Contents

CLOs

CLO equity market reawakens as post-tariff bids strengthen

Poh-Heng Tan from CLO Research provides BWIC highlights on quality US BSL CLO equity tranches traded

Typically, over US$1 billion of US CLO equity notional is put on BWIC following payment dates each quarter. However, equity BWIC activity has been very limited since mid-April 2025.

With loan prices recovering to levels close to those seen before Liberation Day tariffs, a sizable equity BWIC list finally emerged last week after the April payment dates. It featured many high-quality equity tranches managed by top-tier managers such as Oak Hill Advisors, UBS AM, and CIFC.

One standout was OAKC 2014-10RA SUB, a 2014-vintage tranche managed by Oak Hill Advisors, which delivered an impressive IRR of 11.5% for original equity investors—well above the IRRs of most fully liquidated peers from that vintage. Notably, this bond received a higher bid on 8 May 2025 (as shown in the next table) than in both July and September last year, underscoring its resilient performance.

MDPK 2019-37A SUB, managed by UBS AM, achieved a primary equity IRR of 19.0%, supported by a robust inception-to-date annual distribution of around 21.0% and a strong bid of over 50.3. That said, given the wider spread environment, the cover bid received on 8 May 2025 was marginally softer than that seen in November 2024. This bond ranked top among its 2019-vintage peers traded via BWIC since July 2024.

Two 2020-vintage tranches—MAGNE 2020-28A SUB and CIFC 2020-3A SUB—received decent bids, translating to primary equity IRRs of 15.2% and 15.4% respectively. While slightly below the median IRR for their vintage (based on BWIC trades since July 2024), these levels remain respectable in the current volatile market. Notably, CIFC 2020-3A SUB attracted a much stronger bid back in November 2024.

Last but not least, GNRT 2022-10A SUB, managed by Generate Advisors, received a cover bid of 76.161, translating to a primary equity IRR of 16.1%. This placed the bond close to the 75th percentile among its 2022-vintage peers traded via BWIC since July 2024.

Source: SCI and CLO Research 

Asset-Backed Finance

MSP rides back-leverage wave in £350m funding line from JP Morgan and Pollen Street

Deal comprises £200m securitisation facility and £150m provided by private debt manager

JP Morgan and private capital manager Pollen Street provided a combined £350m funding line for UK property development and bridging finance business MSP Capital in early May. The transaction is the latest example of private debt’s growing role in the securitisation market. 

The deal is comprised of a £200m private securitisation facility from JP Morgan, while private capital manager and existing backer Pollen Street is providing a £150m specialty finance line to the business. An industry source explained that Pollen Street’s facility is subordinated to the warehouse transaction.  

At its current scale, the combined £350m transaction will increase MSP’s total funding capacity to £485m. However, there is also the potential for JP Morgan to provide a further £350m of funding in future. All things being well, this means that up to £550m could be lent under the facility, which – if it were to reach that potential scale – would bring MSP’s total funding capacity figure up to £835m. 

Travers Smith head of finance Charles Bischoff, whose team advised on the deal, tells SCI that property-focused specialty lending businesses such as MSP are now coming to securitisations at relatively early stages in their growth journeys.  

Indeed, while MSP was founded in 1981, the development comes two years after the business took on its initial £100m senior-secured development funding facility from Pollen Street and just three months after it launched a five-year strategy to grow its loan book to £750m by 2030. It also comes six and a half years after private equity house Cabot Square Capital acquired a majority stake in MSP. 

The timing of the deal, Bischoff says, was driven by the business’s ability to quickly and successfully scale a portfolio of property development finance and bridging loans focusing on areas on the south coast of England. 

A business of MSP’s size reaches a position where it has a decision to make, says Bischoff – whether it goes into a securitisation programme, tries to increase its debt facility by continuing with just senior debt, or also takes on some mezzanine debt. “There are advantages and disadvantages to any option, but the advantage of the securitisation programme is that once it's put in place – and you're originating well – it really accelerates growth and in relative terms doesn’t need a lot of management,” he says. 

The pool of potential private debt players as backers in the specialty lending space is significantly larger today than it would have been five years ago, Bischoff says, which presents an opportunity.  Yet credit funds’ historical involvement might have seen them becoming involved in a syndicate alongside bank lenders, rather than their growing role as a provider of back-leverage facilities. 

Adam Burk, senior associate at Travers Smith, adds: “The challenge that private credit has always had with asset-backed finance is that, where you have reasonably vanilla assets like mortgage loans, the returns often don't quite work for them. You might see – on a programme securitising mortgage loans – margins that are typically too low for private credit. They seek out, for the most part and with some exceptions, larger returns.” 

In its announcement, Pollen Street said its “deep experience in supporting bridging and development lenders," has enabled it to "create meaningful impact across the UK and European development landscape”.  Other property-backed lending businesses backed by the GP in recent years include MS Lending Group and Sancus Lending Group. It has also provided funding to other specialty finance providers including Tower Street Finance and 365 Finance. 

The aforementioned industry source told SCI: “Returns for that sort of [back leverage] finance [as seen in the MSP deal] are higher because it's a riskier position in the stack. We see private credit throughout this space recognising those opportunities more so for higher margin – not extremely or unduly higher risk – but structurally higher risk, because there's a senior portion above them. That part of the market is coming into its own.” 

Interpath Advisory acted as sole financial adviser to MSP Capital. 

Kenny Wastell

Asset-Backed Finance

Pemberton pushes into NAV and GP lending amid PE gridlock

Firm leverages liquidity solutions to bridge gaps in frozen exit environment

Private equity’s long-awaited rebound has yet to materialise in 2025. In the face of this stagnation, Pemberton Asset Management is leaning into a fund finance strategy based on fund-level financing and GP-level financing, offering innovative solutions to GPs and LPs while unlocking liquidity trapped in portfolios.

Oaktree Capital’s latest quarterly report flags this ongoing gridlock marked by high interest rates, valuation mismatches and economic uncertainty that have frozen M&A activity and IPO windows, leaving financial sponsors to hold portfolio companies for longer and choking off fresh deal flow. Indeed, refinancings have comprised over 85% of loan issuance this year, according to the report. Meanwhile, buyout fund distributions have plunged to just 11% of NAV in 2024, down from 30% in 2021, leaving LPs grappling with mounting capital calls and minimal cash back.

Pemberton’s fund finance strategy

Amid the current gridlock in private equity, Pemberton has anchored its fund finance strategy around NAV loans and GP-level financing. 

“These strategies complement our direct lending offering,” says Jürgen Breuer, head of European NAV origination at Pemberton, and one of its early-stage partners. “We've extended our ability to serve the private equity industry from the investment period, where they're financing portfolio companies, into the post-investment period, where fund-level NAV financing can help with follow-on acquisitions, restructuring, or even distributions.”

Pemberton’s NAV-based lending focuses on financing at the fund level, backed by the net asset value of portfolio companies. The loans are typically used for further platform acquisitions, bolstering underperforming assets, or navigating the current tougher exit environment.

“Companies are typically staying longer in PE portfolios,” says Breuer. “The outlook for exits is more uncertain, so NAV lending offers GPs a way to manage liquidity without leaning on LPs for more capital.”

While some LPs have traditionally been cautious about NAV loans, Breuer notes that sentiment is shifting. “LPs are becoming more open to NAV loans, especially when used for value-accretive purposes like further acquisitions or improving underperforming assets. The goal is always to generate higher returns, ultimately benefiting LPs.”

However, Breuer stresses that Pemberton is careful to ensure that the capital is used responsibly. "We focus on how these loans can generate more value for investors in the long run," he says. 

Risk assessment is handled with the same rigour Pemberton applies to its direct lending business. The firm re-underwrites each portfolio company in a fund to assess conservative NAV, ensuring prudent leverage levels, often as low as 10-20% LTV.

Pemberton’s second area of interest in this space – GP solutions – caters to the GPs, offering loans backed by historical co-investments or accrued management company value. As fundraising slows and LPs demand greater alignment, GPs are under pressure to boost their commitments.

“This is non-dilutive equity,” explains Breuer. “If a GP expects to make 2.5–3x on a fund, paying low-to-mid teens on structured preferred capital makes perfect sense.”

GP financing is used to seed new funds, pursue spinouts, or smooth personal liquidity across vintage cycles. Loans can reach 65% LTV, and with many structured as preferred equity, they avoid direct dilution of ownership or control.

Pemberton’s credibility in this space has been reinforced by last year’s partnership with ADIA (Abu Dhabi Investment Authority), one of the world’s largest sovereign wealth funds, which Breuer confirmed has committed significant capital to anchor its NAV platform.

Looking ahead, Breuer is optimistic about the growth potential of these fund finance tools.

“In the European market, awareness is still evolving. We are in the process of educating GPs about the benefits of NAV and GP financing. Over time, as more deals happen, word will spread around the value-add of the capital and there may even be some FOMO (fear of missing out), and we expect demand to rise rapidly.”

Marta Canini

Capital Relief Trades

New jurisdiction

South African SRT imminent

Landmark deal

A large South African bank is closing in on its inaugural SRT transaction. The bank can’t yet be named because the deal is currently in front of the local regulator, with the Bank hoping to distribute the junior notes as early as July. Such landmark operation would make it the first South African SRT and synthetic portfolio trade in South Africa since before the GFC.

The transaction references a static portfolio of corporate term loans, with the originator placing two tranches with investors.

Commenting on the deal’s investor base, the structurer justified placing the deal locally: “We have witnessed good indicative local appetite and credit spreads within the South African market have just been getting tighter and tighter and tighter.”

South Africa awake and ready

Although not securitisations in a strict sense, South African banks are regular users of repackaging transactions for corporate and other loans. South African banks also enter into risk participation arrangements in relation to their loan portfolios, but for regulatory reasons, synthetic securitisations are still uncommon. Commenting on the local securitisation context, the structurer also noted: “The traditional securitisation market in South Africa is 95% triple-A, therefore it is a funding market. This would be, the first proper risk transfer product in the securitisation space.”

He adds: “Regarding SRTs, the regulation has somewhat lagged. It still requires an SPV and the issuance of commercial paper. Comparatively, our regulations do not really respond to changes at EBA level. However, does the jurisdiction have legislation that works? Fundamentally the answer is yes.”

Separately, Greg Wakelin, md at Absa Group, emphasises the significant role played by the South African Securitisation Forum, in promoting the development of securitisation and SRTs locally. The Forum has membership from across the whole securitisation ecosystem, and has an active relationship with the Prudential Authority.

Looking ahead, Wakelin hopes an inaugural transaction, as in many new emerging SRT jurisdictions, will act as a trigger event for future and broader issuance.

He says: “There are 4 large local banks, and 3 smaller ones. I expect other (local) banks to follow suit shortly after the first and realistically, by HY 2026, new issuances are to be expected.” 

He commented that he would not be surprised if local banks became programmatic actors in this market, Wakelin affirms that “we see the likes of Santander and Barclays actively managing their balance sheets and capital optimisation through SRT so it would not surprise me if local banks start to do the same.”

Vincent Nadeau

Capital Relief Trades

Inaugural trade

PKO Bank Polski and CRC complete SRT deal

PKO Bank Polski has completed its first synthetic securitisation with Christofferson, Robb & Company (CRC). The deal references a portfolio of corporate loans valued at PLN 1,892.3m.

Further breakdown of the agreement includes the transfer of risk of the securitised portfolio through a credit protection instrument in the form of a financial guarantee. This guarantee is collateralised by a deposit placed within PKO Bank Polski. Additionally, the transaction has been structured as meeting the STS criteria.

The transaction is expected to have a positive impact on the bank’s CET1 ratio by approximately 5 basis points compared with end of 2024 levels.

Santander Corporate & Investment Banking acted as sole arranger and lead manager of the transaction.

Dina Zelaya

ABS

Moody's flags risks to stable SME ABS outlook amid trade and climate pressures

German and French SME ABS collateral outlook turns negative, but sector seen as resilient for now

ABS

2025 shaping up as big year in storm recovery ABS

Numerous deals and utilities line up

In excess of US$4bn of storm recovery ABS bonds will be sold in the second half of 2025 from five or more different utilities, say well-placed market sources.

The ravages of 2024’s Hurricane Helene has sent utilities in both North Carolina and South Carolina scurrying to the ABS market, while extensive wildfire damage has elicited demand from the California utilities.

Legislatures in Virginia and West Virginia also expect to be recipients of petitions from local utilities in the near future.

Duke Energy Carolinas is poised to bring a US$842.6m securitization of utility payments while Duke Energy Progress is lining up a $596.2m deal as well. Both of these deals should come in H2 2025 and will fund rebuilding in North Carolina.

Meanwhile Duke Energy Carolinas is also putting together a US$610m package for storm damage caused in South Carolina. The financing rule should be issued by August, so once again a deal could well emerge before the end of the year.

Duke Energy is based in Charlotte, NC,  but the two wings of the company serve different customers in different states.

SoCal Edison, which serves southern California, filed a US$1.6bn petition last week, and as this is a state and utility well acquainted with the storm recovery ABS process it is not expected to be more than a couple of months before approval is granted and a deal could emerge before the end of the year as well.

Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E), based in Oakland, CA, filed a petition for a US$2.3bn securitization for wildfire management in December, but has yet to receive the green light. The northern California utility filed for bankruptcy in 2019 after its inadequate infrastructure was held responsible for two separate devastating wildfires.

The West Virginia state legislature is waiting for a petition from Appalachian Power and Wheeling Power, both operating companies of American Electric Power (AEP), add sources. Virginia has passed the necessary legislation granting approval for storm recovery bonds and is said to be waiting for another petition from AEP.

A US$400m deal for Texas utility CenterPoint is also in the offing, with a financing ruling expected next month, they add, while Electricity Reliability of Texas (ERCOT) is lining up US$380m.

What makes this year’s crop stand out is not the volume of issuance but the number of issuers. The overall volume will not surpass the US$18bn sold in 2021 for wildfire damage, but US$7.5bn alone of that came from PG&E.

An estimated 33 states of the 48 in the contiguous USA have now passed storm recovery legislation, with Arizona and Washington expected to join the party soon. The big standouts are the southern states like Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee and Mississippi.

Simon Boughey

Capital Relief Trades

Growing opportunities

New SRT markets demand early regulatory dialogue Cadwalader states

Scandinavia, Greece and Eastern Europe are among the growing and emerging jurisdictions set to take the spotlight this year, with multiple new deals expected to come to market.

Issuing an SRT, however, doesn't go without challenges as banks must brace for extensive internal preparation and early engagement with regulators, notes Assia Damianova, special counsel at Cadwalader at the firm's London office. 

“First-time issuers often underestimate the level of internal preparation needed. Before even thinking about execution, banks need to overhaul systems to track relevant assets, credit events, and meet investor transparency expectations,” said Damianova.

She further indicates that early dialogue will be particularly critical to offset reputational risk and avoid regulatory misalignment later in the process.

“If for some reason you issue the deal and then you figure out that you won’t obtain the anticipated regulatory relief, it is a huge reputational risk if you call the deal. There is also a massive amount of investor dialogue required for a new issue and you have to allow enough time for investors to DD the bank and its servicing policies.”

Another key factor for new issuers is to remain strategic with both the structure and the pricing of their first transactions.

“The first deal has to really be priced correctly because you have to offer attractive risk-adjusted returns. And some investors won’t take bank credit risk directly, especially given the BRRD bail-in framework, so SPV issuances remain key for smaller or lower-rated issuers,” Damianova explains.

Meanwhile, market volatility may prompt repricing and bigger deal sizes, Damianova suggests.

“The market has been quite tight. In the last quarter of 2024, everyone pushed – seeing how good for issuers the pricing was, they pushed to close their deals – which resulted in bigger ticket deals and very fast execution,” she observes.

Recurring issuers

Damianova shares that a more sustained deal flow is expected across the UK, France, Spain and Italy this year, alongside greater interest from Greek issuers.

Cadwalader believes there will also be opportunities for Nordic lenders, particularly in Sweden, where banks are engaging regulators and exploring inaugural deals.

Damianova says that investor appetite for non-traditional assets keeps growing, with interest in sectors such as project finance, esoteric risk and even capital call facilities – although uptake in Europe remains limited for now.

(Re)isurance participation is also a key regulatory topic, with both the EU and UK exploring frameworks to boost unfunded capacity, she notes.

“Ultimately, strong execution depends on a bank’s internal capabilities, transparency, and structuring flexibility. For first timers and veterans alike, those pillars haven’t changed,” she said.

Nadezhda Bratanova

Capital Relief Trades

SRT allocation

US pension backs Arrowmark with $225m as SRT strategies gain traction with LPs

The $42bn Iowa Public Employees’ Retirement System (IPERS) has backed the synthetic securitisation market at scale, with a $225m allocation to Arrowmark Partners' (Arrowmark) SRT strategy.

The risk-sharing mandate, which begun with a $100m allocation and grew by an additional $125m last year, gives a rare glimpse into how institutional allocators are thinking about SRTs as part of their broader private credit portfolios.

The commitment makes up 7.5% of the LP’s $3bn private credit product – currently investing across direct lending, opportunistic, and real assets credit strategies.

"We've had a relationship since the beginning of 2022 with Arrowmark, who have done a really nice job for us, and their strategy is specifically focused on SRT investments," says Pat Reinhardt, senior investment officer at IPERS.

Arrowmark, one of the longest-tenured investors in the SRT market, has partnered with leading global bank issuers across programmes such as CRAFT (Deutsche Bank), Salisbury (Lloyds), Chakra (Standard Chartered) and Elvetia (Crédit Suisse).

Despite still being generally considered a niche strategy, IPERS sees SRTs as a compelling fit within its opportunistic private credit bucket, which also includes mezzanine lending and special situations.

"We think of SRTs as one of several strategies in the opportunistic space," Reinhardt notes. "Today, we are a little bit overweight to the opportunistic bucket and slightly underweight on direct lending and real assets credit."

The allocator has set aside $650m for private credit investments in 2025 – $300m of which are dedicated to its opportunistic composite, which may signal even further allocations to the SRT space.

Returns so far appear to back the decision, Reinhardt states, as IPERS' SRT exposure is delivering around 10% net of fees, with a time-weighted return of roughly 13% over the past year.

"Our objective going into it was low double-digit type returns net of fees, and it's definitely achieved that for us," he adds.

The strategy was initially Europe-focused but has gradually added US exposure as more American banks show interest in SRT structures.

"Out of the gate, it was predominantly a Europe-based strategy. I know in the last year or so banks in the US have started taking advantage of the strategy. So, we have seen an increase in some of the US exposure, but our particular mandate it is about 70% Europe versus 30% US," Reinhardt explains.

Still, the move is notable. SRT-focused strategies are rarely included in public pension portfolios as a stand-alone allocation, and few allocators speak publicly about their approach to the space. For IPERS, however, the opportunity is evident.

"It's still a little early to call it its own asset class but it is certainly something that a lot of people are interested in. We are interested and we allocate to it," ceo Greg Samorajski tells SCI.

With SRTs consistently gaining traction with a growing investor base, as banks look to optimise capital and issuance reaches record highs, the surge in SRT adoption amongst LPs could equally grow significantly.

Nadezhda Bratanova

Capital Relief Trades

New academic paper supports unfunded SRT

Call to remove collateralisation obligation in synthetic STS for insurance protections

A new academic paper shows how highly regulated, well-capitalised and well-diversified (re)insurers increase the stability of the financial system through the mechanism of insurance-based credit risk transfer. Entitled 'Strengthening Financial Stability through Insurance-based Credit Risk Transfer', the report comes as the EU, the UK and the US review their historical positions on unfunded SRT.

Multiline non-life (re)insurance companies are sophisticated risk managers with a consistant aim of optimising balance sheet diversification. Hence, the transfer of credit risk from the banking sector to the (re)insurance sector has a clear positive effect on both financial stability and competitiveness because systemic risk reduces in the banking sector, while diversification increases financial stability among (re)insurers and banks’ capacity increases to invest in the real economy.

Nevertheless, ‘financial stability’ means different things to different market participants and the degree to which the risk absorbing capacity of (re)insurers is put to work is jurisdiction-dependent. The paper suggests that the wide spectrum of regulatory views on unfunded SRT has consequences for both banks and (re)insurers, as well as their business models.

For example, GSE unfunded risk transfers have been encouraged in the US by the FHFA as core to providing stability in the housing finance system without involving taxpayers’ money. Regarding US commercial banks, it remains to be seen whether banking regulators will maintain the current unfavourable status in the new political environment.

The UK PRA is the only regulator that has the advantage of being able to move fast, with a ‘clarification’ rather than a change in the law. It is also the only regulator that has so far publicly set out its reasoning as to why unfunded SRT should be allowed and how risk mitigants could be implemented.

Meanwhile, the EU is aware that unfunded SRT is developing only on non-STS transactions and not with respect to the large and growing STS market. The European Commission thus raised questions about this issue in a public consultation in late October 2024. Responses to that consultation have shown overwhelming support among banks, (re)insurers, trade associations and market associations to correct the existing situation.

By prohibiting (re)insurers from providing unfunded protection in STS format for on-balance sheet securitisations, the EU reduced opportunities for (re)insurers in the synthetic securitisation area, with three important consequences. First, investment teams at (re)insurers specialising in securitisation products do not grow to their full potential, especially in Europe.

Second, European (re)insurers are not fully able to build the diversified portfolios that they would like to create, across European countries, across both SA and IRB banks and across the asset classes in which they have expertise. Finally, the competitiveness of the European economy is not supported by the credit underwriting capacity of European global champions in the reinsurance sector.

The overall outstanding volume of insurance protections on non-STS transactions is estimated at close to €6bn, as at end-2024, equating to only 10% of the outstanding insured protections on US GSE CRT programmes (as at end-2023). “Opening STS eligibility to insurers’ unfunded credit protection will likely increase and diversify demand in the market, reduce the cost of credit protection for banks, strengthen their protections by combining counterparties sensitive to different systemic risks, foster competition and lead to larger securitisation volumes,” the paper argues.

Achieving these benefits will require removing the collateralisation obligation in the synthetic STS framework for insurance protections provided specifically by highly rated and regulated multiline (re)insurers - a provision designed for credit derivative instruments, but incompatible with the features of credit insurance. “At a time when the EU is confronted with significant investment needs to improve its competitiveness and security, this targeted change must be included in the 2025 contemplated securitisation reform. By accessing both the capital markets and the reinsurance markets, the EU will put to work the large and proven risk management capacity of the European multiline (re)insurance sector, which enjoys a leading position globally but currently has no other choice than to deploy its capacity outside the EU,” the paper argues.

The paper was co-authored by Ian Bell from PCS, Georges Duponcheele from Great Lakes Insurance SE, Michael Bennett from Arch Insurance (EU), Tamar Joulia-Paris from IACPM and Véronique Ormezzano from VYGE Consulting.

Corinne Smith

Structured Finance

Job swaps weekly: SAF Group hires md for new ABF strategy

People moves and key promotions in securitisation

This week’s roundup of securitisation job swaps sees SAF Group naming the md who will lead its new ABF strategy. Elsewhere, BCLP has appointed a London-based partner in its corporate and finance transactions department, while SMBC has hired a new head of FIG coverage and securitised products for the EMEA region. 

SAF Group has recruited Nur Khan as md to head its newly launched ABF strategy. Based in Toronto, Khan brings more than three decades of experience in the securitisation industry to the firm. He joins from RBC Capital Markets, where he most recently served as head of securitisation finance for Canada. His previous roles include senior positions at Lehman Brothers and JP Morgan. 

Meanwhile, BCLP has recruited Lerika Le Grange as a partner in its corporate and finance transactions department, in the London office. She was previously a partner at Taylor Wessing and brings extensive experience advising on corporate finance, leveraged and acquisition finance, asset-based lending, litigation funding, carbon finance and securitisation. 

SMBC has appointed Ben Payne as head of FIG coverage and securitised products for the EMEA region. With nearly 25 years of banking experience, he was previously head of the financial institutions structured finance team in EMEA at Goldman Sachs. 

Mason Hayes & Curran has promoted structured finance lawyer Andrew Gill to partner, based in its Dublin headquarters. Gill joined the firm in 2023 and is promoted from senior associate, having previously worked at FlexFunds, Matheson and LK Shields Solicitors. The promotion was part of a wider announcement by the firm that saw a total of three promoted to partner and seven promoted to of counsel across multiple strategies.  

K&L Gates partner and CMBS specialist Christopher J Fernandez has left the firm to take up a role as partner in Troutman Pepper Locke's bankruptcy and restructuring practice group, based in Chalotte. Fernandez’s practice focuses on loan workout, loan enforcement and CMBS servicing litigation defence. He leaves K&L after seven and a half years with the firm and previously spent six and a half years at Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton. 

Dimitri Chalikopoulos has joined RenaissanceRe as svp, underwriting – structured credit, based in Zurich. He was previously executive director, synthetic securitisation and PD funds at UBS, having joined Credit Suisse in November 2015. 

Marc Levine, former global head of structured finance at Moody’s, has departed to join governance, risk and compliance platform MetricStream. Based in the Greater Boston area, Levine will lead the firm’s AI-push as its new ceo. 

And finally, TD Securities has hired David Morrissey to serve as md and its new head of European corporate debt capital markets. Based in Dublin, Morrissey joins the firm from Morgan Stanley, where he most recently served as head of its UK, Ireland and Nordic corporate debt capital markets. He brings more than 18 years of experience to TD Securities and will work with the firm's global debt capital markets team. 

Claudia Lewis, Corinne Smith, Kenny Wastell