Fitch Affirms Bank of Baroda's IDR at 'BBB-'; Outlook Negative

  • Reuters
  • Stock Market News
Fitch Affirms Bank of Baroda's IDR at 'BBB-'; Outlook Negative
Credit: © Reuters.

(The following statement was released by the rating agency) Fitch Ratings-Singapore/Mumbai-03 December 2020: Fitch Ratings has affirmed India-based Bank of Baroda's (BOB) and wholly owned subsidiary Bank of Baroda (New Zealand) Limited's (BOB NZ) Long-Term Issuer Default Ratings (IDRs) at 'BBB-'. The Outlook is Negative. The agency simultaneously affirmed BOB's Viability Rating (VR) at 'bb-', Support Rating (SR) at '2' and Support Rating Floor ( SRF (NS: SRFL )) at 'BBB-'. A full list of rating actions is at the end of this commentary. The Negative Outlook on BOB's IDR mirrors the Outlook on India's sovereign rating (BBB-), which was revised to Negative from Stable on 18 June 2020 due to the impact of the escalating coronavirus pandemic on India's economy (for more details, please see "Fitch Revises India's Outlook to Negative, Affirms IDR at 'BBB-'" at The operating environment for Indian banks remains challenging despite a moderate revival in economic activity due to gradual easing of the lockdown since May 2020. Fitch revised India's fiscal year ending March 2021 (FY21) real GDP to -10.5% from -5% in September 2020, but expects India's real GDP to rebound to 11% in FY22, largely as a result of the low base. The economic contraction is likely to result in protracted weakness in the asset-quality cycle, which could manifest in significantly higher stressed loans and ultimately more write-offs over the next few years, even though Indian banks' latest 2QFY21 earnings present a more benign picture (please see "Indian Banks to Face Tough Times" at Fitch believes a speedy economic recovery is critical for the sector to rebound meaningfully, even though we expect to see a moderately worse landscape for the Indian banking sector in 2021 on weak prospects for new business and revenue generation. Private banks with stronger loss-absorption buffers will be in a better position to benefit from the recovery against state-owned counterparts, which are generally burdened with greater balance sheet challenges and weaker loss-absorption buffers. Key Rating Drivers IDR, SUPPORT RATING AND SUPPORT RATING FLOOR BOB's Long-Term IDR is driven by its SR of '2' and SRF of 'BBB-', which reflects Fitch's expectations of a high probability of extraordinary state support for BOB, if required. This is based on the bank's high systemic importance from large market shares (6.5% of sector assets and 7% of deposits), its pan-India franchise and majority government ownership (71.6% state ownership). Moreover, large state-owned banks such as BOB play an important policy role in furthering the state's social-lending objectives and thus promote financial inclusion. Fitch believes a default by a large bank such as BOB could result in a general loss of confidence in the sector and pose high reputational risk for the state. The Negative Outlook on the IDR mirrors the Outlook on the Indian sovereign IDR of 'BBB-'. BOB NZ is a fully owned subsidiary of BOB and its IDR is driven by a high probability of support from its parent and, ultimately, from the Indian government. There is strong integration between the two entities, and BOB NZ's small size relative to the parent makes potential support manageable. Therefore, we expect government support for BOB to flow to the subsidiary. VIABILITY RATING BOB's intrinsic profile remains largely unchanged since our last VR action on 30 April 2020. It represents a moderate degree of fundamental financial strength as its capitalisation and earnings are vulnerable to even moderate shocks, which we believe is yet to fully manifest for BOB and other Indian banks. The bank's pan-India domestic franchise and state linkage ensures continuity of stable funding and liquidity, but they have less influence on the VR than do other factors. We believe there is further downside risk to BOB's financial profile unless the moderate loss-absorption buffers, in particular capitalisation, are strengthened. The bank's less-than-satisfactory core capital buffer is most at risk from the heightened stress. BOB's reported common equity Tier 1 (CET1) ratio of 9.2% at end-September 2020 (1HFY21) is lower than most comparable peers and offers only 120bp buffer over the regulatory minimum of 8.0% that banks are supposed to meet from April 2021. The bank had notified the stock exchanges earlier this year that it planned to raise INR135 billion in capital, of which INR90 billion was likely to be in fresh equity. The proposed amount - if raised in full - will add about 150bp to the bank's core capital ratio but not enough to fully mitigate the risk to capital (net non-performing loan (NPL)/CET1 ratio: 30%; 25% post-equity adjustment) if asset-quality stress leads to further losses and capital erosion, as we believe is most likely. However, a sharply discounted equity valuation (price/book: 0.13x) poses a significant challenge for fresh equity raising from the markets, although the state could chip in with capital infusions as the majority owner in a similar way to most state-owned banks. The bank reported a profit in 2QFY21 (after a loss in 1QFY21 and FY20) but overall profitability remains weak with operating profit/risk-weighted assets at 0.4%. The available buffer is thin considering that loan and securities impairment charges/pre-provision profits is still around 87%, despite a material decline in credit costs to 1.6% of loans in 1HFY21 from 2.5% in FY20. Overall income levels are likely to remain muted on weak credit growth. As such, we believe that the bank's coronavirus-related provisions of 0.2% of loans will not be sufficient if there are significant fresh slippages in impaired loans (and restructured loans) from the special mention asset pool, which cumulatively amounted to 5.5% of loans (comprising loans overdue 30 days and 60 days). We expect some reprieve on operating costs (cost/income ratio: 47.8%) in the near term, as management plans to complete the merger integration of Vijaya Bank (NS: VJBK ) and Dena Bank (NS: DENA ) by December 2020 (latest March 2021), after which cost-saving strategies will be in focus. However, credit costs are likely to remain the key determinant of near-term profitability. We maintain the negative outlook on asset quality notwithstanding the modest improvement in both impaired loans ratio (1HFY21: 9.1%; FY20: 9.4%) and loan-loss coverage (1HFY21: 74.4%; FY20: 68.9%), with the former benefiting by about 20bp from the judicial stay on recognition of moratorium loans as NPL. Fitch believes the impaired loans ratio is yet to reflect the true nature of the economic stress inflicted by the pandemic, although a rise in special mention loans has been in line with Fitch's expectations. A sharp increase in delinquencies or restructuring would weaken loan-loss coverage and reverse the trend on the net impaired loans/CET1 ratio (1HFY21: 30.1%; FY20: 37.6%). Deposits account for 84% of BOB's total liabilities, while customer deposits account for 93% of total funding. This stems from high depositor confidence on BOB's close government links as well as size and reach. BOB also reported a low-cost deposit ratio of nearly 40% at 1HFY21, up 70bp from FY20. We expect the loan-deposit ratio to remain low (1HFY21: 75.3%) until credit growth materially resumes. The bank is also carrying excess holdings of government securities (nearly 650bp over regulatory minimum), which we believe will continue to support liquidity coverage ratio (FY20: 136%) and asset-liability management. Managing offshore liquidity is critical in the near term, although available buffers seem sufficient. SENIOR DEBT BOB's senior debt rating is at the same level as the IDR, as the debt represents unsecured and unsubordinated obligations. RATING SENSITIVITIES IDRS, SUPPORT RATING, SUPPORT RATING FLOOR AND SENIOR DEBT Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative rating action/downgrade: The SR and SRF are most sensitive to Fitch's assessment of the government's propensity and ability to support BOB, based on the bank's size, systemic importance and linkage to the state. Weakening of the government's ability to provide extraordinary support - reflected by negative action on India's sovereign ratings - would lead to negative action on the IDR. Negative action on the IDR is also likely should Fitch perceive any reduction in the government's propensity to extend timely support, in which case the agency will reassess the SR and SRF, and the bank's IDR and senior debt ratings, although that is not our base case. Any change in BOB's IDR would have a similar impact on BOB NZ, but the latter's IDR could also be downgraded by a weaker propensity for its parent and, ultimately, the government, to support the subsidiary. Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive rating action/upgrade: A revision of the sovereign rating Outlook to Stable would lead to a corresponding revision on the Outlook on BOB's IDR, provided the sovereign's propensity to support remains unchanged. An upgrade to BOB's SRF could occur in the event of a sovereign upgrade if Fitch believes that the sovereign's ability and propensity to support the bank has improved. However, an upgrade of the sovereign rating appears less certain in the near term. Any changes in BOB's IDR would result in equivalent changes to the senior debt rating. It would also have a similar effect on BOB NZ. VIABILITY RATING Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative rating action/downgrade: BOB's limited loss-absorption capacity against heightened stress implies that the VR could be vulnerable if there is a more severe weakening of the loan portfolio (stressed asset ratio of impaired loans + restructured loans approaching 15% from 9.1% impaired-loan ratio at 1HFY21) and impairment charges. This would put further pressure on earnings and, potentially, capitalisation - a key influencing metric on the VR, unless it is sufficiently augmented. A drop in CET1 ratio closer to the regulatory minimum of 8% would most likely be more consistent with a 'b' category score. Fitch believes the bank's measures to help clients through the downturn will become less effective the longer the downturn lasts, which is likely to limit the speed of recovery after the pandemic has been brought under control. Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive rating action/upgrade: There is little prospect of an upgrade in the VR in the near term in light of the risk to the bank's intrinsic profile from rising external pressures. However, downside risk will be lower if the economic downturn is shallower and the recovery is faster than expected in Fitch's base case, as this may result in less deterioration in the bank's asset quality (from 9.1% impaired-loan ratio at 1HFY21), earnings and profitability. Core capitalisation is also an important factor for the VR; the bank's ability to improve core capitalisation to levels near 12% is important before any VR upgrade can be considered. Best/Worst Case Rating Scenario International scale credit ratings of Financial Institutions and Covered Bond issuers have a best-case rating upgrade scenario (defined as the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a positive direction) of three notches over a three-year rating horizon; and a worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative direction) of four notches over three years. The complete span of best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating categories ranges from 'AAA' to 'D'. Best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings are based on historical performance. For more information about the methodology used to determine sector-specific best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings, visit [] REFERENCES FOR SUBSTANTIALLY MATERIAL SOURCE CITED AS KEY DRIVER OF RATING The principal sources of information used in the analysis are described in the Applicable Criteria. ESG Considerations BOB has an ESG Relevance Score of '4' for Governance Structure. It reflects our assessment that key governance aspects, in particular board independence and effectiveness, ownership concentration and protection of creditor or stakeholder rights are a moderate influence on the VR. It is a negative influence since Fitch views governance to be less developed for state banks, which is evident from weak underwriting that results in high levels of poorly performing loans and credit losses. The board is dominated by government appointees, and business models often focus on supporting government strategy with lending directed towards promoting socioeconomic and macroeconomic policies, which may include lending to government-owned companies. These factors also drive our view on the bank's state linkages that affect support prospects that drive the long-term ratings. BOB has an ESG Relevance Score of '4' for Financial Transparency. It reflects our assessment that the quality and frequency of financial reporting and the auditing process are a moderate influence on the VR. It is a negative influence however since these factors have become more prominent in the past few years because of the sharp financial deterioration at state banks as well as the widely reported divergences in NPL recognition between the banks and the regulator, although these incidences have narrowed in recent years. Still, financial transparency is pivotal for general business and depositor confidence and can lead to significant reputational risk if not managed well. Unless otherwise disclosed in this section, the highest level of ESG credit relevance is a score of '3'. This 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. For more information on Fitch's ESG Relevance Scores, visit Bank of Baroda; Long Term Issuer Default Rating; Affirmed; BBB-; Rating Outlook Negative ; Short Term Issuer Default Rating; Affirmed; F3 ; Viability Rating; Affirmed; bb- ; Support Rating; Affirmed; 2 ; Support Rating Floor; Affirmed; BBB- ----senior unsecured; Long Term Rating; Affirmed; BBB- Bank of Baroda (New Zealand) Limited; Long Term Issuer Default Rating; Affirmed; BBB-; Rating Outlook Negative ; Support Rating; Affirmed; 2 Contacts: Primary Rating Analyst Willie Tanoto, Director +65 6796 7219 Fitch Ratings Singapore Pte Ltd. One Raffles Quay #22-11, South Tower Singapore 048583 Secondary Rating Analyst Saswata Guha, Director +91 22 4000 1741 Committee Chairperson Jonathan Cornish, Managing Director +852 2263 9901 Media Relations: Bindu Menon, Mumbai, Tel: +91 22 4000 1727, Email: Leslie Tan, Singapore, Tel: +65 6796 7234, Email: Peter Hoflich, Singapore, Tel: +65 6796 7229, Email: Additional information is available on Additional Disclosures Dodd-Frank Rating Information Disclosure Form ( Solicitation Status ( Endorsement Status ( Endorsement Policy ( ALL FITCH CREDIT RATINGS ARE SUBJECT TO CERTAIN LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS. PLEASE READ THESE LIMITATIONS AND DISCLAIMERS BY FOLLOWING THIS LINK: HTTPS://WWW.FITCHRATINGS.COM/UNDERSTANDINGCREDITRATINGS (HTTPS://WWW.FITCHRATINGS.COM/UNDERSTANDINGCREDITRATINGS). IN ADDITION, THE FOLLOWING HTTPS://WWW.FITCHRATINGS.COM/RATING-DEFINITIONS-DOCUMENT ( DETAILS FITCH'S RATING DEFINITIONS FOR EACH RATING SCALE AND RATING CATEGORIES, INCLUDING DEFINITIONS RELATING TO DEFAULT. PUBLISHED RATINGS, CRITERIA, AND METHODOLOGIES ARE AVAILABLE FROM THIS SITE AT ALL TIMES. FITCH'S CODE OF CONDUCT, CONFIDENTIALITY, CONFLICTS OF INTEREST, AFFILIATE FIREWALL, COMPLIANCE, AND OTHER RELEVANT POLICIES AND PROCEDURES ARE ALSO AVAILABLE FROM THE CODE OF CONDUCT SECTION OF THIS SITE. DIRECTORS AND SHAREHOLDERS RELEVANT INTERESTS ARE AVAILABLE AT HTTPS://WWW.FITCHRATINGS.COM/SITE/REGULATORY ( FITCH MAY HAVE PROVIDED ANOTHER PERMISSIBLE SERVICE TO THE RATED ENTITY OR ITS RELATED THIRD PARTIES. DETAILS OF THIS SERVICE FOR RATINGS FOR WHICH THE LEAD ANALYST IS BASED IN AN EU-REGISTERED ENTITY CAN BE FOUND ON THE ENTITY SUMMARY PAGE FOR THIS ISSUER ON THE FITCH RATINGS WEBSITE. Copyright © 2020 by Fitch Ratings, Inc., Fitch Ratings Ltd. and its subsidiaries. 33 Whitehall Street, NY, NY 10004. Telephone: 1-800-753-4824, (212) 908-0500. Fax: (212) 480-4435. Reproduction or retransmission in whole or in part is prohibited except by permission. All rights reserved. In issuing and maintaining its ratings and in making other reports (including forecast information), Fitch relies on factual information it receives from issuers and underwriters and from other sources Fitch believes to be credible. Fitch conducts a reasonable investigation of the factual information relied upon by it in accordance with its ratings methodology, and obtains reasonable verification of that information from independent sources, to the extent such sources are available for a given security or in a given jurisdiction. The manner of Fitch's factual investigation and the scope of the third-party verification it obtains will vary depending on the nature of the rated security and its issuer, the requirements and practices in the jurisdiction in which the rated security is offered and sold and/or the issuer is located, the availability and nature of relevant public information, access to the management of the issuer and its advisers, the availability of pre-existing third-party verifications such as audit reports, agreed-upon procedures letters, appraisals, actuarial reports, engineering reports, legal opinions and other reports provided by third parties, the availability of independent and competent third- party verification sources with respect to the particular security or in the particular jurisdiction of the issuer, and a variety of other factors. Users of Fitch's ratings and reports should understand that neither an enhanced factual investigation nor any third-party verification can ensure that all of the information Fitch relies on in connection with a rating or a report will be accurate and complete. Ultimately, the issuer and its advisers are responsible for the accuracy of the information they provide to Fitch and to the market in offering documents and other reports. In issuing its ratings and its reports, Fitch must rely on the work of experts, including independent auditors with respect to financial statements and attorneys with respect to legal and tax matters. Further, ratings and forecasts of financial and other information are inherently forward-looking and embody assumptions and predictions about future events that by their nature cannot be verified as facts. As a result, despite any verification of current facts, ratings and forecasts can be affected by future events or conditions that were not anticipated at the time a rating or forecast was issued or affirmed. The information in this report is provided "as is" without any representation or warranty of any kind, and Fitch does not represent or warrant that the report or any of its contents will meet any of the requirements of a recipient of the report. A Fitch rating is an opinion as to the creditworthiness of a security. This opinion and reports made by Fitch are based on established criteria and methodologies that Fitch is continuously evaluating and updating. Therefore, ratings and reports are the collective work product of Fitch and no individual, or group of individuals, is solely responsible for a rating or a report. The rating does not address the risk of loss due to risks other than credit risk, unless such risk is specifically mentioned. Fitch is not engaged in the offer or sale of any security. All Fitch reports have shared authorship. Individuals identified in a Fitch report were involved in, but are not solely responsible for, the opinions stated therein. The individuals are named for contact purposes only. A report providing a Fitch rating is neither a prospectus nor a substitute for the information assembled, verified and presented to investors by the issuer and its agents in connection with the sale of the securities. Ratings may be changed or withdrawn at any time for any reason in the sole discretion of Fitch. Fitch does not provide investment advice of any sort. Ratings are not a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security. Ratings do not comment on the adequacy of market price, the suitability of any security for a particular investor, or the tax-exempt nature or taxability of payments made in respect to any security. Fitch receives fees from issuers, insurers, guarantors, other obligors, and underwriters for rating securities. Such fees generally vary from US$1,000 to US$750,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent) per issue. In certain cases, Fitch will rate all or a number of issues issued by a particular issuer, or insured or guaranteed by a particular insurer or guarantor, for a single annual fee. Such fees are expected to vary from US$10,000 to US$1,500,000 (or the applicable currency equivalent). The assignment, publication, or dissemination of a rating by Fitch shall not constitute a consent by Fitch to use its name as an expert in connection with any registration statement filed under the United States securities laws, the Financial Services and Markets Act of 2000 of the United Kingdom, or the securities laws of any particular jurisdiction. Due to the relative efficiency of electronic publishing and distribution, Fitch research may be available to electronic subscribers up to three days earlier than to print subscribers. For Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan and South Korea only: Fitch Australia Pty Ltd holds an Australian financial services license (AFS license no. 337123) which authorizes it to provide credit ratings to wholesale clients only. Credit ratings information published by Fitch is not intended to be used by persons who are retail clients within the meaning of the Corporations Act 2001 Fitch Ratings, Inc. is registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission as a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (the "NRSRO"). While certain of the NRSRO's credit rating subsidiaries are listed on Item 3 of Form NRSRO and as such are authorized to issue credit ratings on behalf of the NRSRO (see, other credit rating subsidiaries are not listed on Form NRSRO (the "non-NRSROs") and therefore credit ratings issued by those subsidiaries are not issued on behalf of the NRSRO. However, non-NRSRO personnel may participate in determining credit ratings issued by or on behalf of the NRSRO.

Drop an image here or Supported formats: *.jpg, *.png, *.gif up to 5mb

Error: File type not supported

Drop an image here or


Related Articles