Rating Action Commentary
ֳ Revises 20 Turkish Banks' Outlooks to Stable on Sovereign Change
Tue 12 Nov, 2019 - 6:43 AM ET
Link to ֳ' Report(s): ֳ Revises 20 Turkish Banks' Outlooks to Stable on Sovereign Change
ֳ-London-12 November 2019: ֳ has revised the Outlooks to Stable from Negative on 20 Turkish banks, while affirming their Issuer Default Ratings (IDRs). ֳ has also revised the Outlooks on the Long-Term Local-Currency (LTLC) IDRs of Akbank T.A.S. (Akbank) and Turkiye Is Bankasi (Isbank) to Stable from Negative.
In addition, the ratings of those banks' financial subsidiaries driven by institutional support are affirmed and their Outlooks revised to Stable.
The rating actions follow the revision of the Outlook on Turkey's Long-Term IDR to Stable from Negative (see 'ֳ Revises Turkey's Outlook to Stable; Affirms at 'BB-' dated 1 November 2019 at ). The actions reflect (i) reduced downside risks to the sovereign's ability to support banks, and (ii) the lower near-term likelihood of a sharp deterioration in Turkey's external finances, and therefore of government intervention in the banking system.
The Viability Ratings (VRs) of the banks under review, and of other ֳ-rated Turkish banks with IDRs driven by VRs, are unaffected by the sovereign Outlook change. This reflects our view that risks to banks' stand-alone credit profiles remain heightened and on the downside. This is due to still challenging market conditions and ensuing pressures on financial profiles, even though short-term risks have abated somewhat alongside Turkey's progress in rebalancing and stabilising the economy.
ֳ will continue to monitor developments surrounding banks' asset quality, capital positions, profitability and foreign-currency (FC) liquidity in light of operating environment developments. Increased market stability could mitigate downside risks to banks' credit profiles and reduce downward pressure on VRs, particularly where capital and liquidity buffers are sufficient to absorb significant market stresses.
ֳ has maintained the Rating Watch Negative (RWN) on Turkiye Halk Bankasi's ratings following the announcement on 15 October by the U.S. Department of Justice that the bank had been charged with fraud, money laundering, and sanctions offenses (see 'ֳ Places Halk on Rating Watch Negative' at ).
KEY RATING DRIVERS
IDRS, DEBT RATINGS, SUPPORT RATINGS AND SUPPORT RATINGS FLOORS (SRF) OF STATE-OWNED TURKISH BANKS AND DEVELOPMENT BANKS
T.C. Ziraat Bankasi A.S. (Ziraat; LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
Turkiye Vakiflar Bankasi A.S. (Vakifbank; LTFC IDR 'B+' /Stable)
Vakif Katilim Bankasi A.S. (Vakif Katilim; LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
Turkiye Sinai Kalkinma Bankasi A.S. (TSKB; LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
Turkiye Ihracat Kredi Bankasi A.S. (Turk Eximbank; LTFC IDR 'B+' /Stable)
Turkiye Kalkinma Bankasi A.S. (TKYB; LTFC IDR 'BB-'/Stable)
Emlak Katilim Bankasi A.S. (Emlak Katilim; LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
Turkiye Halk Bankasi A.S. (Halk; LTFC IDR 'B+'/RWN)
The Outlooks on the Long-Term Foreign Currency (LTFC) IDRs of Ziraat, Vakifbank, TSKB, Turk Eximbank, Emlak and Vakif Katilim are revised to Stable from Negative mirroring the Outlook on the sovereign, reflecting reduced risks to the sovereign's ability to provide support, in case of need.
The SRFs of the state-owned commercial banks (Ziraat, Halk, Vakifbank, Vakif Katilim, Emlak Katilim), Turk Eximbank, and of privately-owned development bank TSKB, are affirmed at 'B+'. This reflects a high government propensity to support these banks, given their majority state ownership (except for TSKB), systemic importance (Ziraat, Halk, Vakifbank), policy roles (Ziraat, Halk, TSKB, Turk Eximbank), significant state-related funding (including state-guaranteed in the case of TSKB) and the record of support for state-owned banks. The authorities have shown a strong commitment to support the state banks as evidenced by capital increases in September 2018 and April 2019. The one notch difference between the sovereign rating and the banks' SRFs reflects the limited ability of the authorities to provide support in FC given the sovereign's modest net FC reserves.
The LTFC IDRs of Ziraat, Vakifbank and TSKB - which were previously driven by their VRs and underpinned by their SRFs - are now driven by sovereign support.
The LTLC IDRs of the state-owned commercial banks and the development banks continue to be equalised with the 'BB-' sovereign rating, one notch above their LTFC IDRs, reflecting the stronger ability of the sovereign to provide support in local currency (LC). The revision of the Outlook on these ratings to Stable mirrors that on the sovereign.
The ratings of TKYB continue to be equalised with the sovereign's, reflecting its small size relative to sovereign resources and still largely treasury-guaranteed funding base.
The RWN on Halk's SRF and support-driven ratings have been maintained. This reflects (i) uncertainty about the severity and nature of punitive measures, if any, to be taken against the bank as a result of the U.S. investigations; (ii) significant geopolitical tensions between Turkey and the U.S., which could escalate and raise uncertainty on the authorities' ability and propensity to provide sufficient and timely support in case a material fine or other punitive measures are imposed on Halk, and (iii) significant (49%) non-state ownership of the bank, which may complicate the prompt provision of solvency support, if required.
LTLC IDRS OF AKBANK, ISBANK, AK FINANSAL KIRALAMA, IS FINANSAL KIRALAMA; SRFS OF AKBANK AND ISBANK
Akbank TAS (LTFC IDR; 'B+'/Negative)
Turkiye Is Bankasi A.S. (LTFC IDR; 'B+'/Negative)
Ak Finansal Kiralama (LTFC IDR 'B+' /Negative)
Is Finansal Kiralama (LTFC IDR 'B+'/ Negative)
The SRFs of privately-owned Akbank and Isbank are affirmed at 'B', two notches below the sovereign LTFC IDR, and at the level of the domestic systemically important bank (D-SIB) SRF for Turkish banks. This reflects their systemic importance, but also their private ownership and the Turkish authorities' limited ability to provide support in FC, given Turkey's modest net FC reserves.
The LTFC IDRs of both banks are driven by their VRs, which are one notch above their SRFs, and are therefore unaffected by this rating action. The banks consequently remain on Negative Outlook, reflecting downside risks to standalone profiles given exposure to Turkish operating environment risks.
The LTLC IDRs of Akbank and Isbank are affirmed at 'B+' and the Outlooks revised to Stable from Negative, following the change in sovereign outlook. This reflects ֳ's view of potential support for the banks in LC in case of need. As a result, their LTLC IDRs are now driven by state support.
The affirmation of the LTLC IDRs of the subsidiaries of Akbank and Isbank mirror the rating actions and Outlook revisions on their respective parents.
IDRS, DEBT RATINGS AND SUPPORT RATINGS OF FOREIGN-OWNED BANKS
Turkiye Garanti Bankasi A.S. (Garanti BBVA; LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
Yapi ve Kredi Bankasi A.S. (YKB; LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
Turk Ekonomi Bankasi (TEB; LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
QNB Finansbank A.S. (LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
ING Bank A.S. (LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
Kuveyt Turk Katilim Bankasi (Kuveyt Turk; LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
Alternatifbank A.S. (Alternatifbank; LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
Turkiye Finans Katilim Bankasi (TFKB; LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
Burgan Bank A.S. (Burgan Bank Turkey; LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
ICBC Turkey Bank A.S. (LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
BankPozitif Kredi ve Kalkinma Bankasi (BankPozitif; LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
Denizbank A.S. (LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
The revision of the Outlooks on the foreign-owned banks' Long-Term IDRs to Stable from Negative mirrors the sovereign Outlook change. This reflects the reduced risk of a stress in Turkey's external finances and, as a result, the ensuing lower probability of government intervention in the banking sector. Turkey's high external funding requirement creates a significant incentive to retain market access and avoid capital controls, in our view. However in case of marked deterioration in the country's external finances, some form of intervention in the banking system that might impede the banks' ability to service their FC obligations would become more likely.
The LTFC IDRs and FC senior debt ratings of these foreign-owned banks are affirmed at 'B+'. These ratings are driven by potential institutional support based on their strategic importance, to varying degrees, for their parents, integration, roles within their respective groups and, for some, common branding. The banks are rated one notch below the sovereign LTFC IDR, reflecting ֳ's view that in case of marked deterioration in Turkey's external finances, the risk of government intervention in the banking sector would be higher than that of a sovereign default.
The LTLC IDRs of these banks are rated one notch above their LTFC IDRs, reflecting our view of a lower likelihood of government intervention that would impede the banks' ability to service obligations in LC.
SUBORDINATED DEBT RATINGS
The subordinated notes ratings of YKB, Kuveyt Turk, Garanti and Alternatifbank are notched down once from their support-driven IDRs and have been affirmed in line with their anchor ratings. The notching in each case includes one notch for loss severity and zero notches for non-performance risk (relative to the anchor ratings).
SUBSIDIARY RATINGS
Alternatif Finansal Kiralama AS (LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
Deniz Finansal Kiralama (LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
Joint-Stock Company Denizbank Moscow (LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
Garanti Faktoring (LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
Garanti Finansal Kiralama (LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
QNB Finans Finansal Kiralama A.S. (LTFC IDR 'B+'/ Stable)
QNB Finans Faktoring A.S. (LTFC IDR 'B+'/ Stable)
Yapi Kredi Finansal Kiralama (LTFC IDR 'B+'/ Stable)
Yapi Kredi Faktoring (LTFC IDR 'B+'/ Stable)
Yapi Kredi Yatirim Menkul Degerler (LTFC IDR 'B+'/Stable)
Ziraat Katilim (LTFC IDR 'B+' /Stable)
Subsidiary ratings are equalised with those of parent banks, reflecting their strategic importance to, and integration within, their respective groups. The affirmations of the LTFC IDRs of the subsidiaries of foreign-owned banks (Alternatifbank, Garanti, QNB Finansbank and YKB) and Ziraat, mirror the rating actions and Outlook revisions on their respective parents. The LTFC and LTLC IDRs together with their Outlooks for Denizbank Moscow are equalised with Denizbank's LTFC IDR as the source of support would be in the form of FC.
NATIONAL RATINGS
The National Ratings of all issuers are unaffected by the sovereign rating action, reflecting our view that their creditworthiness in LC relative to other Turkish issuers has not changed.
RATING SENSITIVITIES
STATE-OWNED COMMERCIAL AND DEVELOPMENT BANKS; AKBANK AND ISBANK
The IDRs and senior debt ratings of Ziraat, Halk, Vakifbank, Vakif Katilim, Emlak Katilim TSKB, Turk Eximbank and TKYB, and the LTLC IDRs of Akbank and Isbank, could change if ֳ concludes that there is a change in the ability or propensity of the sovereign to provide support, in case of need. However, the LTFC IDRs of Ziraat, Vakifbank and TSKB, and the LTLC IDRs of Akbank and Isbank, would only be downgraded if the banks' 'b+' VRs are also downgraded.
Halk's support-driven ratings could be downgraded if the bank does not receive sufficient and timely support to offset the impact of any fine or other punitive measures imposed as a result of the U.S investigation. Its IDRs could also be downgraded, or its SRF revised lower, if ֳ believes that potential support from the Turkish authorities, even in the absence of disciplinary actions, becomes less reliable.
The RWN on Halk's support-driven ratings could be removed if ֳ believes there is a clear commitment by the Turkish authorities to provide support, in case of need, to the bank to offset potential punitive actions. However, this would be assessed relative to the sovereign's ability to provide support in FC, which is constrained by limited FX reserves.
FOREIGN-OWNED BANKS
The Long-Term IDRs, Support Ratings and senior debt ratings of the foreign-owned banks are sensitive to Turkey's sovereign rating and a change in ֳ's view of the risk of government intervention in the banking sector. A change in the sovereign rating or Outlook would likely lead to similar actions on these banks.
The banks' support-driven ratings are also sensitive to our view of shareholders' ability and propensity to provide support to the subsidiaries, in case of need. For banks with VRs at the level of their FC IDRs, a reduced likelihood of institutional support would only lead to a downgrade of the banks' ratings if their VRs are also downgraded.
SUBORDINATED DEBT RATINGS
Subordinated debt ratings are primarily sensitive to changes in banks' anchor ratings, namely the Long-Term IDRs in the case of YKB, Garanti, Kuveyt Turk and Alternatifbank.
These ratings are also sensitive to a change in notching from the anchor ratings due to a revision in ֳ's assessment of the probability of the notes' non-performance risk or of loss severity in case of non-performance.
SUBSIDIARY RATINGS
The ratings of these entities are sensitive to changes in the Long-Term IDRs of their parents.
ENVIRONMENT, SOCIAL AND GOVERNANCE SCORES
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 to the way in which they are being managed by the entity. For more information on our ESG Relevance Scores, visit .
Ziraat, Vakifbank and Vakif Katilim have a governance structure relevance score of '4' in contrast to a typical relevance influence score of '3' for comparable banks, reflecting potential government influence over the board's strategy and effectiveness in the challenging Turkish operating environment. ֳ will closely monitor the corporate governance structure.
Halk has been assigned a governance structure relevance score of '5' in contrast to a typical relevance influence score of '3' for comparable banks. This reflects the elevated legal risk of a large fine, which drives the RWN. It also reflects potential government influence over the board's strategy and effectiveness in the challenging Turkish operating environment.
In addition, Islamic banks need to ensure compliance of their entire operations and activities with sharia principles and rules. This entails additional costs, processes, disclosures, regulations, reporting and sharia audit. This results in a governance structure relevance score of '4' for all banks (in contrast to a typical ESG relevance score of '3' for comparable conventional banks), which has a negative impact on the banks' credit profile in combination with other factors. In addition Islamic banks have an exposure to social impacts relevance score of '3' (in contrast to a typical ESG relevance score of '2' for comparable conventional banks), which reflects that Islamic banks have certain sharia limitations embedded in their operations and obligations, although this only has a minimal credit impact on the entities.
Data Adjustment: An adjustment has been made in ֳ's financial spreadsheets for Akbank, Isbank, Garanti, QNB Finansbank, and TSKB that has impacted ֳ's core and complimentary metrics. ֳ has taken a loan classified as a financial asset measured at fair value through profit and loss in the banks' financial statements and reclassified it under gross loans as we believe this is the most appropriate line in ֳ spreadsheets to reflect this exposure.
Contact: For the respective analytical contacts, see the associated Rating Action Report.
Committee Chairperson
Mark Young
Managing Director
+44 20 3530 1318
Media Relations: Louisa Williams, London, Tel: +44 20 3530 2452, Email: louisa.williams@thefitchgroup.com
Additional information is available on
Applicable Criteria
Bank Rating Criteria (pub. 12 Oct 2018)
National Scale Ratings Criteria (pub. 18 Jul 2018)
Non-Bank Financial Institutions Rating Criteria (pub. 12 Oct 2018)
Short-Term Ratings Criteria (pub. 02 May 2019)
Sukuk Rating Criteria (pub. 22 Jul 2019)
Additional Disclosures
Dodd-Frank Rating Information Disclosure Form
Solicitation Status
Endorsement Policy
PARTICIPATION STATUS
The rated entity (and/or its agents) or, in the case of structured finance, one or more of the transaction parties participated in the rating process except that the following issuer(s), if any, did not participate in the rating process, or provide additional information, beyond the issuer’s available public disclosure.