Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Tranche

A tranche is a discrete portion or "slice" of a structured financial product, such as a or , derived from pooling underlying assets like loans or bonds and dividing their cash flows to allocate varying levels of , priority of repayment, and expected returns among . Originating from the French word meaning "slice," the concept emerged prominently in processes to transform illiquid assets into tradable securities with customized profiles, enabling issuers to appeal to diverse investor appetites by tranching payments in a hierarchical "" structure. In practice, tranches are stratified by seniority: senior tranches, which receive payments first and are buffered by subordination from junior layers, typically command investment-grade ratings and lower yields due to their relative safety, while and (junior) tranches absorb initial losses, offering higher potential rewards but greater vulnerability to defaults in the underlying pool. This tranching facilitates credit enhancement for safer portions, allowing broader market participation, but it relies on accurate modeling of asset performance and correlations, which proved fallible during the when widespread mortgage defaults exposed hidden risks in ostensibly secure tranches.

Fundamentals

Definition

In , a is a portion of a pooled asset or cash flow, such as a collection of mortgages, bonds, or loans, divided into classes with differentiated risk exposures, maturities, or payment priorities to appeal to diverse investors. This segmentation enables the repackaging of heterogeneous underlying assets into securities that can achieve targeted ratings, often higher than the average of the for tranches. Tranches typically follow a payment structure, where principal and from the asset pool are allocated sequentially: senior tranches receive payments first and are protected against defaults by subordinate layers, resulting in lower yields but greater stability, while and equity tranches bear initial losses for correspondingly higher returns. For instance, in collateralized mortgage obligations, tranches may be sliced by expected prepayment speeds or , allowing investors to select based on or preferences. The tranche mechanism originated in to enhance and distribution but can amplify systemic vulnerabilities if mispriced, as evidenced by amplified losses in subordinate tranches during credit crunches. Credible analyses emphasize that tranche ratings rely on models assuming low correlation among defaults, which proved optimistic in events like the .

Etymology

The word tranche derives from French tranche, meaning "a slice" or "a portion," which stems from the verb trancher (or trancer), signifying "to cut" or "to slice." This root traces back to the truncāre, related to or cutting off, underscoring the notion of severing a part from a whole. The earliest recorded English usage of tranche appears around 1500, as a direct borrowing from , initially in general senses before its specialized adoption in to describe segmented portions of , loans, or securitized cash flows. In financial parlance, the term evokes the imagery of slicing a pooled asset into risk-differentiated layers, with higher-priority tranches absorbing losses first to protect subordinate ones.

Historical Development

Origins in Securitization

The tranche structure emerged in as a mechanism to redistribute risks, particularly prepayment uncertainty, among investors by slicing pooled cash flows into prioritized classes with varying maturities and loss absorption priorities. This innovation addressed limitations in early (MBS), which from their in 1968 via Ginnie Mae's pass-through certificates distributed principal and pro-rata, exposing all holders equally to variable mortgage prepayments driven by fluctuations. The first structured use of tranches occurred with the issuance of the inaugural (CMO) by the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation () in 1983, developed in collaboration with investment banks and . This $200 million deal divided the underlying into three sequential-pay tranches—A, B, and C—with principal repayments allocated first to the shortest-maturity A tranche until retired, then sequentially to B and C, while interest accrued to all based on outstanding balances. The design aimed to create more predictable cash flows: senior tranches benefited from earlier principal return in low-prepayment scenarios, reducing extension risk, whereas subordinate tranches absorbed disproportionate prepayment in high-rate environments. This tranching approach marked a shift from uniform risk exposure to hierarchical credit enhancement, where junior tranches provided a buffer against defaults or early payoffs for senior ones, enabling higher ratings and broader market appeal. By 1985, the followed with its own CMO issuance, accelerating adoption; outstanding CMO volume reached $100 billion by 1988. The structure's causal efficacy lay in transforming heterogeneous cash flows—empirically volatile due to incentives—into tranches with engineered durations, as evidenced by reduced yield spreads for targeted investor profiles compared to plain-vanilla . Tranches thus originated as a response to empirical prepayment from the 1970s, where average lives deviated sharply from scheduled amortizations (e.g., shortening to under 10 years amid falling rates), prompting issuers to prioritize stability over simplicity. Subsequent refinements, like Z-tranches (accruing to extend maturity) introduced in later deals, built on this foundation but retained the core slicing principle. While effective in expanding securitization's scale—facilitating over $1 trillion in issuance by the early —the approach presupposed accurate modeling of correlated defaults, a vulnerability later exposed in non-mortgage extensions.

Evolution and Key Milestones

The tranche mechanism in evolved from simple pass-through structures to sophisticated multiclass arrangements designed to redistribute prepayment, maturity, and credit risks among investors. Early mortgage-backed securities (MBS), introduced by the (Ginnie Mae) in 1970, operated as single-class pass-throughs, where principal and interest payments from pooled mortgages were distributed proportionally without differentiation by risk or timing. This limited appeal to diverse investor preferences, prompting innovations to slice cash flows into prioritized segments. A landmark development occurred in 1983 with the issuance of the first (CMO) by the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (), featuring sequential-pay tranches that allocated principal repayments first to shorter-maturity classes before longer ones, thereby reducing uncertainty from mortgage prepayments and extending average lives for certain investors. The Federal National Mortgage Association () issued its inaugural CMO in 1985, solidifying tranching as a core tool for tailoring durations and yields in . These time-based tranches, often structured with support tranches like Z-bonds (zero-coupon) by the late 1980s, expanded the market by attracting institutional buyers seeking customized risk profiles. Tranching further advanced into credit enhancement with collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) in 1987, when structured the first such instruments from junk bond portfolios, subordinating junior tranches to absorb defaults before senior ones, thus enabling higher ratings for the bulk of the issue despite heterogeneous . By the , CDO issuance surged, incorporating asset-backed securities as and structures blending cash and synthetic elements via credit default swaps; outstanding CDO volume reached approximately $300 billion by 2000. The 2000s saw explosive growth in subprime-linked CDOs, peaking at over $500 billion in annual issuance by 2006, but the 2007-2008 crisis revealed flaws in tranche ratings and diversification assumptions, leading to widespread losses and regulatory scrutiny under the Dodd-Frank Act. Post-crisis reforms emphasized risk retention and transparency, refining tranche designs for resilience while curtailing complexity.

Mechanics

Securitization Process

The securitization process transforms illiquid financial assets, such as loans or receivables, into tradable securities by pooling them and issuing debt obligations backed by the generated cash flows. Originators, typically banks or , first create these assets through lending activities, then sell them to a bankruptcy-remote special purpose vehicle (SPV) to isolate the pool from the originator's risks. The SPV, often structured as a or , acquires the assets via a true , ensuring and enabling treatment for the originator. Once pooled, the assets' cash flows—principally principal and interest payments—are reallocated through a structured issuance of . A servicer is appointed to collect payments from obligors, manage delinquencies, and distribute proceeds, while a oversees compliance with the transaction documents. Credit enhancements, such as overcollateralization or excess spread accounts, are incorporated to mitigate default risks before tranching occurs. Tranching divides the pooled cash flows into sequential or subordinated classes, each with distinct priorities in the payment waterfall: senior tranches receive payments first and bear minimal credit risk, while junior or equity tranches absorb losses initially to protect seniors. This subordination creates a hierarchy where, for instance, in a typical ABS, the senior tranche (often class A) comprises the largest portion and targets investment-grade ratings, followed by mezzanine (class B) and unrated equity tranches absorbing early defaults. Rating agencies assess each tranche independently based on historical default data, stress scenarios, and structural protections, assigning ratings that reflect varying probabilities of principal impairment. The resulting securities are marketed to investors via underwriters, with proceeds funding the asset purchase and providing originators liquidity for new lending. This process redistributes risks across tranches, enabling customized exposure but introducing complexities like correlation risks in underlying assets, as evidenced in the where mezzanine tranches in subprime mortgage pools incurred substantial losses before impacting seniors.

Tranche Structuring and Waterfall Payments

Tranche structuring in involves dividing the cash flows from a pool of underlying assets into hierarchical layers, or tranches, differentiated by their priority for receiving payments and absorbing losses. tranches hold the highest priority, receiving interest and principal payments first while being protected from defaults by subordination of junior tranches, which absorb losses initially. This credit tranching enhances the credit quality of portions, allowing them to achieve investment-grade ratings despite potentially riskier . The waterfall payment mechanism governs the sequential allocation of cash flows generated by the asset pool, directing funds downward through the tranche hierarchy only after higher-priority obligations are satisfied. In a typical sequential-pay structure, all scheduled interest and principal due to the senior tranche (e.g., Class A) must be paid before distributions reach (e.g., Class B) or (e.g., Class C) tranches. This process, often detailed in the securitization's trust indenture, ensures orderly distribution while providing credit support through excess spread or reserve funds in some cases. Junior tranches, positioned at the bottom of the , offer higher yields to compensate for their greater exposure to and potential principal shortfalls, creating a of risk-return profiles across the . For instance, in asset-backed securities, subordination levels might range from 5-20% of the pool's value, with tranches backed by the full amount minus junior buffers. Such arrangements redistribute , enabling issuers to tap diverse investor bases while aligning payouts with tranche-specific appetites for .

Types

Credit-Based Tranches

divide a securitized pool of assets into segments with varying levels through subordination, where junior tranches provide support to ones by absorbing losses first. This structure enhances the credit quality of tranches, enabling them to achieve higher ratings despite underlying asset risks. Cash flows from the collateral pool are allocated via a waterfall mechanism, prioritizing payments to tranches before subordinate layers. In typical arrangements, senior tranches—often comprising 70-80% of the deal—hold investment-grade ratings like due to protection from multiple layers of subordination, while tranches offer moderate yields with intermediate , and tranches, usually 5-10% of the structure, face initial defaults but compensate with elevated returns. For instance, in collateralized debt obligations (CDOs), senior tranches receive first claim on principal and interest, with losses sequentially eroding junior classes. This tranching redistributes , allowing investors to select exposure aligned with their tolerance. Subordination levels are calibrated based on expected loss distributions from the underlying assets, such as mortgages or corporate loans, with historical data informing attachment points where a tranche begins incurring losses. In mortgage-backed securities (MBS), credit tranching mitigates prepayment and default risks, though empirical evidence from the 2008 crisis highlighted vulnerabilities when correlated defaults exceeded models, leading to widespread senior tranche impairments. Regulators now emphasize stress testing and transparency in tranche structures to address such causal failures in risk isolation.

Time and Cash Flow Tranches

Time tranching in involves dividing the cash flows from an underlying pool of assets, such as , into tranches with distinct maturities or payment schedules to redistribute among investors. This approach creates securities appealing to investors with varying needs or preferences, where earlier tranches receive principal repayments sequentially before later ones, thereby shielding short-term tranches from extension while exposing longer-term ones to it. Unlike tranching, which prioritizes loss absorption hierarchies, time tranching focuses on temporal allocation, often implemented in collateralized obligations () to mitigate the uncertainty of borrower prepayments. Cash flow tranching structures payments through a waterfall mechanism, directing principal and interest from the asset pool to specific tranches based on predefined priorities and schedules. In sequential-pay structures, for instance, all principal payments first retire the balance of the initial tranche—typically with a shorter average life—before allocating to subsequent tranches, ensuring predictable cash flows for early investors at the cost of variability for later ones. Planned amortization class (PAC) tranches exemplify advanced cash flow tranching by guaranteeing stable principal payments within a predefined schedule and prepayment speed band (e.g., 12-18% CPR for mortgages), with companion or support tranches absorbing excess prepayments or slowdowns to protect the PAC's cash flows. This design, introduced in the 1980s for mortgage-backed securities, enhances marketability by reducing reinvestment and duration risks for targeted investors, though it requires precise modeling of underlying asset prepayment behaviors. These tranching methods interact in practice; for example, a CMO might combine time-based sequential payments with credit subordination, where senior time tranches receive priority cash flows absent defaults. Empirical data from U.S. agency CMOs show PAC tranches achieving lower yields (e.g., 50-100 basis points below companions) due to their prepayment protection, attracting conservative investors seeking bond-like stability. However, in volatile environments like the 2008 financial crisis, deviations from assumed prepayment bands led to cash flow disruptions in support tranches, underscoring the reliance on accurate historical prepayment data—such as single-month mortality (SMM) rates averaging 0.5-1% for prime mortgages pre-2007. Regulators like the Basel Committee emphasize that time and cash flow tranches must demonstrate effective risk isolation, with capital requirements scaled by attachment points (e.g., 5-15% for mezzanine time tranches).

Applications

Mortgage-Backed Securities

represent a primary application of tranche structures in , where pools of residential or loans are transformed into tradable securities backed by the underlying cash flows of principal and interest payments. In basic pass-through , such as those issued by government-sponsored enterprises like or Ginnie Mae, cash flows are distributed pro-rata to investors without tranching; however, more complex structures like collateralized mortgage obligations (CMOs) employ tranches to redistribute prepayment, extension, and credit risks among investor classes. Tranching in enables issuers to tailor securities to diverse investor preferences, enhancing by offering instruments with varying maturities, yields, and risk exposures, often achieving higher credit ratings for senior tranches through subordination. The core mechanism involves slicing the pool's cash flows into sequential or prioritized tranches, governed by a payment structure where senior tranches receive payments first, absorbing less default risk but facing greater prepayment variability due to homeowners' incentives. For instance, in sequential-pay , principal repayments are directed entirely to the senior tranche (e.g., Tranche A) until it is retired, then to subordinate tranches (e.g., B, C), with junior or tranches bearing initial losses to protect seniors, often rated by agencies unless cumulative losses exceed subordination levels. This structure mitigates the inherent unpredictability of mortgage prepayments, which can shorten senior tranche durations or extend juniors, as modeled in valuation frameworks sensitive to changes and borrower behavior. Advanced tranches include planned amortization class () tranches, which prioritize stable principal payments within a predefined band by diverting excess prepayments to support (companion) tranches, reducing uncertainty for conservative investors; accrual (Z-bond) tranches, which defer interest to compound principal until seniors are paid; and floating-rate tranches tied to indices like for hedging . In private-label , tranching predominates, with thin slices (1-5% of the ) providing enhancement, as seen in pre-2008 subprime deals where over-reliance on optimistic assumptions amplified systemic vulnerabilities. Overall, tranching expands the investor base for , with outstanding U.S. agency exceeding $2.5 trillion as of 2023, though it introduces complexity requiring sophisticated modeling for accurate pricing.

Collateralized Debt Obligations

Collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) represent a key application of structuring, where pools of assets—such as corporate loans, bonds, or asset-backed securities—are segmented into prioritized layers to allocate and cash flows among investors with varying risk tolerances. The underlying generates and principal payments, distributed via a mechanism that prioritizes senior tranches before subordinating claims to and layers. This segmentation enables issuers to achieve higher overall funding costs by appealing to diverse investor bases, from conservative institutions seeking investment-grade securities to speculative buyers targeting high yields. In a typical CDO, tranches are defined by attachment points specifying the percentage of losses each layer absorbs: senior tranches (often 70-80% of the ) attach at higher loss thresholds (e.g., 20-30% subordination), receiving first claim on cash flows and benefiting from enhancements like overcollateralization or excess , which result in ratings and yields only slightly above Treasuries, such as plus 50-100 basis points as of the early . tranches (5-15% of structure) absorb losses after equity but before seniors, carrying investment-grade or high-yield ratings (e.g., to A) with spreads of 200-500 basis points, while equity tranches (2-10%) bear the first 2-5% of , offering residual returns potentially exceeding 10-20% annually but facing total wipeout in moderate downturns. Synthetic CDOs, using rather than physical assets, replicate this tranching to reference without ownership , amplifying as equity buyers often fund positions with . Tranching in CDOs facilitates risk dispersion and capital efficiency for originators, who offload illiquid loans to special purpose vehicles, freeing balance sheets for new lending, while investors gain customized exposure—senior slices for yield enhancement with principal protection, and junior ones for equity-like upside. However, the structure's complexity introduces valuation challenges, as tranche pricing relies on correlation assumptions in models, which underestimated risks during correlated defaults, leading to mispriced protections and amplified losses when underlying asset quality deteriorated. Empirical data from the showed CDO equity tranches yielding 15-25% pre-crisis but suffering near-total impairment when portfolio rates exceeded 10%, underscoring subordination's limits against systemic shocks.
Tranche TypeTypical Size (% of CDO)Loss AttachmentCredit RatingYield Example (pre-2008)Risk Exposure
70-80%After 20-30% lossesLIBOR + 50-100 bpsLow (protected by subordination)
10-20%After 5-20% lossesBBB to ALIBOR + 200-500 bpsMedium (absorbs post-equity losses)
Equity2-10%First 0-5% lossesUnrated10-20%+ residualHigh (first-loss position)
Post-2008 regulations, such as Dodd-Frank's risk retention rules effective December 24, 2018, mandated CDO sponsors retain 5% of each tranche to align incentives, reducing but constraining issuance volumes. Despite criticisms of opacity, CDOs persist in forms like collateralized loan obligations (CLOs), with U.S. outstanding volume reaching $900 billion by mid-2023, primarily in senior tranches held by banks for regulatory capital benefits.

Other Structured Products

Collateralized loan obligations (CLOs) exemplify the use of tranches in securitizing leveraged corporate loans, distinct from broader CDOs by focusing on syndicated bank loans to below-investment-grade borrowers. In a typical CLO structure, a special purpose vehicle issues multiple debt tranches—ranging from senior AAA-rated notes to and portions—along with an unrated tranche that absorbs initial losses. Cash flows from loan interest and principal repayments follow a priority waterfall, prioritizing senior tranches for stability while holders receive residual spreads, often yielding 10-20% annually depending on portfolio performance as of 2023. Post-2008 regulations, such as Dodd-Frank risk retention rules implemented in 2016, required CLO managers to hold 5% of the tranche, enhancing but increasing issuance costs. Asset-backed securities (ABS) for non-mortgage assets, such as automobile loans, receivables, and , also rely on tranching to segment cash flows and risks. For instance, in auto ABS, senior tranches benefit from overcollateralization—typically 10-15% excess assets—and excess accounts, achieving ratings while subordinate tranches face higher default exposure from vintage-specific loan pools. ABS, issued by entities like banks since the , use revolving structures where tranches are sized by attachment points (e.g., 5-10% for ), with early amortization triggers protecting seniors if delinquencies exceed 4-6%. These products expanded post-2008, with U.S. ABS issuance reaching $250 billion in 2023, driven by diversified reducing systemic risks compared to mortgage pools. Other applications include equipment lease ABS and future flow receivables securitizations for emerging market exporters, where tranches mitigate currency and collection risks through sequential pay structures. In all cases, tranching enables originators to offload assets while providing investors tailored exposure, though junior tranches have historically incurred losses exceeding 50% in stressed scenarios like the 2020 pandemic drawdowns.

Advantages

For Issuers and Originators

Issuers and originators, typically that generate underlying assets such as loans, benefit from tranching in by achieving relief and regulatory capital efficiency. By transferring assets to a special purpose vehicle and issuing tranched securities, originators can remove securitized assets from their s, thereby freeing up capital to originate additional loans without increasing leverage ratios under frameworks like . This off- treatment reduces the capital reserves required against the assets, as the is redistributed to investors holding junior tranches. Tranching further enables issuers to access capital markets at lower funding costs than traditional bank borrowing, as senior tranches often receive higher s independent of the originator's own due to structural protections like overcollateralization and subordination. For instance, an originator with a sub-investment-grade can issue AAA-rated senior tranches backed by high-quality assets, attracting a broader base and reducing overall borrowing expenses compared to . This diversification of sources mitigates reliance on deposit or markets, enhancing during periods of tightening. Additionally, originators retain ongoing streams through servicing fees on the transferred assets, while tranching facilitates that isolates the originator from losses on sold portions, provided true criteria are met to achieve bankruptcy remoteness. However, issuers may elect to retain or junior tranches to signal asset quality and align incentives, though this exposes them to first-loss . Overall, these mechanisms support expanded lending capacity; for example, U.S. originators securitized over $1.7 trillion in assets in 2006, recycling capital to fuel housing finance growth prior to market disruptions.

For Investors and Markets

Tranches enable investors to select securities aligned with their tolerances and objectives, as structured products divide underlying flows into layers with varying priorities for principal and payments. tranches, typically rated investment-grade, offer lower yields but prioritize stability and protection against defaults, appealing to conservative institutions like pension funds. In contrast, junior or tranches absorb initial losses, providing higher potential yields to compensate for elevated risk, thus broadening participation from yield-seeking investors such as funds. This segmentation enhances diversification by allowing exposure to tailored profiles without requiring direct ownership of the underlying assets, which may be illiquid or opaque. For instance, highly rated tranches in securitizations have historically delivered yields exceeding those of comparably rated corporate bonds, incentivizing capital allocation to structured products. Markets benefit from tranching through improved and depth, as it unbundles into tradable slices, attracting a wider base and facilitating more efficient across risk spectra. Overall, tranching promotes efficiency by enabling originators to access funding at lower costs while investors gain granular control over risk-return tradeoffs, supporting broader extension in the .

Risks and Criticisms

Inherent Financial Risks

Tranching redistributes the and other risks of an underlying asset across priority levels, creating tranches protected by subordination that absorb losses only after layers are exhausted, while tranches bear initial defaults. This structure concentrates uncertainty, as tranches exhibit low expected losses but high exposure to events from correlated asset defaults exceeding modeled probabilities. The risk profile of each tranche hinges on its attachment and detachment points, with tranches facing leveraged losses due to narrow loss absorption bands. In mortgage-backed securities, sequential or time-based tranching amplifies prepayment and extension risks, where borrowers' early principal repayments—driven by or —disrupt scheduled cash flows, shortening durations for some tranches and extending others. Planned amortization class tranches mitigate this within predefined bands supported by companion tranches, but breaches from volatile prepayment speeds, often tied to changes, transfer variability to unprotected slices. Collateralized debt obligations similarly embed concentration, where underlying asset correlations, if underestimated, erode tranche protections, as evidenced by models relying on independent default assumptions that fail under systemic . Interest rate risk manifests through duration mismatches between fixed-rate tranches and floating-rate liabilities or underlying assets, potentially devaluing bonds as rates rise. inheres in the bespoke complexity of tranches, rendering secondary markets thin, especially for subordinate or synthetic structures, with bid-ask spreads widening during market stress and impeding rapid exits without significant price concessions. Overall, while tranching enables risk tailoring, it introduces nonlinear payoff dynamics and model dependencies that can magnify losses beyond the pool's average .

Operational and Behavioral Pitfalls

Operational pitfalls in tranching arise primarily from the of and managing securitized products, where errors in modeling, data handling, and servicing can lead to mispriced risks and unexpected losses. Valuation of or tranches, which absorb initial losses, relies heavily on internal models incorporating assumptions about rates, prepayment speeds, and rates; flaws in these models, such as overly optimistic projections, have historically caused and capital distortions for originators retaining such interests. Servicing operations introduce further vulnerabilities, including delays in recognizing delinquencies to artificially sustain tranche values, incomplete records during servicer transitions, and errors in distributions or tracking, all of which amplify operational failures under . Tranching's inherent also fosters non- risks, such as servicer underperformance or disputes over loss allocation among tranche holders, where senior tranches may conflict with equity interests lacking aligned incentives for rigorous oversight. Behavioral pitfalls stem from misaligned incentives across the securitization chain, exacerbating moral hazard as originators, having transferred most risks via senior tranches, reduce screening and monitoring efforts on underlying assets like subprime loans. Deeper tranching intensifies agency costs by dispersing investor ownership, hindering coordinated monitoring of servicers and allowing frictions to worsen, as evidenced in residential mortgage-backed securities where tranche structures correlated with poorer servicer discipline and higher liquidation inefficiencies. Investors often exhibit over-reliance on credit ratings for senior tranches, underestimating tail risks from correlated defaults—ratings focused on expected losses fail to capture extreme scenarios, leading to yield-chasing in low-spread AAA products amid low interest rates pre-2007. Rating agencies' issuer-paid models introduced conflicts, inflating subprime-backed CDO tranche ratings that collapsed post-2005 defaults, reflecting behavioral lapses in independent risk assessment by market participants. These dynamics, unmitigated by sufficient stress testing or transparency, contributed to systemic mispricing and liquidity evaporation during crises.

Role in Financial Crises

The 2008 Global Financial Crisis

Tranches within -backed securities () and collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) played a central role in amplifying the into the broader 2008 global financial meltdown by enabling the widespread distribution of correlated housing risks under the guise of diversified, high-rated investments. Subprime loans, which constituted about 20% of U.S. originations in 2006, were pooled into and sliced into tranches ordered by priority: tranches absorbed initial defaults, tranches followed, and senior tranches—often rated AAA—were theoretically shielded by overcollateralization and subordination. However, rating agencies like Moody's and S&P assigned top ratings to over 90% of securitized subprime loans, assuming low correlation in defaults based on historical data that underestimated nationwide housing downturns. This tranching mechanism allowed originators to offload risks to investors seeking yield, with CDO issuance surging from $30 billion in 2000 to approximately $500 billion by 2006, largely recycling risky BBB-rated tranches into new senior CDO tranches marketed as safe. The opacity and complexity of these tranched structures exacerbated mispricing, as CDO managers purchased tranches from multiple —often the riskiest non-equity portions—and repackaged them, transforming two-thirds of inputs into -rated outputs through mathematical modeling that ignored tail risks. By mid-2006, CDO creators had become the primary buyers of tranches, driving up prices and encouraging lax standards, with subprime delinquencies rising from under 10% in 2006 to over 25% by late as adjustable-rate mortgages reset amid falling home prices. amplified vulnerabilities: banks and funds held leveraged positions in these tranches, assuming senior slices would incur minimal losses (historical models projected under 1% for ), but correlated defaults across geographies wiped out layers first, eroding subordination buffers. The crisis accelerated in 2007 when early warning signs materialized, with two hedge funds collapsing in June due to leveraged bets on subprime CDO tranches, revealing mark-to-market losses exceeding $1.6 billion. As home prices declined 10-20% nationally from peak in 2006, subprime tranches devalued rapidly; even senior tranches faced cumulative losses averaging under 6% through 2013, but on notional exposures exceeding $1 trillion, these triggered margin calls and write-downs totaling hundreds of billions across institutions. By September 2008, the failure of —holding $85 billion in mortgage-related assets, including tranched CDOs—intensified liquidity evaporation, as counterparties questioned the of opaque tranches, freezing interbank lending and prompting interventions. Financial institutions' reliance on short-term funding for long-term tranched holdings created a maturity mismatch, turning localized subprime into systemic ; for instance, super-senior CDO tranches, once deemed risk-free and used as for repo financing, suffered billions in writedowns by early 2008, undermining confidence in balance sheets. The Inquiry Commission attributed much of the crisis's severity to this "CDO machine," which recycled risks without adequate or for correlated shocks, leading to over $1 trillion in global write-downs on products by 2009. While tranching theoretically mitigated risks through prioritization, empirical outcomes demonstrated its fragility when underlying assets shared macroeconomic drivers like housing bubbles, challenging assumptions of independence in risk models.

Analytical Perspectives and Debates

Analysts debate the extent to which tranche structures in securitized products like collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) effectively transfer and diversify , or instead amplify systemic vulnerabilities through complexity and misaligned incentives. Proponents argue that tranching enables efficient risk allocation by tailoring slices to investors' risk tolerances—senior tranches absorb minimal losses for conservative buyers, while tranches offer high yields to risk-tolerant ones—potentially reducing overall requirements for originators and broadening participation. However, critics contend that this segmentation creates nonlinear diversification effects, where apparent safety in senior tranches masks correlated underlying defaults, leading to concentrated losses during stress events as seen in the 2008 crisis, where $542 billion in CDO write-downs occurred despite high ratings on many tranches. Theoretical models underscore these tensions: the Gaussian copula approach, widely used pre-2008 for pricing , assumed independence in asset defaults under normal conditions but severely underestimated tail risks from housing market correlations, resulting in senior tranches priced as if nearly risk-free when they were not. Empirical analyses reveal that fair premia on CDO tranches exceeded those on equivalently rated corporate bonds by significant margins, implying market skepticism of ratings' accuracy even before the crisis, with risk-neutral expected losses far outpacing real-world probabilities due to inherent model fragility. This discrepancy highlights a core debate: while tranching can concentrate uncertainty in junior layers to protect seniors, small errors in input parameters—like default correlations—propagate dramatically, rendering valuations highly sensitive and prone to herd-like mispricing. Behavioral and incentive critiques further complicate the picture, with evidence suggesting originators retained insufficient "skin in the " by offloading mezzanine and equity tranches, exacerbating moral hazard and lax screening of underlying assets. Post-crisis studies affirm that vertical slice retention (holding proportional interests across tranches) outperforms equity-only retention in aligning originator effort with asset quality, yet implementation varies, fueling ongoing disputes over regulatory mandates like the Dodd-Frank risk retention rules. Detractors of heavy tranching argue it fosters opacity, deterring informed and enabling systemic buildup, as interconnected holdings amplified ; proponents counter that simplified structures post-reform have curtailed without proportionally enhancing . These perspectives persist, with recent analyses questioning whether synthetic transfers via tranches truly de-risk balance sheets amid evolving correlations in global credit markets.

Regulatory Framework

Pre-Crisis Environment

Prior to the , the regulatory framework for securitization tranches in the United States emphasized capital efficiency and market-driven risk assessment over comprehensive oversight of structured products. Under , implemented in 1988, banks could securitize assets and achieve significant capital relief by transferring off-balance-sheet, with risk weights assigned based on the type of asset rather than tranching specifics; this encouraged the division of cash flows into senior and junior tranches to minimize regulatory capital for retained senior portions. , finalized in 2004 and partially adopted by U.S. banks by 2007, introduced more sophisticated internal ratings-based approaches that further reduced capital requirements for highly rated tranches, often as low as 7% for AAA-rated senior slices, provided they met supervisory formulas or external ratings criteria. U.S. banking regulators, including the , FDIC, and OCC, aligned these with domestic risk-based capital rules, permitting banks to hold minimal capital against securitized exposures rated investment-grade, which incentivized tranching to isolate low-risk senior tranches for sale to investors. The SEC's primary tool for asset-backed securities (ABS), including those with tranches, was Regulation AB, adopted in December 2004, which mandated disclosures on pool composition, cash flow mechanics, and servicer information for registered offerings but exempted many synthetic or bespoke collateralized debt obligations (CDOs) and relied heavily on credit ratings for investor suitability. This framework treated tranches as distinct securities without specific rules governing their risk tranching or correlation assumptions, allowing opaque pooling of subprime assets into CDOs where junior tranches absorbed initial losses. Credit rating agencies (CRAs), designated as Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations (NRSROs) since 1975, played a pivotal role, with their ratings directly incorporated into capital rules; however, the issuer-pays model created incentives for inflated ratings on complex tranches, as agencies competed for fees from structurers without mandatory disclosure of underlying methodologies or historical performance data. Regulatory gaps extended to the shadow banking sector, where special purpose vehicles (SPVs) and structured investment vehicles (SIVs) held tranched securities with limited on-balance-sheet treatment and no consolidated , exacerbating without corresponding prudential controls. Absent were requirements for originators to retain economic (skin-in-the-game) in tranches or for enhanced of tranche waterfalls under correlated defaults, reflecting a broader deregulatory ethos post-Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 that blurred lines between commercial banking and securities activities. This environment facilitated rapid growth in tranche-based products, with U.S. CDO issuance peaking at $503 billion in 2006, but sowed vulnerabilities through inadequate and over-optimism in ratings-based risk transfer.

Post-Crisis Reforms and Ongoing Developments

In response to the role of tranched securitizations in amplifying the , the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, enacted on July 21, 2010, introduced Section 941 mandating retention for securitizers of asset-backed securities, requiring sponsors or originators to retain at least 5% of the underlying , typically through vertical slices or equity-like tranches to mitigate in the originate-to-distribute model. These rules, finalized by U.S. regulators in October 2014 and effective from December 24, 2015 (with qualified residential mortgage exemptions delaying full implementation until 2018), aimed to ensure originators maintained skin-in-the-game, thereby discouraging the packaging of low-quality assets into senior tranches sold off without consequence. Internationally, the framework, developed by the and phased in from 2013, revised the capital treatment to address excessive risk-weighted asset variability observed during , introducing the Securitisation External Ratings-Based Approach (SEC-ERBA) and defining senior tranches as those with a first claim on the underlying pool, subjecting junior and mezzanine tranches to higher capital charges based on attachment points and thickness to better capture tranche-specific risks. This included output floors to limit internal model leniency and enhanced requirements, reducing banks' incentives to hold or originate high-risk tranches while promoting transparency in tranche waterfalls and subordination levels. In the , parallel reforms under the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR) since 2014 imposed similar 5% risk retention on originators, sponsors, and original lenders, with prohibitions on hedging retained tranches, alongside the 2019 Simple, Transparent, and Standardized () framework favoring low-risk senior tranches in qualifying deals through reduced capital penalties. These measures, informed by recommendations, sought to rebuild investor confidence by curbing the tranching of non-performing loans into investment-grade slices, though critics note they contributed to a persistent decline in overall volumes post-crisis, from peaks exceeding $2 trillion annually in the U.S. to subdued levels around $500 billion by 2024. Ongoing developments include the Financial Stability Board's January 2025 evaluation affirming that reforms, including risk retention and prudential standards, bolstered securitization resilience, particularly for residential mortgage-backed securities, with low delinquency rates in retained junior tranches amid economic stresses. In the U.S., Endgame proposals, advanced in July 2023, propose elevated risk weights for exposures under the Standardized Approach for Counterparty Credit Risk, potentially raising capital costs for banks holding mezzanine tranches and constraining unless adjusted. The EU's June 2025 securitization review package proposes refining criteria, expanding simple on-balance-sheet securitizations, and easing reporting for senior tranches to stimulate synthetic and balance-sheet deals, aiming to unlock €100 billion in annual funding while maintaining risk controls, though implementation awaits legislative approval amid debates over relaxing risk retention for high-quality assets.

References

  1. [1]
    Understanding Tranches: Definition, Examples, and Investment ...
    Aug 22, 2025 · A tranche is a typical structure for secured debt products, like collateralized debt obligations (CDOs), combining assets like mortgages, bonds, ...
  2. [2]
    Tranche Explained: Key Insights into Financial Segmentation - Cbonds
    The term "tranche" originates from the French word for "slice" or "portion." Within the realm of investing, it refers to a financial asset that can be divided ...Missing: explanation | Show results with:explanation
  3. [3]
    Bond Tranches - Definition, Meaning, and Examples
    Bond tranches are portions of mortgage-backed-securities that are offered at the same time and that typically carry different risk levels, rewards, ...
  4. [4]
    Tranche: Definition in Finance, Purposes, and Examples
    A tranche is a security, like a collateralized mortgage obligation, that can be split up into smaller pieces and subsequently sold to investors.
  5. [5]
    Role of Tranches in the Securitization - Learnsignal
    Tranches are segments created from a pool of securities usually debt instruments such as bonds or mortgages that are divvied up by risk, time to maturity.
  6. [6]
    TRANCHE Definition & Meaning - Merriam-Webster
    Oct 17, 2025 · In French, tranche means "slice." Cutting deeper into the word's etymology, we find the Old French word trancer, meaning "to cut." Tranche ...
  7. [7]
    Tranche - Etymology, Origin & Meaning
    Originating c.1500 from French tranche, meaning "a cutting" from trancher "to cut," tranche means a piece cut off; in finance, a loan or bond installment.
  8. [8]
    tranche, n.¹ meanings, etymology and more | Oxford English Dictionary
    OED's earliest evidence for tranche is from around 1500, in Melusine. tranche is a borrowing from French. Etymons: French tranche. See etymology. Nearby entries.
  9. [9]
    [PDF] The Origins and Evolution of the Market for Mortgage-Backed ...
    Aug 19, 2011 · Abstract. The first mortgage-backed security (MBS) was issued in 1968. Thereafter, the MBS market grew rapidly with outstanding issu-.
  10. [10]
    [PDF] History and Overview of Securitization
    Nov 5, 2003 · The different bond classes are also called tranches (a French word meaning slice). Some tranches—CMOs can include 50 or more—can also be ...
  11. [11]
    [PDF] The Ins and Outs of Collateralized Mortgage Obligations
    The first CMO was created in 1983 by investment banks Salomon Brothers and First Boston on behalf of Freddie Mac. The purpose was to offer an instru- ment ...
  12. [12]
    [PDF] Back to basics: What Is Securitization? – Finance & Development
    Securitization is the process in which certain types of assets are pooled so that they can be repackaged into interest-bearing securities. The interest and ...
  13. [13]
    Collateralized Debt Obligation (CDO): What It Is and How It Works
    The creation of CDOs dates back to 1987 when Drexel Burnham Lambert first assembled portfolios of junk bonds into these structured products. Since then, CDOs ...
  14. [14]
    [PDF] Collateralized debt obligation - NYU Stern
    Jan 16, 2008 · First issued in the late 1980s, CDOs emerged a decade later as the fastest growing sector of the asset-backed synthetic securities market.
  15. [15]
    [PDF] Securitization: Lessons Learned and the Road Ahead
    This paper examines securitization's financial stability implications, past lessons, current impediments, and policy recommendations to address crisis factors.Missing: milestones | Show results with:milestones
  16. [16]
    [PDF] Asset Securitization | Comptroller's Handbook - OCC.gov - Treasury
    Introduction. 1. Background. 1. Definition. 2. A Brief History. 2. Market Evolution. 3. Benefits of Securitization. 4. Securitization Process.<|separator|>
  17. [17]
    [PDF] Examination Handbook 221, Asset-Backed Securitization ... - OCC.gov
    Asset securitization is the process by which loans or other credit exposures are pooled and reconstituted into securities, with one or more classes or ...
  18. [18]
    [PDF] The Role of the Securitization Process in the Expansion of Subprime ...
    We show that the securitization process, including the assignment of credit ratings, provided incentives for securitizing banks to purchase loans of poor ...
  19. [19]
    The ABCs of Asset-Backed Finance (ABF) | Guggenheim Investments
    Sep 25, 2025 · Tranching is achieved in a securitization through a set of rules defining the priority of payments—commonly referred to as a waterfall—that is ...Missing: milestones | Show results with:milestones
  20. [20]
    Understanding Securitization: Definition, Benefits, Risks, and Real ...
    Aug 16, 2025 · The tranches consist of individual assets grouped by loan type, maturity date, interest rate, and remaining principal. Each tranche carries ...
  21. [21]
    Asset-Backed Securities (ABS): Understanding Types and Their ...
    An ABS will usually have three tranche classes: A, B, and C. The senior tranche, A, is almost always the largest tranche and is structured to have an investment ...What Is an Asset-Backed... · How an ABS Works · Types · Benefits
  22. [22]
    Asset-Backed Security (ABS) Instrument and Market Features
    Credit tranching, which involves creating distinct senior and subordinated bond classes (“tranches”), offers credit protection for the more senior bond classes ...
  23. [23]
    Securitization 101: A Primer on Structured Finance
    Jun 24, 2025 · ... credit quality. Tranche: A portion of debt or structured financing. Each portion, or tranche, is one of several related securities offered ...<|separator|>
  24. [24]
    What is Credit Tranching in a Securitization? - Principal
    Jan 16, 2024 · Credit tranching is a key credit enhancement feature of most ABS structures. Under credit tranching, the cash flows from the underlying collateral asset pool ...
  25. [25]
    ABS Structures for Credit Risk | CFA Level 1 - AnalystPrep
    Oct 20, 2023 · In such a structure, payments prioritize the most senior tranche, which has the lowest risk and return.
  26. [26]
    Structured Credit Risk | AnalystPrep - FRM Part 2 Study Notes
    The most common payment structure is the waterfall mechanism (also called sequential pay) in which the tranches are ordered, with “Class A” receiving all ...
  27. [27]
    Waterfall Payment: Definition, Benefits, How It Works, and Example
    A waterfall payment structure sets the priority and order in which interest and principal payments are made to creditors based on rankings that can vary in ...
  28. [28]
    Navigating Payment Waterfalls: A Key Mechanism in Structured ...
    Apr 8, 2023 · A payment waterfall is a priority-based mechanism that dictates the distribution of cash flows generated by the underlying assets in a structured finance ...
  29. [29]
    Senior-subordinated structure: buffer or signal in securitisation?
    Subordination refers to the par value of tranches in securitisation with claims junior to the tranche in question (relative to the par value of collateral) ...
  30. [30]
    [PDF] Asset-Backed Securities for Enhanced Return-to-Risk Potential
    Mar 31, 2025 · Subordination. Most ABS deals are structured into tranches ranked by seniority. (Figure 5) The most senior tranche (referred to as Class A) ...
  31. [31]
    [PDF] Auto Asset-Backed Securities (Auto ABS) Primer - NAIC
    Cash reserves are held in an account to absorb losses due to defaults within the asset pool; typically, cash reserves are initially funded by the transaction's.
  32. [32]
    [PDF] THE CDO MACHINE - Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission
    Unlike the traditional cash CDO, synthetic CDOs contained no actual tranches of mortgage-backed securities, or even tranches of other CDOs. Instead, they ...Missing: evolution | Show results with:evolution
  33. [33]
    Prepayment Risk & Time Tranching | CFA Level 1 - AnalystPrep
    Oct 20, 2023 · Time tranching in securitizations is a method designed to manage the unpredictability associated with prepayment risk, which arises when ...
  34. [34]
    Concept 83: Credit Tranching and Time Tranching - IFT World
    ABS are often created with different types of tranches. The aim is to redistribute prepayment risk and credit risk efficiently among the different tranches.
  35. [35]
    Fixed-Income Securitization - PrepNuggets
    Credit tranching involves segregating the ABS into senior and subordinated tranches, with the subordinated tranches absorbing credit losses first. This is also ...<|separator|>
  36. [36]
    [PDF] Valuation and Analysis of Collateralized Mortgage Obligations
    This study develops a model for valuing CMOs, composed of tranches from mortgages, and analyzes their sensitivity to interest rates and prepayments.
  37. [37]
    [PDF] Introduction to Securitized Assets - SOA
    A tranche is actually a French word for a slice. Basically the cash flows from the mortgage collateral are sliced into different bonds with different durations ...
  38. [38]
    CRE40 - Securitisation: general provisions
    Nov 26, 2020 · A traditional securitisation is a structure where the cash flow from an underlying pool of exposures is used to service at least two different ...
  39. [39]
    Mortgage-Backed Securities and Collateralized Mortgage Obligations
    Each tranche may have different principal balances, coupon rates, prepayment risks, and maturity dates. An important risk with regard to residential mortgage- ...
  40. [40]
    [PDF] Residential mortgage securitization - FHFA
    The Enterprises also securitize loans by structuring mortgage cash flows into several tranches.
  41. [41]
    The Role of Securitization in Mortgage Lending
    An MBS can include multiple classes of bonds that differ in the order in which they are repaid (these classes are typically referred to as “tranches”). For ...
  42. [42]
    [PDF] MBS FACT SHEET 1 - SIFMA
    Mortgage-backed securities (MBS) are fixed-income securities that utilize mortgage loans as collateral and the source of funds for payments on the security.Missing: first | Show results with:first<|separator|>
  43. [43]
    [PDF] Understanding the Risk of Synthetic CDOs - Federal Reserve Board
    Synthetic CDOs transfer credit risk from a portfolio of assets, with junior tranches bearing most risk. Risk is divided into tranches of increasing seniority.
  44. [44]
    Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDO) | CFA Level 1 - AnalystPrep
    A CDO is a leveraged transaction. As such, investors who buy the equity tranche use borrowed funds to generate a return higher than the funding costs. Example: ...<|separator|>
  45. [45]
    Understanding Synthetic CDOs: Definition, Function, and Example ...
    The three tranches primarily used in CDOs are known as senior, mezzanine, and equity. The senior tranche includes securities with high credit ratings, tends to ...
  46. [46]
    [PDF] Asymmetric Information and the Death of ABS CDOs
    Nov 16, 2016 · For each CDO deal, the securities are tranched based on their seniority. At the tranche level, there are 4,865 individual CDO securities in our ...Missing: history | Show results with:history
  47. [47]
    Understanding Collateralized Loan Obligations (CLOs)
    Jul 23, 2025 · Each tranche has a different claim priority on the cash received from the loan pool and exposure to loss from the underlying collateral pool.
  48. [48]
    Collateralized Loan Obligation (CLO) Structure, Benefits, and Risks
    CLO tranches are of two types: debt (or mezzanine) tranches, which work like bonds with ratings and coupon payments, and equity tranches, which come second in ...
  49. [49]
    [PDF] An introduction to CLOs | LSEG
    A Collateralized Loan Obligation (CLO) is a funding vehicle that buys leveraged loans as assets and issues rated debt tranches and an unrated equity tranche.<|separator|>
  50. [50]
    Structured finance then and now: a comparison of CDOs and CLOs
    Sep 22, 2019 · Senior CLO tranches currently appear to benefit from larger loss-absorbing cushions than existed for CDOs. Equity and, in particular, mezzanine ...Missing: evolution | Show results with:evolution
  51. [51]
    Structured Finance: Deals, Careers, Salaries, and Exit Opps
    In Structured Finance, banks pool together loans backed by cash flow-producing assets into securities and sell “tranches” of these securities into the capital ...
  52. [52]
    First time originator's guide to securitisation - June 2025
    Jun 10, 2025 · Originators can use securitisation to achieve a lower cost of funding than from other debt products and to remove securitised assets from their balance sheet.
  53. [53]
    Mechanics and Benefits of Securitization - Diamond Hill
    Jul 6, 2023 · Securitization originated in its most basic form in the late 18th century with farm securitization by railroads to assist in funding the ...
  54. [54]
    Introduction to Securitizations - American Bar Association
    Jan 27, 2022 · 1From the French word tranche, or “slice” in English. with varying ... The offering document includes a description of the risk factors, the ...
  55. [55]
    Significance of the Securitization Market: Tapping Institutional ...
    Jul 2, 2024 · It allows them to diversify their funding sources beyond traditional bank loans, reducing dependency on a single funding channel.
  56. [56]
    Enhancing Transparency in the Structured Finance Market | FDIC.gov
    Jun 21, 2023 · The paper contains a number of recommendations that we believe policymakers should consider to improve the transparency of these products.Missing: evolution | Show results with:evolution<|separator|>
  57. [57]
    [PDF] Incentives and Tranche Retention in Securitisation: A Screening Model
    Abstract. This paper examines the power of different contractual mechanisms to influence an originator's choice of costly effort to screen borrowers.
  58. [58]
    Credit Derivatives and Risk Management - Federal Reserve Board
    May 22, 2007 · Credit index tranches are another example of how credit derivatives can produce different risk-return tradeoffs. A credit index such as CDX (in ...
  59. [59]
    Bank Investment in Securitizations: The New Regulatory Landscape ...
    Apr 14, 2023 · For example, highly rated securitization tranches were yielding significantly greater returns than similarly rated non-securitization ...
  60. [60]
    Benefits of Securitization | CFA Level 1 - AnalystPrep
    Oct 20, 2023 · Investors can customize their risk and return perspectives by choosing from different tranches or categories of securities, each with its credit ...
  61. [61]
    [PDF] Structured finance: benefits and potential risks - IMF eLibrary
    The benefits of structured financial instruments for issuers and investors are fourfold: they make it possible to unbundle and trade credit risk; are cost- ...
  62. [62]
  63. [63]
    [PDF] Securitisations: tranching concentrates uncertainty
    Historical experience with securitisation tranches. Extremely popular before the global financial crisis, structured securitisations underperformed ...
  64. [64]
    [PDF] Structured finance: complexity, risk and the use of ratings
    The risk profile of a structured finance tranche, in fact, depends largely on two factors: its seniority (as determined by the lower boundary of the tranche) ...
  65. [65]
    Understanding Securitized Products - PIMCO
    Securitized products are typically sold in tranches, where each tranche higher in the capital structure has a more senior right to the cash flows and principal ...
  66. [66]
    Collateralized Debt Obligations | CFA Level 1 - AnalystPrep
    Oct 20, 2023 · This risk is more pronounced in lower tranches, like equity ones. Liquidity Risk: CDOs, especially those of complex structures, may not be ...
  67. [67]
    Securitization and optimal retention under moral hazard
    One concern is that securitization leads to moral hazard in lender screening and monitoring. By selling loans to investors and removing them from their books, ...
  68. [68]
    The agency costs of tranching: Evidence from RMBS - ScienceDirect
    With deeper tranching it is increasingly costly for dispersed investors to coordinate monitoring and discipline the agent, giving rise to agency problems ...
  69. [69]
    STRUCTURED FINANCE, RISK MANAGEMENT, AND THE ...
    The creation of structured finance was mainly motivated by the transfer of credit risk, through the use of credit derivatives (e.g. CDSs) and banks ...<|separator|>
  70. [70]
    [PDF] Origins of the Crisis - FDIC
    Ultimately, the performance of the different tranches of the MBS securities upon which CDOs and. CDS were based, were highly correlated. When MBS losses mounted ...
  71. [71]
    [PDF] Outbreak: U.S. Subprime Contagion
    Optimism about how sub- prime mortgages would perform led to more than 90 percent of securitized subprime loans being turned into securities with the top rating ...
  72. [72]
    Inside the CDO Market That Catalyzed the Financial Crisis
    May 10, 2022 · The senior-most tranche gets the first right to cash flows. Junior tranches take more risk through a junior right to the cash flows, so they ...Missing: evolution | Show results with:evolution
  73. [73]
    [PDF] Mortgage-Backed Securities and the Financial Crisis of 2008
    First, the bulk of these securities was rated AAA. Second, AAA securities did ok: on average, their total cumulated losses up to 2013 are under six percent.
  74. [74]
    [PDF] Report on the Subprime Crisis - IOSCO
    In June 2007, several hedge funds managed by a major investment bank began to suffer severe losses because of their leveraged investments in mezzanine tranche ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  75. [75]
    [PDF] Collateral Damage: Sizing and Assessing the Subprime CDO Crisis
    CDOs issued between 1998 and 2007, so our central challenge is to define the subset of CDOs that traded on the “ABS CDO desks” at the major investment banks ...<|separator|>
  76. [76]
    [PDF] LATE 2007 TO EARLY 2008: BILLIONS IN SUBPRIME LOSSES
    But as the mortgage market came under increasing pressure and as the market value of even su- per-senior tranches crumbled, the strategy would come back to ...
  77. [77]
    [PDF] Default Risk Sharing Between Banks and Markets
    We argue that the combined effect of retaining the first loss piece and selling senior tranches to investors achieves an efficient risk allocation, reducing ...
  78. [78]
    [PDF] The Story of the CDO Market Meltdown: An Empirical Analysis
    Mar 19, 2009 · First, the collateral composition of CDOs changed as collateral managers looked for ways to earn higher yields. The managers began investing ...
  79. [79]
    Securitization and the dark side of diversification - ScienceDirect.com
    We show that tranching offers nonlinear diversification strategies, which can reduce the failure risk of individual institutions beyond the minimum level ...Missing: criticisms | Show results with:criticisms
  80. [80]
    [PDF] Valuing Toxic Assets: An Analysis of CDO Equity
    Much of the debate about the role of securitized credit in the current crisis focuses on the issue of how these structured or synthetic types of securities are.
  81. [81]
    CDOs and the financial crisis: Credit ratings and fair premia
    We also demonstrate that CDO tranches have large exposure to systematic risk and thus their ratings and prices are likely to decline substantially when credit ...Missing: advantages | Show results with:advantages
  82. [82]
    Incentives and Tranche Retention in Securitisation: A Screening Model
    Sep 23, 2010 · This paper examines the power of different contractual mechanisms to influence an originator's choice of costly effort to screen borrowers.
  83. [83]
    [PDF] Incentives and tranche retention in securitisation : a screening model
    Thicker equity tranches result in higher effort, and therefore, in a higher value for the senior tranches (VdebtV) that are sold to outside investors.
  84. [84]
    Complexity and the default risk of mortgage-backed securities
    The presence of fewer and thinner tranches may pose risks for investors, as default risk can be transferred more easily to senior tranche holders. However, our ...Missing: criticisms | Show results with:criticisms<|separator|>
  85. [85]
    The Economics of Synthetic Risk Transfers - Bank Policy Institute
    Dec 17, 2024 · Banks are increasingly using financial instruments called synthetic risk transfers (SRTs) to manage their lending and balance sheets more efficiently.<|control11|><|separator|>
  86. [86]
    History of the Basel Committee - Bank for International Settlements
    The Basel Committee was established in 1974 to enhance financial stability, and has expanded to 45 institutions, creating Basel I, II, and III standards.
  87. [87]
    A Brief History of Bank Capital Requirements in the United States
    Feb 28, 2020 · Basel II promoted 3 pillars of capital regulation: minimum capital requirements, supervisory review of capital adequacy, and market discipline.
  88. [88]
    [PDF] U.S. Adoption of Basel II Securitization Framework In the December 10
    Dec 10, 2007 · Banks will determine risk-based capital requirements for securitization exposures by multiplying their total risk weighted assets in this ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  89. [89]
    [PDF] RISK-BASED CAPITAL RULES - FDIC
    Jul 29, 2008 · The proposed risk-based capital rules, based on Basel II, offer a more risk-sensitive, optional framework for calculating capital, using credit ...Missing: pre- | Show results with:pre-
  90. [90]
    Regulation AB / Regulation AB II - Chapman and Cutler LLP
    Regulation AB, adopted in 2004, covers asset-backed securities. Regulation AB II, adopted in 2014, revises offering, disclosure, and reporting requirements.
  91. [91]
    [PDF] The Role of Credit Rating Agencies in Structured Finance Markets
    CRAs play a role in the global capital market, with a code of conduct to ensure integrity, but questions arose about their ratings in structured finance.
  92. [92]
    [PDF] Credit Rating Agencies and the Financial Crisis: Less Regulation Is ...
    Credit rating agencies, like Moody's, S&P, and Fitch, played a central role in the subprime mortgage crisis by providing favorable ratings on securitized bonds.
  93. [93]
    Post-Crisis Regulatory Reforms and the Decline of Securitization
    Jul 3, 2025 · However, securitization activity has remained subdued since the 2008 Global Financial Crisis and the legislative and regulatory reforms that ...Missing: pre- | Show results with:pre-
  94. [94]
    Securitization reform under the Dodd-Frank Act - Lexology
    Aug 5, 2010 · The reforms are principally focused on risk retention and increased disclosure to investors.
  95. [95]
    How New Risk-Retention Rules Affect the CMBS Market - Callan
    Oct 5, 2020 · After the GFC, the Dodd-Frank Act instituted new rules requiring that any institution securitizing a pool of commercial mortgages retain at ...
  96. [96]
    [PDF] Revisions to the securitisation framework - Basel III document
    A securitisation exposure (tranche) is considered to be a senior exposure (tranche) if it is effectively backed or secured by a first claim on the entire amount ...
  97. [97]
    Securitization, financial stability and effective risk retention. A ...
    Feb 3, 2020 · This paper examines the financial stability of banks that issued securitizations in the European market from 2000 to 2017.<|separator|>
  98. [98]
    FSB finds that the G20 financial regulatory reforms have enhanced ...
    Jan 22, 2025 · Minimum risk retention and higher prudential requirements have contributed to the resilience of the residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBS) ...
  99. [99]
    How the Basel III Endgame Could Impair Securitization Markets and ...
    Nov 28, 2023 · Take the A2A tranche for example, the risk weight would go up from 30.9% under the current U.S. capital rules to 61.1% under the U.S. proposal – ...
  100. [100]
    Revitalising EU securitisation - Finance - European Commission
    Jun 27, 2025 · The European Commission is moving forward with a set of proposals aimed at revitalising the EU's securitisation frameworkMissing: 2023-2025 | Show results with:2023-2025