


APEX CREDIT 2020: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class ERR Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class X-RR, A-1-RR,
A-2-RR, B-RR, C-RR, D-RR, and E-RR replacement debt from Apex
Credit CLO 2020 Ltd./Apex Credit CLO 2020 LLC, a CLO originally
issued in November 2020 that is managed by Apex Credit Holdings
LLC, a subsidiary of Jefferies Credit Partners LLC. At the same
time, S&P withdrew its ratings on the original class A-1-R, A-2-R,
B-R, C-R, D-R, E-1, and E-2 debt following payment in full on the
June 5, 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-1-RR, A-2-RR, B-RR, C-RR, D-RR, and
E-RR notes were issued at a lower spread over three-month CME term
SOFR than the original notes.

-- The replacement class E-RR notes replaced the original class
E-1 and E-2 notes.

-- The stated maturity and reinvestment period were extended by
3.5 years.

-- The non-call period was extended to April 2025.

-- The weighted average life test was extended to seven years from
the refinancing date.

-- The class X-RR notes were 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.

Replacement And Original Debt Issuances

Replacement debt

-- Class X-RR, $3.20 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.15%

-- Class A-1-RR, $198.39 million: Three-month CME term SOFR +
1.45%

-- Class A-2-RR, $6.40 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.75%

-- Class B-RR, $38.40 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 2.10%

-- Class C-RR (deferrable), $19.20 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 2.65%

-- Class D-RR (deferrable), $17.60 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 4.32%

-- Class E-RR (deferrable), $12.80 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 7.31%

Original debt

-- Class A-1-R, $198.25 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.23%
+ CSA(i)

-- Class A-2-R, $16.25 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.53%
+ CSA(i)

-- Class B-R, $32.50 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.90% +
CSA(i)

-- Class C-R (deferrable), $19.50 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 2.65% + CSA(i)

-- Class D-R (deferrable), $16.25 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 3.95% + CSA(i)

-- Class E-1 (deferrable), $9.75 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 7.56% + CSA(i)

-- Class E-2 (deferrable), $5.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 8.55% + CSA(i)

-- Subordinated notes, $28.63 million: Residual

(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
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."

  Ratings Assigned

  Apex Credit CLO 2020 Ltd./Apex Credit CLO 2020 LLC

  Class X-RR, $3.20 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-1-RR, $198.39 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2-RR, $6.40 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B-RR, $38.40 million: AA (sf)
  Class C-RR (deferrable), $19.20 million: A (sf)
  Class D-RR (deferrable), $17.60 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E-RR (deferrable), $12.80 million: BB- (sf)

  Ratings Withdrawn

  Apex Credit CLO 2020 Ltd./Apex Credit CLO 2020 LLC

  Class A-1-R, $198.25 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2-R, $16.25 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B-R, $32.50 million: AA (sf)
  Class C-R (deferrable), $19.50 million: A (sf)
  Class D-R (deferrable), $16.25 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E-1 (deferrable), $9.75 million: BB (sf)
  Class E-2 (deferrable), $5.00 million: BB- (sf)

  Other Debt

  Apex Credit CLO 2020 Ltd./Apex Credit CLO 2020 LLC

  Subordinated notes, $28.63 million: Not rated



BALBOA BAY 2024-1: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on E Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Balboa Bay
Loan Funding 2024-1 Ltd./Balboa Bay Loan Funding 2024-1 LLC's
floating- and fixed-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 Pacific Investment Management Co.
LLC.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of June 3,
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

  Balboa Bay Loan Funding 2024-1 Ltd./
  Balboa Bay Loan Funding 2024-1 LLC

  Class A-1, $244.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2, $16.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B-1, $34.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class B-2, $10.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C-1 (deferrable), $16.00 million: A+ (sf)
  Class C-2 (deferrable), $8.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D-1 (deferrable), $21.00 million: BBB (sf)
  Class D-2 (deferrable), $7.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $12.00 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $39.35 million: Not rated



BALLYROCK CLO 26: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class D Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Ballyrock CLO 26
Ltd./Ballyrock CLO 26 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 Ballyrock Investment Advisors LLC,
which will engage Fidelity Management & Research Co. LLC as a
subadvisor.

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 debt through portfolio
identification and ongoing management; and

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

  Ratings Assigned

  Ballyrock CLO 26 Ltd./Ballyrock CLO 26 LLC

  Class A-1a, $352.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-1b, $11.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2, $55.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class B (deferrable), $33.00 million: A (sf)
  Class C-1 (deferrable), $30.25 million: BBB (sf)
  Class C-2 (deferrable), $8.25 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class D (deferrable), $16.50 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $56.50 million: Not rated



BANK 2024-BNK47: Fitch Gives 'B-(EXP)sf' Rating on Class J-RR Certs
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has issued a presale report on BANK 2024-BNK47,
commercial mortgage pass-through certificates, series 2024-BNK47.
Fitch has assigned the following expected ratings:

- $6,684,000 class A-1 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $65,786,000 class A-2 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $7,500,000 class A-3 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $14,226,000 class A-SB 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $150,000,000a class A-4 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $513,203,000a class A-5 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $757,399,000b class X-A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $154,185,000 class A-S 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $48,690,000 class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $17,820,000 class C 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;

- $220,695,000b class X-B 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;

- $14,640,000c class D-RR 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $12,172,000c class E-RR 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $14,878,000c class F-RR 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $18,935,000c class G-RR 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $10,820,000c class J-RR 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable.

Fitch does not expect to rate the following class:

- $32,460,008c class K-RR;

a) The initial certificate balances of classes A-4 and A-5 are not
yet known but are expected to be $663,203,000 in aggregate, subject
to a 5% variance. The certificate balances will be determined based
on the final pricing of those classes of certificates. The expected
class A-4 balance range is $0-$300,000,000, and the expected class
A-5 balance range is $363,203,000-$663,203,000. The balances of
classes A-4 and A-5 above represent the hypothetical balance for
class A-4 if class A-5 were sized at the midpoint of its range. In
the event that the class A-5 certificate is issued with an initial
certificate balance of $663,203,000, the class A-4 certificate will
not be issued.

b) Notional amount and interest only.

c) Represents the "eligible horizontal interest" comprising 5.0% of
the pool.

The expected ratings are based on information provided by the
issuer as of June 4, 2024.

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership interest in the
trust, primary assets of which are 52 fixed-rate, commercial
mortgage loans with an aggregate principal balance of
$1,081,999,009 as of the cut-off date. The mortgage loans are
secured by the borrower's fee and leasehold interests in commercial
properties.

The loans were contributed to the trust by Wells Fargo Bank,
National Association, Bank of America, National Association,
Goldman Sachs Mortgage Company, Morgan Stanley Mortgage Capital
Holdings LLC, JPMorgan Chase Bank, National Association, Citi Real
Estate Funding Inc. and National Cooperative Bank, N.A.

The master servicer is expected to be Wells Fargo Bank, National
Association, and the special servicer is expected to be Rialto
Capital Advisors, LLC. The trustee and certificate administrator is
expected to be Computershare Trust Company, N.A. The certificates
are expected to follow a sequential paydown structure.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Fitch Net Cash Flow: Fitch performed cash flow analyses on 31 loans
totaling 93.0% of the pool by balance, including the largest 20
loans and all of the hospitality and office loans in the pool.
Fitch's resulting net cash flow (NCF) of $366.8 million represents
a 13.7% decline from the issuer's underwritten NCF of $424.8
million.

Lower Leverage Compared to Recent Transactions: The pool has lower
leverage than U.S. private-label multi-borrower transactions rated
by Fitch. The pool's Fitch loan-to-value ratio (LTV) of 77.4% is
lower than the YTD 2024 and 2023 averages of 89.1% and 88.3%,
respectively. The pool's Fitch NCF debt yield (DY) of 13.6% is
higher than the YTD 2024 and 2023 averages of 11.3% and 10.9%,
respectively. The pool's Fitch LTV and DY, excluding credit opinion
and co-op loans, are 85.5% and 12.1%, respectively.

Investment-Grade Credit Opinion Loans: Four loans representing
29.5% of the pool balance received an investment-grade credit
opinion. St. Johns Town Center (9.2% of the pool) received a
standalone credit opinion of 'Asf*', Woodfield Mall (7.3% of the
pool) received a standalone credit opinion of 'BBB+sf*', Westwood
Gateway II (6.9% of the pool) received a standalone credit opinion
of 'BBBsf*', and 60 Hudson (6.0% of the pool) received a standalone
credit opinion of 'AAAsf*'. The pool's total credit opinion
percentage of 29.5% is significantly higher than the YTD 2024 and
2023 averages of 13.8% 17.8%, respectively.

Mall Concentration: Mall Concentration: Four loans (24.4% of pool),
including three of the top five loans, are secured by malls
— St. Johns Town Center, Woodfield Mall, Danbury Fair Mall and
Arundel Mills and Marketplace. The malls represent 60.3% of the
pool's entire retail exposure.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

Reduction in cash flow decreases property value and capacity to
meet its debt service obligations.

The table below indicates the model implied rating sensitivity to
changes to the same one variable, Fitch NCF:

- Original Rating: 'AAAsf'/'AA-sf'/'Asf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf' /'BBB-sf'
/'BB-sf' /'B-sf';

- 10% NCF Decline:
'AAsf'/'Asf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBBsf'/'BBB-sf'/'BB+sf'/'Bsf'/'CCCsf'.

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

Similarly, improvement in cash flow increases property value and
capacity to meet its debt service obligations.

The list below indicates the model implied rating sensitivity to
changes in one variable, Fitch NCF:

- Original Rating: 'AAAsf'/'AA-'/'Asf'/'A-sf'/'BBBsf' /'BBB-sf'
/'BB-sf' /'B-sf'

- 10% NCF Increase:
'AAAsf'/'AAAsf'/'AAsf'/'A+sf'/'Asf&'/'BBB+sf'/'BB+sf'/'B+sf&'.

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 comparison and re-computation of
certain characteristics with respect to each of the mortgage loans.
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.


BENCHMARK 2024-V7: Fitch Assigns 'B-sf' Rating on Class J-RR Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned final ratings and Rating Outlooks to
Benchmark 2024-V7 Mortgage Trust Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates Series V7 as follows:

- $1,650,000 class A-1 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $33,000,000 class A-2 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $533,784,000 class A-3 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $568,434,000a class X-A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $86,280,000a,b class X-B 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $86,280,000 class A-S 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $40,602,000 class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $29,437,000b class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $26,392,000a,b class X-D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $18,271,000b class D 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $8,121,000b class E 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $8,120,000b,c class F-RR 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $10,151,000b,c class G-RR 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $11,166,000b,c class J-RR 'B-sf'; Outlook Stable.

Fitch does not expect to rate the following class:

- $31,467,000b,c class K-RR;

- $9,481,000b,d Combined VRR Interest.

Notes:

(a) Notional amount and interest only (IO).

(b) Privately placed and pursuant to Rule 144A.

(c) Classes F-RR, G-RR, J-RR and K-RR certificates comprise the
transaction's horizontal risk retention interest.

(d) The VRR Interest certificates comprise the transaction's
vertical risk retention interest.

Since Fitch published its expecting ratings on May 16, 2024, a
change has occurred. The balances for class A-2 and A-3 were
finalized. At the time the expected ratings were published, the
initial aggregate certificate balance of the A-2 class was expected
to be in the range of $0-$250,000,000, (net of the vertical risk
retention interest). The final class balance for class A-2 is
$33,000,000. The certificate balance of the A-3 class was expected
to be in the range of $316,784,000 to $566,784,000 (net of the
vertical risk retention interest). The final class balance for
class A-3 is $533,784,000.

Fitch updated class X-B to 'AAAsf' from 'AA-(EXP)sf' at the time of
the presale, reflecting the rating of class A-S, the lowest rated
class whose payable interest has an impact on the IO payments. This
is consistent with Appendix 4 of Fitch's "Global Structured Finance
Rating Criteria."

The ratings are based on information provided by the issuer as of
May 30, 2024.

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership interest in the
trust, the primary assets of which are 27 fixed-rate, commercial
mortgage loans with an aggregate principal balance of $821,890,000
as of the cutoff date. The mortgage loans are secured by the
borrowers' fee interests in 80 commercial properties.

The loans were contributed to the trust by Citi Real Estate Funding
Inc., German American Capital Corporation, Goldman Sachs Mortgage
Company, Bank of Montreal and Barclays Capital Real Estate Inc.

The master servicer is Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC
Bank, National Association, and the special servicer is K-Star
Asset Management LLC. The trustee and certificate administrator is
Computershare Trust Company, National Association. These
certificates follow a sequential paydown structure.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Fitch Net Cash Flow: Fitch performed cash flow analysis on 22 loans
totaling 96.5% of the pool by balance. Fitch's resulting net cash
flow (NCF) of $248.6 million represents an 8.6% variance from the
issuer's underwritten NCF of $271.8 million.

Higher Fitch Leverage: The pool has higher leverage compared to
recent U.S. private label multiborrower transactions rated by
Fitch. The pool's Fitch loan-to-value ratio (LTV) of 92.5% is
higher than the YTD 2024 and 2023 averages of 88.3% and 88.3%,
respectively. The pool's Fitch NCF debt yield (DY) of 10.4% is
lower than the YTD 2024 and 2023 averages of 11.5% and 10.9%,
respectively.

Office Concentration: In general, the pool has higher property type
diversity compared to recent Fitch transactions; the pool's
effective property type count of 4.5 is higher than the YTD 2024
and 2023 averages of 4.1 and 4.0, respectively. However, the
largest property type concentration is office (35.9% of the pool),
which is higher than the YTD 2024 and 2023 office averages of 14.6%
and 27.6%, respectively. In particular, the office concentration
includes the top three loans (26.8% of the pool) and four of the
largest 10 loans (32.3% of the pool).

The second largest property type concentration is industrial
(17.3%), which is higher than the YTD 2024 and 2023 averages of
10.7% and 14.1%, respectively. The third largest property type is
multifamily (16.6%), which is lower than the YTD 2024 average of
18.8% and higher than the 2023 average of 9.3%.

Pools that have a greater concentration by property type are at a
greater risk of losses, all else equal. Therefore, Fitch raises the
overall losses for pools with effective property type counts below
five property types.

Investment-Grade Credit Opinion Loans (COLs): Three loans
representing 18.3% of the pool received an investment-grade credit
opinion. 28-40 West 23rd Street (9.7%) received a standalone credit
opinion of 'BBB+sf*', GNL Industrial Portfolio (4.9%) received a
standalone credit opinion of 'BBB-sf*', and Garden State Plaza
(3.7%) received a standalone credit opinion of 'AAsf*'. The pool's
total credit opinion percentage is higher than the YTD 2024 and
2023 averages of 13.4% and 17.8%, respectively. The pool's Fitch
LTV and DY, excluding COLs, are 99.1% and 9.7%, respectively.

High Pool Concentration: The pool is more concentrated than
recently rated Fitch transactions. The top 10 loans in the pool
make up 65.1% of the pool, higher than the YTD 2024 and 2023
averages of 59.6% and 63.7%, respectively. The pool's effective
loan count of 18.6 is below the YTD 2024 and 2023 averages of 22.9
and 20.6, respectively.

Limited Amortization: Based on the scheduled balances at maturity,
the pool will pay down 0.2%, which is below the YTD 2024 and 2023
averages of 0.7% and 1.4%, respectively. The pool has 25 IO loans,
or 91.0% of pool by balance, which is below the YTD 2024 average of
91.8% and higher than the 2023 average of 84.5%.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

Declining cash flow decreases property value and capacity to meet
its debt service obligations. The table below indicates the
model-implied rating sensitivity to changes in one variable, Fitch
NCF:

- Original Rating: 'AAAsf' / 'AA-sf' / 'A-sf' / 'BBBsf' / 'BBB-sf'
/ 'BBsf' / BB-sf';

- 10% NCF Decline: 'AA-sf' / 'A-sf' / 'BBBsf' / 'BB+sf' / 'BBsf' /
'BB-sf' / 'Bsf'.

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

Improvement in cash flow increases property value and capacity to
meet its debt service obligations. The table below indicates the
model-implied rating sensitivity to changes to in one variable,
Fitch NCF:

- Original Rating: 'AAAsf' / 'AA-sf' / 'A-sf' / 'BBBsf' / 'BBB-sf'
/ 'BBsf' / BB-sf';

- 10% NCF Increase: 'AAAsf' / 'AA+sf' / 'A+sf' / 'BBB+sf' / 'BBBsf'
/ 'BBB-sf' / 'BBsf'.

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 a comparison and re-computation of
certain characteristics with respect to each of the mortgage loans.
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.


BENEFIT STREET V-B: Fitch Assigns 'BB+(EXP)sf' Rating on E-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned expected ratings and Rating Outlooks to
Benefit Street Partners CLO V-B, Ltd. reset transaction.

   Entity/Debt       Rating           
   -----------       ------           
Benefit Street
Partners
CLO V-B, Ltd.

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

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Benefit Street Partners CLO V-B, Ltd. (the issuer) is an arbitrage
cash flow collateralized loan obligation (CLO) managed by Benefit
Street Partners L.L.C. that originally closed in May 2018. This is
the first refinancing where the existing notes will be refinanced
in whole on June 13, 2024. 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. 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
98.79% first-lien senior secured loans and has a weighted average
recovery assumption of 75.58%. 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 39% 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 5.1-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 weighted average life (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. 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 'BBB+sf' and 'AA+sf' for class A-2R, between
'BB+sf' and 'AA-sf' for class B-R, between 'B+sf' and 'BBB+sf' for
class C-R, between less than 'B-sf' and 'BBB-sf' for class D-1R,
between less than 'B-sf' and 'BB+sf' for class D-2R, and between
less than 'B-sf' and 'BB-sf' for class E-R.

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

Upgrade scenarios are not applicable to the class A-2R notes 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-R, 'AA+sf' for class C-R, 'A+sf'
for class D-1R, 'A+sf' for class D-2R, and 'BBB+sf' for class E-R.

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 Benefit Street
Partners CLO V-B, 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.


BLACK DIAMOND 2019-2: S&P Affirms BB- (sf) Rating on Class D Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A-1a-R, A-2-R,
B-R, and C-R replacement debt from Black Diamond CLO 2019-2
Ltd./Black Diamond CLO 2019-2 LLC, a CLO originally issued in 2019
that is managed by Black Diamond CLO 2019-2 Adviser LLC, an
affiliate of Black Diamond Capital Management LLC. At the same
time, S&P withdrew its ratings on the original class A-1a, A-2, B,
and C debt following payment in full on the May 31, 2024,
refinancing date. S&P also affirmed its rating on the class D 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:

-- A six-month non-call period was implemented for the refinancing
notes, ending Nov. 30, 2024.

-- The reinvestment period was not extended and will conclude July
23, 2024.

-- The legal final maturity dates (for the replacement debt and
the existing subordinated notes) were not extended.

-- No additional assets were purchased on the May 31, 2024,
refinancing date, and the target initial par amount remains at $500
million. There was no additional effective date or ramp-up period,
and the first payment date following the refinancing is July 23,
2024.

-- The required minimum overcollateralization and interest
coverage ratios were not amended.

-- No additional subordinated notes were issued on the refinancing
date.

Replacement And Original Debt Issuances

Replacement debt

-- Class A-1a-R, $310.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR +
1.32%

-- Class A-1b-R, $15.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR +
1.70%

-- Class A-2-R, $51.25 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 2.20%

-- Class B-R, $31.25 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 2.75%

-- Class C-R, $27.50 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 3.95%

Original debt

-- Class A-1a, $310.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.43%
+ CSA(i)

-- Class A-1b, $15.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.75% +
CSA(i)

-- Class A-2, $51.25 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 2.15% +
CSA(i)

-- Class B, $31.25 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 3.05% +
CSA(i)

-- Class C, $27.50 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 4.00% +
CSA(i)

-- Class D, $22.50 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 6.93% +
CSA(i)

-- Subordinated notes, $50.00 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 debt remain consistent with the credit enhancement
available to support them and take rating actions as we deem
necessary."

  Ratings Assigned

  Black Diamond CLO 2019-2 Ltd./Black Diamond CLO 2019-2 LLC

  Class A-1a-R, $310.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2-R, $51.25 million: AA (sf)
  Class B-R, $31.25 million: A (sf)
  Class C-R, $27.50 million: BBB- (sf)

  Ratings Withdrawn

  Black Diamond CLO 2019-2 Ltd./Black Diamond CLO 2019-2 LLC

  Class A-1a, to NR from 'AAA (sf)'
  Class A-2, to NR from 'AA (sf)'
  Class B, to NR from 'A (sf)'
  Class C, to NR from 'BBB- (sf)'

  Rating Affirmed

  Black Diamond CLO 2019-2 Ltd./Black Diamond CLO 2019-2 LLC

  Class D: BB- (sf)

  Other Outstanding Debt

  Black Diamond CLO 2019-2 Ltd./Black Diamond CLO 2019-2 LLC

  Subordinated notes, $50.00 million: NR

  NR--Not rated.



BMP COMMERCIAL 2023-MF23: Fitch Assigns 'B+sf' Rating on HRR Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned the following ratings and Ratings
Outlooks to BMP Commercial Mortgage Trust 2024-MF23, Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates Series 2024-MF23:

- $623,200,000 class A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $99,100,000 class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $77,800,000 class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $109,600,000 class D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $159,050,000 class E 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $56,250,000a class HRR 'B+sf'; Outlook Stable.

(a) Horizontal risk retention interest representing at least 5.0%
of the estimated fair value of all classes.

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

The certificates represent the beneficial interests in a trust that
holds a two-year, floating-rate, interest-only (IO) mortgage loan
with three one-year extension options. The mortgage will be secured
by the borrowers' fee simple interest in a portfolio of 23
multifamily properties with a total of 7,300 units located across
six states (Florida, Texas, Colorado, Utah, Arizona and Georgia).
The properties were constructed between 1983 and 2023. The
portfolio is 95.4% leased as of the March 2024 rent roll.

Loan proceeds, together with approximately $486.0 million in cash
equity, will be used to acquire the properties for $1.55 billion,
pay closing costs and fund a $30.0 million upfront letter of credit
(LOC).

The certificates will follow a pro rata paydown structure for the
initial 30% of the loan amount and a standard senior sequential
paydown structure thereafter. The borrowers' have a one-time right
to obtain a mezzanine loan. To the extent the mezzanine loan is
outstanding and there is no event of default (EOD) on the mortgage
loan, any voluntary prepayments will be applied pro rata between
both the mortgage and the mezzanine loan.

The loan is originated by Citi Real Estate Funding Inc., Barclays
Capital Real Estate Inc., Goldman Sachs Bank USA and JPMorgan Chase
Bank, National Association. KeyBank National Association will act
as servicer and Torchlight Loan Services, LLC will act as special
servicer. Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB will act as trustee.
Citibank, N.A. will act as certificate administrator. Park Bridge
Lender Services LLC will act as operating advisor. The transaction
is expected to close on June 4, 2024.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Net Cash Flow: Fitch estimates stressed net cash flow (NCF) for the
portfolio at $79.6 million. This is 8.1% lower than the issuer's
NCF and 4.2% lower than the YE 2023 NCF. Fitch applied a 7.5% cap
rate, resulting in a Fitch value of $1.06 billion.

High Fitch Leverage: The $1.125 billion total mortgage loan
($154,110/unit) has a Fitch stressed debt service coverage ratio
(DSCR), loan-to-value ratio (LTV) and debt yield (DY) of 0.83x,
106.0% and 7.1%, respectively. The loan represents approximately
69.4% of the as-portfolio appraised value of $1.62 billion.

Diverse Portfolio: The portfolio is secured by 7,300 units across
23 garden-style multifamily properties located in six states and
eleven MSAs. The portfolio is granular, with no property comprising
more than 7.4% of the total units or 7.1% of allocated loan amount
(ALA). No state or market represents more than 45.6% or 26.0% of
the ALA, respectively.

Institutional Sponsorship: The loan sponsor is Brookfield Strategic
Real Estate Partners V. The sponsor and guarantors are affiliates
of Brookfield. Brookfield and its affiliates had over $900 billion
of total assets under management as of its Dec. 31, 2023 quarterly
report, of which $276 billion is related to real estate. The
sponsor has significant cash equity remaining in the deal.

The portfolio will be managed by Brookfield Property Management
LLC, a Brookfield affiliate. Over the next five years, the sponsor
plans to invest $105.0 million in renovations to the portfolio; $30
million of which is reserved at closing in the form of a letter of
credit (LOC).

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

Declining cash flow decreases property value and capacity to meet
its debt service obligations. The table below indicates the model
implied rating sensitivity to changes in one variable, Fitch net
cash flow (NCF):

- Original Rating: 'AAAsf'/'AA-sf'/'A-sf'/'BBB-sf'/'BB-sf'/'B+sf'

- 10% NCF Decline: 'AAsf'/'BBB+sf '/'BBB-sf'/'BBsf'/'Bsf'/'B-sf'

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

Improvement in cash flow increases property value and capacity to
meet its debt service obligations. The table below indicates the
model implied rating sensitivity to changes to the same one
variable, Fitch NCF:

- Original Rating: 'AAAsf'/'AA-sf '/'A-sf'/'BBB-sf'/'BB-sf'/'B+sf'

- 10% NCF Increase: 'AAAsf'/'AA+sf
'/'A+sf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBsf'/'BB-sf'

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 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. The third-party due
diligence described in Form 15E focused on a comparison and
re-computation of certain characteristics with respect to the
mortgage loan. 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.


BX COMMERCIAL 2024-KING: Fitch Assigns B+sf Rating on Cl. HRR Certs
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned the following final ratings and Ratings
Outlooks to BX Commercial Mortgage Trust 2024-KING, commercial
mortgage pass-through certificates, series 2024-KING:

- $337,300,000a class A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $55,500,000a class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $43,600,000a class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $61,400,000a class D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $72,200,000a class E 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $30,000,000a, b class HRR 'B+sf'; Outlook Stable.

(a) Privately placed and pursuant to Rule 144A.

(b) Horizontal risk retention interest, estimated to be
approximately 5% of the aggregate certificate balance

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership interest in a
trust that will hold a $600.0 million, two-year, floating-rate, IO
commercial mortgage loan with three one-year extension options. The
mortgage will be secured by the borrower's fee simple interest in a
portfolio of 80 self-storage properties located across 16 states.

The loan was originated on May 15, 2024 by Wells Fargo Bank,
National Association and Bank of America, N.A., which will act as
mortgage loan sellers. KeyBank National Association will be the
master servicer and Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank,
National Association, will be the special servicer. Computershare
Trust Company, National Association will act as trustee and
certificate administrator. Park Bridge Lender Services LLC will act
as operating advisor. The transaction is scheduled to close on May
30, 2024.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Net Cash Flow: Fitch's net cash flow (NCF) for the portfolio is
estimated at $47.5 million; this is 4.8% lower than the issuer's
NCF and 4.8% lower than the YE23 NCF. Fitch applied an 8.0% cap
rate to derive a Fitch value of $478.4 million for the portfolio.

Fitch Leverage: The $600.0 million trust loan equates to debt of
approximately $93.9 psf with a Fitch stressed debt service coverage
ratio (DSCR), loan-to-value ratio (LTV) and debt yield of 0.88x,
100.9% and 7.9%, respectively. The loan represents approximately
65.7% of the portfolio's appraised value of $912.7 million.

Geographic Diversity: The portfolio exhibits geographic diversity,
with 80 self-storage properties located across 16 states and 36
individual markets. The largest three state concentrations account
for 61.6% of the portfolio by 2023 NCF. This includes Florida (24
properties; 35.1% of 2023 NCF), Texas (16 properties; 17.1% of 2023
NCF) and North Carolina (seven properties; 9.7% of 2023 NCF). No
other state accounts for more than 7.3% of the portfolio by 2023
NCF.

Seven properties representing 9.5% of the portfolio by 2023 NCF are
located in the Raleigh-Durham market; five properties representing
8.9% of the portfolio by 2023 NCF are located in the Lakeland
market; and eight properties representing 7.6% of the portfolio by
2023 NCF are located in the Pensacola market. All other markets
represent less than 7.4% of the portfolio by 2023 NCF.

Sponsorship: The loan is sponsored by a joint venture between
affiliates of Blackstone Real Estate Income Trust and Andover
Properties. Founded in 1985, The Blackstone Group, L.P. is a New
York City-based global alternative asset manager and provider of
financial advisory services. The company employs over 3,000 in 23
offices worldwide. Blackstone is one of the world's leading
investment firms with approximately $1.0 trillion of assets under
management (AUM) as of Sept. 30, 2023, across investment vehicles
focused on private equity, real estate, public debt and equity,
infrastructure, life sciences, growth equity, opportunistic,
non-investment grade credit, real assets and secondary funds, all
on a global basis.

Blackstone's Real Estate group began investing in real estate in
1991 and is a global leader in real estate investing. Andover
Properties is an investment firm that owns, operates and develops
commercial property throughout the U.S., with a focus on
alternative real estate asset classes such as self-storage,
manufactured housing, RV parks and car washes. Andover is one of
the largest private owner-operators of self-storage facilities in
the U.S. Their current storage portfolio totals over 13 million
rentable sf across 163 facilities in 18 states and operates under
the Storage King USA brand.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

Declining cash flow decreases property value and capacity to meet
its debt service obligations. The table below indicates the
model-implied rating (MIR) sensitivity to changes in one variable,
Fitch NCF:

- Original Rating: 'AAAsf' / AA-sf' / 'A-sf' / 'BBB-sf' / 'BB-sf' /
'B+sf';

- 10% NCF Decline: 'AA-sf' / 'BBB+sf' / 'BBB-sf' / 'BBsf' / 'Bsf' /
'B-sf'.

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

Improvement in cash flow increases property value and capacity to
meet its debt service obligations. The table below indicates the
MIR sensitivity to changes to in one variable, Fitch NCF:

- Original Rating: 'AAAsf' / AA-sf' / 'A-sf' / 'BBB-sf' / 'BB-sf' /
'B+sf';

- 10% NCF Increase: 'AAAsf' / 'AA+sf' / 'A+sf' / 'BBBsf' / 'BB+sf'
/ 'BBsf'.

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 KPMG LLP. The third-party due diligence described in
Form 15E focused on a comparison and re-computation of certain
characteristics with respect to each of the mortgage loans. 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.


BX TRUST 2024-LNK1: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba2 Rating to Cl. E Certs
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned provisional ratings to eight classes
of CMBS securities, issued by BX Trust 2024-LNK1, Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2024-LNK1:

Cl. A, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

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

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

Cl. B, Assigned (P)Aa3 (sf)

Cl. C, Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

Cl. D, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. E, Assigned (P)Ba2 (sf)

Cl. HRR, Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

* Reflects Interest-Only Classes

RATINGS RATIONALE

The certificates are collateralized by a single loan backed by a
first lien mortgage on the borrower's fee simple interests in a
portfolio of 62 industrial properties encompassing approximately
10,264,708 SF. Moody's ratings are based on the credit quality of
the loan and the strength of the securitization structure.

The collateral portfolio consists of 62 industrial properties
located across 16 distinct markets in 13 states. The largest
metropolitan statistical area ("MSA") concentration is Minneapolis
and the largest state concentration is in Minnesota (31.4% of NRA
and 25.7% of Stabilized NOI). The Portfolio's property-level
Herfindahl score is 42.25 based on allocated loan amount (the
"ALA").

The collateral properties contain a total of 10,264,708 SF of NRA
across the following three industrial subtypes:
Warehouse/Distribution (83.1% of NRA, 82.7% of base rent), R&D/Flex
(16.8%, 12.7%), and parking (0.2%, 2.7%). Property size ranges
between 17,296 SF and 875,666 SF, and averages approximately
202,989 SF. Maximum clear heights for properties range between 14
feet and 36 feet, and average approximately 27.5 feet. Construction
dates for properties in the portfolio range between 1955 and 2024,
with a weighted average year built of 2005.  Details regarding past
renovations were not provided for review however the properties are
generally well maintained and show little signs of deferred
maintenance.

Moody's approach to rating this transaction involved the
application of both Moody's Large Loan and Single Asset/Single
Borrower Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securitization methodology and
Moody's IO Rating methodology. The rating approach for securities
backed by a single loan compares the credit risk inherent in the
underlying collateral with the credit protection offered by the
structure. The structure's credit enhancement is quantified by the
maximum deterioration in property value that the securities are
able to withstand under various stress scenarios without causing an
increase in the expected loss for various rating levels. In
assigning single borrower ratings, Moody's also consider a range of
qualitative issues as well as the transaction's structural and
legal aspects.

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. Moody's 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 Moody's first mortgage actual DSCR is 0.99x and Moody's first
mortgage actual stressed DSCR is 0.75x. Moody's DSCR is based on
Moody's stabilized net cash flow.

The loan first mortgage balance of $1,275,000,000 represents a
Moody's LTV ratio of 111.9% based on Moody's value. Adjusted
Moody's LTV ratio for the first mortgage balance is 100.7% based on
Moody's Value using a cap rate adjusted for the current interest
rate environment.

Moody's also grades properties on a scale of 0 to 5 (best to worst)
and considers those grades when assessing the likelihood of debt
payment. The factors considered include property age, quality of
construction, location, market, and tenancy. The portfolio's
property quality grade is 0.75.

Notable strengths of the transaction include: proximity to global
gateway markets, infill locations, geographic diversity, strong
occupancy rate with granular and economically diverse tenant
roster, strong leasing activity with positive leasing spreads,
multiple property pooling and experienced sponsorship.

Notable concerns of the transaction include: rollover risk, high
percentage of office use, cash out, floating-rate interest-only
loan profile, non-sequential prepayment provision, and credit
negative legal features.

Moody's rating approach considers sequential pay in connection with
a collateral release as a credit neutral benchmark. Although the
loans' release premium mitigates the risk of a ratings downgrade
due to adverse selection, the pro rata payment structure limits
ratings upgrade potential as mezzanine classes are prevented from
building enhancement. The benefit received from pooling through
cross-collateralization is also reduced.

The principal methodology used in rating all classes except
interest-only classes was "Large Loan and Single Asset/Single
Borrower Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securitizations Methodology"
published in July 2022.

Moody's approach for single borrower and large loan multi-borrower
transactions evaluates credit enhancement levels based on an
aggregation of adjusted loan level proceeds derived from Moody's
loan level LTV ratios. Major adjustments to determining proceeds
include leverage, loan structure, and property type. These
aggregated proceeds are then further adjusted for any pooling
benefits associated with loan level diversity, other concentrations
and correlations.

Moody's analysis considers the following inputs to calculate the
proposed IO rating based on the published methodology: original and
current bond ratings and credit estimates; original and current
bond balances grossed up for losses for all bonds the IO(s)
reference(s) within the transaction; and IO type corresponding to
an IO type as defined in the published methodology.

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 may
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously anticipated. Factors that may cause an
upgrade of the ratings include significant loan pay downs or
amortization, an increase in the pool's share of defeasance or
overall improved pool performance. Factors that may cause a
downgrade of the ratings include a decline in the overall
performance of the pool, loan concentration, increased expected
losses from specially serviced and troubled loans or interest
shortfalls.


CARLYLE US 2024-4: Fitch Assigns 'BB-(EXP)sf' Rating on Cl. E Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned expected ratings and Rating Outlooks to
Carlyle US CLO 2024-4, Ltd.

   Entity/Debt        Rating           
   -----------        ------           

Carlyle US CLO
2024-4, 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              LT BBB-(EXP)sf Expected Rating
   E              LT BB-(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   Subordinated   LT NR(EXP)sf  Expected Rating

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Carlyle US CLO 2024-4, Ltd. (the issuer) is an arbitrage cash flow
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) that will be managed by
Carlyle CLO Management L.L.C. Net proceeds from the issuance of the
secured and subordinated notes will finance 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. The weighted average rating factor (WARF) of the
indicative portfolio is 25.24, versus a maximum covenant, in
accordance with the initial expected matrix point of 27.44. 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
97.8% first-lien senior secured loans. The weighted average
recovery rate (WARR) of the indicative portfolio is 73.42% versus a
minimum covenant, in accordance with the initial expected matrix
point of 73.42%.

Portfolio Composition (Positive): The largest three industries may
comprise up to 40.5% 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 5.1-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 'BBB+sf' and 'AA+sf' for class A-1, between
'BBBsf' 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, 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-1 and class A-2
notes 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, 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 Carlyle US CLO
2024-4, 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.


CARVANA AUTO 2024-P2: S&P Assigns Prelim 'BB+' Rating on N Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Carvana Auto
Receivables Trust 2024-P2's asset-backed notes.

The note issuance is an ABS securitization backed by prime auto
loan receivables.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of May 30,
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 availability of 14.37%, 11.60%, 9.76%, 6.22%, and 7.30%
credit support (hard credit enhancement and haircut to excess
spread) for the class A (class A-1, A-2, A-3, and A-4), B, C, D,
and N notes, respectively, based on stressed cash flow scenarios.
These credit support levels provide over 5.00x, 4.00x, 3.33x,
2.00x, and 1.73x coverage of S&P's expected cumulative net loss of
2.35% for the class A, B, C, D, and N notes, respectively.

-- The expectation that under a moderate ('BBB') stress scenario
(2.00x S&P's expected loss level), all else being equal, its
preliminary 'AAA (sf)', 'AA (sf)', 'A+ (sf)', 'BBB (sf)', and 'BB+
(sf)' ratings on the class A, B, C, D, and N notes, respectively,
are within our credit stability limits.

-- The timely interest and principal payments by the designated
legal final maturity dates under S&P's stressed cash flow modeling
scenarios, which it believes are appropriate for the assigned
preliminary ratings.

-- The collateral characteristics of the series' prime automobile
loans, S&P's view of the credit risk of the collateral, and its
updated macroeconomic forecast and forward-looking view of the auto
finance sector.

-- The series' bank accounts at Wells Fargo Bank N.A., which do
not constrain the preliminary ratings.

-- S&P's operational risk assessment of Bridgecrest Credit Co. LLC
as servicer, as well as the backup servicing agreement with Vervent
Inc.

-- S&P's assessment of the transaction's potential exposure to
environmental, social, and governance (ESG) credit factors, which
are in line with our sector benchmark.

-- The transaction's payment and legal structures.

  Preliminary Ratings Assigned

  Carvana Auto Receivables Trust 2024-P2

  Class A-1, $56.15 million: A-1+ (sf)
  Class A-2, $161.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-3, $161.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-4, $93.80 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B, $17.76 million: AA (sf)
  Class C, $8.87 million: A+ (sf)
  Class D, $8.63 million: BBB (sf)
  Class N, $15.00 million: BB+ (sf)



CBAM 2018-8: Fitch Assigns 'BB-sf' Rating on Two Tranches
---------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned ratings and Rating Outlooks to the CBAM
2018-8, Ltd reset transaction.

   Entity/Debt         Rating               Prior
   -----------         ------               -----
CBAM 2018-8, Ltd.

   X               LT AAAsf  New Rating
   A-1 12478CAA9   LT PIFsf  Paid In Full   AAAsf
   A-1R            LT AAAsf  New Rating
   A-2 12478CAC5   LT PIFsf  Paid In Full   AAAsf
   A-2R            LT AAAsf  New Rating
   B-1 12478CAE1   LT PIFsf  Paid In Full   AAAsf
   B-1R            LT AAsf   New Rating
   B-2 12478CAG6   LT PIFsf  Paid In Full   AAAsf
   B-2R            LT AAsf   New Rating
   C-R             LT Asf    New Rating
   D-R             LT BBB-sf New Rating
   E-1R            LT BB-sf  New Rating
   E-2R            LT BB-sf  New Rating

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

CBAM 2018-8, Ltd. (the issuer) is an arbitrage cash flow
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) managed by The Carlyle Group
Inc. The original CLO closed in October 2018 with Fitch rating the
class A and B notes. On May 30, 2024, the secured notes were
refinanced in full. 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. The weighted average rating factor (WARF) of the
indicative portfolio is 25.4, versus a maximum covenant, in
accordance with the initial expected matrix point of 27. 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
96.76% first-lien senior secured loans. The weighted average
recovery rate (WARR) of the indicative portfolio is 73.1% versus a
minimum covenant, in accordance with the initial expected matrix
point of 73.1%.

Portfolio Composition (Positive): The largest three industries may
comprise up to 39% 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 5.1-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 weighted-average loan (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 'BBB+sf' and 'AA+sf' for class A-1R, between
'BBBsf' and 'AA+sf' for class A-2R, between 'BB+sf' and 'A+sf' for
class B-R, between 'B-sf' and 'BBB+sf' for class C-R, between less
than 'B-sf' and 'BB+sf' for class D-R, and between less than 'B-sf'
and 'B+sf' for class E-R. Ratings did not change for the class X-R
notes.

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

Upgrade scenarios are not applicable to the class X, class A-1R and
class A-2R notes 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-R, 'AA+sf' for class C-R, 'Asf'
for class D-R, and 'BBB+sf' for class E-R.

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 CBAM 2018-8, 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.


CD 2017-CD3 MORTGAGE: Fitch Lowers Rating on Two Tranches to 'BBsf'
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded five and affirmed 11 classes of CD
2017-CD3 Mortgage Trust Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates. Fitch has also assigned Negative Outlooks to classes
B, X-B, C, V-B and V-C following their downgrades. The Rating
Outlooks for affirmed classes A-S, X-A and V-A were revised to
Negative from Stable.

   Entity/Debt             Rating           Prior
   -----------             ------           -----
CD 2017-CD3 Mortgage
Trust Series 2017-CD3

   A-3 12515GAC1       LT AAAsf  Affirmed   AAAsf
   A-4 12515GAD9       LT AAAsf  Affirmed   AAAsf
   A-AB 12515GAE7      LT AAAsf  Affirmed   AAAsf
   A-S 12515GAF4       LT AAsf   Affirmed   AAsf
   B 12515GAG2         LT BBBsf  Downgrade  Asf
   C 12515GAH0         LT BBsf   Downgrade  BBBsf
   D 12515GAM9         LT CCCsf  Affirmed   CCCsf
   E 12515GAP2         LT CCsf   Affirmed   CCsf
   F 12515GAR8         LT Csf    Affirmed   Csf
   V-A 12515GAX5       LT AAsf   Affirmed   AAsf
   V-B 12515GAZ0       LT BBBsf  Downgrade  Asf
   V-C 12515GBB2       LT BBsf   Downgrade  BBBsf
   V-D 12515GBD8       LT CCCsf  Affirmed   CCCsf
   X-A 12515GAJ6       LT AAsf   Affirmed   AAsf
   X-B 12515GAK3       LT BBBsf  Downgrade  Asf
   X-D 12515GAV9       LT CCCsf  Affirmed   CCCsf

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Increased Loss Expectations; Performance Declines: Fitch's pool
loss expectations have increased, most notably for the Fitch Loans
of Concern (FLOCs), which include loans secured by office
properties with deteriorating performance and three loans (5%)
which transferred to special servicing since Fitch's prior rating
action. Fitch identified 22 loans (55.5% of the pool) as FLOCs,
which includes six loans (18.2%) in special servicing. Fitch's loss
expectations reflect a pool-level 'Bsf' rating case loss of 14.9%.

The Negative Outlook on classes A-S, X-A, B, X-B, C, V-A, V-B and
V-C reflect the pool's high exposure to loans primarily secured by
office collateral (57.1% of the pool, 35.5% are FLOCs), continued
occupancy and cashflow deterioration of FLOCs, along with the lack
of performance stabilization and/or a prolonged workout of
specially serviced loans.

Largest Contributor to Loss Expectations: The largest contributor
to overall loss expectations is 229 West 43rd Street Retail Condo
(8.2% of the pool), the largest loan in the pool, which is secured
by a 245,132-sf retail condominium located in Manhattan's Time
Square district. The loan transferred to special servicing in
December 2019 for imminent monetary default. The property had
already been experiencing tenancy issues prior to the pandemic.
With tenants operating in the entertainment and tourism industries,
the property sustained further declines due to the onset of the
pandemic.

According to the April 2023 rent roll, the property was 40.9%
occupied. The largest remaining tenants include Bowlmor (31.2%;
July 2034), The Ribbon (6.4%, February 2034), and Haru (2.2%,
December 2028). A receiver was appointed in March 2021 and then a
foreclosure action was filed. According to recent servicer
reporting, the foreclosure sale of the asset was scheduled for May
29, 2024.

Fitch's 'Bsf' rating case loss of 91% (prior to concentration
add-ons) reflects a discount to the most recent appraised value
provided by the servicer.

The second largest contributor to overall loss expectations is the
111 Livingston Street loan (5.5%), secured by a 407,861-sf office
building located in Downtown Brooklyn, NY. Major tenants at the
property include Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance
(OTDA) (29.8%; May 2024), Legal Aid (28.7%; October 2037) and
C.U.N.Y. (11%; August 2027). Occupancy started to decline after the
NYS Worker's Compensation Board (12.3% of NRA) vacated their space
in August 2020.

Per the February 2024 rent roll, the property was 79.7% occupied,
compared to 85.6% in March 2023, 86% at YE 2021, 98.6% in June
2020, and 100% at issuance. Per the rent roll, there were four new
leases executed totaling 7.6% of NRA, however, start dates were not
listed. The largest tenant (29.8% of NRA) is scheduled to roll in
May 2024, but an extension has yet to be executed. Fitch requested
a leasing update; however, it was not provided.

Fitch's 'Bsf' rating case loss of 32% (prior to concentration
add-ons) reflects a 9.5% cap rate and a 20% stress to the
annualized September 2023 NOI due to high upcoming rollover.

The third largest contributor to loss expectations is the specially
serviced 166 Geary Street (2.4%). The loan is secured by a
12,713-sf retail property located in San Francisco, CA and includes
ground and second-floor retail underneath 35,000-sf of
non-collateral office space. The loan transferred to special
servicing in April 2021 due to imminent monetary default after two
tenants comprising 42% of the NRA went dark. Physical occupancy
remains lower with sole tenant Suit Supply (46.8% of the NRA;
through May 2025). La Perla (15.2%; through January 2025) has
vacated but continues to pay rent under their lease agreement.

Fitch's 'Bsf' rating case loss of 45% (prior to concentration
add-ons) reflects a stress to the most recent servicer reported
appraised value, which reflects a decline of approximately 72% from
the appraised value at issuance.

Additional FLOCs in special servicing include 16 E 40th Street
(2.6% of the pool), 681 Fifth Avenue (2.4%) and Cherry Creek Place
I & II (2.3%). All three loans transferred to special servicing for
occupancy declines and/or the loss of a major tenant and are
delinquent. The 681 Fifth Avenue loan, which is secured by a
mixed-use retail and office property located in the Manhattan Plaza
District in New York, NY, lost tenant Tommy Hilfiger (27.3% of the
NRA, 78% of total base rent) in 2023. The Cherry Creek Place I & II
loan transferred to special servicing with the largest tenant, ADT
(31% of the NRA), vacating by its 2024 lease expiration.

The Prudential Plaza (5.4% of the pool) loan returned to the master
servicer in March 2024. A loan modification agreement was executed,
which extended the maturity through August 2027 and included two,
one-year extension options. The loan is secured by a two-building
office complex spanning a total of 2.2 million sf located in
Chicago, IL. Per the servicer, the property was 76% occupied at YE
2023, down from 82.5% at YE 2022 and 85% at YE 2021. Occupancy will
decline further due to the expected vacancy of tenants accounting
for 10% of the NRA.

Fitch's 'Bsf' rating case loss of 12% (prior to concentration
add-ons) is based on a lower stabilized cash flow that is 10.6%
below Fitch's stressed cash flow at issuance to account for
performance declines, increasing operating expenses and softening
market conditions.

Minimal Changes to Credit Enhancement: As of the May 2024
remittance report, the pool's aggregate balance has been paid down
by 8.7% to $1.21 billion from $1.33 billion at issuance. Two loans
(1.3% of the pool) have been defeased. Five loans (4.5% of the
original pool balance) have been disposed of with no loss. Interest
shortfalls of $15.2 million are currently affecting classes D, E,
F, G and the VRR interest classes.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

Downgrades would occur with an increase in pool-level losses from
underperforming or specially serviced loans. Downgrades to the
'AAAsf' rated classes are not likely due to the expected paydown
from loan repayments and continued amortization, but may occur
should interest shortfalls affect these classes.

Downgrades to the 'AAsf', 'BBBsf' and 'BBsf' rated classes may
occur if expected losses increase on FLOCs, including 111
Livingston Street, Prudential Plaza, 16 E 40th Street, 681 Fifth
Avenue and Cherry Creek Place I & II and/or if workout times are
prolonged for the specially serviced loans.

Downgrades to classes rated 'CCCsf' and below may occur as losses
are incurred and/or with a greater certainty of loss expectations.

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

Upgrades to classes rated in the 'AAsf' category may be possible
with significantly increased credit enhancement (CE), coupled with
stable-to-improved pool-level loss expectations and sustained
improved performance on the FLOCs, including 1384 Broadway, 111
Livingston Street, Prudential Plaza, Summit Place Wisconsin, Cherry
Creek Place I & II and Comfort Inn & Suites Pittsburgh.

Upgrades to 'BBBsf' and 'BBsf' rated classes are not likely until
the later years in a transaction and only if the performance of the
remaining pool improves, recoveries on the FLOCs are better than
expected and there is sufficient CE to the classes. Additionally,
upgrades could be limited based on sensitivity to concentrations or
the potential for future concentration. Classes would not be
upgraded above 'AA+sf' if there is a likelihood for interest
shortfalls.

The 'Csf', 'CCsf' and 'CCCsf' rated classes are unlikely to be
upgraded absent significant performance improvement and
substantially higher recoveries than expected on the FLOCs and
specially serviced loans.

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

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.


CHASE HOME 2024-RPL2: Fitch Assigns 'Bsf' Rating on Class B-2 Certs
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned final ratings to Chase Home Lending
Mortgage Trust 2024-RPL2 (Chase 2024-RPL2).

   Entity/Debt       Rating             Prior
   -----------       ------             -----
Chase 2024-RPL2

   A-1-A         LT AAAsf  New Rating   AAA(EXP)sf
   A-1-B         LT AAAsf  New Rating   AAA(EXP)sf
   A-1           LT AAAsf  New Rating   AAA(EXP)sf
   A-2           LT AAsf   New Rating   AA(EXP)sf
   M-1           LT Asf    New Rating   A(EXP)sf
   M-2           LT BBBsf  New Rating   BBB(EXP)sf
   B-1           LT BBsf   New Rating   BB(EXP)sf
   B-2           LT Bsf    New Rating   B(EXP)sf
   B-3           LT NRsf   New Rating   NR(EXP)sf
   B-4           LT NRsf   New Rating   NR(EXP)sf
   B-5           LT NRsf   New Rating   NR(EXP)sf
   X             LT NRsf   New Rating   NR(EXP)sf
   B-X           LT NRsf   New Rating   NR(EXP)sf
   PT            LT NRsf   New Rating   NR(EXP)sf
   A-R           LT NRsf   New Rating   NR(EXP)sf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Fitch has rated the residential mortgage-backed certificates issued
by Chase Home Lending Mortgage Trust 2024-RPL2 (Chase 2024-RPL2) as
indicated above. The transaction is expected to close on May 30,
2024. The certificates are supported by one collateral group that
consists of 2,307 seasoned performing loans (SPLs) and reperforming
loans (RPLs) with a total balance of approximately $531.95 million,
which includes $60.5 million, or 11.4%, of the aggregate pool
balance in non-interest-bearing deferred principal amounts, as of
the statistical calculation date.

All of the loans in the transaction were originated by J.P. Morgan
Chase Bank, EMC or Washington Mutual Bank and all loans have been
held by J.P. Morgan Chase since origination or acquisition of
Washington Mutual Bank. All the loans have been serviced by J.P.
Morgan Chase Bank N.A. since origination or acquisition of
Washington Mutual. Chase is considered an 'Above Average'
originator by Fitch. JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A., rated 'RPS1-' by
Fitch, is the named servicer for the transaction.

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

There is no LIBOR exposure in the transaction. The collateral is
98.4% fixed rate and 1.6% step loans and the A-1 bonds are fixed
rate and capped at the net weighted average coupon (WAC)/available
fund cap and classes A-2, M-1, M-2, B-1, B-2, B-3, and B-4 are
based on the net WAC/available fund cap. The B-5 is a principal
only class.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Updated Sustainable Home Prices (Negative): As a result of its
updated view on sustainable home prices, Fitch views the home price
values of this pool as 10.4% above a long-term sustainable level
(versus 11.1% on a national level as of 4Q23, down 0% 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 had increased 5.5% yoy nationally as of
February 2024 despite modest regional declines, but are still being
supported by limited inventory.

Seasoned Performing and Reperforming Credit Quality (Mixed): The
collateral consists of 2,307 seasoned, reperforming fully
amortizing and balloon, fixed-rate and step-rate mortgage loans
secured by first liens on primarily one- to four-family residential
properties, planned unit developments (PUDs), condominiums,
townhouses, manufactured homes, cooperatives, mixed use properties,
and land, totaling $531.95 million and seasoned approximately 217
months in aggregate, according to Fitch (215 months per the
transaction documents).

The loans were originated mainly by Chase (33.1%), EMC (0.1%) and
Washington Mutual (66.8%). The majority of the loans originated by
Washington Mutual and EMC were modified by Chase after they were
acquired. All loans have been serviced by J.P. Morgan Chase Bank
N.A. since origination or since the loans were acquired from
Washington Mutual and EMC.

The borrower profile is typical of recent seasoned RPL transactions
that Fitch has seen. The borrowers have a moderate credit profile
(683 FICO, according to Fitch, and 714 per the transaction
documents) and low current leverage with an updated loan-to-value
(LTV) of 42.8% per the transaction documents (original LTV of 76.0%
as determined by Fitch) and a sustainable LTV (sLTV) as determined
by Fitch of 47.9%.

Borrower debt-to-income ratios (DTIs) were not provided, so Fitch
assumed each loan had a 45% DTI in its analysis. Of the pool, 99.1%
of the loans have been modified, with 22.7% borrower retention
modifications. In its analysis, Fitch only considered 76.5% of the
pool as having a modification, since these modifications were made
due to credit issues. Fitch does not consider loans that have a
borrower retention modification as having been modified in its
analysis.

As of the cutoff date, the pool is 100% current; 83.6% of loans
have been clean current for at least 24 months, with 24.4% clean
current for 24 months and 59.2% clean current for 36 months.

The pool consists of 88.6% of loans where the borrower maintains a
primary residence, while 11.4% are investment properties or second
homes. Fitch viewed the high percentage of primary residences as a
positive feature in its analysis.

There is one loan in the pool with a potential principal reduction
amount (PRA) that totals $2,445. Since this amount will be
forgiven, Fitch increased its loss expectation by this amount (the
increase in loss was not material).

Seven loans in the pool were affected by a natural disaster and
incurred minor damage with a maximum repair cost of $10,000. Since
the damage rep carves out loans that have damages of less than
$30,000, Fitch reduced the updated property value of these seven
loans by the amount of the estimated damage as determined by the
property inspection. As a result, the sLTV were increased for these
loans, which in turn increased the loss severity.

Geographic Concentration (Negative): Approximately 37.9% of the
pool is concentrated in California. The largest MSA concentrations
are in the New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA MSA
(15.0%), the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA MSA (14.4%) and
the Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Miami Beach, FL MSA (8.6%). The top three
MSAs account for 37.9% of the pool. As a result, there was a 1.01x
probability of default (PD) penalty for geographic concentration,
which increased the 'AAAsf' loss by 0.05%.

No Advancing (Positive): The servicer will not be advancing
delinquent monthly payments of P&I. Due to P&I advances made on
behalf of loans that become delinquent and eventually reduce
liquidation proceeds to the trust, the loan-level loss severities
(LS) are 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.

Sequential Payment Structure (Positive): The transaction's cash
flow is based on a sequential-pay structure, whereby the
subordinate classes do not receive principal until the senior
classes are repaid in full. Losses are allocated in
reverse-sequential order. Furthermore, the provision to re-allocate
principal to pay interest on the 'AAAsf' and 'AAsf' rated
certificates prior to other principal distributions is highly
supportive of timely interest payments to those classes with no
advancing. Fitch rates to timely interest for 'AAAsf' rated classes
and rates to ultimate interest for all other rated classes.

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 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
the 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 41.7% at 'AAA'. The analysis indicates that 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

Fitch incorporates a sensitivity analysis to demonstrate how the
ratings would react to steeper MVDs than assumed at the MSA level.
Sensitivity analyses 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 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 modeling 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.

CRITERIA VARIATION

There was one criteria variation used in the analysis. The
variation was to Fitch's "U.S. RMBS Loan Loss Model Criteria."
Fitch used lower LS floors that start at 20% for the AAA stress and
end at 5% at the base case rather than starting at 30% for the AAA
stress and ending at 10% in the base case in the analysis of this
pool due to the seasoning of the loans and the very low LTVs. Using
a 30% LS floor is overly punitive, since almost 40% of the pool
will liquidate without a loss under Fitch's analysis if no LS floor
is applied at the AAA stress. Not applying this criteria variation
would result in a one category difference in the ratings.

Fitch used a customized version of the "U.S. RMBS Loan Loss Model."
The model was customized to revise the LS floors lower.

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 Clayton. A third-party due diligence
review was performed on 24.7% of the loans in the final pool. These
loans had a compliance review, servicing comment review, payment
history review, and data integrity review completed by SitusAMC and
Clayton, which are assessed by Fitch as 'Acceptable' third-party
review (TPR) firms.

The review scope was consistent with Fitch criteria for due
diligence on seasoned and re-performing loans. All loans in the
final pool that had a due diligence review completed received a
grade of 'A' or 'B' with no material findings.

A tax, title and lien review was performed on 690 loans by SitusAMC
and 89 loans by Clayton. The review found there are $258,389 in
outstanding tax, municipal, and HOA liens (0.05% of the total pool
balance).

Some loans in the pool have missing or defective documents, which
JPMCB is actively tracking down. JPMCB also consulted their
foreclosure attorney who confirmed that the majority of the missing
documents would not prevent a foreclosure. If JPMCB is not able to
obtain the missing documents by the time the loan goes to
foreclosure and not able to foreclose, it will repurchase the
loan.

A pay history review was conducted on a sample of the loans that
confirmed the pay strings are accurate.

Fitch considered the results of the due diligence in its analysis.
Fitch did not adjust its loss expectations for any risks posed by
due diligence findings due to the following mitigating factor:
JPMCB is the R&W provider that holds an investment-grade rating.

DATA ADEQUACY

Fitch relied on an independent third-party due diligence review
performed on 24.7% of the pool. The third-party due diligence was
generally consistent with Fitch's "U.S. RMBS Rating Criteria."
SitusAMC and Clayton were engaged to perform the review. Loans
reviewed under this engagement were given compliance grades.
Minimal exceptions and waivers were noted in the due diligence
reports. Refer to the Third-Party Due Diligence section of the
presale for more details.

AMC and Clayton also performed a serving comment review, payment
history review, and data integrity review of the loans that had a
compliance review.

690 loans had a tax and title review performed by SitusAMC and 89
loans by Clayton.

JPMorgan Chase has a very robust process for confirming the data in
loan tape is accurate based on the documentation they have in the
loan files and servicing systems, which is a mitigating factor to
the limited data integrity review by SitusAMC and Clayton in
addition to the R&W being provided by JPMorgan Chase.

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; however, this information was not provided
based on the American Securitization Forum's (ASF) data layout
format. Despite this difference in data presentation, Fitch
considered the data comprehensive. The data contained in the data
tape were reviewed by the due diligence company and no material
discrepancies were noted.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

Chase 2024-RPL2 has an ESG Relevance Score of '4' [+] for
transaction parties and operational risk. Operational risk is well
controlled in Chase 2024-RPL2 and includes strong transaction due
diligence, and all the pool loans are serviced by a servicer rated
'RPS1-'. All these attributes result in a reduction in expected
losses and in conjunction with other factors are relevant to the
ratings.

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.


CHASE MORTGAGE 2021-CL1: Moody's Hikes Cl. M-4 Certs Rating to Ba1
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has upgraded the ratings of 46 bonds from five US
residential mortgage-backed transactions (RMBS), backed by prime
jumbo and agency eligible mortgage loans.

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: Chase Mortgage Reference Notes, Series 2021-CL1

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to A2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2021 Definitive
Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Cl. M-4, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-5, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B2 (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Trust 2021-7

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2023 Upgraded
to Aa2 (sf)

Cl. B-1-A, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2023
Upgraded to Aa2 (sf)

Cl. B-1-X*, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2023
Upgraded to Aa2 (sf)

Cl. B-2, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2023 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

Cl. B-2-A, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2023 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

Cl. B-2-X*, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2023
Upgraded to A2 (sf)

Cl. B-3, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on May 27, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. B-5, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on May 27, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B3 (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Trust 2021-8

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2023 Upgraded
to Aa2 (sf)

Cl. B-1-A, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2023
Upgraded to Aa2 (sf)

Cl. B-1-X*, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2023
Upgraded to Aa2 (sf)

Cl. B-2, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2023 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

Cl. B-2-A, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2023 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

Cl. B-2-X*, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2023
Upgraded to A2 (sf)

Cl. B-3, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Aug 29, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jun 30, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. B-5, Upgraded to B1 (sf); previously on Jun 30, 2021 Definitive
Rating Assigned B3 (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Trust 2021-10

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Jul 30, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-1-A, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Jul 30, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-1-X*, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Jul 30, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-2, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Jul 30, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

Cl. B-2-A, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Jul 30, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

Cl. B-2-X*, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Jul 30, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

Cl. B-3, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jul 30, 2021 Definitive
Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 30, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. B-5, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Jul 30, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B3 (sf)

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Trust 2021-11

Cl. A-14, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 31, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-15, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 31, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-15-A, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 31, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-15-X*, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 31, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-X-4*, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Aug 31, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Aug 31, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-1-A, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Aug 31, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-1-X*, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Aug 31, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-2, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Aug 31, 2021 Definitive
Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

Cl. B-2-A, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Aug 31, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

Cl. B-2-X*, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Aug 31, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

Cl. B-3, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Aug 31, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Aug 31, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. B-5, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Aug 31, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B3 (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 updated loss expectations on the underlying pool. The
rating upgrades are a result of the stable performance of the
related pools, and an increase in credit enhancement an average of
approximately 2.3% for the upgraded bonds since Moody's last
review. Collateral performance remains stable as each of the deals
have less than 0.4% of loans delinquent more than 60 days and the
cumulative net losses for the transactions are, on average, about
0.01% as of the April distribution date.

In addition, Moody's analysis applied a greater probability of
default stress on loans that have experienced modifications,
Moody's decreased that stress to the extent the modifications were
in the form of temporary payment relief.

The rating actions also reflect the further seasoning of the
collateral and increased clarity regarding the impact of borrower
relief programs on collateral performance. Information obtained
from loan servicers in recent years has shed light on their current
strategies regarding borrower relief programs and the impact those
programs may have on collateral performance and transaction
liquidity, through servicer advancing. Moody's recent analysis has
found that in addition to robust home price appreciation, many of
these borrower relief programs have contributed to stronger
collateral performance than Moody's had previously expected, thus
supporting the upgrades.

No actions were taken on the remaining rated classes in these deals
as those classes are already at the highest achievable levels
within Moody's rating scale.

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.


CIFC FUNDING 2013-IV: Moody's Lowers Rating on F-RR Notes to Caa1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has upgraded the ratings on the following notes
issued by CIFC Funding 2013-IV, Ltd.:

US$59,000,000 Class B-RR Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2031 (the "Class B-RR Notes), Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on
March 6, 2023 Upgraded to Aa1 (sf)

US$23,500,000 Class C-RR Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class C-RR Notes), Upgraded to Aa2 (sf);
previously on March 6, 2023 Upgraded to A1 (sf)

US$31,500,000 Class D-RR Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class D-RR Notes), Upgraded to Baa2 (sf);
previously on May 29, 2018 Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

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

US$6,250,000 Class F-RR Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate
Notes due 2031 (the "Class F-RR Notes), Downgraded to Caa1 (sf);
previously on May 29, 2018 Definitive Rating Assigned B3 (sf)

CIFC Funding 2013-IV, Ltd., originally issued in November 2013,
refinanced in February 2017 and May 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 April 2023.

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

RATINGS RATIONALE

The upgrade rating actions are primarily a result of deleveraging
of the senior notes and increase in overcollateralization ratios
since May 2023. The Class A-1-RR notes have been paid down by
approximately 16% or $48.8 million since then. Based on Moody's
calculation the OC ratios for Class B-RR, C-RR and D-RR are
calculated at 132.82%, 123.99% and 113.85% respectively, versus
trustee reported May 2023 [1] levels of 129.38%, 121.83% and
112.98% respectively.

The downgrade rating action on the Class F-RR notes reflects the
specific risks to the junior notes posed by par loss and credit
deterioration observed in the underlying CLO portfolio. Based on
the Moody's calculation, the deal has lost approximately $12.7
million or 2.5% of portfolio par compared to the deals original
ramp-up. Furthermore, the  Moody's calculated weighted average
rating factor (WARF) have been deteriorating and the current levels
are 2934 compared to 2846 since the last rating action in March
2023.

No actions were taken on the Class A-1-RR, Class A-2-RR, and Class
E-RR 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: $436,581,632

Defaulted par:  $5,474,140

Diversity Score: 74

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2934

Weighted Average Spread (WAS) (before accounting for reference rate
floors): 3.28%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.6%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 3.5 years

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, 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
May 2024.

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.


CITIGROUP 2024-INV2: Moody's Assigns (P)B3 Rating to Cl. B-5 Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned provisional ratings to 84 classes of
residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) to be issued by
Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust 2024-INV2, and sponsored by Citigroup
Global Markets Realty Corp.

The securities are backed by a pool of prime jumbo (5.8% by
balance) and GSE-eligible (94.2% by balance) residential mortgages
aggregated by Citigroup Global Markets Realty Corp, originated by
multiple entities and serviced by Fay Servicing, LLC.

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Citigroup Mortgage Loan Trust 2024-INV2

Cl. A-1, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-1-IO1*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-1-IO2*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-1-IO3*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-1-IO4*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-1-IO5*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-1A, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

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

Cl. A-1C, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2-IO1*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2-IO2*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2-IO3*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2-IO4*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2-IO5*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2A, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

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

Cl. A-2C, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3-IO1*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3-IO2*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3-IO3*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3-IO4*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3-IO5*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3A, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3B, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3C, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3N, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3N-IO1*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3N-IO2*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3N-IO3*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3N-IO4*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3N-IO5*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3NA, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3NB, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3NC, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-4N, Assigned (P)Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-4N-IO1*, Assigned (P)Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-4N-IO2*, Assigned (P)Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-4N-IO3*, Assigned (P)Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-4N-IO4*, Assigned (P)Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-4N-IO5*, Assigned (P)Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-4NA, Assigned (P)Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-4NB, Assigned (P)Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-4NC, Assigned (P)Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-5-IO3*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-5-IO4*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-5-IO5*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-5-IOX*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-5-IO3X*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-5-IO4X*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-5-IO5X*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-6, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-6-IO1*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-6-IO2*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-6-IO3*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-6-IO4*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-6-IO5*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-6A, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-6B, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-6C, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-7, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-7-IO1*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-7-IO2*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-7-IO3*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-7-IO4*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-7-IO5*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-7A, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-7B, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-7C, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-8, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-8-IO1*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-8-IO2*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-8-IO3*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-8-IO4*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-8-IO5*, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-8A, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-8B, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-8C, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. B-1, Assigned (P)Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-2, Assigned (P)A2 (sf)

Cl. B-3, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

Cl. B-5, Assigned (P)B3 (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 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
1.02%, in a baseline scenario-median is 0.67% and reaches 8.83% 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.


COLT 2024-3: Fitch Assigns 'Bsf' Rating on Class B2 Certificates
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned final ratings to the residential
mortgage-backed certificates issued by COLT 2024-3 Mortgage Loan
Trust (COLT 2024-3).

   Entity/Debt       Rating            Prior
   -----------       ------            -----
COLT 2024-3

   A1            LT  AAAsf  New Rating   AAA(EXP)sf
   A2            LT  AAsf   New Rating   AA(EXP)sf
   A3            LT  Asf    New Rating   A(EXP)sf
   M1            LT  BBBsf  New Rating   BBB(EXP)sf
   B1            LT  BBsf   New Rating   BB(EXP)sf
   B2            LT  Bsf    New Rating   B(EXP)sf
   B3            LT  NRsf   New Rating   NR(EXP)sf
   AIOS          LT  NRsf   New Rating   NR(EXP)sf
   X             LT  NRsf   New Rating   NR(EXP)sf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Fitch has assigned ratings to the residential mortgage-backed
certificates to be issued by COLT 2024-3 Mortgage Loan Trust as
indicated above. The certificates are supported by 582 nonprime
loans with a total balance of approximately $357.1 million as of
the cut-off date.

Loans in the pool were originated by multiple originators,
including, HomeXpress Mortgage Corp., OCMBC, Inc (d/b/a LoanStream
Mortgage), Acra, and others. Loans were aggregated by Hudson
Americas L.P. Loans are currently serviced by Fay Servicing LLC
(Fay), Select Portfolio Servicing, Inc. (SPS), Northpointe Bank,
and Acra.

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 9.8% above a long-term sustainable level (versus
11.1% on a national level as of 4Q23, unchanged 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 increased 5.5% yoy nationally as of February
2024, despite modest regional declines, but are still being
supported by limited inventory.

COLT 2024-3 has a combined original loan-to-value (cLTV) of 74.2%,
slightly lower than the cLTV of the previous Hudson transaction,
COLT 2024-2. However, based on Fitch's updated view of housing
market overvaluation, this pool's sustainable LTV ratio (sLTV) is
82.5% compared to 82.4% for the previous transaction.

NQM Credit Quality (Negative): The collateral consists of 582 loans
totaling $357.1 million and seasoned at approximately three months
in aggregate. The borrowers have a moderate credit profile,
consisting of a 736 model FICO, and moderate leverage with a 82.5%
sLTV and a 74.2% combined original LTV (cLTV).

The pool consists of 60.0% of loans where the borrower maintains a
primary residence, while 34.4% comprise an investor property.
Additionally, 58.4% are nonqualified mortgages (NQM), 5.7% are Safe
Harbor QM (SHQM) and 1.5% are high-priced QM (HPQM). The QM rule
does not apply to the remainder.

Fitch's expected loss in the 'AAAsf' stress is 22.5%. This is
mainly driven by the NQM collateral and the significant investor
cash flow product (debt service coverage ratio [DSCR])
concentration.

Loan Documentation (Negative): Around 92.3% of loans in the pool
were underwritten to less than full documentation and 62.0% were
underwritten to a bank statement program for verifying income,
which is not consistent with Fitch's view of a full documentation
program. A key distinction between this pool and legacy Alt-A loans
is that these loans adhere to underwriting and documentation
standards required under the Consumer Financial Protections
Bureau's (CFPB) Ability to Repay Rule (ATR Rule, or the Rule).
Fitch's treatment of alternative loan documentation increased
'AAAsf' expected losses by 650bps compared with a deal of 100%
fully documented loans.

High Percentage of DSCR Loans (Negative): There are 94 DSCR
products in the pool (12.6% by unpaid principal balance [UPB]).
These business purpose loans are available to real estate investors
that are qualified on a cash flow basis, rather than debt-to-income
(DTI), and borrower income and employment are not verified.

Compared with standard investment properties, for DSCR loans, Fitch
converts the DSCR values to a DTI and treats them as low
documentation. Fitch's treatment for DSCR loans results in a higher
Fitch-reported non-zero DTI.

Of the DSCR loans, 3.0% include a default interest rate feature
whereby the interest rate to the borrower increases upon
delinquency/default. Fitch expects a lower cure rate on loans with
this feature and increases the likely default rate similar to the
impact of an adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM). Fitch's average
expected losses for DSCR loans is 33.4% in the 'AAAsf' stress.

Modified Sequential Payment Structure with Limited Advancing
(Mixed): The structure distributes principal pro rata among the
senior certificates while shutting out the subordinate bonds from
principal until all senior classes are reduced to zero. If a
cumulative loss trigger event, delinquency trigger event or credit
enhancement (CE) trigger event occurs in a given period, principal
will be distributed sequentially to class A-1, A-2 and A-3
certificates until they are reduced to zero.

Advances of delinquent P&I will be made on the mortgage loans for
the first 90 days of delinquency, to the extent such advances are
deemed recoverable. If the P&I advancing party fails to make a
required advance, the master servicer and then the securities
administrator will be obligated to make such advance.

The limited advancing reduces loss severities, as a lower amount is
repaid to the servicer when a loan liquidates and liquidation
proceeds are prioritized to cover principal repayment over accrued
but unpaid interest. The downside to this is the additional stress
on the structure, as there is limited liquidity in the event of
large and extended delinquencies.

COLT 2024-3 has a step-up coupon for the senior classes (A-1, A-2
and A-3). After four years, the senior classes pay the lesser of a
100bps increase to the fixed coupon or the net weighted average
coupon (NWAC) rate. Any class B-3 interest distribution amount will
be distributed to the class A-1, A-2 and A-3 certificates on and
after the step-up date if the cap carryover amount is greater than
zero. This increases the P&I allocation for the senior classes.

As an additional analysis to Fitch's rating stresses, it took into
account a WAC deterioration that varied by rating stress. The WAC
cut was derived by assuming a 2.5% cut (based on the most common
historical modification rate) on 40% (the historical Alt-A
modification percentage) of the performing loans. Although the WAC
reduction stress is based on historical modification rates, Fitch
did not include the WAC reduction stress in its testing of the
delinquency trigger.

Fitch viewed the WAC deterioration as more of a pre-emptive cut
given the ongoing macroeconomic and regulatory environment. A
portion of borrowers will likely be impaired but will not
ultimately default due to modifications and reduced P&I.
Furthermore, this approach had the largest impact on the backloaded
benchmark scenario.

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 level to assess the effect of higher MVDs for
the subject pool as well as lower MVDs, illustrated by a gain in
home prices.

The defined negative rating sensitivity analysis demonstrates how
the 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 41.3% at 'AAA'. The analysis indicates that there
is some potential rating migration with higher MVDs for all rated
classes, compared with the model projection. 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

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

The 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. A 10% gain
in home prices would result in a full category upgrade for the
rated class excluding those assigned 'AAAsf' ratings.

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 Consolidated Analytics, SitusAMC, Clayton, Evolve,
Selene, Clarifii, Opus and Maxwell. The third-party due diligence
described in Form 15E focused on credit, compliance and property
valuation review. Fitch considered this information in its analysis
and, as a result, Fitch made the following adjustment to its
analysis: a 5% credit was given at the loan level for each loan
where satisfactory due diligence was completed. This adjustment
resulted in a 52bps reduction to the 'AAA' expected loss.

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.


COMM 2015-CCRE27: Fitch Affirms 'CCC' Rating on Class F Debt
------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 12 classes of Deutsche Bank Securities,
Inc.'s COMM 2015-CCRE27 Mortgage Trust. Following their
affirmations, the Rating Outlooks for classes D, E, and X-C remain
Negative.

   Entity/Debt          Rating           Prior
   -----------          ------           -----
COMM 2015-CCRE27

   A-3 12635QBF6    LT AAAsf  Affirmed   AAAsf
   A-4 12635QBG4    LT AAAsf  Affirmed   AAAsf
   A-M 12635QBJ8    LT AAAsf  Affirmed   AAAsf
   A-SB 12635QBE9   LT AAAsf  Affirmed   AAAsf
   B 12635QBK5      LT AA-sf  Affirmed   AA-sf
   C 12635QBL3      LT A-sf   Affirmed   A-sf
   D 12635QAL4      LT BBB-sf Affirmed   BBB-sf
   E 12635QAN0      LT BB-sf  Affirmed   BB-sf
   F 12635QAQ3      LT CCCsf  Affirmed   CCCsf
   X-A 12635QBH2    LT AAAsf  Affirmed   AAAsf
   X-B 12635QAA8    LT AA-sf  Affirmed   AA-sf
   X-C 12635QAC4    LT BBB-sf Affirmed   BBB-sf

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Elevated Loss Expectations: The Negative Outlooks for classes D, E
and X-C reflect elevated loss expectations due to performance
declines of office and retail Fitch Loans of Concern (FLOCs)
including Midwest Shopping Center, Intellicenter, Hotel de Luxe,
Chase Park and Evergreen Square. There are 12 loans (24.8% of the
pool) that were identified as FLOCs, which includes five loans
(10.4%) in special servicing. Fitch's current ratings reflect a
'Bsf' rating case loss of 5.8%.

The Negative Outlooks reflect an additional sensitivity analysis
that includes higher probabilities of default on the Intellicenter,
A&H Pacific, Rockford Crossing, and Shops at Randall Road.

Largest Contributor to Loss Expectations: The largest contributor
to loss expectations is the specially serviced Evergreen Square
(0.8% of the pool), which is secured by an 80,601-sf retail center
located in Peroria, IL. The loan transferred to special servicing
in July 2020 at the borrower's request due to pandemic-related
performance declines. Since transferring, occupancy declined to
about 16.6% with the two remaining tenants consisting of Dollar
Tree Stores (13.8%) and H&R Block Enterprises (2.8%) whose leases
go through January 2025 and April 2024, respectively. The special
servicer has tried to liquidate the asset after it became REO in
September 2022.

Fitch has modeled a full loss on the loan, which is based on the
November 2023 appraised value with a 30% stress, representing an
89% decline compared to the value at issuance.

The second largest contributor to loss expectations and the largest
increase in loss expectations compared to the prior review is the
Midwest Shopping Portfolio (4.1% of the pool), which is secured by
six retail properties located in Iowa (2), Illinois (2), Oklahoma
(1), and Missouri (1) totaling 889,413-sf. The loan transferred to
special servicing in July 2020 due to payment default. Per the
special servicer, litigation commenced in several jurisdictions and
receivership/foreclosure actions are continuing. The borrower has
not provided updated rent rolls or financials.

Fitch's 'Bsf' rating case loss of 19.3% (prior to concentration
add-ons) is based on the December 2023 appraised value with a 30%
stress.

The third largest contributor to loss expectations is the Chase
Park loan, (3.2% of the pool) secured by a 287,514-sf suburban
office building in Austin, TX was identified as a FLOC due to
sustained performance declines. Occupancy declined to about 46.7%
after the largest tenant, the Texas Division of Emergency
Management (16.9% of the NRA), vacated in 2023, ahead of their
October 2026 lease expiration. The tenant's departure adds to prior
vacancies including Seto Family of Hospitals (16.5% of the NRA) who
vacated in 2023 as well as Austin Stone Church (10.4%) who vacated
in 2020.

Due to the increased vacancy, the YE 2023 and YE 2022 NOI are about
53.2% and 18.2% below NOI at issuance. The NOI DSCR for the YE 2023
reporting period has declined to 0.83x from 1.45x at YE 2022.

Fitch's 'Bsf rating case loss of 27.7% (prior to concentration
add-ons) includes a 10% cap rate and a 25% stress to the YE 2022
NOI as well as an increased probability of default due to the
loan's heightened term and maturity default concerns. The loan is
the largest contributor to loss expectations in the pool.

The fourth largest contributor to loss expectations is Hotel deLuxe
(3.6% of the pool), which is secured by a 130-key full-service
hotel in Portland, OR. The loan transferred to special servicing in
June 2020 at the borrower's request due to pandemic-related
performance declines. Performance remains lower with the September
2023 occupancy reported around 41%, which compares to 81% at YE
2019. The loan has maintained an NOI DSCR of around 0.00x since YE
2020. The borrower has requested to bring a current statement and a
non-permitted equity transfer, which was approved by the lender.

Fitch's 'Bsf' ratings case loss expectations of 20.2% (prior to
concentration additions) are based off the November 2023 appraised
value with 20% stress.

Intellicenter (4.0%) is the fifth largest contributor to pool loss
expectations and is secured by a 203,509-sf suburban office
building in Tampa, FL and is occupied by four tenants; H. Lee
Moffitt Cancer Center (76.1% of the NRA; March 2027 lease
expiration), Morgan Stanley (12.4%; March 2024), Open Text, Inc.
(10.5%; March 2024), and Four Fingers (0.9%; December 2023). Fitch
requested leasing updates on the three smaller tenants, but
received no response.

Overall property performance has remained stable, with the servicer
reported YTD September 2023 NOI DSCR reported at 1.83x.

To account for the near-term rollover of smaller tenants and
concentrated rollover of the large tenant around the loan's October
2025 maturity date, Fitch's 'Bsf' rating case loss expectations of
14.6% (prior to concentration adjustments) includes 40% stress to
the YE 2022 NOI and an increased probability of default.

Increasing Credit Enhancement: As of the May 2024 distribution
date, the pool's aggregate balance has been reduced by 17.5% to
$768.8 million from $931.6 million at issuance. Since the prior
review, an additional three loans have defeased, bringing total
defeasance to 21 loans for 34.8% of the pool. All remaining loans
are scheduled to mature between July 2025 and October 2025.
Interest shortfalls of $1.21 million are currently impacting the
non-rated class H.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

- Downgrades to 'AAAsf'-rated classes are not likely due to higher
pool defeasance, increasing CE and expected pay-off from non-FLOCs
and performing FLOCs. Downgrades are possible should a large
portion of non-FLOCs that Fitch expects to pay off default at or
before maturity, exposing these classes to prolonged workout
losses.

- Downgrades to classes rated 'AA-sf' and 'A-sf' may occur should
performance of Intellicenter, Chase Park, Canon West Shopping
Center, HGI Kennewick, and/or Shops at Randall Road experience
further performance declines or performing FLOCs, including the A&H
Pacific and Rockford Crossing default at or before maturity.

- Downgrades to classes rated 'BBB-sf', 'BB-sf', and 'CCCsf' may
occur should the aforementioned FLOCs experience further declines,
or should additional loans fail to repay at maturity.

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

- Upgrades to the classes rated 'AA-sf' and 'A-sf' may occur with
performance improvements of the FLOCs including Intellicenter,
Canon West Shopping Center, HGI Kennewick, and/or Shops at Randall
Road, coupled with improving CE and/or defeasance.

- Upgrades to classes rated 'BBB-sf' or 'BB-sf' would occur with
improving performance of the aforementioned loans, and favorable
workout strategies of the loans in special servicing.

- Upgrades to classes rated 'CCCsf' are unlikely unless FLOCs
anticipated at maturity refinance without issue and loans currently
in special servicing experience favorable workout strategies.

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

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.


CSAIL 2019-C15: FItch Lowers Rating on Class F-RR Debt to CCC
-------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed 13 classes of CSAIL 2018-C14 Commercial
Mortgage Trust (CSAIL 2018-C14) and 14 classes of CSAIL 2019-C16
Commercial Mortgage Trust (CSAIL 2019-C16). Fitch has revised the
Rating Outlooks for affirmed classes E-RR and F-RR in CSAIL
2019-C16 to Negative from Stable.

Fitch has also downgraded one class and affirmed 12 classes of
CSAIL 2019-C15 Commercial Mortgage Trust (CSAIL 2019-C15). Fitch
assigned a Negative Outlook to class F-RR following the downgrade
and revised the Outlook to Negative from Stable for affirmed
classes, D, X-D, and E-RR.

   Entity/Debt          Rating               Prior
   -----------          ------               -----
CSAIL 2018-C14

   A-2 12596GAX7    LT PIFsf  Paid In Full   AAAsf
   A-3 12596GAY5    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-4 12596GAZ2    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-S 12596GBD0    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-SB 12596GBA6   LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   B 12596GBE8      LT AA-sf  Affirmed       AA-sf
   C 12596GBF5      LT A-sf   Affirmed       A-sf
   D 12596GAG4      LT BBBsf  Affirmed       BBBsf
   E 12596GAJ8      LT BB-sf  Affirmed       BB-sf
   F 12596GAL3      LT CCCsf  Affirmed       CCCsf
   G 12596GAN9      LT CCsf   Affirmed       CCsf
   X-A 12596GBB4    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   X-F 12596GAA7    LT CCCsf  Affirmed       CCCsf
   X-G 12596GAC3    LT CCsf   Affirmed       CCsf  

CSAIL 2019-C15

   A-2 22945DAC7    LT PIFsf  Paid In Full   AAAsf
   A-3 22945DAE3    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-4 22945DAG8    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-S 22945DAQ6    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-SB 22945DAJ2   LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   B 22945DAS2      LT AA-sf  Affirmed       AA-sf
   C 22945DAU7      LT A-sf   Affirmed       A-sf
   D 22945DAY9      LT BBB-sf Affirmed       BBB-sf
   E-RR 22945DBA0   LT BBB-sf Affirmed       BBB-sf
   F-RR 22945DBC6   LT B-sf   Downgrade      BB-sf
   G-RR 22945DBE2   LT CCCsf  Affirmed       CCCsf
   X-A 22945DAL7    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   X-B 22945DAN3    LT AA-sf  Affirmed       AA-sf
   X-D 22945DAW3    LT BBB-sf Affirmed       BBB-sf

CSAIL 2019-C16

   A-1 12596WAA2    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-2 12596WAB0    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-3 12596WAC8    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-S 12596WAG9    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-SB 12596WAD6   LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   B 12596WAH7      LT AA-sf  Affirmed       AA-sf
   C 12596WAJ3      LT A-sf   Affirmed       A-sf
   D 12596WAM6      LT BBB-sf Affirmed       BBB-sf
   E-RR 12596WAP9   LT BBB-sf Affirmed       BBB-sf
   F-RR 12596WAR5   LT B+sf   Affirmed       B+sf
   G-RR 12596WAT1   LT B-sf   Affirmed       B-sf
   X-A 12596WAE4    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   X-B 12596WAF1    LT A-sf   Affirmed       A-sf
   X-D 12596WAK0    LT BBB-sf Affirmed       BBB-sf

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Performance and 'B' Loss Expectations: Deal-level 'Bsf' ratings
case losses are 6.9% in CSAIL 2018-C14, 6.3% in CSAIL 2019-C15 and
5.0% in CSAIL 2019-C16. Fitch Loans of Concern (FLOCs) comprise
seven loans (20.1% of the pool) in CSAIL 2018-C14 including two
specially serviced loans (13.0%), eight loans (23.4%) in CSAIL
2019-C15 including one specially serviced loan (3.3%) and seven
loans (17.4%) in CSAIL 2019-C16 including two specially serviced
loans (5.4%).

The downgrade to class F-RR in CSAIL 2019-C15 reflects higher pool
loss expectations since Fitch's prior rating action, driven
primarily by further performance declines on FLOCs including
Embassy Suites Portland Washington Square (7.5%) and Continental
Towers (3.3%). The Negative Outlooks on classes E-RR and F-RR
reflect the continued occupancy and cashflow deterioration among
the FLOCs.

Affirmations and Stable Outlooks in CSAIL 2018-C14 and CSAIL
2019-C16 reflect generally stable performance since Fitch's prior
rating action. The Negative Outlooks for classes D and E in CSAIL
2018-C14 reflect possible downgrades with further performance
deterioration on the FLOCs, primarily Continental Towers (9.2%) and
Holiday Inn FiDi (3.9%). The Negative Outlooks for classes E-RR,
F-RR, and G-RR in CSAIL 2019-C16 reflect possible downgrades with
further performance deterioration on the FLOCs, primarily Embassy
Suites Seattle Bellevue (5.4%) and Santa Fe Portfolio (4.3%).

The largest contributor to overall loss expectations in the CSAIL
2018-C14 and CSAIL 2019-C15 transaction is the specially serviced
Continental Towers loan. The loan is secured by a 910,866-sf
suburban office property located in Rolling Meadows, IL, which is
approximately 25 miles northwest of downtown Chicago. The
collateral consists of three 12-story office buildings surrounding
a large single-story commercial building that were built in 1978
and subsequently renovated between 2013-2018. The loan transferred
to special servicing in April 2023 due to imminent monetary
default. The borrower failed to pay various expenses and multiple
liens were filed. According to servicer updates, loan modification
discussions are ongoing.

Occupancy has steadily declined since issuance and is at 58.7% as
of November 2023 from 62% at March 2023, 74% at YE 2020, 86% at YE
2019 and 93% at issuance. Fitch's base case 'Bsf' ratings case loss
of 45% (prior to concentration add-ons) reflects a 10.5% cap rate,
15% stress to the YE 2022 NOI as well as recognition of a higher
probability of default.

The second largest contributor overall loss expectations in CSAIL
2019-C15 is Embassy Suites Portland Washington Square, which is
secured by a 356-room full-service hotel located approximately
eight miles southwest of downtown Portland. The hotel has a large
amount of event and meeting space, with an 8,200-sf ballroom and
24,000sf of total meeting space. The loan is considered FLOC due to
declining cash flow, the property's performance has yet to return
to pre-pandemic levels. As of September 2023, subject NOI debt
service coverage ratio (DSCR) was 0.81x, compared to 1.20x at YE
2022, 0.16 at YE 2021, -0.23x at YE 2020 and 1.95x at YE 2019.

Fitch did not receive an updated STR report but according to a
September 2023 financial statement occupancy was 53.7%, ADR was
$164, and RevPAR was $88 compared to 43.5%, $163, and $71
respectively as of the June 2022 STR report. Fitch's base case
'Bsf' ratings case loss of 18% (prior to concentration add-ons)
reflects a 11.5% cap rate to the YE 2022 NOI.

The largest contributor overall loss expectations in CSAIL 2019-C16
is Embassy Suites Seattle Bellevue, which is secured by a 240-room
full-service hotel in Bellevue, WA. The hotel was built in 1990 and
renovated in 2015 and 2016. The hotel underwent $10.1 million
($41,977 per key) in renovations to guestrooms, lobby, atrium,
restaurant and common area improvements. This loan was flagged as a
FLOC due to low DSCR as property performance has struggled to
rebound from the pandemic.

As of the TTM ended December 2023, the hotel's reported occupancy,
ADR, and RevPAR of 61.6%, $186, and $115, respectively, compared
with 61.5%, $179, and $110 at TTM December 2022, 35%, $109, and $38
at TTM June 2021, 27%, $131, and $36 at TTM December 2020; and 77%,
$181, and $140 at TTM December 2019. The hotel reported a RevPAR
Penetration index of 94.7% as of TTM December 2023, and for the
same period, the hotels competitive set reported an occupancy, ADR
and RevPAR, of 65.4%, $185 and $121, respectively. The NOI DSCR as
of YE 2023 was 1.15x from 1.18x at YE 2022, 0.17x at YE 2021,
-0.53x at YE 2020 and 1.61x at YE 2019.

Fitch's base case 'Bsf' ratings case loss of 17% (prior to
concentration add-ons) reflects a 11.25% cap rate to the YE 2023
NOI.

The second largest contributor overall loss expectations in CSAIL
2019-C16 is the Santa Fe Portfolio loan, which is secured by a
portfolio of 11 properties (six retail, four office and one
mixed-use) located in downtown Santa Fe, NM. The loan transferred
to special servicing for payment default in June 2020. The loan was
modified in June 2021 and was brought current in February 2022
after having been 60+ days delinquent since its initial default;
however, the Borrower re-defaulted after the loan became delinquent
in August 2022. The special servicer is in the process of returning
the loan to the master servicer.

The portfolio's major tenants include Gerald Peters Gallery (23.5%
NRA; lease expiry October 2033), Santa Fe Properties (8.7% NRA;
October 2033) and Hidden Mountain Brewing Company (3.9% NRA;
October 2033). Nine of the tenants are sponsor affiliates which
represent approximately 45% of the NRA. Per the most recent
available September 2022 rent roll, portfolio occupancy was 98%,
from 90% at YE 2021, 89% at YE 2020, 96% at YE 2019 and 95% at
issuance.

Fitch's base case 'Bsf' ratings case loss of 10% (prior to
concentration add-ons) reflects a stressed value of approximately
$135 psf.

Changes in Credit Enhancement: As of the May 2024 distribution
date, the aggregate balances of the CSAIL 2018-C14, CSAIL 2019-C15
and CSAIL 2019-C16 transactions have been paid down by 15.9%, 9.2%,
and 2.4%, respectively, since issuance. The CSAIL 2018-C14
transaction includes one loan (.8% of the pool) that has fully
defeased, while CSAIL 2019-C15 has one defeased loan (.6%), and
CSAIL 2019-C16 has three defeased loans (3.2%).

Interest Shortfalls: Cumulative interest shortfalls of
approximately $610,000 are affecting the non-rated class NR in
CSAIL 2018-C14, approximately $86,000 are affecting the non-rated
class NR-RR in CSAIL 2019-C15, and approximately $180,000 are
affecting the non-rated class NR-RR in CSAIL 2019-C16.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

Downgrades to senior and junior 'AAAsf' rated classes are not
expected due to the position in the capital structure and expected
continued amortization and loan repayments, but may occur if
deal-level losses increase significantly and/or interest shortfalls
occur.

Downgrades to classes rated in the 'AAsf' and 'Asf' categories
could occur if deal-level losses increase significantly from
outsized losses on larger FLOCs and/or more loans than expected
experience performance deterioration and/or default at or prior to
maturity.

Downgrades to in the 'BBBsf', 'BBsf' and 'Bsf' categories are
possible with higher than expected losses from continued
underperformance of the FLOCs, and/or with greater certainty of
losses on FLOCs. Of particular concern in the CSAIL 2018-C14
transaction include Continental Towers and Holiday Inn FiDi FLOCs.
Of particular concern in the CSAIL 2019-C15 transaction include the
Embassy Suites Portland Washington Square and Continental Towers
FLOCs. Of particular concern in the CSAIL 2019-C16 transaction
include the Embassy Suites Seattle Bellevue and Santa Fe Portfolio
FLOCs.

Downgrades to 'CCCsf' and 'CCsf' rated classes would occur should
additional loans transfer to special servicing and/or default, or
as losses become realized or more certain.

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

Upgrades to classes rated in the 'AAsf' and 'Asf' category may be
possible with significantly increased credit enhancement (CE),
coupled with stable-to-improved pool-level loss expectations and
sustained improved performance on the FLOCs, specifically
Continental Towers, Embassy Suites Portland Washington Square,
Embassy Suites Seattle Bellevue, and Santa Fe Portfolio.

Upgrades to the 'BBBsf' category rated classes would be limited
based on sensitivity to concentrations or the potential for future
concentration. Classes would not be upgraded above 'AA+sf' if there
is likelihood for interest shortfalls.

Upgrades to 'BBsf' and 'Bsf' category rated classes are not likely
until the later years in a transaction and only if the performance
of the remaining pool is stable, recoveries on the FLOCs are better
than expected and there is sufficient CE to the classes.

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

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.


DRYDEN 36: S&P Affirms 'B+ (sf) Rating on Class E-R2 Notes
----------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings raised its ratings on the class B-R3, C-R3, and
D-R3 notes from Dryden 36 Senior Loan Fund and removed them from
CreditWatch with positive implications. S&P also affirmed its
rating on the class A-R3 and E-R2 notes from the same transaction.
The transaction is a U.S. CLO managed by PGIM Inc.

The rating actions follow its review of the transaction's
performance using data from the March 2024 trustee report.

S&P said, "We had placed the class B-R3, C-R3, and D-R3 notes on
CreditWatch with positive implications on April 17, 2024, primarily
reflecting the transactions' increased credit support following
paydowns to senior classes.

"Since our Dec. 11, 2020 rating actions, the transaction has paid
down $205.56 million to the class A-R3 notes. These paydowns
resulted in improved reported overcollateralization (O/C) ratios
since the October 2020 trustee report which we used at the time of
the December refinancing:

-- The class B-R3 O/C ratio improved to 141.27% from 131.04%.

-- The class C-R3 O/C ratio improved to 120.31% from 117.43%.

While the senior O/C ratios improved, the junior O/C ratios
declined since the October 2020 trustee report:

-- The class D-R3 O/C ratio declined slightly to 110.40% from
110.49%.

-- The class E-R2 O/C ratio declined to 103.93% from 105.76%.

While the senior O/C ratios experienced a positive movement due to
the lower balances of the senior notes, the class D-R3 and E-R2 O/C
ratio declined, partially due to an increase in defaults and
haircuts that the CLO incurred since our last rating action. The
class E-R2 O/C ratio test was not in compliance by 27 basis points
in March 2024 trustee report, but interest proceeds were diverted
to cure the test on the April 15, 2024, payment date.

The collateral portfolio's credit quality has slightly deteriorated
since our last rating actions. Collateral obligations with ratings
in the 'CCC' category have decreased to $37.55 million in March
2024 trustee report from $60.23 million in October 2020 trustee
report. Despite the reduction in the par amount of 'CCC', the
exposure in the total remaining portfolio has increased. Over the
same period, the par amount of defaulted collateral has increased
to $14.15 million from $7.01 million. This increased the scenario
default rates of the portfolio, which is a reflection of the credit
support to the classes.

The transaction has exposure to long-dated assets (assets maturing
after the CLO's stated maturity). According to March 2024 trustee
report, the balance of collateral with a maturity date after the
transaction's stated maturity is $3.74 million (0.75% of the
portfolio).

The upgraded ratings reflect 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.

On a standalone basis, the results of the cash flow analysis
indicated a higher rating on the class C-R3, D-R3, and E-R2 notes.
S&P said, "However, because the transaction currently has some
elevated exposure to 'CCC' rated collateral obligations, defaulted
assets, and long-dated assets, we limited the upgrade on some
classes to offset future potential credit migration in the
underlying collateral. Our rating actions reflect additional
sensitivity runs that considered the exposure to lower quality
assets and distressed prices we noticed in the portfolio."

S&P said, "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 Raised And Removed From CreditWatch Positive

  Dryden 36 Senior Loan Fund Ltd.

  Class B-R3 to 'AAA (sf)' from 'AA (sf)/Watch Pos'
  Class C-R3 to 'AA- (sf)' from 'A (sf)/Watch Pos'
  Class D-R3 to 'BBB (sf)' from 'BBB- (sf)/Watch Pos'

  Ratings Affirmed

  Dryden 36 Senior Loan Fund Ltd.

  Class A-R3: AAA (sf)
  Class E-R2: B+ (sf)



DRYDEN 83 CLO: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E-R Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A-R, B-1-R,
B-2-R, C-1-R, C-2-R, D-1-R, D-2-R, and E-R replacement debt from
Dryden 83 CLO Ltd./Dryden 83 CLO LLC, a CLO originally issued in
January 2021 that is managed by PGIM Inc. At the same time, we
withdrew our ratings on the original class A, B, C, D, and E debt
following payment in full on the May 30, 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-R, B-1-R, B-2-R, C-1-R, C-2-R, D-1-R,
D-2-R, and E-R notes were issued at a floating spread.

-- The stated maturity and the reinvestment period were extended
by 5.25 years.

-- A new non-call period was established, which will end
immediately prior to (and excludes) the payment date in April
2026.

-- Several new features were added, including but not limited to
amendments to the collateral debt obligation definition and the
conditions to invest additional money in workout-related assets (as
defined in the document).

Replacement And Original Debt Issuances

Replacement debt

-- Class A-R, $288.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.53%

-- Class B-1-R, $40.50 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.95%

-- Class B-2-R, $13.50 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 2.15%

-- Class C-1-R (deferrable), $18.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 2.35%

-- Class C-2-R (deferrable), $9.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 2.80%

-- Class D-1-R (deferrable), $23.60 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 3.70%

-- Class D-2-R (deferrable), $6.75 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 5.20%

-- Class E-R (deferrable), $14.65 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 6.32%

Original debt

-- Class A, $250.99 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.22% +
CSA(i)

-- Class B, $48.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.60% +
CSA(i)

-- Class C (deferrable), $24.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR
+ 2.15% + CSA(i)

-- Class D (deferrable), $24.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR
+ 3.50% + CSA(i)

-- Class E (deferrable), $14.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR
+ 5.55% + CSA(i)

(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
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."

  Ratings Assigned

  Dryden 83 CLO Ltd./Dryden 83 CLO LLC

  Class A-R, $288.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B-1-R, $40.50 million: AA+ (sf)
  Class B-2-R, $13.50 million: AA (sf)
  Class C-1-R (deferrable), $18.00 million: A+ (sf)
  Class C-2-R (deferrable), $9.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D-1-R (deferrable), $23.60 million: BBB (sf)
  Class D-2-R (deferrable), $6.75 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E-R (deferrable), $14.65 million: BB- (sf)

  Ratings Withdrawn

  Dryden 83 CLO Ltd./Dryden 83 CLO LLC

  Class A to not rated from 'AAA (sf)'
  Class B to not rated from 'AA (sf)'
  Class C to not rated from 'A (sf)'
  Class D to not rated from 'BBB- (sf)'
  Class E to not rated from 'BB- (sf)'

  Other Debt

  Dryden 83 CLO Ltd./Dryden 83 CLO LLC

  Subordinated notes(i), $57.52 million: Not rated

(i)Includes $40.00 million of subordinated notes issued on the Jan.
6, 2021, closing date



EATON VANCE 2019-1: Fitch Assigns 'B-sf' Rating on Class F-R2 Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned ratings and Rating Outlooks to Eaton
Vance CLO 2019-1, Ltd. Refinancing notes.

   Entity/Debt        Rating           
   -----------        ------           
Eaton Vance
CLO 2019-1
  
   A-R2           LT NRsf    New Rating
   B-R2           LT AAsf    New Rating
   C-R2           LT Asf     New Rating
   D-1-R2         LT BBB-sf  New Rating
   D-2-R2         LT BBB-sf  New Rating
   E-R2           LT BB-sf   New Rating
   F-R2           LT B-sf    New Rating
   Subordinated   LT NRsf    New Rating
   X-R2           LT NRsf    New Rating

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Eaton Vance CLO 2019-1, Ltd. (the issuer) is an arbitrage cash flow
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) managed by Eaton Vance
Management that originally closed in May 2019 and is being
refinanced for the second time. Net proceeds from the issuance of
the secured 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', which is in line with that of recent
CLOs. The weighted average rating factor (WARF) of the indicative
portfolio is 23.33, versus a maximum covenant, in accordance with
the initial expected matrix point of 24. 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
99.6% first-lien senior secured loans. The weighted average
recovery rate (WARR) of the indicative portfolio is 75.67% versus a
minimum covenant, in accordance with the initial expected matrix
point of 68.3%.

Portfolio Composition (Positive): The largest three industries may
comprise up to 42.5% 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 5.1-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 weighted average life (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-R2, between 'B+sf'
and 'BBB+sf' for class C-R2, between less than 'B-sf' and 'BB+sf'
for class D-1-R2, between less than 'B-sf' and 'BB+sf' for class
D-2-R2, between less than 'B-sf' and 'B+sf' for class E-R2, and
between B+sf' and less than 'B-sf' for class F-R2.

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-R2, 'AAsf' for class C-R2, 'A-sf'
for class D-1-R2, 'BBB+sf' for class D-2-R2, 'BBB+sf' for class
E-R2, and 'BB+sf' for class F-R2.

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 Eaton Vance CLO
2019-1, 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.


ELLINGTON CLO IV: Moody's Lowers Rating on 2 Tranches to Caa1
-------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has upgraded the ratings on the following notes
issued by Ellington CLO IV, Ltd.:

US$32,775,000 Class D-1 Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes (the
"Class D-1 Notes"), Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on January 12,
2024 Upgraded to A1 (sf)

US$5,700,000 Class D-2-R Secured Deferrable Fixed Rate Notes (the
"Class D-2-R Notes"), Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on January
12, 2024 Upgraded to A1 (sf)

Moody's has also downgraded the ratings on the following notes:

US$44,450,000 Class E-1 Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes (the
"Class E-1 Notes"), Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on January
12, 2024 Downgraded to B2 (sf)

US$3,050,000 Class E-2-R Secured Deferrable Fixed Rate Notes (the
"Class E-2-R Notes"), Downgraded to Caa1 (sf); previously on
January 12, 2024 Downgraded to B2 (sf)

Ellington CLO IV, Ltd., originally issued in March 2019 and
partially refinanced in June 2021, 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 2021.

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

RATINGS RATIONALE

The upgrade rating actions on the Class D-1 and Class D-2-R notes
are primarily a result of deleveraging of the senior notes and an
increase in the transaction's over-collateralization (OC) ratios
since January 2024. The Class A-R notes were paid in full by
approximately $6.1 million, and Class B-R have been paid down by
approximately 88.7% or $40.0 million since then. Based on Moody's
calculation, the OC ratio for the Class D-1/D-2-R notes is
currently 170.82%, versus January 2024 level of 146.52%.  

The downgrade rating actions on the Class E-1 and Class E-2-R 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 calculation, the OC ratio for the Class E-1/E-2-R
notes is currently 103.02%, versus January level of 104.61%.
Furthermore, Moody's calculated weighted average rating factor
(WARF) has been deteriorating and the current level is 4793,
compared to 4380 in January 2024.

No actions were taken on the Class B-R, Class C-R, Class F-1 and
Class F-2 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: $109,592,908

Defaulted par:  $39,699,113

Diversity Score: 15

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 4793

Weighted Average Spread (WAS) (before accounting for reference rate
floors): 4.94%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 3.99%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 43.37%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 2.06 years

Par haircut in OC tests and interest diversion test:  3.9%

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, and 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
May 2024.

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.


ELMWOOD CLO 28: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Elmwood CLO 28
Ltd./Elmwood CLO 28 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 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.

  Ratings Assigned

  Elmwood CLO 28 Ltd./Elmwood CLO 28 LLC

  Class A, $256.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B, $48.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C (deferrable), $24.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D (deferrable), $24.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $16.00 million: BB- (sf)
  Class F (deferrable), $4.00 million: B- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $32.00 million: Not rated



EMPOWER CLO 2024-2: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Empower CLO
2024-2 Ltd./Empower CLO 2024-2 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 Empower Capital Management LLC.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of June 5,
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

  Empower CLO 2024-2 Ltd./Empower CLO 2024-2 LLC

  Class A-1 loan, $62.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-1, 194.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2, $8.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B, $40.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C (deferrable), $24.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D (deferrable), $24.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $16.00 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $38.50 million: Not rated



FANNIE MAE 2024-R04: S&P Assigns BB (sf) Rating on Cl. 1B-1X Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Fannie Mae Connecticut
Avenue Securities Trust 2024-R04's notes.

The note issuance is an RMBS transaction backed by fully
amortizing, first-lien, fixed-rate residential mortgage loans
secured by one- to four-family residences, planned-unit
developments, condominiums, manufactured housing, and cooperatives
made primarily to prime borrowers.

The ratings reflect:

-- The credit enhancement provided by the subordinated reference
tranches and the associated structural deal mechanics;

-- The REMIC structure, which reduces the counterparty exposure to
Fannie Mae for periodic principal and interest payments but also
pledges the support of Fannie Mae (as a highly rated counterparty)
to cover any shortfalls on interest payments and make up for any
investment losses;

-- The issuer's aggregation experience and the alignment of
interests between the issuer and the noteholders in the
transaction's performance, which we believe enhance the notes'
strength;

-- The enhanced credit risk management and quality control (QC)
processes Fannie Mae uses in conjunction with the underlying R&W
framework; and

-- The potential impact that current and near-term macroeconomic
conditions may have on the performance of the mortgage borrowers in
the pool. S&P said, "Per our latest macroeconomic update, the U.S.
economy appears on track for 2.5% average growth in 2024 (up from
1.5% in our November 2023 forecast), spurred by a sturdy labor
market--repeating last year's outperformance versus peers. We
continue to expect the economy to transition to below-potential
growth as the year progresses. We apply our current market outlook
as it relates to the 'B' projected archetypal foreclosure frequency
(which we updated to 2.50% from 3.25% in October 2023), reflecting
our benign view of the mortgage and housing market as demonstrated
through general national-level home price behavior, unemployment
rates, mortgage performance, and underwriting."

  Ratings Assigned

  Fannie Mae Connecticut Avenue Securities Trust 2024-R04

  Class 1A-H(i), $17,539,449,120: Not rated
  Class 1A-1, $220,403,000: A+ (sf)
  Class 1A-1H(i), $11,600,295: Not rated
  Class 1M-1, $220,403,000: BBB+ (sf)
  Class 1M-1H(i), $11,600,295: Not rated
  Class 1M-2A(ii), $58,774,000: BBB+ (sf)
  Class 1M-AH(i), $3,093,545: Not rated
  Class 1M-2B(ii), $58,774,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1M-BH(i), $3,093,545: Not rated
  Class 1M-2C(ii), $58,774,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1M-CH(i), $3,093,545: Not rated
  Class 1M-2(ii), $176,322,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1B-1A(ii), $45,240,000: BB+ (sf)
  Class 1B-AH(i), $24,360,989: Not rated
  Class 1B-1B(ii), $45,240,000: BB (sf)
  Class 1B-BH(i), $24,360,989: Not rated
  Class 1B-1(ii), $90,480,000: BB (sf)
  Class 1B-2H(i), $139,201,977: Not rated
  Class 1B-3H(i), $92,801,319: Not rated

  Related combinable and recombinable notes exchangeable
classes(iii)

  Class 1E-A1, $58,774,000: BBB+ (sf)
  Class 1A-I1, $58,774,000(iv): BBB+ (sf)
  Class 1E-A2, $58,774,000: BBB+ (sf)
  Class 1A-I2, $58,774,000(iv): BBB+ (sf)
  Class 1E-A3, $58,774,000: BBB+ (sf)
  Class 1A-I3, $58,774,000(iv): BBB+ (sf)
  Class 1E-A4, $58,774,000: BBB+ (sf)
  Class 1A-I4, $58,774,000(iv): BBB+ (sf)
  Class 1E-B1, $58,774,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1B-I1, $58,774,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-B2, $58,774,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1B-I2, $58,774,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-B3, $58,774,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1B-I3, $58,774,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-B4, $58,774,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1B-I4, $58,774,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-C1, $58,774,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1C-I1, $58,774,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-C2, $58,774,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1C-I2, $58,774,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-C3, $58,774,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1C-I3, $58,774,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-C4, $58,774,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1C-I4, $58,774,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-D1, $117,548,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-D2, $117,548,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-D3, $117,548,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-D4, $117,548,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-D5, $117,548,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-F1, $117,548,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-F2, $117,548,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-F3, $117,548,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-F4, $117,548,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1E-F5, $117,548,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1-X1, $117,548,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1-X2, $117,548,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1-X3, $117,548,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1-X4, $117,548,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1-Y1, $117,548,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1-Y2, $117,548,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1-Y3, $117,548,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1-Y4, $117,548,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1-J1, $58,774,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1-J2, $58,774,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1-J3, $58,774,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1-J4, $58,774,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1-K1, $117,548,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1-K2, $117,548,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1-K3, $117,548,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1-K4, $117,548,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1M-2Y, $176,322,000: BBB (sf)
  Class 1M-2X, $176,322,000(iv): BBB (sf)
  Class 1B-1Y, $90,480,000: BB (sf)
  Class 1B-1X, $90,480,000(iv): BB (sf)

(i)Reference tranche only and will not have corresponding notes.
Fannie Mae retains the risk of these tranches.
(ii)The class 1M-2 noteholders may exchange all or part of that
class for proportionate interests in the class 1M-2A, 1M-2B, and
1M-2C notes and vice versa. The class 1B-1 noteholders may exchange
all or part of that class for proportionate interests in the class
1B-1A and 1B-1B notes and vice versa. The class 1M-2A, 1M-2B,
1M-2C, 1B-1A, and 1B-1B noteholders may exchange all or part of
those classes for proportionate interests in the classes of RCR
notes as specified in the offering documents.
(iii)See the offering documents for more detail on possible
combinations.
(iv)Notional amount.



FLATIRON CLO 28: Fitch Assigns 'BB-sf' Rating on Class E Notes
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned ratings and Rating Outlooks to Flatiron
CLO 28 Ltd.

   Entity/Debt              Rating           
   -----------              ------           
Flatiron CLO 28, Ltd.

   A-1                  LT NRsf   New Rating
   A-2                  LT AAAsf  New Rating
   A-L                  LT NRsf   New Rating
   B                    LT AAsf   New Rating
   C                    LT Asf    New Rating
   D-1                  LT BBB-sf New Rating
   D-2                  LT BBB-sf New Rating
   E                    LT BB-sf  New Rating
   Subordinated Notes   LT NRsf   New Rating

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Flatiron CLO 28 Ltd. (the issuer) is an arbitrage cash flow
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) that will be managed by NYL
Investors LLC. Net proceeds from the issuance of the secured and
subordinated notes will provide financing on a portfolio of
approximately $450 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 23.48, versus a maximum covenant, in accordance with
the initial expected matrix point of 26. 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
98.61% first-lien senior secured loans. The weighted average
recovery rate (WARR) of the indicative portfolio is 76.28% versus a
minimum covenant, in accordance with the initial expected matrix
point of 72.9%.

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 3.1-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 '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 'BB-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 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, '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 Flatiron CLO 28
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.


FORTRESS CREDIT XXV: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Fortress
Credit BSL XXV Ltd./Fortress Credit BSL XXV 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 FC BSL CLO Manager LLC series V, an
affiliate of Fortress Investment Group LLC.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of June 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 debt through portfolio
identification and ongoing management; and

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

  Preliminary Ratings Assigned

  Fortress Credit BSL XXV Ltd./Fortress Credit BSL XXV LLC

  Class A, $276.750 million: Not rated
  Class B, $58.500 million: AA (sf)
  Class C (deferrable), $27.000 million: A (sf)
  Class D-1A (deferrable), $16.875 million: BBB (sf)
  Class D-1B (deferrable), $10.125 million: BBB (sf)
  Class D-2 (deferrable), $5.625 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $10.125 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $48.650 million: Not rated



FREDDIE MAC 2021-HQA2: Moody's Hikes Rating on 3 Tranches to Ba1
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has upgraded the ratings of 118 bonds from seven US
residential mortgage-backed transactions (RMBS), which were issued
by the Freddie Mac to share the credit risk on a reference pool of
mortgages with the capital markets. These transactions are high-LTV
transactions, which benefit from mortgage insurance. In addition,
the credit risk exposure of the notes depends on the actual
realized losses and modification losses incurred by the reference
pool.

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

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: Freddie Mac STACR REMIC Trust 2020-HQA2

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded to
A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2B, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2BI*, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2BR, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2BS, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2BT, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2BU, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2I*, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2R, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2RB, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2S, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2SB, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2T, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2TB, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2U, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Cl. M-2UB, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A3 (sf)

Issuer: Freddie Mac STACR REMIC Trust 2020-HQA5

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2022 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. B-1A, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2022 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. B-1AI*, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2022 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. B-1AR, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2022 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. B-1B, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Aug 4, 2022 Upgraded
to Ba2 (sf)

Issuer: Freddie Mac STACR REMIC TRUST 2021-HQA1

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. B-1A, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. B-1AI*, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. B-1AR, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. B-1B, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded to
Baa1 (sf)

Cl. M-2A, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

Cl. M-2AI*, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

Cl. M-2AR, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

Cl. M-2AS, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

Cl. M-2AT, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

Cl. M-2AU, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to A2 (sf)

Cl. M-2B, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-2BI*, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-2BR, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-2BS, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-2BT, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-2BU, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-2I*, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. M-2R, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. M-2RB, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-2S, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. M-2SB, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-2T, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. M-2TB, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-2U, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. M-2UB, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Baa2 (sf)

Issuer: Freddie Mac STACR REMIC TRUST 2021-HQA2

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jun 25, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B2 (sf)

Cl. B-1A, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jun 25, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B1 (sf)

Cl. B-1AI*, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jun 25, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B1 (sf)

Cl. B-1AR, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jun 25, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B1 (sf)

Cl. B-1B, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jun 25, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B3 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. M-2A, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-2AI*, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-2AR, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-2AS, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-2AT, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-2AU, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. M-2B, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M-2BI*, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M-2BR, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M-2BS, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M-2BT, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M-2BU, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M-2I*, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. M-2R, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. M-2RB, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M-2S, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. M-2SB, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M-2T, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. M-2TB, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. M-2U, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa3 (sf)

Cl. M-2UB, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023
Upgraded to Ba1 (sf)

Issuer: Freddie Mac STACR REMIC Trust 2021-HQA4

Cl. M-1, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2A, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2AI*, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2AR, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2AS, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2AT, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2AU, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2B, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B1 (sf)

Cl. M-2BI*, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B1 (sf)

Cl. M-2BR, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B1 (sf)

Cl. M-2BS, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B1 (sf)

Cl. M-2BT, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B1 (sf)

Cl. M-2BU, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B1 (sf)

Cl. M-2I*, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2R, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2RB, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B1 (sf)

Cl. M-2S, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2SB, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B1 (sf)

Cl. M-2T, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2TB, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B1 (sf)

Cl. M-2U, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2UB, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Dec 10, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B1 (sf)

Issuer: Freddie Mac STACR REMIC Trust 2022-HQA2

Cl. M-1A, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

Cl. M-1B, Upgraded to Baa2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Cl. M-2, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2B, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2BI*, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2BR, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2BS, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2BT, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2BU, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2I*, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2R, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2RB, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2S, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2SB, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2T, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2TB, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Cl. M-2U, Upgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. M-2UB, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on Jul 29, 2022
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Issuer: STACR 2016-HQA2

Cl. M-3, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Aa1 (sf)

Cl. M-3B, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Jun 5, 2023 Upgraded
to Aa1 (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 updated loss expectations on the underlying pools. Each of
the transactions Moody's reviewed continue to display strong
collateral performance, with cumulative losses for each transaction
under 0.05% and a small number of loans in delinquency. In
addition, enhancement levels for the tranches have grown
significantly, as the pools amortize relatively quickly. The credit
enhancement since closing has grown, on average, over 80% for the
non-exchangeable tranches upgraded.

Moody's analysis also considered the relationship of exchangeable
bonds to the bonds they could be exchanged for.

In addition, while Moody's analysis applied a greater probability
of default stress on loans that have experienced modifications,
Moody's decreased that stress to the extent the modifications were
in the form of temporary payment relief.

The rating actions also reflect the further seasoning of the
collateral and increased clarity regarding the impact of borrower
relief programs on collateral performance. Information obtained
from loan servicers in recent years has shed light on their current
strategies regarding borrower relief programs and the impact those
programs may have on collateral performance and transaction
liquidity, through servicer advancing. Moody's recent analysis has
found that in addition to robust home price appreciation, many of
these borrower relief programs have contributed to stronger
collateral performance than Moody's had previously expected, thus
supporting the upgrades.

No actions were taken on the other rated classes in these deals
because their expected losses on the bonds 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 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 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.

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.


FRONTIER ISSUER 2024-1: Fitch Gives 'BB-(EXP)sf' Rating on C Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings expects to rate Frontier Issuer LLC, Secured Fiber
Network Revenue Notes Series 2024-1 as follows:

- $530.0 million 2024-1 class A-2 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;

- $73.0 million 2024-1 class B 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $147.0 million 2024-1 class C 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable.

The ratings on all existing notes are subject to affirmation
concurrent with the transaction close and the assignment of final
ratings.

   Entity/Debt             Rating           
   -----------             ------           
Frontier Issuer LLC,
Secured Fiber Network
Revenue Term Notes,
Series 2024-1

   A-2                  LT A(EXP)sf    Expected Rating
   B                    LT BBB(EXP)sf  Expected Rating
   C                    LT BB-(EXP)sf  Expected Rating

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

The transaction is a securitization of contract payments derived
from an existing fiber-to-the-premises (FTTP) network. The
collateral assets include conduits, cables, network-level
equipment, access rights, customer contracts, transaction accounts
and a shared infrastructure service agreement for common assets.
Debt is secured by net revenue from operations and benefits from a
perfected security interest in the securitized assets.

The collateral network consists of the sponsor's retail fiber
network including 728,012 fiber passings and 215,059 copper
passings across several submarkets located in Dallas, TX and in the
greater North Texas area. The network supports broadband, phone,
video and non-switch (point-to-point ethernet) services for
approximately 329,357 residential and commercial fiber
subscribers.

Transaction proceeds will be utilized to for growth capex, to pay
transaction expenses, to refinance existing debt, and for general
corporate purposes.

The ratings reflect a structured finance analysis of cash flows
from the ownership interest in the underlying fiber optic network,
rather than an assessment of the corporate default risk of the
ultimate parent, Frontier Communications Parent, Inc.
(B+/Negative).

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Net Cash Flow and Leverage: Fitch's net cash flow (NCF) on the pool
is $247.0 million, implying a 12.7% haircut to issuer NCF. The debt
multiple relative to Fitch's NCF is 9.50x, versus the debt/issuer
NCF leverage of 8.25x.

Based on the Fitch NCF and assumed annual revenue growth consistent
with the issuer, and following the transaction's ARD, the 2023-1
and 2024-1 notes would be repaid within 18.6 years from closing and
the investment-grade-rated notes would be repaid within 10.8 years
from closing.

Credit Risk Factors: The major factors affecting Fitch's
determination of cash flow and maximum potential leverage (MPL)
include the high quality of the underlying collateral networks,
scale of the customer base, market position and penetration, market
concentration, capability of the operator, and strength of the
transaction structure.

Technology-Dependent Credit: Due to the specialized nature of the
collateral and potential for changes in technology to affect
long-term demand for digital infrastructure, the senior classes of
this transaction do not achieve ratings above 'Asf'. The securities
have a rated final payment date 30 years after closing, and the
long-term tenor of the securities increases the risk that an
alternative technology, rendering obsolete the current transmission
of data through fiber optic cables, will be developed. Fiber optic
cable networks are currently the fastest and most reliable means to
transmit information, and data providers continue to invest in and
utilize this technology.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

- Declining cash flow as a result of higher expenses, customer
churn, lower market penetration, declining contract rates or the
development of an alternative technology for the transmission of
data could lead to downgrades;

- Fitch's base case NCF was 12.7% below the issuer's underwritten
cash flow. A further 10% decline in Fitch's NCF indicates the
following ratings based on Fitch's determination of MPL: Class A-2
from 'Asf' to 'BBB+sf'; class B from 'BBBsf' to 'BBB-sf'; class C
from 'BB-sf' to 'Bsf'.

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

- Increasing cash flow without an increase in corresponding debt,
from rate increases, additional customers or contract amendments
could lead to upgrades;

- A 20% increase in Fitch's NCF indicates the following ratings
based on Fitch's determination of MPL: Class A-2 from 'Asf' to
'Asf'; class B from 'BBBsf' to 'Asf'; class C from 'BB-sf' to
'BBBsf';

- Upgrades are unlikely for these transactions given the provision
for the issuer to issue additional notes, which rank pari passu or
subordinate to existing notes, without the benefit of additional
collateral. In addition, the transaction is capped in the 'Asf'
category, given the risk of technological obsolescence.

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.


GCAT 2024-NQM2: Fitch Assigns 'B-sf' Final Rating on Cl. B-2 Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned final ratings to the residential
mortgage-backed certificates issued by GCAT 2024-NQM2 Trust (GCAT
2024-NQM2).

   Entity/Debt       Rating            Prior
   -----------       ------            -----
GCAT 2024-NQM2
Trust

   A-1           LT AAAsf New Rating   AAA(EXP)sf
   A-2           LT AAsf  New Rating   AA(EXP)sf
   A-3           LT Asf   New Rating   A(EXP)sf
   M-1           LT BBBsf New Rating   BBB(EXP)sf
   B-1           LT BB-sf New Rating   BB-(EXP)sf
   B-2           LT B-sf  New Rating   B-(EXP)sf
   B-3           LT NRsf  New Rating   NR(EXP)sf
   A-IO-S        LT NRsf  New Rating   NR(EXP)sf
   X             LT NRsf  New Rating   NR(EXP)sf
   R             LT NRsf  New Rating   NR(EXP)sf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Fitch rates the residential mortgage-backed certificates to be
issued by GCAT 2024-NQM2 Trust as indicated. The certificates are
supported by 671 loans with a total balance of approximately $330.7
million as of the cutoff date.

A majority of the loans were originated by Arc Home LLC (Arc) and
United Wholesale Mortgage, with all other originators contributing
less than 10%. All loans currently, or will be, serviced by NewRez
LLC (dba Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing [SMS]) and AmWest.

After the presale report was published, Fitch received a
post-pricing structure with reduced coupons for all of the rated
tranches. Additionally, the B-1 bond is now fixed rate. There were
no changes to the credit enhancement levels. Fitch ran its cash
flow analysis and the bonds passed their respective rating
stresses. As a result, the final ratings remain unchanged from the
expected ratings that were published in the presale report.

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 10.8% above a long-term sustainable level (versus
11.1% on a national level as of 4Q23, remaining unchanged since
last quarter). 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
February 2024, despite modest regional declines, but are still
being supported by limited inventory.

Non-QM Credit Quality (Negative): The collateral consists of 671
loans totaling $330.7 million and seasoned at approximately five
months in aggregate, as calculated by Fitch. The borrowers have a
strong credit profile (744 FICO and 38.6% debt-to-income [DTI]
ratio, both as calculated by Fitch) and moderate leverage (79.6%
sustainable loan-to-value [sLTV] ratio). The pool consists of 64.4%
of loans where the borrower maintains a primary residence, while
35.6% of the pool loans involve investor property or a second home.
Additionally, 9.3% are designated as qualified mortgage (QM) loans,
while 5.4% are higher price QM (HPQM) loans and 55.3% are non-QM
loans.

For the remaining loans, the Ability-to-Repay (ATR) Rule (or the
Rule) does not apply, due to either the loan being an investor
property or because the loan was originated through a community
development financial institution (CDFI).

Loan Documentation (Negative): Approximately 80.9% of the pool
loans were underwritten to less than full documentation.
Furthermore, 49.2% were underwritten to a 12-month or 24-month bank
statement program for verifying income, which is not consistent
with Fitch's view of a full documentation program.

A key distinction between this pool and legacy Alt-A loans is that
these loans adhere to underwriting and documentation standards
required under the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's (CFPB)
ATR Rule, which reduces the risk of borrower default arising from
lack of affordability, misrepresentation or other operational
quality risks due to the rigor of the Rule's mandates with respect
to underwriting and documentation of the borrower's ability to
repay. Additionally, 9.0% is a CPA (cost per action) or P&L product
and 18.9% is a debt service coverage ratio product.

Limited Advancing (Mixed): The transaction is structured to three
months of servicer advances for delinquent P&I. The limited
advancing reduces loss severities, as there is a lower amount
repaid to the servicer when a loan liquidates and liquidation
proceeds are prioritized to cover principal repayment over accrued
but unpaid interest. The downside to this is the additional stress
on the structure side, as there is limited liquidity in the event
of large and extended delinquencies.

Advances of delinquent P&I required but not paid by the servicers
will be paid by Nationstar. If Nationstar is unable to advance,
advances will be made by U.S. Bank Trust Company, National
Association, the transaction's paying agent.

Modified Sequential-Payment Structure (Mixed): The structure
distributes principal pro rata among the senior certificates while
shutting out the subordinate bonds from principal until all senior
classes are reduced to zero. If a cumulative loss trigger event or
delinquency trigger event occurs in a given period, principal will
be distributed sequentially to class A-1, A-2 and A-3 certificates
until they are reduced to zero.

The structure includes a step-up coupon feature where the fixed
interest rate for classes A-1, A-2 and A-3 will increase by 100
basis points (bps), subject to the net weighted average coupon,
starting on the June 2028 payment date. This reduces the excess
spread available to repay losses. On each payment date on or after
the step-up date, interest distribution amounts otherwise allocable
to the unrated class B-3 certificates, to the extent available, may
be used to reimburse any unpaid cap carryover amount for classes
A-1, A-2 and A-3.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

The defined negative rating sensitivity analysis demonstrates how
the ratings would react to steeper market value declines (MVDs) at
the national level. The analysis assumes MVDs of 10.0%, 20.0% and
30.0% in addition to the model projected 42.0% at 'AAA'. The
analysis indicates that 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% 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 modeling 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 multiple third-party review firms.

The third-party due diligence described in Form 15E focused on a
credit, compliance and property valuation review. Fitch considered
this information in its analysis and, as a result, Fitch made the
following adjustmentsrecommendere to its analysis:

- A 5% PD credit was applied at the loan level for all loans graded
either 'A' or 'B';

- Fitch lowered its loss expectations by approximately 53bps as a
result of the diligence review.

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.


GCAT TRUST 2024-INV2: Moody's Assigns B2 Rating to Cl. B-5 Certs
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned definitive ratings to 34 classes of
residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) issued by GCAT
2024-INV2 Trust, and sponsored by Blue River Mortgage III LLC.

The securities are backed by a pool of GSE-eligible residential
mortgages aggregated by Blue River Mortgage III LLC, originated by
multiple entities and serviced by NewRez LLC d/b/a Shellpoint
Mortgage Servicing, PennyMac Loan Services LLC and PennyMac Corp.
(collectively, PennyMac)

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: GCAT 2024-INV2 Trust

Cl. A-1, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-2, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-3, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-4, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-5, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-6, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-7, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-8, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-9, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-10, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-11, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-12, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-13, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-14, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-15, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-16, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-X-1*, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-X-2*, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-X-4*, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-X-6*, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-X-8*, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-X-10*, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-X-12*, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

Cl. A-X-14*, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-X-16*, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. B-1-A, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-1, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-X-1*, Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-2-A, Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

Cl. B-2, Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

Cl. B-X-2*, Definitive Rating Assigned A2 (sf)

Cl. B-3, Definitive Rating Assigned Baa2 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. B-5, Definitive Rating Assigned B2 (sf)

*Reflects Interest-Only Classes

Moody's is withdrawing the provisional ratings for the Class A-1A
loans, assigned on May 23, 2024, because the issuer will not be
issuing these classes.

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
0.88%, in a baseline scenario-median is 0.54% and reaches 8.80% 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.


GOLDENTREE LOAN 2: Moody's Ups Rating on $44.708MM E Notes to Ba2
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has upgraded the ratings on the following notes
issued by GoldenTree Loan Management US CLO 2, Ltd.:

US$44,708,000 Class C Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2030, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on August 16, 2023 Upgraded
to Aa1 (sf)

US$49,542,000 Class D Mezzanine Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2030, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on August 16, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

US$44,708,000 Class E Junior Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2030, Upgraded to Ba2 (sf); previously on November 28, 2017
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (sf)

GoldenTree Loan Management US CLO 2, Ltd., originally issued in
November 2017, and partially refinanced in October 2021, 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 January 2023.

A comprehensive review of all credit ratings for the respective
transactions 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 August 2023. The Class A-R
notes have been paid down by approximately 54.2% or $231.2 million
since then. Based on Moody's calculation, the OC ratios for the
Class C, Class D and Class E notes are currently 145.17%, 124.43%
and 110.22%, respectively, versus August 2023 levels of 126.13%,
115.32% and 107.04%, respectively.

Nevertheless, the credit quality of the portfolio has deteriorated
since August 2023. Based on Moody's calculation, the weighted
average rating factor (WARF) is currently 3044 compared to 2711 in
August 2023.

No actions were taken on the Class A-R, Class B-R 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 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: $428,093,026

Defaulted par:  $6,594,500

Diversity Score: 44

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3044

Weighted Average Spread (WAS) (before accounting for reference rate
floors): 3.68%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 48.11%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 3.36 years

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, and 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
May 2024.

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.


GOLUB CAPITAL 60(B): Moody's Gives Ba3 Rating to $17.8MM E-R Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned ratings to two classes of refinancing
notes (the "Refinancing Notes") issued by Golub Capital Partners
CLO 60(B), Ltd. (the "Issuer").          

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$248,000,000 Class A-R Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2034, Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$17,800,000 Class E-R Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes due
2034, Assigned Ba3 (sf)

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

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.

The Issuer is a managed cash flow collateralized loan obligation
(CLO). The issued notes are collateralized primarily by a portfolio
of broadly syndicated senior secured corporate loans .

OPAL BSL LLC (the "Manager") will continue to 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 remaining reinvestment period.

In addition to the issuance of the Refinancing Notes and three
other classes of refinanced secured notes, the Issuer's previously
issued one class of subordinated notes will remain outstanding.

Other changes to transaction features in connection with the
refinancing include extension of the non-call period.

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: $397,294,889

Defaulted par:  $1,458,839

Diversity Score: 57

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3147

Weighted Average Spread (WAS) (before accounting for reference rate
floors): 3.57%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 4.25%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.32%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 5.75 years

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, lower recoveries on defaulted assets.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
May 2024.

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

The performance of the Refinancing Notes is subject to uncertainty.
The performance of the Refinancing 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.


GOODLEAP SUSTAINABLE 2023-2: Fitch Affirms 'BBsf' Rating on C Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed the class A, B and C notes issued by
GoodLeap Sustainable Home Solutions Trust 2023-2 (GoodLeap 2023-2)
as detailed below.

   Entity/Debt            Rating           Prior
   -----------            ------           -----
GoodLeap Sustainable
Home Solutions
Trust 2023-2

   A 38237AAA0        LT A-sf   Affirmed   A-sf
   B 38237AAB8        LT BBBsf  Affirmed   BBBsf
   C 38237AAC6        LT BBsf   Affirmed   BBsf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

GoodLeap 2023-2 is a securitization of 20-25 years of consumer
loans primarily backed by solar equipment.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Performance Within Expectations: As of the May 2024 servicer
report, the cumulative default rate (CDR) is consistent with
expectations, while OC has remained stable and within target
levels. Although prepayment have been below its pre-Investment Tax
Credit (ITC) season assumption (10%), Fitch expects the prepayments
to further increase as more of the loans move towards their ITC
date.

Asset Assumptions: Fitch considered both originator-wide data and
previous GoodLeap's transactions to set a lifetime default
expectation of 9.05%. Fitch has also assumed a 25% base case
recovery rate. Fitch's rating default rates (RDRs) for 'A-sf',
'BBBsf' and 'BBsf' are, respectively, 27.5%, 21.9% and 15.1%.
Fitch's rating recovery rates (RRRs) are, respectively, 16.8%,
18.3% and 20.5%.

Amortization Trigger: The notes initially amortize based on target
overcollateralization (OC) percentages. Should the asset
performance deteriorate: first, additional principal will be paid
to cover any defaulted amounts; and, second, if the cumulative loss
trigger is breached, the payment waterfall will switch to "turbo"
sequential to the senior class. The trigger provides less
protection in Fitch's driving model scenario, which has back-loaded
defaults and a high level of prepayments.

Standard, Reputable Counterparties; No Swap: The transaction
account is with Wilmington Trust (A/Negative/F1), and the
servicer's lockbox account is at KeyBank (BBB+/Stable/F2).
Commingling risk is mitigated by daily transfer of collections, the
high ACH share at closing and the ratings of KeyBank.

Established Lender but New Assets: GoodLeap has grown to be one of
the largest U.S. solar loan lenders. Underwriting is mostly
automated and in line with those of other U.S. ABS originators.
Other than the solar lending business, GoodLeap also originates
mortgage and sustainable home improvement loans. Some loan
servicing is outsourced to Genpact (UK) Limited, the subservicer,
while GoodLeap has increased its role in direct servicing over
time. Servicing disruption risk is further mitigated by the
appointment of Vervent, Inc. as the backup servicer.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

Additional performance data, that imply ADRs in excess of 1.2% or
show lower than expected prepayment rates may contribute to a
negative outlook or downgrade.

Material changes in policy support, the economics of purchasing and
financing photovoltaic (PV) panels and batteries, and/or
ground-breaking technological advances that make the existing
equipment obsolete may also affect the ratings negatively.

Below, Fitch shows model-implied rating sensitivities to changes in
default and/or recovery assumptions. As transaction performance is
in line with expectations, the model has not been re-run since
closing.

Increase of defaults (Class A / B / C):

+15%: 'BBB+sf' / 'BB+sf' / 'BB-sf';

+25%: 'BBBsf' / 'BB+sf' / 'B+sf';

+50%: 'BBB-sf' / 'BBsf' / 'Bsf'.

Decrease of recoveries (Class A / B / C):

-15%: 'BBB+sf' / 'BBB-sf' / 'BBsf';

-25%: 'BBB+sf' / 'BBB-sf' / 'BBsf';

-50%: 'BBB+sf' / 'BBB-sf' / 'BB-sf'.

Increase of defaults/decrease of recoveries (Class A / B / C):

+15% / -15%: 'BBBsf' / 'BB+sf' / 'BB-sf';

+25% / -25%: 'BBBsf' / 'BBsf' / 'B+sf';

+50% / -50%: 'BB+sf' / 'B+sf' / 'CCCsf'.

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

Fitch currently caps ratings in the 'Asf' category due to limited
data history. The rating cap may be lifted should more robust
performance data be provided; positive rating actions may also
result from data specific to the level of default after the ITC
timing, more data on recoveries, and the performance of IO loans.

Subject to those conditions, good transaction performance, credit
enhancement at the target OC levels and ADRs materially below 1.2%
would support an upgrade.

Below, Fitch shows model-implied rating sensitivities to changes in
default and/or recovery assumptions. As transaction performance is
in line with expectations, the model has not been re-run since
closing.

Decrease of defaults (Class A / B / C):

-15%: 'Asf' / 'BBB+sf' / 'BB+sf';

-25%: 'A+sf' / 'BBB+sf' / 'BBB-sf';

-50%: 'A+sf' / 'A+sf' / 'BBB+sf'.

Increase of recoveries (Class A / B / C):

+15%: 'A-sf' / 'BBBsf' / 'BBsf';

+25%: 'A-sf' / 'BBBsf' / 'BBsf';

+50%: 'Asf' / 'BBBsf' / 'BB+sf'.

Decrease of defaults/increase of recoveries (Class A / B / C):

-15% / +15%: 'Asf' / 'BBB+sf' / 'BB+sf';

-25% / +25%: 'A+sf' / 'A-sf' / 'BBB-sf';

-50% / +50%: 'A+sf' / 'A+sf' / 'A-sf'.

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 historical information available for this originator was
limited in that originations began less than seven years ago, while
the loan tenure can be as long as 25 years. Fitch applied a rating
cap at the 'Asf' category to address this limitation, as well as
default and recovery stresses at the high or median-high level of
the criteria range. The amortizing nature of the assets and the
application of an annual default rate to the static portfolio
allowed us to determine lifetime default assumptions.

Fitch also considered proxy data from other originators and
borrower characteristics (including demographics and relatively
high FICO scores) to derive asset assumptions, as envisaged under
the Consumer ABS Rating Criteria. Taking into account this
analytical approach, the rating committee considered the available
data sufficient to support a rating in the 'Asf' category.

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.


GS MORTGAGE 2018-GS10: Fitch Lowers Rating on G-RR Debt to CCC
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has downgraded two and affirmed 10 classes of GS
Mortgage Securities Trust 2018-GS9. In addition, the Rating
Outlooks were revised to Negative from Stable for two of the
affirmed classes. Fitch has assigned a Negative Outlook to one of
the downgraded classes.

Fitch downgraded two and affirmed 13 classes of GS Mortgage
Securities Trust 2018-GS10. In addition, the Outlooks were revised
to Negative from Stable for eight of the affirmed classes. Fitch
has assigned a Negative Outlook to one of the downgraded classes.

   Entity/Debt          Rating           Recovery   Prior
   -----------             ------           --------   -----
GSMS 2018-GS10

   A-1 36250SAA7    LT PIFsf  Paid In Full   AAAsf
   A-2 36250SAB5    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf  
   A-3 36250SAC3    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-4 36250SAD1    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-5 36250SAE9    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-AB 36250SAF6   LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-S 36250SAJ8    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   B 36250SAK5      LT AA-sf  Affirmed       AA-sf
   C 36250SAL3      LT A-sf   Affirmed       A-sf
   D 36250SAM1      LT BBBsf  Affirmed       BBBsf
   E 36250SAR0      LT BBB-sf Affirmed       BBB-sf
   F 36250SAT6      LT B-sf   Downgrade      BB-sf
   G-RR 36250SAV1   LT CCCsf  Downgrade      B-sf
   X-A 36250SAG4    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   X-B 36250SAH2    LT AA-sf  Affirmed       AA-sf
   X-D 36250SAP4    LT BBB-sf Affirmed       BBB-sf

GSMS 2018-GS9

   A-2 36255NAR6    LT PIFsf  Paid In Full   AAAsf
   A-3 36255NAS4    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-4 36255NAT2    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-AB 36255NAU9   LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   A-S 36255NAX3    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   B 36255NAY1      LT AA-sf  Affirmed       AA-sf
   C 36255NAZ8      LT A-sf   Affirmed       A-sf
   D 36255NAA3      LT BBB-sf Affirmed       BBB-sf
   E 36255NAE5      LT Bsf    Downgrade      BB-sf
   F-RR 36255NAG0   LT CCCsf  Downgrade      B-sf
   X-A 36255NAV7    LT AAAsf  Affirmed       AAAsf
   X-B 36255NAW5    LT AA-sf  Affirmed       AA-sf
   X-D 36255NAC9    LT BBB-sf Affirmed       BBB-sf
  
KEY RATING DRIVERS

Increased 'Bsf' Loss Expectations: The deal-level 'Bsf' rating case
loss has increased since Fitch's prior rating action to 4.6% in
GSMS 2018-GS9 and 5.3% in GSMS 2018-GS10. The GSMS 2018-GS9
transaction has eight Fitch Loans of Concern (FLOCs; 21.5% of the
pool), including two loans (10.5%) in special servicing. The GSMS
2018-GS10 transaction has eight FLOCs (26.2%), including two loans
(10.6%) in special servicing.

GSMS 2018-GS9: The downgrades on classes E and F-RR reflect higher
pool loss expectations since the prior rating action, driven
primarily by the specially serviced Pin Oak North Medical Office
loan (6.5%) where the borrower is intending to transition the
property back to the lender, and the specially serviced 90 Fifth
Avenue loan (4.0%) where the borrower failed to remit property tax
payments. The Negative Outlook on classes D, X-D and E reflect
possible downgrades should loss expectations on these specially
serviced loans increase further due to lack of performance
stabilization, updated lower valuations and/or with extended
resolution times.

GSMS 2018-GS10: The downgrades on classes F and G-RR reflect higher
pool loss expectations since the prior rating action driven
primarily by the GSK North American HQ loan (9.5%). The GSK North
American HQ loan, designated a FLOC, transferred to special
servicing in November 2022 and was reported as a non-performing
matured balloon loan as of April 2024. A receiver was put in place
and the servicer indicated a foreclosure sale is expected in June
2024.

The Negative Outlooks on classes A-S, X-A, B, X-B, C, D, E, X-D,
and F reflect an additional sensitivity scenario which considers a
higher potential loss on the GSK North American HQ loan and a
heightened probability of default on the 1000 Wilshire loan (8.2%).
Downgrades to these classes are possible with prolonged workouts,
lack of leasing momentum to re-tenant the dark GSK North American
HQ property and/or further performance deterioration for 1000
Wilshire. Additionally, the Negative Outlooks reflect the pool's
high concentration of office loans, comprising 34.5% of the pool,
including 20% which are office FLOCs.

The largest contributor to overall loss expectations in GSMS
2018-GS9 is the Pin Oak North Medical Office loan, secured by three
office properties totaling 352,050-sf located in Bellaire, TX. The
loan transferred to special servicing in October 2023 and the
borrower has indicated their intention to transition the property
back to the lender. The loan was reported as 60+ days delinquent as
of May 2024. Occupancy was 75.5% as of the December 2023 rent roll,
compared with 69.9% as of June 2022, 77.3% at YE 2021, 86.7% as of
YE 2020 and 90% as of YE 2019. The largest tenants include The
Frost National Bank (7.1% NRA; renewed through November 2028 from
April 2023) and Methodist Primary Care Group (6.0% NRA; extended
through July 2025 from July 2023).

The servicer-reported NOI DSCR has fallen to 0.92x at YE 2023 from
1.69x at YE 2021 and 2.15x at YE 2020. The loan began amortizing in
January 2021. Performance declined in 2023 as occupancy dipped due
to several tenants vacating their spaces at lease expiration. The
borrower actively marketed the space and occupancy has improved to
75.5% as of YE 2023. Although occupancy has increased due to a
number of smaller tenants that executed leases in Q4 2023, these
tenants have signed at below submarket rates.

Fitch's 'Bsf' rating case loss of 30.5% (prior to concentration
add-ons) reflects a 10% cap rate and a Fitch sustainable cash flow
of approximately $5 million, which accounts for the new leasing as
indicated on the December 2023 rent roll and operating expenses
that are in line with historical levels.

Another FLOC in the GSMS 2018-GS9 transaction is 90 Fifth Avenue,
which is secured by a 139,886-sf office and retail property located
adjacent to the Fifth Avenue and West 14th Street subway stop,
north of Union Square in Manhattan. The loan transferred to special
servicing in March 2024 due to the borrower's failure to remit
property tax payments. The special servicer is assessing the next
steps to resolve the loan.

Occupancy was 91% as of YE 2023, compared with 100% at YE 2022 and
YE 2021, and 92% at issuance. The property has a major tenant
concentration with the largest tenant, Urban Compass (72.1% NRA
through May 2025). Additional tenants include Hash Map Lab (9.0%;
May 2025), Republic First Bancorp (7.5%; July 2034) and Commerce
Bank, NA (2.8%; November 2027).

In the event that Urban Compass files for bankruptcy, gives notice
to terminate its lease, or fails to renew its lease 24 months prior
to lease expiration, which is by May 2023, a cash flow sweep shall
immediately commence to be applied towards re-tenanting costs for
the Urban Compass space. The servicer-reported YE 2023 NOI DSCR was
2.04x, compared with 1.80x at YE 2022, 1.89x at YE 2021 and 1.82x
at YE 2020.

Fitch's 'Bsf' rating case loss of 3.1% (prior to concentration
add-ons) reflects an 8.25% cap rate and 10% stress to the YE 2023
NOI.

The largest contributor to overall loss expectations in GSMS
2018-GS10 is the GSK North American HQ loan, which represents
approximately 39.3% of Fitch's total expected loss for the pool.
The loan is secured by a 207,779-sf suburban office property
located in the Navy Yards district of Philadelphia, PA,
approximately five miles east of Philadelphia International
Airport. The loan transferred to special servicing in November 2022
for imminent maturity default. According to the servicer,
foreclosure and receivership has been filed and a receiver is in
place, with a foreclosure sale expected to occur in June 2024.

The property was built to suit for British pharmaceutical company
GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) in 2013 at a total cost of $80 million. GSK
leases the entire building on a triple-net basis through September
2028 with two five-year extension options and no termination
options. However, GSK vacated in August 2022 and downsized to
another location in Philadelphia. The tenant continues to pay its
lease obligations at the property. Fitch has reached out to the
servicer for any updates on subleasing of the dark GSK space,
however, the servicer has noted that no further leasing updates are
available, as of May 2024. The servicer-reported YE 2023 NOI DSCR
was 2.28x, compared with 2.38x at YE 2021, and 2.38x at YE 2020.

Fitch's 'Bsf' rating case loss of 21.7% (prior to concentration
add-ons) reflects a 9.25% cap rate and 15% stress to the YE 2023
NOI. An additional sensitivity scenario applied a higher loss of
25.0% on the loan should the property remain dark for a prolonged
period of time, which contributed to the Negative Outlooks.

The second largest contributor to overall loss expectations in GSMS
2018-GS10 is the Capital Complex loan, which is secured by a
178,328-sf suburban office property located in Frankfurt, KY. The
loan transferred to special servicing in January 2023 due to
imminent monetary default. The collateral was placed into
receivership in April 2023. There are multiple GSA tenants at the
property, including the Attorney General (27.0% NRA through June
2026), Department of Juvenile Justice (10.0%; June 2026) and
Cabinet for Health & Family Services (4.3%; June 2027). As of June
2023, the property was 52% occupied. Due to occupancy declines, the
servicer-reported NOI DSCR has remained below 1.0x since YE 2020.

Fitch's 'Bsf' rating case loss of 55.6% (prior to concentration
add-ons) reflects a discount to the most recent appraisal value,
equating to a stressed value of $24.90 psf.

The fifth largest contributor to overall loss expectations in GSMS
2018-GS10 is the 1000 Wilshire loan, which is secured by a
477,774-sf office property located in downtown Los Angeles, CA.
This loan is a FLOC due to a downwards trend in performance and
occupancy. The largest tenants include Wedbush Securities (21.0%;
December 2025), Buchalter Nemer (18.3%, August 2034) and Open Bank
(6.3%; January 2025). As of the September 2023 rent roll, the
collateral was 78.3% occupied with a TTM March 2023 NOI DSCR of
1.93x, compared with YE 2021 occupancy of 85% and YE 2020 occupancy
of 87%. The loan is full-term, interest-only with a scheduled
maturity in March 2025.

Fitch's 'Bsf' rating case loss of 2.6% (prior to concentration
add-ons) reflects an 8.5% cap rate and a Fitch sustainable cash
flow of approximately $8.0 million, which accounts for rental
revenue and reimbursements as reported on the August 2023 rent roll
and operating expenses per the TTM March 2023 financials. An
additional sensitivity scenario applied a higher loss of 13.4% on
the loan, should performance further deteriorate, which contributed
to the Negative Outlooks.

Increased Credit Enhancement (CE): As of the May 2024 distribution
date, the pool's aggregate balance for GSMS 2018-GS9 has been
reduced by 6.0% to $833.8 million from $887.1 million at issuance.
Seven loans (12.3% of pool) have been defeased. Fourteen loans
(59.6%) are full-term interest-only (IO) and the remaining 40.4% of
the pool is amortizing.

As of the May 2024 distribution date, the pool's aggregate balance
for GSMS 2018-GS10 has been reduced by 2.0% to $856.2 million from
$873.8 million at issuance. Two loans (4.9%) have been defeased.
Sixteen loans (64.5%) are full-term IO and the remaining 35.5% of
the pool is amortizing.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

- Downgrades to 'AAAsf' and 'AAsf' category rated classes could
occur if deal-level expected losses increase significantly;
downgrades to 'AAAsf' rated classes if interest shortfalls occur;

- Downgrades to classes rated in the 'Asf' and 'BBBsf' categories
could occur if deal-level losses increase significantly from
outsized losses on larger FLOCs and/or more loans than expected
experience performance deterioration and/or default at or prior to
maturity. Of particular concern in the GSMS 2018-GS9 transaction
include the Pin Oak North Medical Office and 90 Fifth Avenue FLOCs.
Of particular concern in the GSMS 2018-GS10 transaction include the
GSK North American HQ, 1000 Wilshire, and Capital Complex FLOCs;

- Downgrades to in the 'BBsf' and 'Bsf' categories are possible
with higher than expected losses from continued underperformance of
the FLOCs and/or lack of resolution and increased exposures on the
specially serviced loans;

- Downgrades to 'CCCsf' and rated classes would occur should
additional loans transfer to special servicing and/or default, or
as losses become realized or more certain.

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

- Upgrades to 'AAsf' and 'Asf' category rated classes are possible
with significantly increased CE from paydowns, coupled with
improved pool-level loss expectations and performance stabilization
of FLOCs, such as Pin Oak North Medical Office and 90 Fifth Avenue
in GSMS 2018-GS9 and GSK North American HQ, 1000 Wilshire, and
Capital Complex in GSMS 2018-GS10;

- Upgrades to the 'BBBsf' category rated classes would be limited
based on sensitivity to concentrations or the potential for future
concentration. Classes would not be upgraded above 'AA+sf' if there
is likelihood for interest shortfalls;

- Upgrades to 'BBsf' and 'Bsf' category rated classes are not
likely until the later years in a transaction and only if the
performance of the remaining pool is stable, recoveries on the
FLOCs are better than expected and there is sufficient CE to the
classes;

- Upgrades to 'CCCsf' are not likely, but may be possible with
better than expected recoveries on specially serviced loans and/or
significantly higher values on FLOCs.

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

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.   
                                                                   
                


HAYFIN KINGSLAND VIII: Moody's Affirms Ba3 Rating on $30MM E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has upgraded the ratings on the following notes
issued by Hayfin Kingsland VIII, Ltd.:

USD67.75M Class B Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes, Upgraded to
Aaa (sf); previously on Mar 31, 2023 Upgraded to Aa1 (sf)

USD31M Class C Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes,
Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Mar 31, 2023 Upgraded to A1
(sf)

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

USD384M (Current outstanding amount is USD251,711,788) Class A
Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously
on Mar 27, 2018 Assigned Aaa (sf)

USD39M Class D Mezzanine Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes,
Affirmed Baa3 (sf); previously on Mar 27, 2018 Assigned Baa3 (sf)

USD30M Class E Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes,
Affirmed Ba3 (sf); previously on Mar 27, 2018 Assigned Ba3 (sf)

Hayfin Kingsland VIII, Ltd., issued in March 2018, is a
collateralised loan obligation (CLO) backed by a portfolio of
mostly high-yield senior secured US loans. The portfolio is managed
by Hayfin Capital Management LLC. The transaction's reinvestment
period ended in April 2023.

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating upgrades on the Class B and C notes are primarily a
result of the deleveraging of the senior notes following
amortisation of the underlying portfolio since the payment date in
April 2023.

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

The Class A notes have paid down by approximately USD132.29 million
(34.45%) in the last 12 months. As a result of the deleveraging,
over-collateralisation (OC) has increased. According to the trustee
report dated April 2024 [1], the Class A/B and Class C OC ratios
are reported at 131.82% and 122.42% compared to April 2023 [2]
levels of 130.77% and 122.38%, respectively. Moody's notes that the
April 2024 principal payments are not reflected in the reported OC
ratios.

Key model inputs:

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

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

Performing par and principal proceeds balance: USD446.99m

Defaulted Securities: USD1.03m

Diversity Score: 56

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2922

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 3.37 years

Weighted Average Spread (WAS) (before accounting for reference rate
floors): 3.62%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 47.12%

Par haircut in OC tests and interest diversion test: none

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

Moody's notes that the May 2024 trustee report was published at the
time it was completing its analysis of the April 2024 data. Key
portfolio metrics such as WARF, diversity score, weighted average
spread and life exhibit little change between these dates.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's Global
Approach to Rating Collateralized Loan Obligations" published in
May 2024.

Counterparty Exposure:

The rating action took into consideration the notes' exposure to
relevant counterparties using the methodology "Moody's Approach to
Assessing Counterparty Risks in Structured Finance methodology"
published in October 2023. Moody's concluded the ratings of the
notes are not constrained by these risks.

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

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

Additional uncertainty about performance is due to the following:

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

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

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


HAYFIN US XV: Fitch Assigns 'BB-sf' Rating on Class E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned ratings and Rating Outlooks to the
HAYFIN US XV, Ltd.

   Entity/Debt              Rating           
   -----------              ------           
HAYFIN US XV, LTD.

   A-1                  LT NRsf   New Rating
   A-2                  LT AAAsf  New Rating
   B                    LT AAsf   New Rating
   C                    LT Asf    New Rating
   D-1                  LT BBB+sf New Rating
   D-2                  LT BBB-sf New Rating
   E                    LT BB-sf  New Rating
   Subordinated Notes   LT NRsf   New Rating
   X                    LT NRsf   New Rating

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Hayfin US XV, Ltd. (the issuer) is an arbitrage cash flow
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) that will be managed by Hayfin
Capital Management 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 23.1, versus a maximum covenant, in
accordance with the initial expected matrix point of 26. 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 98%
first-lien senior secured loans. The weighted average recovery rate
(WARR) of the indicative portfolio is 75.74% versus a minimum
covenant, in accordance with the initial expected matrix point of
75.3%.

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 4.9-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 '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 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 HAYFIN US XV, 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.


HILDENE TRUPS A10BC: Moody's Assigns B3 Rating to $15.65MM B Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned ratings to two classes of notes issued
by Hildene TruPS Resecuritization A10BC, LLC (the "Issuer").

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$37,150,000 Class A Notes due 2036, Definitive Rating Assigned
Baa3 (sf)

US$15,650,000 Class B Notes due 2036, Definitive Rating Assigned B3
(sf)

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

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rationale for the ratings is based on a consideration of the
risks associated with the portfolio of ALESCO Preferred Funding X,
Ltd. (the "Underlying TruPS CDO") and structure as described in
Moody's methodology.

The Rated Notes are secured by the following securities that were
issued by the Underlying TruPS CDO on March 15, 2006:

US$22,225,500 of the $80,734,073 Class B Deferrable Third Priority
Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2036 (the "Class B Notes")

US$37,868,454 of the $98,372,724 Class C-1 Deferrable Fourth
Priority Mezzanine Secured Floating Rate Notes Due 2036 (the "Class
C-1 Notes")

US$38,915,382 of the $66,041,809 Class C-2 Deferrable Fourth
Priority Mezzanine Secured Fixed/Floating Rate Notes Due 2036 (the
"Class C-2 Notes")

The Class B Notes, the Class C-1 Notes and the Class C-2 Notes are
referred to herein, collectively as the "Underlying Securities".

Hildene Structured Advisors, LLC will serve as collateral servicer
for this transaction. The transaction prohibits any asset purchases
or substitutions at any time.

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer issued one class of
subordinated notes.

The transaction incorporates par coverage tests which, if
triggered, divert interest proceeds to pay down the notes in order
of seniority. The transaction also includes an interest diversion
feature from and after the July 2030 payment date, when 60% of the
interest at a junior step in the priority of interest payments will
be used to pay the principal on the Class A Notes until the Class A
Notes' principal has been paid in full, then to the payment of
principal of the Class B Notes.

The portfolio of the Underlying TruPS CDO consists of mainly TruPS
issued by US regional and community banks and insurance companies,
the majority of which Moody's does not publicly rate. Moody's
assesses the default probability of bank obligors that do not have
public ratings through credit scores derived using RiskCalc™, an
econometric model developed by Moody's. Moody's evaluation of the
credit risk of the bank obligors in the pool relies on FDIC Q4-2023
financial data. Moody's assesses the default probability of
insurance company obligors that do not have public ratings through
credit assessments provided by its insurance ratings team based on
the credit analysis of the underlying insurance companies' annual
statutory financial reports. Moody's assumes a fixed recovery rate
of 10% for bank obligations.

Moody's obtained a loss distribution for this CDO's portfolio by
simulating defaults using Moody's CDOROM™, which used Moody's
assumptions for asset correlations and fixed recoveries in a Monte
Carlo simulation framework. Moody's then used the resulting loss
distribution, together with structural features of the CDO, as an
input in its CDOEdge™ cash flow model.

For modeling purposes, Moody's used the following base-case
assumptions for the Underlying TruPS CDO's portfolio:

Par amount: $376,529,000.00

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 1434

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 1.96%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 10.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8.71 years

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating TruPS CDOs" published in March 2024.           


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 portfolio consists primarily
of unrated assets whose default probability Moody's assesses
through credit scores derived using RiskCalc(TM) or credit
assessments. Because these are not public ratings, they are subject
to additional estimation uncertainty.


HILDENE TRUPS A11BC: Moody's Gives (P)B3 Rating to $6.25MM B Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned provisional ratings to two classes of
notes to be issued by Hildene TruPS Resecuritization A11BC, LLC
(the "Issuer").

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$28,750,000 Class A Notes due 2037, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

US$6,250,000 Class B Notes due 2037, Assigned (P)B3 (sf)

The Class A Notes and the Class B Notes are referred to herein,
collectively, as the "Rated Notes."

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rationale for the ratings is based on a consideration of the
risks associated with the portfolio of ALESCO Preferred Funding XI,
Ltd. (the "Underlying TruPS CDO") and structure as described in
Moody's methodology.

The Rated Notes are secured by the following securities that were
issued by the Underlying TruPS CDO on June 29, 2006:

US$14,319,680.28 of the $54,316,029 Class B Deferrable Third
Priority Secured Floating Rate Notes due December 2036 (the "Class
B Notes")

US$25,455,521.66 of the $40,829,649 Class C-1 Deferrable Fourth
Priority Mezzanine Secured Floating Rate Notes due December 2036
(the "Class C-1 Notes")

US$13,170,479.00 of the $13,170,479 Class C-2 Deferrable Fourth
Priority Mezzanine Secured Fixed/ Floating Rate Notes due December
2036 (the "Class C-2 Notes")

US$629,075.00 of the $63,536,599 Class C-3 Deferrable Fourth
Priority Mezzanine Secured Fixed Rate Notes due December 2036 (the
"Class C-3 Notes")

The Class B Notes, the Class C-1 Notes, the Class C-2 Notes and the
Class C-3 Notes are referred to herein, collectively as the
"Underlying Securities".

Hildene Structured Advisors, LLC will serve as collateral servicer
for this transaction. The transaction prohibits any asset purchases
or substitutions at any time.

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer will issue one class of
subordinated notes.

The transaction incorporates par coverage tests which, if
triggered, divert interest and principal proceeds to pay down the
notes in order of seniority. The transaction also includes an
interest diversion feature from and after the July 2030 payment
date, when 60% of the interest at a junior step in the priority of
interest payments will be used to pay the principal on the Class A
Notes until the Class A Notes' principal has been paid in full,
then to the payment of principal of the Class B Notes.

The portfolio of the Underlying TruPS CDO consists of mainly TruPS
issued by US regional and community banks and insurance companies,
the majority of which Moody's does not publicly rate. Moody's
assesses the default probability of bank obligors that do not have
public ratings through credit scores derived using RiskCalc™, an
econometric model developed by Moody's. Moody's evaluation of the
credit risk of the bank obligors in the pool relies on FDIC Q4-2023
financial data. Moody's assesses the default probability of
insurance company obligors that do not have public ratings through
credit assessments provided by its insurance ratings team based on
the credit analysis of the underlying insurance companies' annual
statutory financial reports. Moody's assumes a fixed recovery rate
of 10% for bank obligations.

Moody's obtained a loss distribution for this CDO's portfolio by
simulating defaults using Moody's CDOROM(TM), which used Moody's
assumptions for asset correlations and fixed recoveries in a Monte
Carlo simulation framework. Moody's then used the resulting loss
distribution, together with structural features of the CDO, as an
input in its CDOEdge(TM) cash flow model.

For modeling purposes, Moody's used the following base-case
assumptions for the Underlying TruPS CDO's portfolio:

Par amount: $255,947,000

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 1095

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 1.87%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 8.0%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8.8 years

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Moody's
Approach to Rating TruPS CDOs" published in March 2024.           


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 portfolio consists primarily
of unrated assets whose default probability Moody's assesses
through credit scores derived using RiskCalc(TM) or credit
assessments. Because these are not public ratings, they are subject
to additional estimation uncertainty.


HORIZON AIRCRAFT I: Fitch Affirms CCC Rating on Class C Debt
------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed the ratings on the outstanding Horizon
Aircraft Finance I Limited (Horizon I), Horizon Aircraft Finance II
Limited (Horizon II), and Horizon Aircraft Finance III Limited
(Horizon III) class A, B and C notes. The Rating Outlooks are
Stable.

   Entity/Debt              Rating           Prior
   -----------              ------           -----
Horizon Aircraft
Finance III Limited

   A 44040JAA6          LT BBB-sf Affirmed   BBB-sf
   B 44040JAB4          LT BB-sf  Affirmed   BB-sf
   C 44040JAC2          LT CCCsf  Affirmed   CCCsf

Horizon Aircraft
Finance II Limited

   Series A 44040HAA0   LT BBBsf  Affirmed   BBBsf
   Series B 44040HAB8   LT BBsf   Affirmed   BBsf
   Series C 44040HAC6   LT CCC+sf Affirmed   CCC+sf

Horizon Aircraft
Finance I Limited

   A 440405AE8          LT BBB-sf Affirmed   BBB-sf
   B 440405AF5          LT Bsf    Affirmed   Bsf
   C 440405AG3          LT CCCsf  Affirmed   CCCsf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

The ratings reflect current transaction performance, Fitch's cash
flow projections, and its expectation for the structures to
withstand rating-specific stresses under Fitch's criteria and
related asset model. Rating considerations include lease terms,
lessee credit quality and performance, updated aircraft values, and
Fitch's assumptions and stresses, which inform Fitch's modeled cash
flows and coverage levels.

Fitch's rating assumptions for airlines are based on a variety of
performance metrics and airline characteristics. For any
transaction exposed to aircraft held in Russia or Ukraine, or
leased to any Russian or Ukrainian lessee, Fitch incorporated
expected proceeds from insurance claims filed by the lessor into
its cash flow analysis.

Portfolio performance varies considerably. Credit profiles of all
three transactions have remained stressed with continued
delinquencies associated with APAC lessees. Horizon I and III
contain several lessees sharing common ownership that represent
approximately 47% and 42%, respectively, of reported delinquencies.
For Horizon II they represent 5% of reported delinquencies. These
leases are in the process of being restructured, with several
already successfully restructured.

The Stable Outlook reflects improved utilization and modestly lower
LTVs for the senior notes, which have been driven by improvement in
rental collections year-over-year. Several new leases and
modifications should result in more stable payment performance
going forward.

Horizon II is currently expecting insurance proceeds for a total
loss aircraft related to the Russia-Ukraine war. Fitch incorporated
expected proceeds from this claim into its analysis. The Rating
Outlook for the transaction is Stable. However, even though credit
quality could be negatively affected if insurance proceeds are
lower than expected, Fitch believes the ratings are sufficiently
robust to deviations from the expected proceeds incorporated into
its analysis.

Across the three Horizon transactions, the A notes are behind
scheduled principal payments by between 15% and 28% and the B notes
are behind scheduled principal payments by between 47% and 81%. The
C notes have not received principal payments and have capitalized
interest since mid-2020. All three transactions are serviced by
Babcock & Brown Aircraft Management (BBAM) and are backed by
aircraft operating leases.

Overall Market Recovery

Demand for air travel remains robust. Total passenger traffic is
above 2019 levels with April revenue passenger kilometers (RPKs) up
11% compared to April 2024 per IATA. International traffic lead the
way with 15.8% year-over-year RPK growth; domestic traffic grew at
4.0% year-over-year. Asia Pacific lead the overall growth in
traffic. Aircraft ABS transaction servicers are reporting strong
demand for aircraft, particularly those with maintenance green time
remaining, and increased lease rates.

Macro Risks

While the commercial aviation market has recovered significantly
over the past 12 months, it will continue to face risks, including
workforce shortages, supply chain issues, geopolitical risks, and
recessionary concerns that would impact passenger demand. In
addition, uncertainty regarding inflationary pressures despite some
improvements remain. Most of these events would lead to greater
credit risk due to increased lessee delinquencies, lease
restructurings, defaults, and reductions in lease rates and asset
values, particularly for older aircraft. All of these factors would
cause downward pressure on future cash flows needed to meet debt
service.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Asset Values

The aircraft in the Horizon transactions are generally mid-aged
with a weighted-average age (by value) of between 13 years and 15
years depending on the transaction. For each of the transactions,
the Maintenance Reserve Account is funded at approximately 70%-75%
of target.

Using mean maintenance-adjusted base value in order to make period
to period comparisons the loan-to-value (LTV) for the A and B notes
has generally decreased since Fitch's last review (October 2023)
whereas the LTV for two of the three C notes has increased as
follows:

- Horizon I: A note 75.1% to 70.9%; B note 92.1% to 89.3%; C note
102.4% to 100.8%;

- Horizon II: A note 71.0% to 69.0%; B note 88.5% to 89.5%; C note
101.2% to 104.3%;

- Horizon III: A note 81.7% to 76.1%; B note 97.7% to 92.1%; C note
104.2% to 109.2%.

In determining the Fitch Value of each pool, Fitch used the
December 2023 appraisals. Depreciation assumptions were applied
pursuant to Fitch's criteria. Fitch employs a methodology whereby
Fitch varies the type of value per aircraft based on the remaining
leasable life:

- Less than three years of leasable life: Maintenance-adjusted
market value;

- More than three years of leasable life, but more than 15 years
old: Maintenance-adjusted base value;

- Less than 15 years old: Half-life base value.

Fitch then uses an LMM (lesser of mean and median) of the given
value. The starting Fitch value for each of the transactions is as
follows:

- Horizon I: $417 million;

- Horizon II: $326 million;

- Horizon III: $361 million.

Fitch also applies a haircut to residual values that vary based on
rating stress level beginning at 5% at 'Bsf' and increasing to 15%
at 'Asf'.

Tiered Collateral Quality:

Fitch utilizes three tiers when assessing the quality and
corresponding marketability of aircraft collateral: tier 1 which is
the most marketable and tier 3 which is the least marketable. As
aircraft in the pool reach an age of 15 years and then 20 years,
pursuant to Fitch's criteria, the aircraft tier will migrate one
level lower. Additional detail regarding Fitch's tiering
assumptions can be found here:

The weighted average age-adjusted tier for Horizon I, II, and III
is 1.5, 1.3, and 1.4, respectively, reflecting the desirability of
the aircraft.

Pool Concentration

Horizon I sold two aircraft since the prior review; however, two
engines from part outs are now on lease and the total asset count
remains at 27. Horizon II's pool has remained unchanged since
Fitch's last review. Horizon III consists of 17 aircraft and two
engines. As the pools age and Fitch models aircraft being sold at
the end of their leasable lives (generally 20 years), pool
concentration will increase. Pursuant to Fitch's criteria, cash
flows are further stressed based on the effective aircraft count.
Concentration haircuts vary by rating level and are applied at
stresses higher than CCCsf.

Horizon I is reasonably diversified across regions with 30%
exposure to Emerging Asia Pacific, 29% to Emerging Europe & CIS,
19% to Developed Europe, 11% to Emerging South & Central America,
7% to Developed North America, and 4% to Developed Asia Pacific.

Horizon II is reasonably diversified across regions with 43%
exposure to Emerging Asia Pacific, 19% to Developed Europe, 16% to
Emerging Europe & CIS, 8% to Emerging Middle East & Africa, 6% to
Developed North America, and 6% to Emerging South & Central
America.

Horizon III is diversified across regions with 42% exposure to
Emerging Asia Pacific, 17% to Emerging Europe & CIS, 13% to
Developed Europe, 11% to Developed North America, 11% to Emerging
South & Central America, and 5% to Emerging Middle East & Africa.

Lessee Credit Risk

Fitch considers the credit risks posed by the pool of lessees to be
moderate-to-high. The portfolio composition by lessee credit rating
has not materially changed since last review. Although
delinquencies have improved since the prior review in Horizon II,
Horizon I and III are exposed to significant arrears balances which
will take time to recover. The modeled credit rating Fitch assigns
to the subject airlines may improve if they demonstrate a longer
track record of timely payment performance, particularly for
airlines that have recently been restructured.

Operation and Servicing Risk

Fitch deems the servicer, Babcock & Brown Aircraft Management, to
be qualified based on its experience as a lessor, overall servicing
capabilities and historical ABS performance to date.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

- An increase in delinquencies, lower lease rates, or sales of
aircraft below Fitch's projections could lead to a downgrade;

- The aircraft ABS sector has a rating cap of 'Asf'. All
subordinate tranches carry ratings lower than the senior tranche
and below the ratings at close;

- Fitch ran a sensitivity related to the lessee credit quality in
the pool. Fitch assigns a credit rating of 'CCC' or lower to a high
percentage of lessees in the pools. The sensitivity assumes all
lessees are currently rated 'CC', excluding lessees rated by Fitch,
and that all future lessees are rated 'CCC.' This scenario results
in a 0-1 notch decrease in the model-implied-ratings (MIR).

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

- If contractual lease rates outperform modeled cash flows or
lessee credit quality improves materially, this may lead to an
upgrade. Similarly, if assets in the pool display higher values and
stronger rent generation than Fitch's stressed scenarios this may
also lead to an upgrade.

- Fitch ran a sensitivity related to the lessee credit quality in
the pool. Fitch assigns a credit rating of 'CCC' or lower to a high
percentage of lessees in the pools. The sensitivity assumes all
lessees are currently rated 'B', excluding lessees rated by Fitch,
and that all future lessees remain rated 'B.' This scenario results
in a 1-2 notch increase in the model-implied-ratings (MIR).

- Fitch also considers jurisdictional concentrations per its
"Structured Finance and Covered Bonds Country Risk Rating
Criteria," which could result in rating caps lower than 'Asf'.

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

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.


HOTWIRE FUNDING 2024-1: Fitch Assigns BBsf Final Rating on C Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned final ratings and Rating Outlooks to
Hotwire Funding LLC's Secured Fiber Network Revenue Notes, Series
2024-1 as follows:

   Entity/Debt                Rating           Prior
   -----------                ------           -----
Hotwire Secured Fiber
Network Revenue Notes,
Series 2023-1

   2023-1 A-2 44148HAA1   LT Asf   Affirmed    Asf
   2023-1 B 44148HAC7     LT BBBsf Affirmed    BBBsf
   2023-1 C 44148HAE3     LT BBsf  Affirmed    BBsf

Hotwire Secured Fiber
Network Revenue Notes,
Series 2024-1

   2024-1 A-2 44148JAH2   LT Asf   New Rating  A(EXP)sf
   2024-1 B 44148JAK5     LT BBBsf New Rating  BBB(EXP)sf
   2024-1 C 44148JAM1     LT BBsf  New Rating  BB(EXP)sf
   2024-1 R               LT NRsf  New Rating

Hotwire Secured Fiber
Network Revenue Notes,
Series 2021-1

   2021-1 A-1-V           LT Asf   Affirmed    Asf
   2021-1 A-2 44148JAA7   LT Asf   Affirmed    Asf
   2021-1 B 44148JAB5     LT BBBsf Affirmed    BBBsf
   2021-1 C 44148JAC3     LT BBsf  Affirmed    BBsf

- $442.0 million 2024-1 class A-2 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;

- $62 million 2024-1 class B 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $124 million 2024-1 class C 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable.

The following class is not rated by Fitch:

- $36,211,000(a) series 2024-1, class R.

The note balances include $250 million of prefunding, which is
allocated between classes A-2, B and C.

In addition, Fitch has affirmed the following classes:

- $300 million(b) 2021-1 class A-1-V at 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;

- $895 million 2021-1 class A-2 at 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;

- $150 million 2021-1 class B at 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $295 million 2021-1 class C at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable.

- $416.3 million 2023-1 class A-2 at 'Asf'; Outlook Stable;

- $38 million 2023-1 class B at 'BBBsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $80 million 2023-1 class C at 'BBsf'; Outlook Stable.

(a) Horizontal credit risk retention interest representing 5% of
the 2024-1 notes.

(b) In connection with the transaction, the 2021-1 class A-1-V
variable funding note's committed balance has increased to $300
million from $240 million as a result of the second amendment to
the Variable Funding Note Purchase Agreement.

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

The transaction is a securitization of the contract payments
derived from an existing Fiber to the Home (FTTH) network. Debt is
secured by the net cash flow from operations and benefits from a
perfected security interest in the securitized assets, which
includes conduits, cables, network-level equipment, access rights,
customer contracts, transaction accounts and an equity pledge from
the asset entities.

The collateral consists of best-in-class fiber lines supporting the
provision of internet, cable, and telephony services to a portfolio
of homeowners' associations (HOAs) and condominium owners'
associations (COAs), located predominantly in Florida (96.0%
annualized run rate return [ARRR]). These agreements are governed
by long-term contracts directly with the associations.

At closing, transaction proceeds were utilized to fund the series
2024-1 prefunding account, fund the applicable securitization
transaction reserves, pay transaction fees and expenses, pay the
outstanding principal balance of the series 2021-1 class A-1-V
notes and for general corporate purposes.

In connection with the transaction, the 2021-1, class A-1-V was
amended to increase the committed balance to $300 million from $240
million, extend the maturity date to June 2027 and retain its two
one-year extension options. The ratings reflect a structured
financial analysis of the cash flows from the ownership interest in
the underlying fiber optic network, not an assessment of the
corporate default risk of the ultimate parent, Hotwire
Communications, LLC.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Net Cash Flow (NCF) and Trust Leverage: Fitch Ratings' net cash
flow (NCF) on the pool is $195.2 million in the base case, implying
a 13.8% haircut to issuer base case NCF. The debt multiple relative
to Fitch's NCF on the rated classes is 11.5x in this scenario,
versus the debt/issuer NCF leverage of 10.0x.

Inclusive of the cash flow required to draw upon the variable
funding note (VFN), which will have a $300 million commitment at
transaction closing and the $250 million expected prefunding
account balance, Fitch NCF is $248.4 million, implying a 15.6%
haircut to the implied issuer NCF.

Credit Risk Factors: The major factors impacting Fitch's
determination of cash flow and maximum potential leverage (MPL)
include the high quality of the underlying collateral networks,
scale, creditworthiness and diversity of the customer base,
long-term contractual cash flow, market position of the sponsor,
capability of the operator, limited operational requirements and
strength of the transaction structure.

Technology-Dependent Credit: Due to the specialized nature of the
collateral and potential for changes in technology to affect
long-term demand for digital infrastructure, the senior classes of
this transaction do not achieve ratings above 'Asf'. The securities
have a rated final payment date 30 years after closing, and the
long-term tenor of the securities increases the risk that an
alternative technology will be developed, rendering the
transmission of data through fiber optic cables obsolete. Fiber
optic cable networks are the fastest and most reliable means to
transmit information, and data providers continue to invest in and
utilize this technology.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

- Declining cash flow as a result of higher expenses, contract
churn, contract amendments or the development of an alternative
technology for the transmission of data could lead to downgrades;

- Fitch's NCF was 13.8% below the issuer's underwritten cash flow
as of April 2024. A further 10% decline in Fitch's NCF indicates
the following ratings based on Fitch's determination of Maximum
Potential Leverage: class A to 'BBBsf' from 'Asf'; class B to
'BB+sf' from 'BBBsf'; class C to CCCsf' from 'BBsf'.

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

- Increasing cash flow without an increase in corresponding debt,
from rate increases, additional contracts, contract amendments, or
lower expenses could lead to upgrades;

- A 10% increase in Fitch's NCF indicates the following ratings
based on Fitch's determination of Maximum Potential Leverage: class
A to 'Asf' from 'Asf'; class B to 'Asf' from 'BBBsf'; class C to
'BBB-sf' from 'BBsf';

- Upgrades are unlikely for these transactions given the provision
for the issuer to issue additional notes, which rank pari passu or
subordinate to existing notes, without the benefit of additional
collateral. In addition, the transaction is capped in the 'Asf'
category, given the risk of technological obsolescence.

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 Deloitte & Touche LLP. The third-party due diligence
described in Form 15E focused on a comparison of certain
characteristics with respect to the portfolio of fiber assets and
related contracts in the data file. Fitch considered this
information in its analysis and it did not have an effect on
Fitch's analysis or conclusions.


INVESCO U.S. 2024-3: S&P Assigns Prelim BB- (sf) Rating on E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Invesco U.S.
CLO 2024-3 Ltd./Invesco U.S. CLO 2024-3 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 Invesco CLO Equity Fund 3 L.P., a
subsidiary of Invesco Senior Secured Management Inc.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of May 31,
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 debt through portfolio
identification and ongoing management; and

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

  Preliminary Ratings Assigned

  Invesco U.S. CLO 2024-3 Ltd./Invesco U.S. CLO 2024-3 LLC

  Class X, $2.00 million: AAA (sf)
  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, $44.30 million: Not rated



JP MORGAN 2018-MINN: Moody's Lowers Rating on Cl. D Certs to B2
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has downgraded the ratings on four and affirmed the
ratings on two classes in J.P. Morgan Chase Commercial Mortgage
Securities Trust 2018-MINN, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates, Series 2018-MINN as follows:

Cl. A, Downgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Feb 8, 2023
Downgraded to Aa2 (sf)

Cl. B, Downgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Feb 8, 2023
Downgraded to A3 (sf)

Cl. C, Downgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Feb 8, 2023 Downgraded
to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. D, Downgraded to B2 (sf); previously on Feb 8, 2023 Downgraded
to B1 (sf)

Cl. E, Affirmed Caa1 (sf); previously on Feb 8, 2023 Downgraded to
Caa1 (sf)

Cl. F, Affirmed Caa3 (sf); previously on Feb 8, 2023 Downgraded to
Caa3 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings on four P&I classes were downgraded to reflect the
accumulation of loan advances and continued delinquency since the
last review as well as the potential for higher losses due to the
uncertainty around the timing and proceeds from the ultimate
resolution. This floating rate loan has been in special servicing
since May 2020 and became REO in October 2023. As of the May 2024
distribution date, the loan remains last paid through its November
2021 payment date and there is approximately $35 million of P&I
advances, other expenses plus cumulative accrued unpaid advance
interest outstanding.

The property's performance continues to improve having achieved
$14.6 million of net operating income (NOI) in the first nine
months of 2023, surpassing the full year 2022 NOI of $14.1 million.
The loan is an interest-only floating rate loan and based on
current one-month Term SOFR rates plus margin of 3.6%, the debt
service coverage ratio (DSCR) would be approximately 1.0X based on
the property's most recent net cash flow (NCF).  This potentially
limits the need for future advances; however, the lack of
significant excess cash flow after payment of debt service may
result in the current outstanding advances being resolved through
the ultimate liquidation or sale of the asset. Servicing advances
are senior in the transaction waterfall and are paid back prior to
the payment of interest and principal which may result in lower
recovery to the total trust balance.  

The ratings on the two junior P&I classes were affirmed as their
respective ratings are consistent with loss estimates.

In this credit rating action Moody's considered qualitative and
quantitative factors in relation to the senior-sequential structure
and trophy/dominant nature of the asset, and Moody's analyzed
multiple scenarios to reflect various levels of stress in property
values could impact loan proceeds at each rating level.

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.

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

Factors that could lead to a downgrade of the ratings include a
further decline in actual or expected performance of the loan, an
increase in realized and expected losses or increased interest
shortfalls.

METHODOLOGY UNDERLYING THE RATING ACTION

The principal methodology used in these ratings was "Large Loan and
Single Asset/Single Borrower Commercial Mortgage-Backed
Securitizations Methodology" published in July 2022.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the May 15, 2024 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance remains unchanged at $180 million
from securitization. The 5-year (final maturity date was in
November 2023), interest only, floating rate loan is secured by
leasehold interests in the Hilton Minneapolis. The loan transferred
to special servicing in April 2020 for monetary default stemming
from COVID related closure and became REO in October 2023.

The property is an AAA Four Diamond rated full-service hotel with
approximately 60,500 SF of meeting and event space with a 24,780 SF
grand ballroom, the largest ballroom in the state of Minnesota.
It's also the largest hotel in the Minneapolis-St. Paul area in
terms of room count (821 guestrooms) and meeting space. The hotel
hosts events for large groups as well as accommodate spillover
needs and room demand for the Minneapolis Convention Center located
three blocks away. The Property was constructed in 1992 and is
subject to a 100- year ground lease with the City of Minneapolis
expiring in October 2091. However, starting 2019, the property was
not obligated to pay any ground rent for the duration of the ground
lease.

The property's performance continues to improve having achieved
$14.6 million of net operating income (NOI) in the first nine
months of 2023, surpassing the full year 2022 NOI of $14.1 million.
Moody's has increased its NCF to $12.8 million from $10.5 million
at the last review and used the capitalization rate of 10.75% since
securitization, however, the loan's total exposure has continued to
increase due the amount of outstanding loan advances.

The first mortgage balance of $180 million represents a Moody's LTV
of 152%. The most recent appraisal from April 2023 valued the
property at $204.5 million but it is less than total exposure
including advances and interest shortfalls. As of the most recent
distribution date and there is outstanding total advances totaling
almost $35 million. There is outstanding interest shortfalls
totaling approximately $6.4 million up from $3.7 million from the
last review affecting Cl. G and Cl. HRR.


JP MORGAN 2020-INV1: Moody's Hikes Rating on 2 Tranches from Ba2
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has upgraded the ratings of five bonds issued by
J.P. Morgan Mortgage Trust 2020-INV1. The collateral backing this
deal consists of prime jumbo and agency eligible mortgage loans.

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

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Trust 2020-INV1

Cl. B-3, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2023 Upgraded
to Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-3-A, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2023 Upgraded
to Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Upgraded to Aa3 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa2 (sf)

Cl. B-5, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2023 Upgraded to
Ba2 (sf)

Cl. B-5-Y, Upgraded to A3 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2023 Upgraded
to Ba2 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating upgrades reflect the increased levels of credit
enhancement available to the bonds, the recent performance, and
Moody's updated loss expectations on the underlying pool. The
transaction continues to display strong collateral performance,
with cumulative loss for the transaction at 0.08% and a small
number of loans in delinquency. In addition, enhancement levels for
the tranches have grown significantly, as the pool amortize
relatively quickly. The credit enhancement for each tranche
upgraded has grown by at least 3x since closing.

In addition, while Moody's analysis applied a greater probability
of default stress on loans that have experienced modifications,
Moody's decreased that stress to the extent the modifications were
in the form of temporary payment relief.

The rating actions also reflect the further seasoning of the
collateral and increased clarity regarding the impact of borrower
relief programs on collateral performance. Information obtained
from loan servicers in recent years has shed light on their current
strategies regarding borrower relief programs and the impact those
programs may have on collateral performance and transaction
liquidity, through servicer advancing. Moody's recent analysis has
found that in addition to robust home price appreciation, many of
these borrower relief programs have contributed to stronger
collateral performance than Moody's had previously expected, thus
supporting the upgrades.

Moody's analysis also considered the relationship of exchangeable
bond to the bonds it could be exchanged for.

No actions were taken on some rated classes in this deal because
the expected losses on the bonds remain commensurate with their
current ratings, after taking into account the updated performance
information, structural features, credit enhancement and other
qualitative considerations. No actions were taken on the remaining
rated classes in this deal as those classes are already at the
highest achievable levels within Moody's rating scale.

Principal Methodologies

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 of the subordinate bonds 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 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.


JP MORGAN 2020-LTV1: Moody's Raises Rating on 2 Tranches From Ba1
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has upgraded the ratings of five bonds issued by
J.P. Morgan Mortgage Trust 2020-LTV1. The collateral backing this
deal consists of prime jumbo and agency eligible mortgage loans.

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

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: J.P. Morgan Mortgage Trust 2020-LTV1

Cl. B-3, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2023 Upgraded
to Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-3-A, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2023 Upgraded
to Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Upgraded to Aa1 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2023 Upgraded
to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. B-5, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2023 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)

Cl. B-5-Y, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Jul 6, 2023 Upgraded
to Ba1 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating upgrades reflect the increased levels of credit
enhancement available to the bonds, the recent performance, and
Moody's updated loss expectations on the underlying pool. The
transaction continues to display strong collateral performance,
with cumulative loss for the transaction at 0.07% and a small
number of loans in delinquency. In addition, enhancement levels for
the tranches have grown significantly, as the pool amortize
relatively quickly. The credit enhancement for each tranche
upgraded has grown by at least 5.7x since closing.

In addition, while Moody's analysis applied a greater probability
of default stress on loans that have experienced modifications,
Moody's decreased that stress to the extent the modifications were
in the form of temporary payment relief.

The rating actions also reflect the further seasoning of the
collateral and increased clarity regarding the impact of borrower
relief programs on collateral performance. Information obtained
from loan servicers in recent years has shed light on their current
strategies regarding borrower relief programs and the impact those
programs may have on collateral performance and transaction
liquidity, through servicer advancing. Moody's recent analysis has
found that in addition to robust home price appreciation, many of
these borrower relief programs have contributed to stronger
collateral performance than Moody's had previously expected, thus
supporting the upgrades.

No actions were taken on some rated classes in this deal because
the expected losses on the bonds remain commensurate with their
current ratings, after taking into account the updated performance
information, structural features, credit enhancement and other
qualitative considerations. No actions were taken on the remaining
rated classes in this deal as those classes are already at the
highest achievable levels within Moody's rating scale.

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 of the subordinate bonds 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 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.


JP MORGAN 2024-HE2: Fitch Assigns Bsf Final Rating on Cl. B-2 Certs
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned final ratings to J.P. Morgan Mortgage
Trust 2024-HE2 (JPMMT 2024-HE2).

   Entity/Debt      Rating            Prior
   -----------      ------            -----
JPMMT 2024-HE2

   A-1          LT AAAsf New Rating   AAA(EXP)sf
   M-1          LT AAsf  New Rating   AA(EXP)sf
   M-2          LT Asf   New Rating   A(EXP)sf
   M-3          LT BBBsf New Rating   BBB(EXP)sf
   B-1          LT BBsf  New Rating   BB(EXP)sf
   B-2          LT Bsf   New Rating   B(EXP)sf
   B-3          LT NRsf  New Rating   NR(EXP)sf
   B-4          LT NRsf  New Rating   NR(EXP)sf
   BX           LT NRsf  New Rating   NR(EXP)sf
   A-IO-S       LT NRsf  New Rating   NR(EXP)sf
   X            LT NRsf  New Rating   NR(EXP)sf
   R            LT NRsf  New Rating   NR(EXP)sf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Fitch has rated the residential mortgage-backed certificates backed
by a second lien, prime, open home equity line of credit (HELOC) on
residential properties issued by J.P. Morgan Mortgage Trust
2024-HE2 (JPMMT 2024-HE2), as indicated above. This is the fifth
transaction to be rated by Fitch that includes prime-quality second
lien HELOCs with open draws off the JPMMT shelf and the fifth
second lien HELOC transaction off the JPMMT shelf.

The loans associated with the draws allocated to the participation
certificate are 4,321 non-seasoned, performing, prime-quality
second lien HELOC loans with a current outstanding balance (as of
the cutoff date) of $379.91 million. The collateral balance based
on the maximum draw amount is $507.24 million, as determined by
Fitch. As of the cutoff date, 100% of the HELOC lines are open or
on a temporary freeze and may be opened in the future. The
aggregate available credit line amount, as of the cutoff date, is
expected to be $70.4 million, per transaction documents. As of the
cutoff date, weighted average (WA) utilization of the HELOCs is
92.2%, per the transaction documents.

The main originators in the transaction are loanDepot.com, LLC
(19.25% per the transaction docs) and United Wholesale Mortgage
(68.43% per the transaction docs). All other originators make up
less than 10% of the pool. The loans are serviced by NewRez LLC
d/b/a Shellpoint Mortgage Servicing (Shellpoint) (80.75% per the
transaction docs) and loanDepot.com (19.25% per the transaction
docs), LLC.

Distributions of principal are based on a modified sequential
structure, subject to the transaction's performance triggers.
Interest payments are made sequentially to all classes, except B-4,
which is a principal-only class, while losses are allocated reverse
sequentially once excess spread is depleted.

Draws will be funded by JPMorgan Mortgage Acquisitions Corp.
(JPMMAC). This transaction will not use a variable funding note
(VFN) structure; rather, it will use participation certificates.
JPMMT 2024-HE2 is only entitled to cash flows based on the amount
drawn as of the cutoff date. The remaining available draws will be
allocated to the JPMorgan participation certificate (JPM PC) if
they are drawn in the future. See the Highlights section for a
description.

In Fitch's analysis, Fitch assumes 100% of the HELOCs are 100%
drawn on day one. As a result, all Fitch-determined percentages are
based off the maximum HELOC draw amount.

The servicers, Shellpoint and loanDepot.com, LLC, will not be
advancing delinquent (DQ) monthly payments of P&I.

The collateral comprises 100% adjustable-rate loans. These loans
are adjusted based on the prime rate, none of which reference
LIBOR. The class A-1, M-1, M-2, M-3 and B-1 certificates are
floating rate and use SOFR as the index; they are capped at the net
WA coupon (WAC). The annual rate on class B-2 and B-3 certificates
with respect to any distribution date (and the related accrual
period) will be equal to the net WAC for such distribution date.
The B-4 certificates are entitled to distributions of principal
only and will not receive any distributions of interest. There is
no exposure to LIBOR in this transaction.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Updated Sustainable Home Prices (Negative): Due to Fitch's view on
sustainable home prices, Fitch views the home price values of this
pool as 10.3% above a long-term sustainable level (vs. 11.1% on a
national level as of 4Q23, down 0% 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 February 2024 despite modest
regional declines but are still being supported by limited
inventory.

High-Quality Prime Mortgage Pool (Positive): The participation
interest is in a fixed pool of draws related to 4,321
prime-quality, performing, adjustable-rate open-ended HELOCs that
have three- five- or 10-year interest-only periods and maturities
of up to 30 years. The open-ended HELOCs are secured by second
liens on primarily one- to four-family residential properties
(including planned unit developments), condominiums and a
townhouse, totaling $507.24 million (includes the maximum HELOC
draw amount). The loans were made to borrowers with strong credit
profiles and relatively low leverage.

The loans are seasoned at an average of seven months, according to
Fitch, and three months, per the transaction documents. The pool
has a WA original FICO score of 743, as determined by Fitch,
indicative of very high credit-quality borrowers. About 44.3% of
the loans, as determined by Fitch, have a borrower with an original
FICO score equal to or above 750. The original WA combined
loan-to-value (CLTV) ratio of 67.8%, as determined by Fitch,
translates to a sustainable LTV (sLTV) ratio of 75.1%.

The transaction documents stated a WA drawn LTV of 18.4% and a WA
drawn CLTV of 66.7%. The LTVs represent moderate borrower equity in
the property and reduced default risk, compared with a borrower
CLTV of over 80%. Of the pool loans, 33.3% were originated by a
retail or correspondent channel with the remaining 66.7% originated
by a broker channel. Of the loans, 100% are underwritten to full
documentation. Based on Fitch's documentation review, it considered
98.5% of the loans to be fully documented.

Of the pool, 96.8% comprise loans where the borrower maintains a
primary or secondary residence, and the remaining 3.2% are investor
loans. Single-family homes, planned unit developments (PUDs), a
townhouse and single-family attached dwellings constitute 93.8% of
the pool (or 93.7%, per the transaction documents). Condominiums
make up 4.1%, while multifamily homes make up 2.1% (2.2% per the
transaction documents).

According to Fitch, the pool consists of loans with the following
loan purposes: 98.8% cashout refinances (loans that have a cashout
amount greater than 2% of the original balance), 1.1% purchases and
0.1% rate-term refinances (loans with a cashout amount less than 2%
of the original balance). The transaction documents show 98.5% of
the pool to be cashouts. Fitch considers a loan to be a rate term
refinance if the cashout amount is less than $5,000, which explains
the difference in the cashout amount percentages.

None of the loans in the pool are over $1.0 million, and the
maximum draw amount is $500,000.

Of the pool loans, 38.5% (38.3% per the transaction documents) are
concentrated in California. The largest MSA concentration is in the
Los Angeles MSA (14.8%), followed by the Miami MSA (6.0%) and the
Riverside MSA (5.8%). The top three MSAs account for 26% of the
pool. As a result, no probability of default (PD) penalty was
applied for geographic concentration.

Second Lien HELOC Collateral (Negative): The entirety of the
collateral pool consists of second lien HELOC loans originated by
loanDepot.com, LLC, United Wholesale Mortgage and other
originators. Fitch assumed no recovery and 100% loss severity (LS)
on second lien loans, based on the historical behavior of the loans
in economic stress scenarios. Fitch assumes second lien loans
default at a rate comparable to first lien loans. After controlling
for credit attributes, no additional penalty was applied.

Modified Sequential Structure with No Advancing of Delinquent P&I
(Mixed): The proposed structure is a modified-sequential structure
in which principal is distributed pro rata to classes A-1, M-1, M-2
and M-3 to the extent the performance triggers are passing. To the
extent the triggers are failing, principal is paid sequentially.
The transaction also benefits from excess spread that can be used
to reimburse for realized and cumulative losses, as well as cap
carryover amounts.

The transaction has a lockout feature benefiting more senior
classes if performance deteriorates. If the applicable credit
support percentage of classes M-1, M-2 or M-3 is less than the sum
of (i) 150% of the original applicable credit support percentage
for that class plus (ii) 50% of the non-performing loan percentage
plus (iii) the charged off loan percentage, then that class is
locked out of receiving principal payments and the principal
payments are redirected toward the most senior class. To the extent
any class of certificates is a locked out class, each class of
certificates subordinate to such locked out class will also be a
locked out class. Due to this lockout feature, the class M will be
locked out starting on day one.

Classes A-1, M-1, M-2, M-3, and B-1 are floating-rate classes based
on the SOFR index and are capped at the net WAC. The annual rate on
the class B-2 and B-3 certificates with respect to any distribution
date (and the related accrual period) will be equal to the net WAC
for such distribution date. Class B-4 is a principal-only class and
is not entitled to receive interest. If no excess spread is
available to absorb losses, losses will be allocated to all classes
reverse sequentially, starting with class B-4. The servicer will
not advance delinquent monthly payments of P&I.

180-Day Chargeoff Feature (Positive): Loans that become 180 days
delinquent based on the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA)
delinquency method, except for those in a forbearance plan, will be
charged off. The 180-day chargeoff feature will result in losses
being incurred sooner, while a larger amount of excess interest is
available to protect against losses. This compares favorably to a
delayed liquidation scenario, whereby the loss occurs later in the
life of the transaction and less excess is available.

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 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
the 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 41.7% at 'AAA'. The analysis indicates that 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

Fitch incorporates a sensitivity analysis to demonstrate how the
ratings would react to steeper MVDs than assumed at the MSA level.
Sensitivity analyses 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 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 modeling 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 decreased its loss expectations by 0.98% at the
'AAAsf' stress due to 100% due diligence with no material
findings.

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
for more detail.

Fitch also utilized data files provided by the issuer on its SEC
Rule 17g-5 designated website. Fitch received loan level
information based on the ResiPLS data layout format, and the data
are considered comprehensive. The data contained in the ResiPLS
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.


LBA TRUST 2024-BOLT: Fitch Assigns 'Bsf' Rating on Class HRR Certs
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned the following ratings and Ratings
Outlooks to LBA Trust 2024-BOLT, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
Certificates Series 2024-BOLT:

- $314,800,000 class A 'AAAsf'; Outlook Stable;

- $51,500,000 class B 'AA-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $39,900,000 class C 'A-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $56,200,000 class D 'BBB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $86,200,000 class E 'BB-sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $21,400,000 class F 'B+sf'; Outlook Stable;

- $30,000,000b class HRR 'Bsf'; Outlook Stable.

(a) Notional amount and interest only.

(b) Horizontal risk retention interest representing at least 5.0%
of the estimated fair value of all classes.

Since Fitch published its expected ratings on May 17, 2024, classes
X-CP and X-EXT were removed from the transaction structure by the
issuer. Fitch has withdrawn the expected 'BBB-(EXP)sf' ratings from
each of the class X-CP and X-EXT because the classes were removed
from the final deal structure by the issuer. The classes above
reflect the final ratings and deal structure.

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

The certificates represent the beneficial ownership interest in a
trust that will hold a $600 million, two-year, floating-rate, IO
mortgage loan with three one-year extension options. The mortgage
will be secured by the borrower's fee simple interest in a
portfolio of 18 industrial facilities, comprising approximately 9.9
million sf located in nine states and 11 markets.

Loan proceeds will be used to refinance approximately $471 million
of existing debt, pay approximately $13.0 million in closing costs
and return approximately $116.0 million of equity to the sponsor.
The certificates will follow a pro rata paydown for the initial 30%
of the loan amount and a standard senior sequential paydown
thereafter. The borrower has a one-time right to obtain a mezzanine
loan. To the extent the mezzanine loan is outstanding and no
mortgage loan event of default (EOD) is continuing, voluntary
prepayments will be applied pro rata between the mortgage and the
mezzanine loan.

The loan is originated by Morgan Stanley Mortgage Capital Holdings
LLC. KeyBank National Association is the servicer, with CWCapital
Asset Management LLC as special servicer. Wilmington Trust, N.A.,
is the trustee and Computershare Trust Company, N.A. is the
certificate administrator. Pentalpha Surveillance LLC will act as
operating advisor.

The transaction is scheduled to close on June 5, 2024

Since Fitch published its expected ratings on May 17, 2024, classes
X-CP and X-EXT were removed from the transaction structure by the
issuer. Fitch has withdrawn the expected ratings of 'BBB-(EXP)sf'
from each of the class X-CP and X-EXT because the classes were
removed from the final deal structure by the issuer. The classes
above reflect the final ratings and deal structure.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

Net Cash Flow: Fitch's estimates stressed net cash flow (NCF) for
the portfolio at $39.4 million. This is 6.0% lower than the
issuer's NCF and 8.6% higher than YE 2023 NCF. Fitch applied a
7.25% cap rate to derive a Fitch value of $544.0 million.

High Fitch Leverage: The $600.0 million whole loan equates to debt
of approximately $58 psf, with a Fitch stressed loan-to-value ratio
(LTV) and debt yield of 110.3% and 6.6%, respectively. The loan
represents approximately 56.5% of the appraised value of $962.1
million. Fitch increased the LTV hurdles by 1.25% to reflect the
higher in-place leverage.

Geographic and Tenant Diversity: The portfolio exhibits strong
geographic diversity with 18 industrial properties (9.9 million sf)
located across nine states and 11 MSAs. The three largest state
concentrations are Illinois (1.6 million sf; two properties), South
Carolina (1.5 million sf; two properties) and Tennessee (1.4
million sf; two properties). The three largest MSAs are Chicago, IL
(16.0% of NRA; 14.9% of ALA); Memphis, TN (13.9% of NRA; 7.5% of
ALA); and Baltimore, MD (13.8% of NRA; 16.5% of ALA). The portfolio
also exhibits significant tenant diversity as it features 20
distinct tenants, with no tenant occupying more than 13.7%.

Institutional Sponsorship and Management: The loan is sponsored by
a JV between LBA Logistics (LBA) and GIC. LBA has approximately 102
million sf of logistics and office assets under management. Of
this, 92 million sf are warehouse, distribution, light
manufacturing, multi-tenanted business parks and R&D spaces. GIC is
headquartered in Singapore with investments in over 40 countries.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

Declining cash flow decreases property value and capacity to meet
its debt service obligations. The table below indicates the model
implied rating sensitivity to changes in one variable, Fitch net
cash flow (NCF):

- Original Rating:
'AAAsf'/'AA-sf'/'A-sf'/'BBB-sf'/'BB-sf'/'B+sf'/'Bsf'

- 10% NCF Decline: 'AAsf'/'BBB+sf
'/'BBB-sf'/'BBsf'/'Bsf'/'B-sf'/'CCCsf'

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

Improvement in cash flow increases property value and capacity to
meet its debt service obligations. The table below indicates the
model implied rating sensitivity to changes to the same one
variable, Fitch NCF:

- Original Rating: 'AAAsf'/'AA-sf
'/'A-sf'/'BBB-sf'/'BB-sf'/'B+sf'/'Bsf'

- 10% NCF Increase: 'AAAsf'/'AA+sf
'/'A+sf'/'BBB+sf'/'BBsf'/'BB-sf'/'BB-sf'

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 a comparison and re-computation of
certain characteristics with respect to the mortgage loans. 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.


MADISON PARK LIX: Fitch Assigns 'BB+sf' Rating on Class E-R Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned ratings and Rating Outlooks to Madison
Park Funding LIX, Ltd. Reset Transaction

   Entity/Debt          Rating                Prior
   -----------          ------                -----
Madison Park
Funding LIX, Ltd.

   A1-R             LT  NRsf    New Rating
   A2-R             LT  AAAsf   New Rating
   B-R              LT  AA+sf   New Rating
   C 55822EAE9      LT  PIFsf   Paid In Full   A+sf
   C-R              LT  A+sf    New Rating
   D 55822EAG4      LT  PIFsf   Paid In Full   BBB+sf
   D1-R             LT  BBBsf   New Rating
   D1-R (Fixed)     LT  BBBsf   New Rating
   D2-R (Fixed)     LT  BBB-sf  New Rating
   E-R              LT  BB+sf   New Rating
   F-R              LT  NRsf    New Rating
   Subordinated-R   LT  NRsf    New Rating

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Madison Park Funding LIX, Ltd. (the issuer) is an arbitrage cash
flow collateralized loan obligation (CLO) that will be managed by
UBS Asset Management (Americas) LLC. The original deal closed in
December 2021. On May 30, 2024, the secured notes were refinanced
in full. Net proceeds from the issuance of the secured and
subordinated notes will provide financing on a portfolio of
approximately $700 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
95.5% first-lien senior secured loans and has a weighted average
recovery assumption of 75%. 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 weighted-average loan (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. 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 'BBB+sf' and 'AA+sf' for class A2-R, between
'BB+sf' and 'A+sf' for class B-R, between 'B+sf' and 'BBB+sf' for
class C-R, between less than 'B-sf' and 'BB+sf' for class D1-R,
between less than 'B-sf' and 'BB+sf' for class D2-R, and between
less than 'B-sf' and 'BB-sf' for class E-R.

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-R, 'AA+sf' for class C-R, 'A+sf'
for class D1-R, 'Asf' for class D2-R, and 'BBB+sf' for class E-R.

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 LIX. 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.


MADISON PARK LXIX: Fitch Assigns BB+sf Final Rating on Cl. E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned final ratings and Rating Outlooks to
Madison Park Funding LXIX, Ltd.

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

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

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Madison Park Funding LXIX, Ltd. (the issuer) is an arbitrage cash
flow collateralized loan obligation (CLO) that will be managed by
UBS Asset Management (Americas), LLC (f.k.a. 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
96.24% first-lien senior secured loans and has a weighted average
recovery assumption of 75.47%. 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 'A-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

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

Moody's Ratings' rating action is as follows:

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

US$250,000 Class F Deferrable Floating Rate Junior Notes due 2037,
Definitive Rating Assigned 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 96.0% of the portfolio must
consist of first lien senior secured loans and up to 4.0% of the
portfolio may consist of loans that are not senior secured. The
portfolio is approximately 70% ramped as of the closing date.

UBS Asset Management (Americas) 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 issued 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 Ratings 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 May 2024.

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

Par amount: $500,000,000

Diversity Score: 60

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 3136

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.60%

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
May 2024.            

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.


MCR 2024-TWA: Moody's Assigns (P)B3 Rating to Cl. F Certs
---------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned provisional ratings to seven classes
of CMBS securities, to be issued by MCR 2024-TWA Mortgage Trust,
Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2024-TWA:

Cl. A, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

Cl. X-A*, Assigned (P)Aa1 (sf)

Cl. B, Assigned (P)Aa3 (sf)

Cl. C, Assigned (P)A3 (sf)

Cl. D, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

Cl. E, Assigned (P)Ba3 (sf)

Cl. F, Assigned (P)B3 (sf)

* Reflects Interest-Only Classes

RATINGS RATIONALE

The certificates are collateralized by a single loan backed by a
first lien commercial mortgage collateralized by the borrower's
leasehold interest in the TWA Hotel, a full-service hotel, located
onsite at John F. Kennedy International Airport ("JFK Airport") in
Jamaica, NY. Moody's ratings are based on the credit quality of the
loan and the strength of the securitization structure.

The TWA Hotel is a 512-guestroom, full-service, LEED Gold certified
hotel located onsite and directly connected to Terminal 5 at JFK
Airport. The property was originally developed as the TWA Flight
Center in 1962 and was redeveloped into the subject hotel 2019. The
TWA Hotel was designed to combine the retro aspects of the 1960s
style ambiance with contemporary amenities and finishes. Hotel
features include approximately 50,000 SF of meeting space, six food
and beverage venues, an outdoor rooftop infinity pool, fitness
center and sundries shop. Since opening in 2019, the TWA Hotel has
received numerous awards including Forbes' Best Hotel Opening of
2019, The Best Architecture of 2019 by The Wall Street Journal and
best airport hotel in North America by Skytrax in 2024.

Moody's approach to rating this transaction involved the
application of both Moody's Large Loan and Single Asset/Single
Borrower Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securitization methodology and
Moody's IO Rating methodology. The rating approach for securities
backed by a single loan compares the credit risk inherent in the
underlying collateral with the credit protection offered by the
structure. The structure's credit enhancement is quantified by the
maximum deterioration in property value that the securities are
able to withstand under various stress scenarios without causing an
increase in the expected loss for various rating levels. In
assigning single borrower ratings, Moody's also consider a range of
qualitative issues as well as the transaction's structural and
legal aspects.

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. Moody's 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 Moody's first mortgage actual DSCR is 0.95X and Moody's first
mortgage actual stressed DSCR is 0.85X. Moody's DSCR is based on
Moody's stabilized net cash flow.

The loan first mortgage balance of $290,000,000 represents a
Moody's LTV of 127.4%. Moody's LTV ratio is based on Moody's value.
Moody's did not adjust Moody's value to reflect the current
interest rate environment as part of Moody's analysis for this
transaction.

Moody's also grades properties on a scale of 0 to 5 (best to worst)
and considers those grades when assessing the likelihood of debt
payment. The factors considered include property age, quality of
construction, location, market, and tenancy. The property's
property quality grade is 1.50.

Positive features of the transaction include the location, future
demand, asset quality, net cash flow margins and sponsorship.
Offsetting these strengths are the dependence on a single demand
driver, limited operating history, lack of collateral
diversification, interest-only loan profile, low debt service
coverage, performance volatility inherent within the hotel sector,
and certain credit negative legal features.

The principal methodology used in rating all classes except
interest-only classes was "Large Loan and Single Asset/Single
Borrower Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securitizations Methodology"
published in July 2022.

Moody's approach for single borrower and large loan multi-borrower
transactions evaluates credit enhancement levels based on an
aggregation of adjusted loan level proceeds derived from Moody's
Moody's loan level LTV ratios. Major adjustments to determining
proceeds include leverage, loan structure, and property type. These
aggregated proceeds are then further adjusted for any pooling
benefits associated with loan level diversity, other concentrations
and correlations.

Moody's analysis considers the following inputs to calculate the
proposed IO rating based on the published methodology: original and
current bond ratings and credit estimates; original and current
bond balances grossed up for losses for all bonds the IO(s)
reference(s) within the transaction; and IO type corresponding to
an IO type as defined in the published methodology.

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 may
indicate that the collateral's credit quality is stronger or weaker
than Moody's had previously anticipated. Factors that may cause an
upgrade of the ratings include significant loan pay downs or
amortization, an increase in the pool's share of defeasance or
overall improved pool performance. Factors that may cause a
downgrade of the ratings include a decline in the overall
performance of the pool, loan concentration, increased expected
losses from specially serviced and troubled loans or interest
shortfalls.


OAKTREE CLO 2024-26: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Oaktree CLO 2024-26
Ltd./Oaktree CLO 2024-26 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 Oaktree CLO Management Co. 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 notes through portfolio
identification and ongoing management; and

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

  Ratings Assigned

  Oaktree CLO 2024-26 Ltd./Oaktree CLO 2024-26 LLC

  Class A-1, $256.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2, $12.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B, $36.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C (deferrable), $24.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D-1 (deferrable), $24.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class D-2 (deferrable), $4.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $12.00 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $38.00 million: Not rated



OHA LOAN 2016-1: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E-R2 Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to the class A-1-R2,
B-1-R2, B-2-R2, C-R2, D-1-R2, D-2-R2, and E-R2 replacement debt
from OHA Loan Funding 2016-1 Ltd./OHA Loan Funding 2016-1 LLC, a
CLO managed by Oak Hill Advisors L.P. that was originally issued in
December 2016 and underwent a refinancing in February 2020. The
replacement class A-2-R2 debt is not rated by S&P Global Ratings.

On the June 3, 2024, refinancing date, the proceeds from the
replacement debt were used to redeem the February 2020 debt. At
that time, S&P withdrew its ratings on the February 2020 debt and
assigned ratings to the replacement debt.

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

-- The replacement debt was issued at a lower weighted average
cost of debt than the previous debt.

-- The replacement class D debt was split into the class D-1 and
D-2 debt and is sequential in payment.

-- The stated maturity was extended by approximately 4.5 years.

-- The reinvestment period and non-call period were reestablished
to July 2029 and June 2026, respectively.

-- The weighted average life test was updated to 9.5 years after
the refinancing date.

-- The required minimum overcollateralization (O/C) test for the
replacement debt was updated along with the reinvestment O/C test.

-- The required minimum interest coverage test was unchanged for
the replacement class.

-- There was additional subordinated debt issued on the
refinancing date.

Replacement And February 2020 Debt Issuances

Replacement debt

-- Class A-1-R2, $372.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR +
1.46%

-- Class A-2-R2, $30.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR +
1.65%

-- Class B-1-R2, $44.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR +
1.70%

-- Class B-2-R2, $10.00 million: 5.79%

-- Class C-R2 (deferrable), $36.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 2.10%

-- Class D-1-R2 (deferrable), $36.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 3.05%

-- Class D-2-R2 (deferrable), $6.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 4.35%

-- Class E-R2 (deferrable), $18.00 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 5.70%

-- Subordinated notes, $64.00 million: Residual(i)

(i)The balance of subordinated notes includes $58.00 million
principal amount of existing subordinated notes.

February 2020 debt

-- Class A-R, $384.60 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.26% +
CSA(i)

-- Class B-R-1, $62.10 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.60%
+ CSA(i)

-- Class B-R-2, $10.00 million: 2.92%

-- Class C-R (deferrable), $36.05 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 1.95% + CSA(i)

-- Class D-R (deferrable), $36.05 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 3.00% + CSA(i)

-- Class E-R (deferrable), $24.05 million: Three-month CME term
SOFR + 6.35% + CSA(i)

-- Subordinated notes, $58.00 million: Residual

(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."


  Ratings Assigned

  OHA Loan Funding 2016-1 Ltd./OHA Loan Funding 2016-1 LLC

  Class A-1-R2, $372 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2-R2, $30 million: Not rated
  Class B-1-R2, $44 million: AA (sf)
  Class B-2-R2, $10 million: AA (sf)
  Class C-R2 (deferrable), $36 million: A (sf)
  Class D-1-R2 (deferrable), $36 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class D-2-R2 (deferrable), $6 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E-R2 (deferrable), $18 million: BB- (sf)

  Ratings Withdrawn

  OHA Loan Funding 2016-1 Ltd./OHA Loan Funding 2016-1 LLC

  Class A-R to not rated from 'AAA (sf)'
  Class B-R-1 to not rated from 'AA (sf)'
  Class B-R-2 to not rated from 'AA (sf)'
  Class C-R to not rated from 'A (sf)'
  Class D-R to not rated from 'BBB- (sf)'
  Class E-R to not rated from 'BB- (sf)'

  Other Debt

  OHA Loan Funding 2016-1 Ltd./OHA Loan Funding 2016-1 LLC

  Subordinated notes, $64 million: Not rated(i)

(i)The balance of subordinated notes includes $58.00 million
principal amount of existing subordinated notes.




ORION CLO 2024-3: S&P Assigns Prelim BB-(sf) Rating on Cl. E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Orion CLO
2024-3 Ltd./Orion CLO 2024-3 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 Antares Liquid Credit Strategies LLC,
an affiliate of Antares Capital Advisers LLC, and a subsidiary of
Antares Holdings L.P.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of May 31,
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 debt through portfolio
identification and ongoing management; and

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

  Preliminary Ratings Assigned

  Orion CLO 2024-3 Ltd./Orion CLO 2024-3 LLC

  Class A, $246.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B, $58.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C (deferrable), $24.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D (deferrable), $24.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $16.00 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $39.95 million: Not rated



PMT LOAN 2021-INV2: Moody's Hikes Rating on Cl. B-5 Certs to Ba3
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has upgraded the ratings of 11 bonds issued by PMT
Loan Trust 2021-INV2. The collateral backing this deal consists of
prime conforming, investment property mortgage loans that were
originated by PennyMac Corp. (PennyMac).

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

The complete rating actions are as follows:

Issuer: PMT Loan Trust 2021-INV2

Cl. A-26, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-27, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-28, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-X26*, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-X27*, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. A-X28*, Upgraded to Aaa (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa1 (sf)

Cl. B-1, Upgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Aa3 (sf)

Cl. B-2, Upgraded to A1 (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2021 Definitive
Rating Assigned A3 (sf)

Cl. B-3, Upgraded to Baa1 (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Baa3 (sf)

Cl. B-4, Upgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned Ba2 (sf)

Cl. B-5, Upgraded to Ba3 (sf); previously on Dec 22, 2021
Definitive Rating Assigned B2 (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 updated loss expectations on the underlying pool.

The transaction continues to display strong collateral performance,
with no cumulative loss to date and a small number of loans in
delinquency. The credit enhancement since closing has grown by 12%,
on average, for the tranches upgraded as the pool has amortized
since origination.

Moody's analysis also considered the existence of historical
interest shortfalls for some of the bonds and the Class B-4 and B-5
each experienced a temporary, and rather small, interest shortfall
in June 2023. While all shortfalls have since been recouped, the
size and length of the past shortfalls, as well as the potential
for recurrence, were analyzed as part of the upgrades.

The rating actions also reflect the further seasoning of the
collateral and increased clarity regarding the impact of borrower
relief programs on collateral performance. Information obtained
from loan servicers in recent years has shed light on their current
strategies regarding borrower relief programs and the impact those
programs may have on collateral performance and transaction
liquidity, through servicer advancing. Moody's recent analysis has
found that in addition to robust home price appreciation, many of
these borrower relief programs have contributed to stronger
collateral performance than Moody's had previously expected, thus
supporting the upgrades.

No actions were taken on the remaining rated classes in this deal
as those classes are already at the highest achievable levels
within Moody's rating scale.

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 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 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.


RIN LLC VIII: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba3 Rating to $7.5MM Cl. E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned provisional ratings to six classes of
notes to be issued by RIN VIII LLC (the "Issuer" or "RIN VIII").

Moody's rating action is as follows:

US$320,000,000 Class A-1 Floating Rate Senior Notes due 2037,
Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$5,000,000 Class A-2 Floating Rate Senior Notes due 2037,
Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$55,000,000 Class B Floating Rate Senior Notes due 2037, Assigned
(P)Aa3 (sf)

US$30,000,000 Class C Deferrable Floating Rate Mezzanine Notes due
2037, Assigned (P)A3 (sf)

US$27,500,000 Class D Deferrable Floating Rate Mezzanine Notes due
2037, Assigned (P)Baa3 (sf)

US$7,500,000 Class E Deferrable Floating Rate Mezzanine Notes due
2037, Assigned (P)Ba3 (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 project finance collateralized loan obligations' (PF CLO)
portfolio and structure.

RIN VIII is a managed cash flow PF CLO. The issued notes will be
collateralized primarily by broadly syndicated senior secured
project finance and corporate infrastructure  loans. At least 50.0%
of the portfolio must consist of project finance infrastructure
loans and eligible investments. The PF CLO permits up to 45% of the
portfolio to be in project finance loans in the electricity (gas)
contracted,  merchant or power renewables sectors. At least 96.0%
of the portfolio must consist of first lien senior secured loans
and eligible investments, and up to 4.0% of the portfolio may
consist of second lien loans and permitted debt securities (i.e.,
senior secured bonds, senior secured notes, second priority senior
secured note and high-yield bonds). Moody's expect the portfolio to
be approximately 68% ramped as of the closing date.

RREEF America L.L.C., a subsidiary of DWS Group GmbH & Co. KGaA
(the "Portfolio Advisor") 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 Portfolio Advisor may reinvest
unscheduled principal payments and proceeds from sales of credit
risk assets.

In addition to the Rated Notes, the Issuer will issue 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 ratings of the Rated Notes also took into account the
concentrated nature of the portfolio. The PF CLO's indenture allows
for a portfolio that is highly concentrated by sector and
individual asset size. Up to 35% of the portfolio's assets may be
in the electricity (gas) contracted, merchant or power renewables
sectors. The five largest sub-sectors could constitute up to 61% of
the portfolio, with the largest sub-sector potentially being up to
45% of the portfolio. Additionally, the portfolio may have minimum
of 50 obligors with the largest obligor potentially comprising up
to 3.50% of the portfolio. Credit deterioration in a single sector
or in a few obligors could have an outsized negative impact on the
PF CLO portfolio's overall credit quality. Moody's analysis
considered the potential for a concentrated portfolio.

Moody's modeled the transaction by applying the Monte Carlo
simulation framework in Moody's CDOROM(TM), as described in the
"Project Finance and Infrastructure Asset CLOs methodology" rating
methodology published in February 2024 and by using a cash flow
model which estimates expected loss on a CLO's tranche, as
described in the "Moody's Global Approach to Rating Collateralized
Loan Obligations" rating methodology published in May 2024.

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

Par amount: $500,000,000

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF) of Project Finance Loans:
2001

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF) of Corporate Infrastructure
Loans: 2603

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 3.30%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 6.00%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR) of Project Finance Loans:
42.10%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR) of Corporate Infrastructure
Loans: 64.70%

Weighted Average Life (WAL): 8.0 years

Permitted Debt Securities and Second Lien Loans: 4.0%

Total Obligors: 50

Largest Obligor: 3.50%

Largest 5 Obligors: 17.25%

B2 Default Probability Rating Obligations: 17.0%

B3 Default Probability Rating Obligations: 10.0%

Project Finance Infrastructure Obligors: 50.0%

Corporate Power Infrastructure Obligors: 15.0%

Power Infrastructure Obligors: 45.0%

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The methodologies used in these ratings were "Project Finance and
Infrastructure Asset CLOs methodology" published in February 2024.

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 Portfolio Advisor's
investment decisions and management of the transaction will also
affect the performance of the Rated Notes.


SANDSTONE PEAK III: S&P Assigns BB- (sf) Rating on Class E Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its ratings to Sandstone Peak III
Ltd./Sandstone Peak III 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 Beach Point CLO 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

  Sandstone Peak III Ltd./Sandstone Peak III LLC

  Class A-1, $212.0 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-1L, $40.0 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2, $8.0 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B, $44.0 million: AA (sf)
  Class C (deferrable), $24.0 million: A (sf)
  Class D-1 (deferrable), $20.0 million: BBB (sf)
  Class D-2a (deferrable), $7.0 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class D-2b (deferrable), $1.0 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $10.0 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $36.5 million: Not rated



SLM STUDENT 2014-1: Fitch Affirms 'Bsf' Rating on Two Tranches
--------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has affirmed the ratings on outstanding notes of SLC
Student Loan Trust (SLC) 2008-2 and 2009-3 along with SLM Student
Loan Trust (SLM) 2014-1. Fitch has downgraded the outstanding notes
of SLM 2010-1.

The Rating Outlooks for the notes of SLM 2014-1 remain Stable,
while the Outlook for the class A notes of SLC 2009-3 has been
revised to Negative from Stable.

   Entity/Debt         Rating           Prior
   -----------         ------           -----
SLM Student Loan
Trust 2014-1

   A-3 78448EAC9   LT Bsf   Affirmed    Bsf
   B 78448EAD7     LT Bsf   Affirmed    Bsf

SLM Student Loan
Trust 2010-1

   A 78445XAA4     LT CCsf  Downgrade   Bsf
   B 78445XAB2     LT CCsf  Downgrade   Bsf

SLC Student Loan
Trust 2009-3

   A 78444TAA4     LT AA+sf Affirmed    AA+sf

SLC Student Loan
Trust 2008-2

   A-4 78444NAD1   LT Dsf   Affirmed    Dsf
   B 78444NAE9     LT Csf   Affirmed    Csf

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

SLC 2008-2: The affirmation of the class A-4 notes at 'Dsf'
reflects the default on the senior class A-4 notes in the full
payment of their outstanding principal on or before their legal
final maturity date of June 15, 2021. The notes remain outstanding
and will remain at 'Dsf' so long as the event of default is
continuing. The class B notes are affirmed at 'Csf', reflective of
the high level of credit risk for the notes, resulting from the
occurrence of an event of default in the transaction.

Thus far the class B notes have continued to make interest
payments; however, pursuant to the trust indenture, the trust could
switch to a post-event of default waterfall, directing all payments
to the class A-4 notes until the balance is paid in full, which
would result in interest payments being diverted away from the
class B notes. If this course of action were followed, the class B
notes would not pass Fitch's base case cashflow scenarios, as
reflected by the current rating on the notes. Fitch will continue
monitoring remedies to the occurrence of the event of default
implemented by the noteholders or transaction parties, as provided
under the trust indenture, and take any additional rating action
based on the impact of those remedies, as deemed appropriate.

SLC 2009-3: The class A notes pass all credit and maturity stresses
in cashflow modeling with sufficient hard credit enhancement (CE).
The class A notes were affirmed at 'AA+sf'. The Outlook revision to
Negative from Stable on the class A notes reflects the decreasing
cushion in the amount of time the notes pay in full under Fitch's
maturity stresses. The trust recorded a very high increase in the
weighted average remaining loan term over the last 18 months, which
has subdued more recently; however, if remaining term continues to
increase the assigned ratings will have negative rating pressure
consistent will the Negative Outlook.

SLM 2010-1: The outstanding class A notes miss their legal final
maturity date of March 25, 2025 under both credit and maturity
stresses in Fitch's cashflow modelling. If the class A notes miss
their legal final maturity date, this constitutes an event of
default on the transaction's indenture, which would result in
diversion of interest from the class B notes to pay class A notes
until the class A notes are paid in full. This would cause an event
of default for the class B notes. The outstanding notes are
eventually paid in full under Fitch's stressed, 'Bsf', cashflow
analysis.

The legal final maturity date of the class A notes is approximately
nine months away in March 2025.The repayment of this class by its
legal final maturity date is unlikely under Fitch's maturity stress
scenarios without an extension of the legal final maturity date or
without support from the sponsor. Currently there are not active
consent solicitations for a maturity date extension for this
transaction.

The trust has entered into a revolving credit agreement with
Navient by which it may borrow funds at maturity in order to pay
off the notes. Due to the short amount of time to the legal final
maturity of the class A notes, Fitch decreased the qualitative
credit to the revolving credit agreement available to the trust and
downgraded the class A and B notes to 'CCsf' from 'Bsf'. If this
revolving credit facility is utilized, it will result in positive
rating pressure to these ratings.

SLM 2014-1: The outstanding class A-3 notes of the trust miss their
legal final maturity date of February 26, 2029 under Fitch's credit
and maturity stresses. If the class A-3 notes miss their legal
final maturity date, this would constitute an event of default on
the transaction's indenture, which would result in diversion of
interest from the class B notes to pay class A-3 notes until the
class A-3 notes are paid in full. This would cause an event of
default for the class B notes. Both classes from this transaction
are eventually paid in full under Fitch's stressed cashflow
analysis.

In affirming the ratings at 'Bsf' rather than 'CCCsf' or below,
Fitch has considered qualitative factors such as Navient's ability
to call the notes upon reaching 10% pool factor, the time horizon
until the A-3 maturity date, current rate of amortization, the
revolving credit agreement available to the trust and the eventual
full payment of principal in modeling. The Outlooks remain Stable.

The sustainable constant default rate (sCDR) assumption was
increased to 5.30% from 4.30% for SLC 2008-2, 7.00% from 6.00% for
SLM 2010-1, and 5.00% from 2.70% for SLM 2014-1 as Fitch has noted
an increase in the trend of defaults that represent higher
long-term trends for the transactions. In addition, the sustainable
constant prepayment rate (sCPR) assumption was increased to 9.00%
from 8.00% for SLC 2008-2 and 2009-3 and to 10.00% from 9.00% for
SLM 2010-1 as prepayments, including from loan consolidation,
remain higher than expectations and historical levels for these
transactions.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

U.S. Sovereign Risk: The trust collateral comprises 100% Federal
Family Education Loan Program (FFELP) loans with guaranties
provided by eligible guarantors and reinsurance provided by the
U.S. Department of Education (ED) for at least 97% of principal and
accrued interest. The U.S. sovereign rating is currently
'AA+'/Outlook Stable.

Collateral Performance: For all transactions, Fitch applies the
standard default timing curve in its credit stress cash flow
analysis. Additionally, the increase in sCDR levels for
transactions below is due to an increase in transaction-specific
defaults above historic levels, while the increase in sCPR levels
is due to prepayments, including from loan consolidation, remaining
high despite the end of the Public Service Loan Forgiveness waiver
in October 2022. The claim reject rate is assumed to be 0.25% in
the base case and 1.65% in the 'AA' case.

SLC 2008-2: Based on transaction-specific performance to date,
Fitch assumes a cumulative default rate of 47.00% under the base
case scenario and a default rate of 100.00% under the 'AA' credit
stress scenario. After applying the default timing curve per
criteria, the effective default rate is 99.99% in the 'AA' case.
Fitch is revising the sCDR upwards to 5.30% from 4.30% along with
revising the sCPR (voluntary and involuntary prepayments) upwards
to 9.00% from 8.00% in cash flow modeling.

The trailing-12-month (TTM) levels of deferment, forbearance, and
income-based repayment (IBR; prior to adjustment) are 6.39% (6.44%
at February 28, 2023), 17.75% (16.97%) and 30.67% (27.42%). These
assumptions are used as the starting point in cash flow modelling
and subsequent declines or increases are modelled as per criteria.
The 31-60 DPD have decreased and the 91-120 DPD have increased and
are currently 4.89% for 31 DPD and 2.38% for 91 DPD compared to
5.38% and 2.11% one year ago for 31 DPD and 91 DPD, respectively.
The borrower benefit is approximately 0.11%, based on information
provided by the sponsor.

Occurrence of an Event of Default: The affirmation of 'D' for the
class A-4 notes is based on the event of default and the
continuation of the event of default on the legal final maturity
date of the class A-4 notes. For class B notes, default remains a
real possibility depending on remedies adopted by the transaction
parties under the transaction's indenture, which include among
others the acceleration of the notes and/or the liquidation of the
trust assets.

SLC 2009-3: Based on transaction-specific performance to date,
Fitch assumes a cumulative default rate of 23.25% under the base
case scenario and a default rate of 63.94% under the 'AA' credit
stress scenario. After applying the default timing curve per
criteria, the effective default rate is unchanged from the
cumulative default rate. Fitch is maintaining the sCDR of 3.00% and
revising the sCPR upwards to 9.00% from 8.00% in cash flow
modeling.

The TTM levels of deferment, forbearance, and IBR are 4.24% (4.85%
at February 28, 2023), 17.25% (15.19%) and 26.94% (23.84%). These
assumptions are used as the starting point in cash flow modelling
and subsequent declines or increases are modelled as per criteria.
The 31-60 DPD and the 91-120 DPD have decreased and are currently
3.64% for 31 DPD and 1.54% for 91 DPD compared to 3.79% and 1.57%
one year ago for 31 DPD and 91 DPD, respectively. The borrower
benefit is approximately 0.08%, based on information provided by
the sponsor.

SLM 2010-1: Based on transaction-specific performance to date,
Fitch assumes a cumulative default rate of 59.00% under the base
case scenario and a default rate of 100.00% under the 'AA' credit
stress scenario. After applying the default timing curve per
criteria, the effective default rate is unchanged from the
cumulative default rate. Fitch is revising the sCDR upwards to
7.00% from 6.00% along with revising the sCPR upwards to 10.00%
from 9.00% in cash flow modeling.

The TTM levels of deferment, forbearance, and IBR are 6.56% (6.66%
at March 31, 2023), 17.64% (17.80%) and 32.51% (28.91%). These
assumptions are used as the starting point in cash flow modelling
and subsequent declines or increases are modelled as per criteria.
The 31-60 DPD have increased and the 91-120 DPD have decreased and
are currently 5.71% for 31 DPD and 1.89% for 91 DPD compared to
4.76% and 2.23% one year ago for 31 DPD and 91 DPD, respectively.
The borrower benefit is approximately 0.03%, based on information
provided by the sponsor.

SLM 2014-1: Based on transaction-specific performance to date,
Fitch assumes a cumulative default rate of 36.00% under the base
case scenario and a default rate of 99.00% under the 'AA' credit
stress scenario. After applying the default timing curve per
criteria, the effective default rate is unchanged from the
cumulative default rate. Fitch is revising the sCDR upwards to
5.00% from 2.70% and maintaining the sCPR of 12.00% in cash flow
modeling.

The TTM levels of deferment, forbearance, and IBR are 4.99% (5.00%
at March 31, 2023), 17.66% (17.77%) and 31.31% (27.09%). These
assumptions are used as the starting point in cash flow modelling
and subsequent declines or increases are modelled as per criteria.
The 31-60 DPD and the 91-120 DPD have decreased and are currently
5.06% for 31 DPD and 2.01% for 91 DPD compared to 5.52% and 2.38%
one year ago for 31 DPD and 91 DPD, respectively. The borrower
benefit is approximately 0.08%, based on information provided by
the sponsor.

Basis and Interest Rate Risk: Basis risk for these transactions
arises from any rate and reset frequency mismatch between interest
rate indices for Special Allowance Payments (SAP) and the
securities. As of the most recent collection periods, 80.02%,
99.62%, 79.83%, and 99.74% of the student loans in SLC 2008-2, SLC
2009-3, SLM 2010-1, and SLM 2014-1, respectively, are indexed to
SOFR, and the balance of the loans is indexed to the 91-day T-bill
rate.

All of the outstanding notes in SLC 2008-2 and 2009-3 are indexed
to 90-day Average SOFR plus the spread adjustment of 0.26161%,
while all the outstanding notes in SLM 2010-1 and 2014-1 are
indexed to 30-day Average SOFR plus the spread adjustment of
0.11448%. Fitch applies its standard basis and interest rate
stresses to the transactions as per criteria.

Payment Structure: Credit enhancement (CE) is provided by
over-collateralization (OC), excess spread, and for the class A
notes of SLC 2008-2, SLM 2010-1, and SLM 2014-1, subordination
provided by the class B notes. As of the most recent collection
periods, reported total parity is 106.40%, 107.53%, 102.44%, and
101.01% for SLC 2008-2, SLC 2009-3, SLM 2010-1, and SLM 2014-1,
respectively. Liquidity support is provided by reserve accounts
sized at their floors of $2,095,557, $1,211,252, and $996,942 for
SLC 2009-3, SLM 2010-1, and SLM 2014-1, respectively. The reserve
account for SLC 2008-2 is sized at $0. SLC 2009-3, SLM 2010-1, and
SLM 2014-1 will continue to release cash as long as their target OC
or parity amounts are maintained.

Operational Capabilities: Day-to-day servicing is provided by
Navient Solutions, LLC. Fitch believes Navient to be an adequate
servicer, due to its extensive track record as one of the largest
servicers of FFELP loans. Fitch was notified that Navient entered
into a binding letter of intent on Jan. 29, 2024 that will
transition the student loan servicing to Missouri Higher Education
Loan Authority (MOHELA), a student loan servicer for government and
commercial enterprises. The transition to MOHELA is not expected to
interrupt servicing activities.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

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

'AA+sf' rated tranches of most FFELP securitizations will likely
move in tandem with the U.S. sovereign rating given the strong
linkage to the U.S. sovereign, by nature of the reinsurance
provided by the ED. Aside from the U.S. sovereign rating, defaults,
basis risk and loan-extension risk account for the majority of the
risk embedded in FFELP student loan transactions.

This section provides insight into the model-implied sensitivities
the transaction faces when one assumption is modified, while
holding others equal. Fitch conducts credit and maturity stress
sensitivity analysis by increasing or decreasing key assumptions by
25% and 50% over the base case. The credit stress sensitivity is
viewed by stressing both the base case default rate and the basis
spread. The maturity stress sensitivity is viewed by stressing
remaining term, IBR usage and prepayments. The results below should
only be considered as one potential outcome, as the transaction is
exposed to multiple dynamic risk factors and should not be used as
an indicator of possible future performance.

SLC Student Loan Trust 2008-2

Upon the occurrence of the event of default, the class A-4 notes
will remain at 'Dsf' so long as the event of default is continuing.
For class B notes, the event of default can result in positive or
negative rating actions depending upon the remedies decided upon by
the noteholders or the indenture trustee, in accordance with the
terms of the trust indenture. Assuming a post-event of default
waterfall, model-implied ratings for the class B are shown below:

Credit Stress Rating Sensitivity

- Default increase 25%: class B 'Csf';

- Default increase 50%: class B 'Csf';

- Basis Spread increase 0.25%: class B 'Csf';

- Basis Spread increase 0.50%: class B 'Csf'.

Maturity Stress Rating Sensitivity

- CPR decrease 25%: class B 'Csf';

- CPR decrease 50%: class B 'Csf';

- IBR Usage increase 25%: class B 'Csf';

- IBR Usage increase 50%: class B 'Csf'.

- Remaining Term increase 25%: class B 'Csf';

- Remaining Term increase 50%: class B 'Csf'.

SLC Student Loan Trust 2009-3

Current Ratings: class A 'AA+sf'

Current Model-Implied Ratings: class A 'AA+sf' (Credit and Maturity
Stress)

Credit Stress Rating Sensitivity

- Default increase 25%: class A 'AA+sf';

- Default increase 50%: class A 'AA+sf';

- Basis Spread increase 0.25%: class A 'AA+sf';

- Basis Spread increase 0.50%: class A 'AA+sf';

Maturity Stress Rating Sensitivity

- CPR decrease 25%: class A 'AA+sf';

- CPR decrease 50%: class A 'AA+sf';

- IBR Usage increase 25%: class A 'AA+sf';

- IBR Usage increase 50%: class A 'AA+sf';

- Remaining Term increase 25%: class A 'BBsf';

- Remaining Term increase 50%: class A 'CCCsf'.

SLM Student Loan Trust 2010-1

Current Ratings: class A 'CCsf'; class B 'CCsf'

Credit Stress Rating Sensitivity

- Default increase 25%: class A 'CCsf'; class B 'CCsf';

- Default increase 50%: class A 'CCsf'; class B 'CCsf';

- Basis Spread increase 0.25%: class A 'CCsf'; class B 'CCsf';

- Basis Spread increase 0.50%: class A 'CCsf'; class B 'CCsf'.

Maturity Stress Rating Sensitivity

- CPR decrease 25%: class A 'CCsf'; class B 'CCsf';

- CPR decrease 50%: class A 'CCsf'; class B 'CCsf';

- IBR Usage increase 25%: class A 'CCsf'; class B 'CCsf';

- IBR Usage increase 50%: class A 'CCsf'; class B 'CCsf';

- Remaining Term increase 25%: class A 'CCsf'; class B 'CCsf';

- Remaining Term increase 50%: class A 'CCsf'; class B 'CCsf'.

SLM Student Loan Trust 2014-1

Current Ratings: class A 'Bsf'; class B 'Bsf'

Current Model-Implied Ratings: class A 'CCCsf' (Credit and Maturity
Stress); class B 'CCCsf' (Credit and Maturity Stress)

Credit Stress Rating Sensitivity

- Default increase 25%: class A 'CCCsf'; class B 'CCCsf';

- Default increase 50%: class A 'CCCsf'; class B 'CCCsf';

- Basis Spread increase 0.25%: class A 'CCCsf'; class B 'CCCsf';

- Basis Spread increase 0.50%: class A 'CCCsf'; class B 'CCCsf'.

Maturity Stress Rating Sensitivity

- CPR decrease 25%: class A 'CCCsf'; class B 'CCCsf';

- CPR decrease 50%: class A 'CCCsf'; class B 'CCCsf';

- IBR Usage increase 25%: class A 'CCCsf'; class B 'CCCsf';

- IBR Usage increase 50%: class A 'CCCsf'; class B 'CCCsf';

- Remaining Term increase 25%: class A 'CCCsf'; class B 'CCCsf';

- Remaining Term increase 50%: class A 'CCCsf'; class B 'CCCsf'.

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

SLC Student Loan Trust 2008-2

Upon the occurrence of the event of default, the class A-4 notes
will remain at 'Dsf' so long as the event of default is continuing.
For class B notes, the event of default can result in positive or
negative rating actions depending upon the remedies decided upon by
the noteholders or the indenture trustee, in accordance with the
terms of the trust indenture.

SLC Student Loan Trust 2009-3

No upgrade credit or maturity stress sensitivity is provided for
the class A notes, as they are already at their highest possible
current and model-implied ratings.

SLM Student Loan Trust 2010-1 and 2014-1

The current ratings are most sensitive to Fitch's maturity risk
scenario. An extension of the legal final maturity date of the A
notes, which would effectively mitigate the maturity risk in
Fitch's cash flow modeling, would result in upward rating pressure.
Additional secondary factors that may lead to a positive rating
action are: material increases in the payment rate and/or a
material reduction in the weighted average remaining loan term.

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

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.


STRATS TRUST 2004-6: Moody's Puts 'Ba2' on Review for Downgrade
---------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has placed on review for downgrade the rating of
the following certificates issued by STRATS Trust for United States
Cellular Corporation Securities, Series 2004-6:

US$12,500,000 Class A-1 Notes due 2033 (the "Class A-1 Notes"), Ba2
Placed On Review for Downgrade; previously on August 4, 2021
Downgraded to Ba2

RATINGS RATIONALE

The rating action is a result of the change of the rating of the
6.70% Senior Notes due 2033 issued by United States Cellular
Corporation (the "Underlying Securities"), whose Ba2 rating was
placed on review for downgrade on May 29, 2024. The transaction is
a structured note whose rating is based on the rating of the
Underlying Securities and the legal structure of the transaction.

Methodology Underlying the Rating Action:

The principal methodology used in this rating was "Repackaged
Securities Methodology" published in June 2023.

Moody's conducted no additional cash flow analysis or stress
scenarios because the ratings are a pass-through of the rating of
the underlying entity.

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

The rating will be sensitive to any change in the rating of the
Underlying Securities which are the 6.70% Senior Notes due 2033
issued by United States Cellular Corporation.


VENTURE 49 CLO: Moody's Assigns (P)Ba3 Rating to $16MM Cl. E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned provisional ratings to four classes of
notes to be issued by Venture 49 CLO, Limited (the "Issuer" or
"Venture 49").

Moody's Ratings' rating action is as follows:

US$3,000,000 Class X Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2037,
Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$248,000,000 Class A1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2037, Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$16,000,000 Class AJ Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2037,
Assigned (P)Aaa (sf)

US$16,000,000 Class E Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2037, Assigned (P)Ba3 (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.

Venture 49 is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes 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 up to 10.0% of the portfolio
may consist of second lien loans, unsecured loans and permitted
debt securities. Moody's expect the portfolio to be approximately
90% ramped as of the closing date.

MJX Venture Holdings II LP (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 five 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 Ratings 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 May 2024.

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

Par amount: $400,000,000

Diversity Score: 80

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2826

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 4.00%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 5.0%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 46.25%

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
May 2024.

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.


VENTURE 49 CLO: Moody's Assigns Ba3 Rating to $16MM Class E Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has assigned ratings to four classes of notes
issued by Venture 49 CLO, Limited (the "Issuer" or "Venture 49").

Moody's Ratings' action is as follows:

US$3,000,000 Class X Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2037,
Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$248,000,000 Class A1 Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due
2037, Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$16,000,000 Class AJ Senior Secured Floating Rate Notes due 2037,
Definitive Rating Assigned Aaa (sf)

US$16,000,000 Class E Junior Secured Deferrable Floating Rate Notes
due 2037, Definitive Rating Assigned Ba3 (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.

Venture 49 is a managed cash flow CLO. The issued notes 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 up to 10.0% of the portfolio
may consist of second lien loans, unsecured loans and permitted
debt securities. The portfolio is approximately 90% ramped as of
the closing date.

MJX Venture Holdings II LP (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 issued five 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 Ratings 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 May 2024.

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

Par amount: $400,000,000

Diversity Score: 80

Weighted Average Rating Factor (WARF): 2826

Weighted Average Spread (WAS): 4.00%

Weighted Average Coupon (WAC): 5.0%

Weighted Average Recovery Rate (WARR): 46.25%

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
May 2024.

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 2024-5: S&P Assigns Prelim B-(sf) on B-2 Notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Verus
Securitization Trust 2024-5'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 1,008 loans
backed by 1,014 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 1,008 loans, two loans are
cross-collateralized loans backed by eight properties.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of June 5,
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 2024-5(i)

  Class A-1, $351,375,000: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2, $39,191,000: AA (sf)
  Class A-3, $66,491,000: A (sf)
  Class M-1, $35,138,000: BBB- (sf)
  Class B-1, $19,461,000: BB- (sf)
  Class B-2, $17,568,000: B- (sf)
  Class B-3, $11,352,983: 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 June 3, 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.



VIBRANT CLO XII: Fitch Assigns 'BB-sf' Rating on Class D-R Notes
----------------------------------------------------------------
Fitch Ratings has assigned ratings and Rating Outlooks to the
Vibrant CLO XII, Ltd. reset transaction.

   Entity/Debt             Rating           
   -----------             ------           
Vibrant CLO XII, Ltd.

   A-1AR               LT NRsf   New Rating
   A-1BR               LT AAAsf  New Rating
   A-2AR               LT AA+sf  New Rating
   A-2BR               LT AAsf   New Rating
   B-R                 LT Asf    New Rating
   C-1R                LT BBBsf  New Rating
   C-2R                LT BBB-sf New Rating
   D-R                 LT BB-sf  New Rating
   Subordinated        LT NRsf   New Rating

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Vibrant CLO XII, Ltd. (the issuer) is an arbitrage cash flow
collateralized loan obligation (CLO) managed by Vibrant Credit
Partners, LLC that originally closed in March 2021. The existing
secured notes will be redeemed in full on May 30, 2024. Net
proceeds from the issuance of the refinancing secured and existing
subordinated notes will provide financing on a portfolio of
approximately $450 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 24.28, versus a maximum covenant, in accordance with
the initial expected matrix point of 25.49. 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
98.9% first-lien senior secured loans. The weighted average
recovery rate (WARR) of the indicative portfolio is 76.44% versus a
minimum covenant, in accordance with the initial expected matrix
point of 70.53%.

Portfolio Composition (Positive): The largest three industries may
comprise up to 39% 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 1.9-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 weighted average life (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
metrics; the results under these sensitivity scenarios are as
severe as between 'BBB+sf' and 'AA+sf' for class A-1BR notes,
between 'BBBsf' and 'AAsf' for class A-2AR notes, between 'BBB-sf'
and 'AA-sf' for class A-2BR notes, between 'BBsf' and 'A-sf' for
class B-R notes, between less than 'B-sf' and 'BB+sf' for class
C-1R notes, between less than 'B-sf' and 'BB+sf' for class C-2R
notes, and between less than 'B-sf' and 'B+sf' for class D-R
notes.

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

Upgrade scenarios are not applicable to the class A-1BR notes 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 A-2AR notes, 'AAAsf' for class
A-2BR notes, 'AA+sf' for class B-R notes, 'Asf' for class C-1R
notes, 'A-sf' for class C-2R notes, and 'BBB+sf' for class D-R
notes.

Key Rating Drivers and Rating Sensitivities are further described
in the new issue report.

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 assesses the asset portfolio
information.

Overall, and together with any assumptions referred to above,
Fitch's assessment of the information relied upon for the rating
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 Vibrant CLO XII,
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.


VIBRANT CLO XII: S&P Withdraws 'BB- (sf)' Rating on Class D Notes
-----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its rating to the class A-1AR
replacement debt from Vibrant CLO XII Ltd./Vibrant CLO XII LLC a
CLO originally issued in March 2021 that is managed by Vibrant
Capital Partners Inc. At the same time, S&P withdrew its ratings on
the original class A-1, A-2, B-1, B-2-A, B-2-B, B-3, C, and D debt
following payment in full on the May 30, 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:

-- A non-call period for the new debt was effectuated, ending
April 20, 2025.

-- The reinvestment period was not extended and ends April 20,
2026.

-- The legal final maturity dates (for the replacement debt and
the existing subordinated notes) were extended to April 20, 2034.

-- The weighted average life test was not extended.

-- No additional assets were purchased on the May 30, 2024,
refinancing date, and the target initial par amount remains at $450
million. There was no additional effective date or ramp-up period,
and the first payment date following the refinancing is July 20,
2024.

-- The required minimum overcollateralization coverage ratios were
amended.

-- No additional subordinated notes were issued on the refinancing
date.

Replacement And Original Debt Issuances

Replacement debt

-- Class A-1AR, $288.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR +
1.42%

-- Class A-1BR, $9.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.78%

-- Class A-2AR, $31.50 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.90%

-- Class A-2BR, $13.50 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 2.25%

-- Class B-R, $27.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 2.50%

-- Class C-1R, $27.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 3.75%

-- Class C-2R, $4.50 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 5.00%

-- Class D-R, $13.50 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 6.94%

Original Debt

-- Class A-1, $279.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.23% +
CSA(i)

-- Class A-2, $63.00 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.65% +
CSA(i)

-- Class B-1, $10.50 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 2.20% +
CSA(i)

-- Class B-2-A, $3.75 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 1.85% +
CSA(i)

-- Class B-2-B, $3.75 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 2.55% +
CSA(i)

-- Class B-3, $9.00 million: 3.497%

-- Class C, $22.50 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 3.65% +
CSA(i)

-- Class D, $19.13 million: Three-month CME term SOFR + 7.11% +
CSA(i)

-- Subordinated notes, $47.53 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."

  Rating Assigned

  Vibrant CLO XII Ltd./Vibrant CLO XII LLC

  Class A-1AR, $288.00 million: AAA (sf)

  Ratings Withdrawn

  Vibrant CLO XII Ltd./Vibrant CLO XII LLC

  Class A-1 to NR from 'AAA (sf)'
  Class A-2 to NR from 'AA (sf)'
  Class B-1 to NR from 'A (sf)'
  Class B-2-A to NR from 'AA- (sf)'
  Class B-2-B to NR from 'A (sf)'
  Class B-3 to NR from 'A (sf)'
  Class C to NR from 'BBB- (sf)'
  Class D to NR from 'BB- (sf)'

  Other Outstanding Debt

  Vibrant CLO XII Ltd./Vibrant CLO XII LLC
  
  Subordinated notes, $47.53 million: NR

  NR--Not rated.



WELLFLEET CLO 2024-1: S&P Assigns Prelim BB-(sf) Rating on E Notes
------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings assigned its preliminary ratings to Wellfleet
CLO 2024-1 Ltd./Wellfleet CLO 2024-1 LLC's floating- and fixed-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 Blue Owl Liquid Credit Advisors LLC,
a subsidiary of Blue Owl Capital Inc.

The preliminary ratings are based on information as of May 30,
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 debt through portfolio
identification and ongoing management; and

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

  Preliminary Ratings Assigned

  Wellfleet CLO 2024-1 Ltd./Wellfleet CLO 2024-1 LLC

  Class A-1, $244.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class A-2, $12.00 million: AAA (sf)
  Class B, $48.00 million: AA (sf)
  Class C (deferrable), $24.00 million: A (sf)
  Class D-1 (deferrable), $10.00 million: BBB (sf)
  Class D-1-F (deferrable), $10.00 million: BBB (sf)
  Class D-2 (deferrable), $8.00 million: BBB- (sf)
  Class E (deferrable), $10.00 million: BB- (sf)
  Subordinated notes, $39.35 million: Not rated



WFRBS COMMERCIAL 2014-C24: Moody's Cuts Cl. C Certs Rating to B1
----------------------------------------------------------------
Moody's Ratings has affirmed the ratings on three classes and
downgraded the ratings on four classes in WFRBS Commercial Mortgage
Trust 2014-C24, Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates,
Series 2014-C24, as follows:

Cl. A-4, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 2, 2023 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-5, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 2, 2023 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-SB, Affirmed Aaa (sf); previously on May 2, 2023 Affirmed Aaa
(sf)

Cl. A-S, Downgraded to Aa2 (sf); previously on May 2, 2023 Affirmed
Aa1 (sf)

Cl. B, Downgraded to Baa3 (sf); previously on May 2, 2023
Downgraded to Baa1 (sf)

Cl. C, Downgraded to B1 (sf); previously on May 2, 2023 Downgraded
to Ba2 (sf)

Cl. PEX, Downgraded to Ba1 (sf); previously on May 2, 2023
Downgraded to Baa2 (sf)

RATINGS RATIONALE

The ratings on three P&I classes, Cl. A-4, Cl. A-5 and Cl. A-SB,
were affirmed because of their significant credit support and the
transaction's key metrics, including Moody's loan-to-value (LTV)
ratio, Moody's stressed debt service coverage ratio (DSCR) and the
transaction's Herfindahl Index (Herf), are within acceptable
ranges.

The ratings on three P&I classes, Cl. A-S, Cl. B and Cl. C, were
downgraded due to a decline in pool performance and higher expected
losses due to the exposure to specially serviced and poorly
performing loans that may have heightened maturity default risk.
Two specially serviced loans represent 4% of the pool and Moody's
have also identified additional troubled loans, representing 14% of
pool, that have experienced significant declines in performance.
Furthermore, all of the remaining mortgage loans mature by November
2024 and given the higher interest rate environment and loan
performance, certain loans may be unable to pay off at their
maturity dates, which may increase interest shortfall risk for the
outstanding classes.

The rating on the exchangeable class, Cl. PEX, was downgraded based
on a decline in the credit quality of its referenced exchangeable
classes.

Moody's rating action reflects a base expected loss of 9.3% of the
current pooled balance, compared to 6.9% at Moody's last review.
Moody's base expected loss plus realized losses is now 13.0% of the
original pooled balance, compared to 12.0% 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 these ratings was "US and
Canadian Conduit/Fusion Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securitizations
Methodology" published in July 2022.

DEAL PERFORMANCE

As of the May 17, 2024 distribution date, the transaction's
aggregate certificate balance has decreased by 36% to $696.6
million from $1.088 billion at securitization. The certificates are
collateralized by 68 mortgage loans ranging in size from less than
1% to 10.8% of the pool, with the top ten loans (excluding
defeasance) constituting 42.7% of the pool. Twenty-nine loans,
constituting 32.7% of the pool, have defeased and are secured by US
government securities.

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 15, compared to 16 at Moody's last review.

As of the May 2024 remittance report, loans representing 96% were
current or within their grace period on their debt service payments
and 4% were greater than 90 days delinquent or in foreclosure.

Thirty-six loans, constituting 61% 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.

Four loans have been liquidated from the pool, resulting in an
aggregate realized loss of $76.4 million (for an average loss
severity of 72.5%). Two loans, constituting 3.6% of the pool, are
currently in special servicing.

The largest specially serviced loan is the Orlando Plaza Retail
Center Loan ($17.7 million -- 2.5% of the pool), which is secured
by a 101,330 SF retail property located in Orlando, Florida. The
collateral consists of two retail condo units (retail and theater).
The loan has been in special servicing since April 2020 and
servicer commentary indicates the borrower agreed to a consensual
receivership and a purchase and sale agreement was executed for a
receiver sale. The loan was last paid through its March 2022
payment date and the loan has had a DSCR below 1.00X since 2020.
The property was 90% leased as of December 2023 compared to 85% in
2021 and 93% at securitization. The loan had recognized a 41%
appraisal reduction (based on the outstanding loan amount) as of
the May 2024 remittance statement.

The other specially serviced loan is the Chicago Garage Portfolio
Loan ($7.4 million -- 1.1% of the pool), which is secured by two
parking garages (East Walton Parking Garage and Skybridge Garage)
located in Chicago, Illinois. Property operations were impacted by
the pandemic and the loan transferred to special servicing in July
2020 due to payment default. Special Servicer is pursuing a
foreclosure strategy and a receiver has been appointed for both
properties with the aim of conducting a receiver sale of the
collateral.

Moody's has also assumed a high default probability for five poorly
performing loans, constituting 14.1% of the pool, and has estimated
an aggregate loss of $48.4 million (a 39% expected loss on average)
from these specially serviced and troubled loans. The largest
troubled loan is the Crossings at Corona, which is discussed in
further detail below. The remaining four troubled loans all had a
most recent NOI DSCR below 1.00X due to declines in performance and
will likely face increased refinance risk at their upcoming
maturity dates.

As of the May 2024 remittance statement cumulative interest
shortfalls were $2.3 million and impact up to Cl. D. Moody's
anticipates interest shortfalls will continue because of the
exposure to specially serviced loans and/or modified loans.
Interest shortfalls are caused by special servicing fees, including
workout and liquidation fees, appraisal entitlement reductions
(ASERs), loan modifications and extraordinary trust expenses.

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. Moody's 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 or partial year 2023 operating results for 84% of
the pool (excluding specially serviced and defeased loans). Moody's
weighted average conduit LTV is 105%, compared to 104% at Moody's
last review. Moody's conduit component excludes loans with
structured credit assessments, defeased and CTL loans, and
specially serviced and troubled loans. Moody's net cash flow (NCF)
reflects a weighted average haircut of 25% to the most recently
available net operating income (NOI). Moody's value reflects a
weighted average capitalization rate of 9.9%.

Moody's actual and stressed conduit DSCRs are 1.78X and 1.09X,
respectively, compared to 1.84X and 1.10X at the last review.
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 loans represent 23.4% of the pool balance. The
largest loan is the Gateway Center Phase II Loan ($75.0 million --
10.8% of the pool), which represents a pari passu portion of a $300
million mortgage loan. The loan is secured by a 602,000 SF retail
center located in Brooklyn, New York. The center is the second
phase of a larger retail power center. As of December 2023, the
property was 100% leased, the same as in December 2019 and at
securitization. Retailers at the property include JC Penney (which
owns their improvements and leases the land from the borrower),
ShopRite, and Burlington Coat Factory. JC Penney represents 20% of
the total property's square footage but less than 5% of the base
rental revenue. The reported year-end 2023 NOI DSCR (based on
interest only payments at a 4.2770% interest rate) was 1.89X
compared to 2.02X at year-end 2019 and 1.81X at securitization.

The loan is interest-only throughout the loan term and matures in
September 2024. Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 120% and 0.76X,
respectively, unchanged from the last review.

The second largest loan is the Crossings at Corona Loan ($61.5
million -- 8.8% of the pool), which represents a pari passu portion
of a $127.3 million mortgage loan. The loan is secured by an
834,000 SF component of an approximately 962,200 SF power center
located 50 miles south-east of Los Angeles in Corona, California.
The center is anchored by a Kohl's, Edwards Cinemas (Regal) and
Best Buy and is also shadow anchored by a Target. As of December
2023, the property was 78% leased, compared to 97% at
securitization. Toys R Us (7.6% of the NRA) closed in April 2018 in
conjunction with the company's bankruptcy. As a result, the loan is
on the master servicer's watchlist due to low DSCR with an NOI DSCR
of 0.95X and low occupancy. The 2023 NOI was 35% lower than in 2014
and the property faces elevated lease rollover risk over the next
24 months. Due to the sustained decline in cash flow, significant
upcoming tenant lease expirations and maturity date in September
2024, Moody's considers this as a troubled loan.

The third largest loan is the Hilton Biltmore Park Loan ($26.8
million -- 3.8% of the pool), which is secured by a 165 unit,
full-service hotel located in Asheville, North Carolina and was
built in 2008. The property was impacted by the coronavirus
pandemic but has since rebounded significantly and the year-end
2023 NOI was in-line with expectations at securitization. As of
December 2023, the occupancy, ADR and RevPAR were 81%, $182 and
$147, respectively, compared to 72%, $182 and $131 as of December
2022. The loan has remained current on debt service payments and
has amortized 15.5% since securitization. The loan matures in
November 2024 and Moody's LTV and stressed DSCR are 115% and 1.08X,
respectively, compared 118% and 1.05X at the last review.


[*] S&P Places 31 Ratings from 26 US CLO Deals on Watch Negative
----------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings placed its ratings on 31 classes from 26 CLO
transactions on CreditWatch Negative.

The transactions are all in their amortization phase, except for
Park Avenue Institutional Advisers CLO Ltd. 2019-2, which is in its
reinvestment phase until October 2026. The transactions are 26 CLOs
backed by broadly syndicated speculative-grade (rated 'BB+' and
below) loans.

S&P said, "We noted that while paydowns to senior notes are
generally a positive for the credit enhancement of the senior
portion of the capital structure, increased exposure to lower
quality assets and portfolio concentration in these amortizing
transactions can increase the credit risk of the junior CLO notes."


This was the case for most of the 31 classes, which fell in the
'BB' (26), 'B' (four), and 'CCC' (one) rating categories. The
CreditWatch placements primarily reflect the decline in the
classes' overcollateralization levels, which is primarily due to a
combination of par losses, increased defaults, and increased
haircuts due to excess exposure to 'CCC' collateral. In addition,
S&P considered other factors, such as indicative cash flow runs,
current exposure to collateral rated 'CCC' and lower, and an
estimate of the classes' current overcollateralization ratios
without 'CCC' haircuts in relation to the overall market average.

S&P said, "We intend to resolve these CreditWatch placements within
90 days, following a committee review. We will continue to monitor
the transactions we rate and take rating actions, including
CreditWatch placements, as we deem appropriate."

  Ratings List

  RATING

  ISSUER     
    
      CLASS       CUSIP          FROM             TO

  Octagon Investment Partners XV Ltd.

      E-R       67590EBA1        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Octagon Investment Partners XVI Ltd.

      E-R       67590DAG1        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Octagon Investment Partners XVI Ltd.

      F-R       67590DAJ5        B-       B- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Telos CLO 2013-4 Ltd.

      D-R       87974HAY7        BB+      BB+ (sf)/Watch Neg

  Telos CLO 2013-4 Ltd.

      E-R       87974JAC1        CCC+     CCC+ (sf)/Watch Neg

  Wind River 2013-2 CLO Ltd.

      E-1-R     88432ABE9        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Wind River 2013-2 CLO Ltd.

      E-2-R     88432ABG4        B        B (sf)/ Watch Neg

  LCM XVI L.P.

      E-R2      50181HAC2        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Octagon Investment Partners XXII Ltd.

      E-RR      67574QAL1        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Octagon Investment Partners XXII Ltd.

      F-RR      67574QAN7        B-       B- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Anchorage Capital CLO 7 Ltd.

      E-R2      03328UAS1        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  BlueMountain CLO 2015-4 Ltd.

      E-R       095766AG6        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  HPS Loan Management 8-2016 Ltd.

      E-R       40437JAA5        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  HPS Loan Management 9-2016 Ltd.

      D-R       40436RAG5        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Octagon Investment Partners 27 Ltd.

      E-R       67591CAE7        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Octagon Investment Partners 27 Ltd.

      F-R       67591CAG2        B-       B- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Park Avenue Institutional Advisers CLO Ltd. 2016-1

      D-R       70016AAE2        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  BlueMountain Fuji US CLO I Ltd.

      E         09629DAA1        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  MKS CLO 2017-1 Ltd.

      E         12661LAA6        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  BlueMountain Fuji US CLO III Ltd.

      E         09628HAA3        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Carlyle US CLO 2017-5 Ltd.

      D         14316RAA8        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Octagon Investment Partners 35 Ltd.

      D         67591RAA2        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Anchorage Capital CLO 1-R Ltd.

      E         03329BAA1        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Carlyle Global Market Strategies CLO 2014-2-R Ltd.

      D         14314NAA9        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Signal Peak CLO 6 Ltd.

      E         56846KAA3        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  LCM 27 Ltd.   

      E         50200LAA4        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Catamaran CLO 2018-1 Ltd.

      E         14889NAA4        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  LCM 28 Ltd.

      E         50200QAA3        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Voya CLO 2019-1 Ltd.

      E-R       92917QAE1        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Park Avenue Institutional Advisers CLO Ltd. 2019-1

      D         70017XAA9        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg

  Park Avenue Institutional Advisers CLO Ltd. 2019-2

      D-R       70018BAE8        BB-      BB- (sf)/Watch Neg



[*] S&P Takes Various Actions on 249 Classes From Nine US RMBS Deal
-------------------------------------------------------------------
S&P Global Ratings completed its review of the ratings on 249
classes from nine U.S. RMBS seasoned and prime jumbo mortgage
transactions. The review yielded 52 upgrades and 197 affirmations.


A list of Affected Ratings can be viewed at:

                  https://rb.gy/zcalla

S&P said, "For each transaction, we performed a credit analysis
using updated loan-level information from which we determined
foreclosure frequency, loss severity, and loss coverage amounts
commensurate for each rating level. In addition, we used the same
mortgage operational assessment, representation and warranty, and
due diligence factors that were applied at issuance. Our geographic
concentration and prior credit event adjustment factors were based
on the transactions' current pool composition."

The upgrades primarily reflect deleveraging as the transaction
seasons, resulting in the rated classes benefitting from a growing
percentage of credit support from regular principal payments,
historical prepayments, and the degree of credit enhancement
relative to delinquencies.

The affirmations reflect S&P's view that the projected collateral
performance relative to its projected credit support on these
classes remains relatively consistent with its prior projections.

Analytical Considerations

S&P incorporates various considerations into its decisions to
raise, lower, or affirm ratings when reviewing the indicative
ratings suggested by its projected cash flows. These considerations
are based on transaction-specific performance or structural
characteristics (or both) and their potential effects on certain
classes. Some of these considerations may include:

-- Collateral performance (including prepayment and delinquency
trends),

-- Priority of principal payments,

-- Priority of loss allocation, and

-- Available subordination and credit enhancement.



                            *********

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 ***