S&P Light Vehicles Report

Permission to reprint or distribute any content from this presentation
requires the prior written approval of Standard & Poors. Copyright 2013
by Standard & Poors Financial Services LLC. All rights reserved.
Auto Industry
Hot Topics Conference
Corporate Ratings

October 10, 2013

www.standardandpoors.com/autos
Permission to reprint or distribute any content from this presentation requires the prior written approval of
Standard & Poors. Copyright 2013 by Standard & Poors Financial Services LLC. All rights reserved.
Introduction

Ron Barone
Managing Director
Corporate Ratings

2
Global Vehicle Outlook:
Full Speed Ahead?
Jeff Schuster
Senior Vice President
October 10
th
2013
10 October 2013 LMC Automotive 4
Outline
Global Automotive Trends
Regional Focus: North America
Global Risks What to Watch

2013 Global LV Sales Stable but with Risks
Global: 83.4M
4%
India: 2.9M
-12%
USA: 15.6M
8%
Brazil: 3.7M
1%
N. America: 18.4M
7%
Europe: 17.4M
-3%
S. America: 5.6M
2%
Asia: 35.7M
5%
Russia: 2.8M
-4%
China: 21.3M
11%
Japan: 5.2M
-2%
Germany: 3.2M
-3%
Source: LMC Automotive
Enormous Potential from Low Density and
Economic Growth
-
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
- 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000
P
V

D
e
n
s
i
t
y

p
e
r

0
0
0

p
o
p

GDP Per Capita PPP (2005 USD)
GDP PER CAPITA & PASSENGER VEHICLE DENSITY
Source: Oxford Economics; LMC Automotive
USA
Australia
Canada
Taiwan
Germany
UK Japan
France
Italy
Spain
South Korea
Russia
Malaysia
Argentina
Mexico
Brazil
Thailand
India
Philippines
Indonesia
China
Emerging Markets Now Dominate Global Light
Vehicle Demand
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
3
2
0
0
6
2
0
0
9
2
0
1
2
2
0
1
3
2
0
1
4
2
0
1
5
2
0
1
6
2
0
1
7
Mature Emerging
57
59
67
65
81
83
23%
28%
36%
48%
54%
55%
Mn
58%
60%
61%
62%
88
93
99
104
Closing in on 100 million
units by 2016
Double 2000 sales by
2020
BRICs, C&E Europe
continue to drive long-
term growth
Western Europe still in
recovery
US recovery evident but
growth will slow
But They Remain Highly Diverse
Share of LV Sales by Size Segment (2012)
Global Light Vehicle Production Summary

Emerging growth and
Mature recovery in
demand drive increases in
regional production
At odds or in concert -
globalization and
localization both are
shaping the future
Asia dominance continues
48% of global production
in 11 to 53% by 17 -
China expansion continues
as most rapid

36.7
40.7
42.1
45.2
48.9
53.3
56.1
20.5
19.4
19.0
19.4
20.3
21.4 13.1
15.4
16.0
16.5
17.3
17.9
18.4
4.3
4.3
4.7
4.9
5.2
5.5
5.8
23.0
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
2
0
1
1
2
0
1
2
2
0
1
3
2
0
1
4
2
0
1
5
2
0
1
6
2
0
1
7
Other
S. America
N. America
Europe
Asia
Million
Locations of Production Expansion
Net New LV Plants, by Country, 2012 vs 2015
0
5
10
15
20
25
C
h
i
n
a
I
n
d
i
a
B
r
a
z
i
l
I
n
d
o
n
e
s
i
a
M
e
x
i
c
o
R
u
s
s
i
a
T
h
a
i
l
a
n
d
T
a
i
w
a
n
M
a
l
a
y
s
i
a
T
u
r
k
e
y
*
* Number of new plants, minus plants closed
non-Chinese brand
-6%
-4%
-2%
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
T
o
y
o
t
a
V
W
G
M
R
e
n
-
N
i
s
H
y
u
n
d
a
/
K
i
a
F
o
r
d
F
i
a
t
-
C
h
r
y
s
l
e
r
H
o
n
d
a
P
S
A
S
u
z
u
k
i

Global OEMs - Short- and Mid-term Outlook
2013 Global LV Production Growth (YoY from 2012)
(In Millions)
Chase for Top Global OEM
Exposure in Europe and India has negative impact on short-term
growth.
Battle for Largest producer continues Volkswagen looks to
recapture in 2017, but could be 4 way race
(GM with JVs would be 9.9M in 13 and 11.9 in 17)

India: Clear And Present Danger

3.2
3.6
4.1
3.5
3.8
4.5
9.0
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2020
India Light Vehicle Production (mn)
-14%
+9%
Long-term Outlook Remains Good
Car purchasing limits pose as a risk to growth, amid worsening air
quality and traffic jams
CAAM: 8 cities likely to implement
car purchasing limits with affected
volume estimated at 400k units/year,
or 2% to total vehicle market
~1.8 million passenger vehicles
registered in 2012 in these tier-2/1
cities
Car purchasing limits in place
Car purchasing limits under discussion
Tianjin
Shijiazhuang
Qingdao
Hangzhou
Shenzhen
Wuhan
Chongqing
Chengdu
China Market Risks
China Still Outpaces Emerging Markets but
6 million production by 2018 - Indonesia and Thailand are the engines of growth
And forecasts for Indonesia and Thailand are conservative

Mn
Light Vehicle production
ASEAN: Larger Production than Brazil or Russia
Source: Oxford Economics
10.0
11.0
12.0
13.0
14.0
15.0
16.0
17.0
18.0
1
9
8
9
1
9
9
0
1
9
9
1
1
9
9
2
1
9
9
3
1
9
9
4
1
9
9
5
1
9
9
6
1
9
9
7
1
9
9
8
1
9
9
9
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
1
2
0
0
2
2
0
0
3
2
0
0
4
2
0
0
5
2
0
0
6
2
0
0
7
2
0
0
8
2
0
0
9
2
0
1
0
2
0
1
1
2
0
1
2
2
0
1
3
2
0
1
4
M
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
West European Car sales Recovery Pace
2013:
11.4mn
(-3.0%)
2014:
11.5mn
(+1.0%)
-1,200,000
-1,000,000
-800,000
-600,000
-400,000
-200,000
0
200,000
400,000
600,000
800,000
2
0
0
6
Q
1
2
0
0
7
Q
1
2
0
0
8
Q
1
2
0
0
9
Q
1
2
0
1
0
Q
1
2
0
1
1
Q
1
2
0
1
2
Q
1
2
0
1
3
Q
1
2
0
1
4
Q
1
European LV Inventory Analysis
European Inventory Change, Cumulative
Days supply averaged 73 days in 2008 and now at 65 daysWell
managed considering
European LV Production Outlook Up from
Here?
17.5
18.0
18.5
19.0
19.5
20.0
20.5
21.0
21.5
22.0
2
0
1
0
2
0
1
1
2
0
1
2
2
0
1
3
2
0
1
4
2
0
1
5
2
0
1
6
m
n
s

+7.3%
-5.3%
-2.3%
+2.3%
+4.4%
+5.6%
Output only reaches
2007 pre-crash level
in 2017
+15%
Outline

11.7M
10.3M
2011 2012
1.
Disposable
Income
2.
Unemp. Stock
Market
4. 3.
Housing
Market
5.
Fuel
Prices
6.
Credit
Avail.
10.
Product
Activity
7.
Vehicle
Equity
2013F

V
o
l
u
m
e

Vehicle
Price
8. 9.
Incentive
Actions
Total Sales
14.5M
12.9M
12.7M
Risk 10%
YoY
15.6M
Total Sales
Macro Factors Consumer Internals & OEM Drivers
Source: LMC Automotive, Oxford Economics, JDP PIN
U.S. Retail Sales Trend Outpacing
Expectations!
North American Demand Growth Slows, but
Remains Solid
2013:
1.72M

North American Light Vehicle Sales
13.9
15.2
17.1
18.4
18.9
19.4
20.9
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2020
(
M
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
)
+3%
2013:
15.60M

+8%
2013:
1.08M

+10%
US Segment Share Battleground in 2013
16.0%
Share
Pickups gain on housing recovery, product
D Segment cars stable, but giving back some
gains from 2012
12.0%
Share
-0.3%
11.5%
Share Premium staled for much of
2013,improvement started in
September
+0.7%
Non-premium CUVs in
high demand
+1.2%
No Change
21.0%
Share
-0.6%
15.0
16.0
3.7 1.7
2007 2013 NA Production Underutilized Capacity
16.1m 15.6m
US sales
Recovery, Localization and exports bolstering regional output
Inventory Holding in 50-60 day Range with Some Pockets of Trouble
NA Production - Then and Now
91%
80%
Volkswagen
Renault-Nissan
Hyundai
Honda
GM
Fuji Heavy
Ford
Fiat-Chrysler
BMW
Other
Daimler
Toyota
-20% -15% -10% -5% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
North America Near-term Production by
OEM Group
2012 to 2013 Year-over-Year Change
15.4
16.0
2012 2013
+4%
R-N adds Rogue and Versa Note
Current Success of Elantra Driving Hyundai Growth
YoY NA Sales Up Across GM - Excess Inventory and Ramp-ups Limit Production Growth

Increasing NA sourcing and exports drive production expansion Global platforms
Demand driven growth supports level, leaner build environment continues
15.7
15.2 15.0
12.6
8.5
11.8
13.1
15.4
16.0
16.5
17.4
18.0
18.4 18.7 18.7 18.8
3.6
3.8
3.7
6.0
9.2
5.3
4.2
2.1
1.7
1.7
1.7
2.1
1.8 1.7 1.6 1.5
0
5
10
15
20
25
2005 2007 2009 2011 2013 2015 2017 2019
M
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
NA Production Underutilized Capacity % Utilization
NA Production and Capacity Long-term Trend
3.7
5.5
7.8
6.8
6.5
7.2
5.3
3.4
3.7
0
4
8
12
16
20
2005 2010 2015 2020
M
i
l
l
i
o
n
s
Compact Midsize Large
Underlying shift in segment mix; greater production diversity

Fundamental shift in cost structures translates to margins on small cars

Shift in consumer preference, economic and regulatory derived

NA Production Segment Shift
NA Production and US Sales Decouple
Import substitution & increased exports are key drivers
Fuji Heavy Lafayette (SIA)
Honda Alliston, Greensburg, Lincoln
Hyundai West Point (Kia)
Toyota Cambridge, Georgetown 3, Princeton,
Tupelo
GM Spring Hill
Audi San Jose Chiapa
BMW Queretaro?
Daimler Aguascalientes II?
Honda Celaya
Mazda Salamanca
Nissan Aguascalientes II
Toyota Salamanca w/Mazda
Fiat-Chrysler Saltillo Van
+3.4M

Investment Pours into Region (2012-2020)
BMW Spartanburg
Daimler Vance
VW Chattanooga
New Capacity
Capacity Expansion
90% of new
capacity to MEX
USA/MEX as low
cost producers
CAN: position
weakens with
little new
investment
MEX: primarily B-
and C-segment
NAFT
A
Sourcing Trends Impact on NA Production
Country Share
Outline

Risks: macroeconomic/geopolitical
Eurozone
split
Rebalancing,
banking, slower
growth?
Currency &
infrastructure
Slower
external
boost in
growth?
Cheap
oil/slower
growth
Currency?
Conflict
Shale Gas
Abenomics?
End
QE)/Washington
self-destructing
Risks: Macroeconomic/Geopolitical
Source: LMC Automotive Global Automotive Scenario Service
Risks: automotive
Gen Y/
Replacement
demand

Curbs on
ownership
Currency/
Infrastructure
Affordability/
Govt Support
Oil Prices
Inland
growth
Risks: Automotive
Downside Risks Emerge in Demand Scenarios
N. America LV Sales (mn)
S. America LV Sales (mn)
Europe LV Sales (mn)
Asia LV Sales (mn)
Highest scenario
Baseline
Lowest scenario
World LV Production Scenarios
Light Vehicle Production (mn)
Concluding Remarks
US recovery close to completion and the outlook remains
positive North American industry is on a sound footing
but capacity constraints could hold back growth
European demand is now stable, though low but when
will recovery come and what kind of recovery will it be?
Emerging market growth still key for global expansion,
but giving mixed signals in near-term
An unusually broad range of (mostly) negative of risks
characterize the automotive outlook
Accurate Real-Time Automotive
Forecasting
and Market Intelligence
Oxford Detroit Frankfurt Paris Bangkok Shanghai Tokyo So Paulo

www.lmc-auto.com
jschuster@lmc-auto.com
Credit Outlook for European and U.S. Automakers,
Suppliers and Retailers

Moderator: Jesse Juliano, Director, Analytical Manager

Nishit Madlani, Associate Director
Nancy Messer, CFA, Director
Larry Orlowski, CFA, Director
Dan Picciotto, CFA, Senior Director
Eric Tanguy, Senior Director
36
Market Conditions: a Flat European Market in 2014
H213 expected to be slightly better than H1
Western Europe expected to be down 4-5% year-on year
Countries most affected: Italy (-20% in 2012 /-8% in 2013), France (-11%/-9%) and
Spain (-13%/-1%). Germany (-1%/-3%) turning negative; only the UK (+4%/+5%) is
proving resilient.

FY 2013
Western Europe expected to be flat, up 1% year-on year
No State interventions; austerity packages not supportive of any rebound next year
Need to focus on Asia-Pacific, North America and others (Russia, Turkey, South
America & Mercosur, ANZ) to capture growth and sustain earnings
FY 2014
2012 and 1H 2013 European Auto
North-South divide in terms of revenues and profitability: IG German car markers
still reporting broadly flat margins while southern European OEMs are struggling to
achieve break-even in Autos (Fiat boosted by Chrysler and resilient contribution
from Latin America).

In Europe, important to cling to ones
market share
Changes reflect company-specific
country mix but also more fundamental
factors (brand positioning, recent model
launches and marketing efforts, perceived
quality, RV expectations, etc)
Some have been doing better than
others.
Sales outside Europe is key
Not all OEMs are equal in terms
of geographic diversification
Geographic Mix European Auto
0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
Other EM Asia-Pacific North America South America
Unit sold outside Europe - FY2012
Manufacturing Footprint
Some companies have moved capacity outside of Western Europe faster than
others (eg Romania, Turkey and Morocco for Renault, Eastern Europe for VW)
Impact of industrial footprint needs to be assessed in conjunction with a
companys ability to command a price premium

Downside Risk
Several events may affect European OEMs in 2014:
Further tensions within the Eurozone, adverse currency movements
Another dip into recession
Slide of the European car market continuing in 2014
Slower growth in China
Erosion in premium pricing power globally
Tariffs and local content rules in various regions
European Automakers' Downside case
Guidance Threshold where guidance likely to be tested
Aston Martin
FFO to debt 12%
Debt to EBITDA < 5.0x
Dependance on launch of new models
EBITDA Margin not restored to 18-19% (e)
BMW
EBIT Margin in the 8-10% range through the cycle
FFO to debt 50%-60%
Significant positive FOCF
EBIT Margin < 8-10% range
Negative FOCF from Auto
More aggressive financial policy
Daimler
FFO to debt 50%-60%
3-4% revenue decline
Sustained negative FOCF from Auto
JLR FFO to debt >30%
Evoque a firebrand and not a sustained phenomenon
Failure to reposition Jaguar
EBITDA margin < 12%
Fiat
FFO to debt 12-20% range
Further deterioration in European performance
Liquidity situation no longer 'adequate' (excl. Chrysler)
Major outflow related to VEBA's stake in Chrysler
Peugeot
FFO to debt 12-20% range
Negative FOCF to be halved in 2013
Execution issues wrt restructuring plans (agreed; 2nd one being negotiated)
No marked reduction in negative FOCF in auto for 2013 (max -1.4 bn)
FOCF at break-even by YE'14 no longer in sight
Renault
FFO to debt ~25%
FFO to debt < 25%
Inability to maintain positive FOCF in auto for more than a year
Scania
FFO to Debt > 60%
Debt to EBITDA < 1.5x Related to Volskswagen
Volkswagen
FFO to Debt > 60%
Group EBIT margin > 6%
Lower dependance on European market
EBIT margin 100 bps below recent level
More aggressive financial policy (eg future acquisitions in particular wrt trucks)
FFO to debt < 45%
Volvo
FFO to debt > 35%
FFO to debt < 30%
Inability to restore EBIT margins at 6%
Inability to maintain positive FOCF through the cycle
U.S. SAAR Trend
42
Pick-Up Truck Sales Estimates
43
Company Focus: Ford Motor Co. BBB- / Stable
Business Risk
Satisfactory
Financial Risk
Intermediate
Key Strengths Key Weaknesses
Reduced cost base in N.A. = overall
profits and positive cash flow
NA segment margin better than
other domestics (>10% in H1 2013)
Improved product diversity (cars)
and consumer perception
Pension funding improving (cash
contributions and discount rate)
Mgmt continuity and strategy
Losses in Europe
Profit mix still weighted to light
trucks
Still high debt + pension
Limited, but improving, exposure
to certain attractive developing
markets
Liquidity: Strong Stable Outlook
Auto cash June 2013, $25 billion
Gradual reduction of debt and
voluntary pension funding
Automotive free cash flow ~$4+ bil
expected
FMCC funding channels appear
stable

Current rating: Adjusted Debt to
EBITDA of 2.5x, FOCF/ Debt ~15%
Higher rating: < 2.5x and 20%+,
among other factors
Higher rating: More diverse
profitability and good NA, definitive
Europe profit prospects
44
Company Focus: General Motors Co. BB+ / Positive
Business Risk
Fair
Financial Risk
Intermediate
Reduced cost base and debt
burden in NA supporting profits (>7%
H1 2013 segment margin) and
positive cash flow
Geographic diversity: strong
positions China & Brazil
IPO completed. UST stake being
eliminated
Losses in Europe
trucks
High unfunded pensions
Ownership mix temporary
Somewhat elevated level of mgt
turnover
Auto cash at June 2013, $24 billion
voluntary pension funding/derisking
Automotive cash flow >$3 bil
expected
Evolving captive finance ops

Outlook incorporates assumption
of continued profitability in NA and
Auto FOCF
For a higher rating: Adjusted Debt
to EBITDA of 2.5x, FOCF / Debt
~15%, among other factors such as
pathway to European profit
45
Company Focus: Chrysler Group LLC B+ / Positive
Business Risk
Weak
Financial Risk
Aggressive
burden leading to profits and positive
cash flow
Fiat (BB-/Stable/B) ownership a
positive for business risk
Solid positions in certain segments
(e.g. Jeep, pickups and minivan)
Good NA market conditions
Profit mix very weighted to light
trucks
2013 expect op profit margin
around 5% despite heavy NA
exposure
Limited geographic diversity
Still needs to improve consumer
perception in U.S. after 2009
Liquidity: Adequate Positive Outlook
Cash at Dec. 31, $11.6 billion
Cash flow positive >$1 bil expected
No captive finance ops

Assumes profits in N.A.
Fiat - Chrysler rating difference
will not increase
For higher rating: Fiat rating and
degree of alignment is major factor;
also FOCF >$1 bil and margin
improvement
46
S&P 2013 & 2014 Assumption Summary
Key Factors S&P Base-Case Assumptions
Light Vehicles (millions) 2013 2014
U.S. Light Vehicle Sales * 15.6 ( 8% YoY) 16.0 ( 3% )
North American Production 16.0 ( 4% ) 16.5 ( 3% )
Europe Production 18.9 ( 3% ) 19.3 ( 2% )
China Production 20.2 ( 11% ) 23.1 ( 14% )
Commercial Vehicles - Class 8 (000s)
North American Production 252 ( 10% ) 281 ( 11% )
W. Europe Production 299 ( 1% ) 291 ( 3% )
China Production 638 ( 8%) 707 ( 11% )
S&P Projections
Revenue Growth (midspread) 2.0% to 5.0% 3.0% to 6.5%
Adjusted EBITDA margins (midspread) 8.5% - 13.5% 9.0% - 14.0%
Adj. FOCF/Debt (median) ~ 5.0% ~ 6.5%
Adj. Debt to EBITDA (median) ~ 3.8x ~ 3.4x
source: LMC Automotive September 2013 (previously, a forecasting division of J.D. Power);
* Standard & Poors estimates

47
Supplier Margins Flattening Out
48
11.6%
10.4%
9.6%
10.4%
8.5%
8.6%
11.7%
11.6%
11.0%
8.7%
8.0%
9.9%
10.8%
7.7%
7.3%
9.3%
9.1%
8.6%
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Suppliers
OEMs
Global Auto Sector: Selected Threats
S&P Perspectives Probability Time Frame Effect
Affected
Parties
Double dip recession in near
term or hard landing in China.
U.S. 10% - 15%
(near low end);
Europe bottoming?
China slower but
ok?
Near to
medium term
Moderate if
brief
Automakers
and Suppliers
Adverse product mix shifts ($5
gas driven)
Moderate - High Medium term
Less
severe
than 2008
bc of
improved
efficiency?
Automakers
and some
Suppliers
Rising emissions, fuel economy
and safety standards
High
Medium to
long term
Moderate
Automakers
and some
Suppliers
Raw material price impact Moderate - High Near term Moderate
Automakers
and many
Suppliers
Unsettled capital markets High Anytime?
Positive for
now, but
this can
swing
quickly.
Automakers
and Suppliers
49
Auto Suppliers/Retailers Business & Financial Risk Profile
Business Risk Profile
Minimal Modest Intermediate Significant Aggressive Highly Leveraged
Excellent -- -- -- -- -- --
Strong Bosch,
Denso
Aisin Seiki Toyota
Industries
-- -- --
Satisfactory -- Knorr-
Bremse,
Hyundai
Mobis,
Magna,
Autoliv
JCI, Michelin,
BorgWarner,
Valeo, Harman,
TRW
Autonation,
GKN,
Gestamp
Continental Schaeffler AG
Fair -- -- Delphi, LKQ Group 1,
Asbury, Sonic
Piaggio, Goodyear Tire, KAR,
Pinafore, Penske, Allison,
Falcon
Europcar, Servus
Weak -- -- Lear, Metalsa Tenneco,
Dana, Shiloh,
Stoneridge,
Cooper-
Standard,
Cooper Tire,
Tenedora
Axle, Visteon, ASP HHI, Mark IV,
Metaldyne, PGW, Remy,
Tower, Grede, Waupaca,
Wabash, China Zhengtong,
Baoxin, ARCAS, PT Gajah,
KSS, Pendragon, SANLUIS
Meritor, Affinia, August
Cayman, A.T.U Auto-Teile
Unger Handels, Transtar,
Fed-Mog, American Tire,
Fastlane, Hyva, UCI,
Autoparts Holdings
Vulnerable -- -- -- -- International Automotive
Components, Neenah
UC Holdings, Accuride,
Commercial Vehicle
Business And Financial Risk Profile Matrix
Financial Risk Profile
As of September 16, 2013
50
Credit Outlook for European and U.S. Automakers,
Suppliers and Retailers

Moderator: Jesse Juliano, Director, Analytical Manager

Nishit Madlani, Associate Director
Nancy Messer, CFA, Director
Larry Orlowski, CFA, Director
Dan Picciotto, CFA, Senior Director
Eric Tanguy, Senior Director

Asset-Backed Securities: Auto ABS Update and Outlook

Amy Martin, Senior Director
Mark Risi, Senior Director
James Traynor, Director
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 P
Auto Loan ($ Bil) Auto Lease ($ Bil) DFP ($ Bil) Auto Sales (Million Units)
$

B
i
l
l
i
o
n

A
u
t
o

S
a
l
e
s

(
M
i
l
l
i
o
n

U
n
i
t
s
)

$117.3
$95.2
$58.8
$57.4
$62.3
$66.7
$91.5
$83.0
Auto ABS Issuance Tracks Auto Sales
Source: Standard & Poors Ratings Services
U.S. Retail Auto Loan ABS Volume (Public and Private)
YTD 9/30/2013
57 Transactions - $46.3 Billion
2012
75 Transactions - $66.8 Billion
Domestic Captives
20%
Foreign Captives
33%
Prime - Banks
7%
Prime - Other
8%
Nonprime
2%
Subprime
30%
Note: Domestic Captives include Ally Bank.
Source: Standard & Poors Ratings Services.
Domestic
Captives
28%
Foreign Captives
29%
Banks
7%
Prime - Other
8%
Nonprime
2%
Subprime
27%
U.S. Retail Auto Loan Issuance by Issuer
Ford
14%
Santander
13%
Ally
14%
AmeriCredit
8%
Honda
8%
Hyundai
7%
Nissan
4%
Toyota
4%
CarMax
4% Volkswagen
4%
B of A
4%
Huntington
3%
World Omni
2%
Mercedes
2%
Other (< 2.0%)
9%
2012
75 Transactions - $66.76 bn
Santander
12%
Ford
11%
Ally
9%
Hyundai
9%
Honda
9%
AmeriCredit
9%
CarMax
6%
Nissan
6%
Toyota
4%
Fifth Third
4%
M&T
3%
Volkswagen
3%
Mercedes
2%
Other (< 2.0%)
13%
YTD 9/30/2013
57 Transactions - $46.3 bn
Potentially lowers funding costs
Improves funding diversification and liquidity
Provides match funding
Benefits of Securitization
56
0
5
10
15
20
25
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 9
months
9/2012
9
months
9/2013
Subprime Auto Loan ABS Industry Volume
(In $Billions)

Special and Unique Considerations
Financial condition, funding flexibility and liquidity
Company background, management, and infrastructure
Amount and quality of performance data
Collections (decentralized or centralized collections, back-up servicer
arrangements)
Weakness in the above areas may preclude us from issuing a rating
or may result in us limiting the rating well assign to a transaction.
For more information, please see Standard & Poors Explains Its
Approach To Rating Subprime Auto Loan ABS Transactions, August
29, 2011.

58
Standard & Poors Rating Process for Subprime Auto ABS
Issuers

Underwriting remains strong, however, there has been some
weakening in 2013
Weighted Average FICO down to 738, from 745 in 2012
Percent of loans with terms greater than 60 months is up to 47.69%, from 44.90% in 2012
Weighted average loan-to-value ratio up to 96.81%, from 94.48% in 2012
However, underwriting remains stronger than what we saw in 2008-2009
Collateral performance remains very strong, with near record low
losses
Defaults and net losses remain well below historical averages
Recoveries remain high, bolstered by continued strength in the used vehicle market
Some slight deterioration in 2013 from 2012 as performance starts to normalize from
unsustainable levels
Ratings performance remains predominantly positive
From 2001 through August 2013, weve upgraded 1011 ratings and downgraded only 39 for credit
reasons. This includes prime and subprime. 26 upgrades for every 1 downgrade.
Since the start of 2012, we have upgraded 118 prime auto loan ratings and have not downgraded
any.

59
Prime Auto Loan ABS:
700
710
720
730
740
750
2010 2011 2012 2013
FICO
90
92
94
96
98
100
2010 2011 2012 2013
Loan-To-Value (%)
40
42
44
46
48
50
2010 2011 2012 2013
WAOM >60 months
0
2
4
6
8
2010 2011 2012 2013
WAAPR (%)
60
Prime Collateral Trends
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
61
Prime Cumulative Net Losses (By Vintage)
0.00
0.20
0.40
0.60
0.80
1.00
1.20
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
62
Prime Delinquencies 60+ (By Vintage)
63
Captive Issuer Performance CNL% by Issuance Year
.

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Month 36 Month 36 Month 36 Month 36 Month 33 Month 21 Month 8
Prime Index
1.56% 2.60% 2.01% 0.92% 0.53% 0.43% 0.12%
Ally N/A N/A N/A 0.42% 0.24% 0.22% 0.07%
Ford 1.51% 2.01% 1.76% 1.03% 0.67% 0.39% 0.10%
Honda 1.03% 0.83% 0.91% 0.68% 0.39% 0.27% 0.07%
Hyundai 2.63% 3.43% 2.35% 1.29% 0.77% 0.50% 0.26%
Mitsubishi N/A 2.82% 1.93% 1.89% 1.84% 1.26% 0.38%
Toyota N/A N/A N/A N/A 0.25% 0.16% 0.08%
Volkswagen N/A 1.42% 1.98% N/A 0.86% 0.43% 0.12%
World Omni 1.66% 2.59% 3.43% 1.24% 0.49% 0.66% 0.30%

Ally, Ford, Honda and Toyota have historically performed better than the
average
Hyundai and Mitsubishi have historically performed worse than the average
0.00%
0.50%
1.00%
1.50%
2.00%
2.50%
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
0
6
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
0
6
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
6
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
0
6
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
0
7
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
0
7
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
7
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
0
7
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
0
8
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
0
8
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
8
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
0
8
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
0
9
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
0
9
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
9
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
0
9
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
0
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
0
J
u
l
y

2
0
1
0
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
0
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
1
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
J
u
l
y

2
0
1
1
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
1
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
2
J
u
l
y

2
0
1
2
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
2
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
3
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
3
J
u
l
-
1
3
Net Losses Delinquencies (60+)
64
Prime Monthly Net Losses & Delinquencies
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
0
6
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
0
6
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
6
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
0
6
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
0
7
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
0
7
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
7
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
0
7
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
0
8
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
0
8
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
8
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
0
8
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
0
9
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
0
9
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
9
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
0
9
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
0
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
0
J
u
l
y

2
0
1
0
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
0
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
1
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
J
u
l
y

2
0
1
1
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
1
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
2
J
u
l
y

2
0
1
2
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
2
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
3
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
3
J
u
l
-
1
3
Recoveries Manheim
65
Prime Recoveries & Manheim Used Vehicle Value Index
Manheim
Increased competition has led to some softening in underwriting as
loan-to-value ratios and loan tenors continue to rise
Weighted average loan-to-value ratio up to 113.87%, from 113.15% in 2012
Percent of loans with terms greater than 60 months is up to 81.52%, from 76.90% in 2012
FICO scores up somewhat (577 vs. 573). However, FICO not best predictor of performance in this
sector
Collateral performance remains strong despite some weakening in
2013
Defaults and losses are up year-over-year
Recoveries have softened somewhat, impacting net losses
The slight credit deterioration was expected as originators loosen underwriting standards
Ratings performance remains predominantly positive
Standard & Poors has never downgraded a public subprime auto loan ABS rating for credit
reasons.
Since 2004, we have upgraded 234 subprime auto loan ABS ratings with 139 of the upgrades
coming since the start of 2012

66
Subprime Auto Loan ABS:
570
572
574
576
578
580
2010 2011 2012 2013
FICO
100
104
108
112
116
120
2010 2011 2012 2013
Loan-To-Value (%)
70
74
78
82
86
90
2010 2011 2012 2013
WAOM >60 months
15
16
17
18
19
20
2010 2011 2012 2013
WAAPR (%)
67
Subprime Collateral Trends
0.00
2.00
4.00
6.00
8.00
10.00
12.00
14.00
16.00
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
68
Subprime Cumulative Net Losses (By Vintage)
0.00
1.00
2.00
3.00
4.00
5.00
6.00
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 33 35
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
69
Subprime Delinquencies 60+ (By Vintage)
70
Subprime Issuer Performance CNL% by Issuance Year
.

AmeriCredit has consistently been in-line with or better than the subprime
average
Santander and CPS have historically been somewhat higher than the subprime
average. However, they are each outperforming the average in 2012

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Month 36 Month 36 Month 36 Month 36 Month 33 Month 21 Month 8
Subprime
Index
12.73% 14.67% 15.48% 9.85% 7.70% 4.56% 1.75%
AmeriCredit 12.91% 14.63% 14.23% 9.22% 4.51% 3.32% 1.09%
CPS 14.48% 15.60% 15.80% N/A 12.31% 5.27% 1.23%
Santander 22.97% 23.49% N/A N/A 9.62% 5.83% 1.50%
0.00%
2.00%
4.00%
6.00%
8.00%
10.00%
12.00%
14.00%
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
0
6
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
0
6
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
6
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
0
6
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
0
7
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
0
7
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
7
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
0
7
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
0
8
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
0
8
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
8
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
0
8
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
0
9
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
0
9
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
9
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
0
9
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
0
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
0
J
u
l
y

2
0
1
0
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
0
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
1
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
J
u
l
y

2
0
1
1
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
1
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
2
J
u
l
y

2
0
1
2
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
2
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
3
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
3
J
u
l
-
1
3
Net Losses Delinquencies (60+)
71
Subprime Monthly Net Losses & Delinquencies
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
125
130
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
0
6
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
0
6
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
6
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
0
6
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
0
7
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
0
7
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
7
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
0
7
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
0
8
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
0
8
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
8
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
0
8
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
0
9
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
0
9
J
u
l
y

2
0
0
9
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
0
9
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
0
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
0
J
u
l
y

2
0
1
0
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
0
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
1
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
1
J
u
l
y

2
0
1
1
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
1
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
2
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
2
J
u
l
y

2
0
1
2
O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
2
J
a
n
u
a
r
y

2
0
1
3
A
p
r
i
l

2
0
1
3
J
u
l
-
1
3
Recoveries Manheim
72
Subprime Recoveries & Manheim Used Vehicle Value Index
Manheim
Volume is expected to reach $60 billion in 2013
This would be down approximately 10% from $67 billion in 2012
Prime issuance should make up about two-thirds of the total volume while subprime makes up about a third
Lower issuance by domestic captives and banks is expected to continue in the short-term
Competition is expected to continue to put pressure on underwriting
While many issuers are expected to remain disciplined in their approach, we do expect some to loosen credit
more than others
We expect the trend towards longer term loans (72, 84and maybe even 96!) to continue
Collateral performance should weaken somewhat
Looser underwriting and lower used vehicle values should cause losses to increase in both the prime and
subprime sector
Prime losses are expected to increase. However, 2012 and 2013 have seen record low losses for this sector, a
trend we believe is likely unsustainable.
Subprime losses are also expected to increase. However, we dont expect losses to reach the levels seen in the
recession .
Ratings are expected to remain stable
The trend of upgrades far outweighing downgrades is expected to continue
High floors and sequential pay structures lead to deleverage and increased loss coverage

73
Auto Loan ABS Outlook:
Auto Dealer Floorplan:
Request for Comment on Proposed Criteria
James Traynor
Director
Structured Finance ABS

October 10, 2013
Finance companies originate floorplan loans to automobile dealers who, in turn, use
them to purchase the manufacturers vehicles (i.e., the dealers' inventory) for
subsequent sale to consumers. These loans are securitized in an ABS dealer
floorplan transaction
We believe a dealer's ability to repay its loans is linked to the financial health of the
manufacturer and its wholly owned captive finance company.
Low Losses at or near 0%
Historic loss performance on non-diversified auto dealer floorplan has been near zero
given significant financial support from the manufacturers
Typical support from manufacturer include: sales incentives, retail (product
warranty), repurchase agreements, and other financial assistance.
Typical support from finance company/servicer include: Close monitoring of dealer
performance, physical collateral audits, financial audits
Performance metrics tested to spot dealer distress early

Overview: Auto Dealer Floorplan and Related Risks
Manufacturer bankruptcy
Consumer ability and willingness to purchase vehicles is weakened
Aged inventory on dealer lots is increasing
Sales incentives offered by the Manufacturer prior to the bankruptcy are
increasing
Finance Company/Servicer Bankruptcy
Our criteria will generally limit dealer floorplan ABS ratings to a six- to nine-
notch elevation above the corporate credit rating of the servicer or the
manufacturer, unless a formal backup servicer agreement is in place

S&Ps Criteria: Dual Bankruptcy Assumptions and Consequences
A high payment rate indicates strong demand relative to the supply of
vehicles on dealer lots and reflects a low "day's supply" of inventory.
Historical Payment Rates
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
90.0%
100.0%
110.0%
120.0%
Ford Ally Hyundai
Dealer
Pools typically range from 100 to 4,000+ dealers/obligors
Top dealer concentrations typically range from 4% to about 10%.
The higher concentrated dealers are typically large dealer groups

Manufacturer
Most active Trusts in the US are from captive lenders and thus a single manufacturer
makes up predominantly all of the dealer inventory

Product
Most pools contain some percentage of used collateral which is capped in the transaction
documents

Typical Concentration Considerations
On July 29, 2013 we published Request For Comment: Global Non-Diversified Auto
Dealer Floorplan Rating Methodology And Assumptions
The proposed criteria place increased emphasis on the related manufacturer's
corporate credit rating (CCR) when assessing a non-diversified ADFP
transaction's credit risk.
We are seeking responses to the following questions, among others:
Do you agree that a manufacturer's CCR is a key factor in assessing a non-
diversified ADFP pool's credit risk? As such, movement in a manufacturer's CCR
may affect the ABS rating.
Are there any additional risks or mitigating factors that you think we should
consider in the base modeling assumptions?
Do you agree with the adjustment factors?
manufacturer and dealer-base specific
legal jurisdictional and market-specific
Transaction specific
S&Ps Request for Comment: Non-diversified Auto Dealer Floorplan
The cumulative net loss expectations derived from the stressed amortization
scenarios will be a function of the manufacturer's CCR and the transaction's
early amortization event payment rate trigger.
Cumulative Loss Assumptions
Manufacturer CCR
45% payment
rate trigger
35% payment
rate trigger
25% payment
rate trigger
15% payment
rate trigger
'AAA' 15.0 16.0 17.5 19.5
'AA' 16.0 17.5 19.0 21.5
'A' 17.5 18.5 20.5 23.0
'BBB' 18.5 20.0 22.0 24.5
'BB' 20.5 22.0 24.0 27.0
'B' 22.5 24.0 26.5 29.5
'CCC' and lower 26.0 28.0 31.0 34.5
Unlike most ABS, the ratings for non-diversified ADFP are sensitive to a change in the
rating on an affiliate of the seller/servicer. The table below shows the affect that a
manufacturer downgrade could have on the non-diversified ADFP rating. Based on
this analysis, we believe the proposed criteria are consistent with our credit stability
criteria.

ABS Rating Sensitivity to Manufacturer Downgrade
Expected ADFP rating
Current
manufacturer CCR
One-category
downgrade of
CCR
Two-category
downgrade of
CCR
CCR
downgraded to
'CCC'
'AAA' 'AA+' 'AA' 'BBB+'
'AA' 'AA+' 'AA' 'A-'
'A' 'AA+' 'AA' 'A'
'BBB' 'AA+' 'AA' 'A+'
'BB' 'AA+' 'AA-' 'AA-'
'B' 'AA' 'AA' 'AA'
Ford Credit Floorplan Master Owner Trust A, Series 2013-5 (closed September 2013)
Hard credit enhancement of 24.38% available for the AAA(sf) rated Class A Notes.
3-year bullet maturity
Class A-1 Coupon of 1.50%
Class A-2 Coupon of One-Month LIBOR plus 0.47%
Ally Master Owner Trust, Series 2013-3 (closed September 2013)
Class A Coupon of One-Month LIBOR plus 0.52%
Hyundai Floorplan Master Owner Trust (closed May 2013)
Class A Coupon of One-Month LIBOR plus 0.35%
2013 Deal Update
S&Ps Views On The U.S. Car Rental Industry
Betsy R. Snyder, CFA
Director
Corporate and Government Ratings

October 10, 2013
The U.S. Car Rental Industry
Sector credit fundamentals
Operating and financial performance
Consolidation update
Ratings
Sector outlook
Credit outlook
Sector Credit Fundamentals
Strong cash flow generation
Capital intensive
High debt leverage
Ability to reduce capital spending as warranted
Credit metrics differ from those of similarly rated industrials
Free cash flow tends to be countercyclical
Relatively Stable Operating and Financial Performance
Modest growth in demand
Modest price increases driven by stronger leisure pricing
Ongoing non-vehicle cost reduction efforts
Higher vehicle costs
Lower funding costs
Consolidation Results in Three Major U.S. Car Renters
Hertz finally acquires Dollar Thrifty

Avis Budget acquires Zipcar

Ongoing small acquisitions

Ratings U.S. Car Renters
Rating
Business
Risk
Financial
Risk
Liquidity
Enterprise
Holdings Inc.
BBB+/Stable Satisfactory Intermediate Adequate
Avis Budget
Group Inc.
B+/Positive Fair Aggressive Adequate
Hertz Global
Holdings Inc.
B+/Stable Fair Aggressive Adequate

Ratings as of Oct. 4, 2013
Sector Outlook
Demand/supply
Pricing
Geographic exposure
M&A activity
Access to capital
Credit Outlook
Improving operating performance despite higher vehicle costs
Improving credit metrics
Continued access to capital
Potentially higher ratings

91
Appendix
Corporate Ratings Criteria Summary
Business Risk
Country risk
Industry risk
Competitive position
Profitability/Peer group comparisons

Financial Risk
Accounting
Financial governance and policies/risk tolerance
Cash flow adequacy
Capital structure/asset protection
Liquidity

92
Corporate Ratings: Business Risk/Financial Risk Matrix
93
Sector Coverage
Automakers and Truckmakers (About 50% high yield)
18 global automakers
4 global truckmakers

Auto Suppliers (mainly high yield)
About 75 rated companies serving the global auto-related sector
OE suppliers
Auto retailers
Five publically held U.S. auto retailers. Different model: sales, service and F&I.
Other companies
Tire manufacturers
Whole car and insurance auto auctions
Commercial truck suppliers
Aftermarket parts suppliers
Distributors (tires, truck parts)
94
Ranking Table - Rated Auto and Truck Makers September 16, 2013
Company Ranking Ratings
Business Risk
Profile
Financial Risk
Profile
GLOBAL AUTOMAKERS
Toyota Motor Corp. 1 AA-/Stable/A-1+ Strong Minimal
Honda Motor Co. Ltd. 2 A+/Stable/A-1 Strong Modest
BMW AG 3 A/Stable/A-1 Strong Modest
Volkswagen AG 4 A-/Positive/A-2 Strong Modest
Daimler AG 5 A-/Stable/A-2 Satisfactory Modest
Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. 6 BBB+/Stable/A-2 Satisfactory Modest
Hyundai Motor Co. 7 BBB+/Stable/-- Satisfactory Modest
Kia Motors Corp. 8 BBB+/Stable/-- Satisfactory Intermediate
Ford Motor Co. 9 BBB-/Stable/NR Satisfactory Intermediate
General Motors Co. 10 BB+/Positive/-- Fair Intermediate
95
Business Risk
Profile
Financial Risk
Profile
GLOBAL AUTOMAKERS
Renault S.A. 11 BB+/Stable/B Fair Intermediate
Jaguar Land Rover Plc 12 BB/Stable/-- Fair Intermediate
Tata Motors Ltd. 13 BB/Stable/-- Fair Significant
Fiat SpA 14 BB-/Stable/B Fair Aggressive
Peugeot S.A. 15 BB-/Negative/B Fair Aggressive
Chrysler Group LLC 16 B+/Positive/-- Weak Aggressive
Aston Martin Holdings
(UK) Ltd.
17 B+/Stable/-- Fair Aggressive
Mitsubishi Motors
Corp.
18 B+/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive
96
Business Risk
Profile
Financial Risk
Profile
GLOBAL TRUCKMAKERS
PACCAR Inc. 1 A+/Stable/A-1 Satisfactory Minimal
Scania (publ.) AB 2 A-/Positive/A-2 Satisfactory Modest
AB Volvo 3 BBB/Stable/A-2 Satisfactory Intermediate
Navistar
International Corp.
4 B-/Negative/-- Vulnerable
Highly
Leveraged
97
Global Auto Supplier Rating Distribution: Most Are Speculative Grade
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
AAA AA A BBB BB B CCC CC SD D
No. of Issuers

*As of September 16, 2013
98
Global Auto Supplier Outlook Distribution: Majority Are Stable
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Positive Stable Negative Developing Watch Pos Watch Neg Watch Dev
No. of Issuers

*As of September 16, 2013
99
The Auto Sector - Our View October 2013
Economic uncertainty remains the key variable globally
U.S. economy improving
Europe headed for sixth consecutive year of vehicle registration decline but seems to be bottoming out
Latin America slower growth, more competition and some tariffs complicate some manufacturing footprints
China slower growth than in the past growth likely to continue; new normal
Sales recovery in U.S.
This is supporting the results of many automakers and suppliers both U.S and foreign brands
Consumer confidence remains fragile and volatile and unemployment high but improving along with housing
Replacement demand nearly sated?
What is the new normal SAAR?
In the U.S.? Probably there.
In Europe? Higher, but when and what level.
China and Brazil growing but at a slower pace
We believe most ratings are sustainable with mixed economic conditions: U.S improves, Europe flat and
Brazil and China are flat to up there is some cushion in most ratings
Our base case is for a U.S. sales and production increase in 2013 and 2014
Will automakers maintain production-inventory-sales discipline when volatility returns?
Will large capital expenditure plans to met with commensurate pricing power with consumers?
How receptive will capital markets remain for automakers, suppliers and auto retail finance?
Timing is everything lots of refinancing has been done
Few U.S. auto sector defaults since mid 2009

100
U.S. Corp. Spec-Grade Default Rate % And 12-Mo. Fcast
{The U.S. corporate trailing 12-month speculative-grade default rate is 2.6% as of June 2013}
Auto Sector Weakest Links Are Few Relative To Other Sectors
Global Auto Sector: Selected Threats

S&P Perspectives Probability Time Frame Effect
Affected
Parties
Double dip recession in near
term or hard landing in China.
U.S. 10% - 15%
(near low end);
Europe bottoming?
China slower but
ok?
Near to
medium term
Moderate if
brief
Automakers
and Suppliers
Adverse product mix shifts ($5
gas driven)
Moderate - High Medium term
Less
severe
than 2008
bc of
improved
efficiency?
Automakers
and some
Suppliers
Rising emissions, fuel economy
and safety standards
High
Medium to
long term
Moderate
Automakers
and some
Suppliers
Raw material price impact Moderate - High Near term Moderate
Automakers
and many
Suppliers
Unsettled capital markets High Anytime?
Positive for
now, but
this can
swing
quickly.
Automakers
and Suppliers
103
104
The U.S. Automakers
Summary Of The Three U.S. Automakers
Ford is BBB-/Stable. The rating reflects our view:
Very good NA performance supports cash flow generation and provides evidence of solid execution since 2009 (e.g.
global platforms, consumer acceptance, controlled incentives)
Acting decisively in Europe on restructuring and some traction on European retail market share support case for
eventual profitability
Improved diversification given progress in China and reasonable performance in challenging SA markets
Higher rating: continued improvement in credit measures (cash flow generation, pension underfunding reduction),
definitive path to European profit, maintain good performance in NA and progress in Asia
GM is BB+/Positive. The outlook reflects our view:
Good NA sales and profitability support cash flow generation along with strong position in China
Acting to restructure Europe but still a work in progress
Clarifying ownership (UST exit by April 2014), capital structure (Series A Pfd at end of 2014) and finco strategy (growing
global presence)
Chrysler is B+/Positive
Benefits from NA. Strategic execution and linkage with Fiat (BB-/Stable) is main rating driver
When and how does Fiat merger happen
All three companies have returned to profitability in N.A.
Cost reductions support expectations for sustained profits in North America
Cash flow positive at sales levels that formerly produced losses
North America provides critical support to all three companies
Financial policies appear to be focused on lowering financial risk, again, to varying degrees

105
Company Focus: Ford Motor Co. BBB- / Stable
Business Risk
Satisfactory
Financial Risk
Intermediate
Reduced cost base in N.A. = overall
profits and positive cash flow
NA segment margin better than
other domestics (>10% in H1 2013)
Improved product diversity (cars)
and consumer perception
Pension funding improving (cash
contributions and discount rate)
Mgmt continuity and strategy
Losses in Europe
trucks
Still high debt + pension
Limited, but improving, exposure
to certain attractive developing
markets
Auto cash June 2013, $25 billion
voluntary pension funding
Automotive free cash flow ~$4+ bil
expected
FMCC funding channels appear
stable

Current rating: Adjusted Debt to
EBITDA of 2.5x, FOCF/ Debt ~15%
Higher rating: < 2.5x and 20%+,
among other factors
Higher rating: More diverse
profitability and good NA, definitive
Europe profit prospects
106
Company Focus: General Motors Co. BB+ / Positive
Business Risk
Fair
Financial Risk
Intermediate
burden in NA supporting profits (>7%
H1 2013 segment margin) and
positive cash flow
Geographic diversity: strong
positions China & Brazil
IPO completed. UST stake being
eliminated
Losses in Europe
trucks
High unfunded pensions
Ownership mix temporary
Somewhat elevated level of mgt
turnover
Auto cash at June 2013, $24 billion
voluntary pension funding/derisking
Automotive cash flow >$3 bil
expected
Evolving captive finance ops

Outlook incorporates assumption
of continued profitability in NA and
Auto FOCF
For a higher rating: Adjusted Debt
to EBITDA of 2.5x, FOCF / Debt
~15%, among other factors such as
pathway to European profit
107
Company Focus: Chrysler Group LLC B+ / Positive
Business Risk
Weak
Financial Risk
Aggressive
burden leading to profits and positive
cash flow
Fiat (BB-/Stable/B) ownership a
positive for business risk
Solid positions in certain segments
(e.g. Jeep, pickups and minivan)
Good NA market conditions
Profit mix very weighted to light
trucks
2013 expect op profit margin
around 5% despite heavy NA
exposure
Limited geographic diversity
Still needs to improve consumer
perception in U.S. after 2009
Liquidity: Adequate Positive Outlook
Cash at Dec. 31, $11.6 billion
Cash flow positive >$1 bil expected
No captive finance ops

Assumes profits in N.A.
Fiat - Chrysler rating difference
will not increase
For higher rating: Fiat rating and
degree of alignment is major factor;
also FOCF >$1 bil and margin
improvement
108
Finance remains a critical aspect of the vehicle sales process
Retail and floor plan financing are most critical
Lease financing is a more discretionary but important - competitive dynamic for some brands.
Returning after lease residual performance and financing markets forced cutbacks
Provides dedicated source of financing when banks and other lenders are less willing to
make loans
But the captive business model still carries significant risks:
Dependence on external, largely wholesale sources of funding
Potential for turbulent profitability based on credit losses or lease residuals
Auto ABS Good rating performance. Far more upgrades than downgrades
Used car prices still strong supports residual values for now

Automotive Finance Operations
109
Three Different Strategies For Financing Consumers + Dealers
General Motors
Relies on subprime lender General Motors Financial Co. (BB / Positive/--), former unit Ally Financial,
and various banks. One notch differential with parent due to our view it is strategic but not yet core
Strategy is evolving; buying certain Ally international assets. Completion will provide broader coverage
of product and geography
o Assets about $30 billion at June 2013. Capital sufficient for some near term growth

Ford
Ford Motor Credit (BBB-/Stable) is a traditional captive finance company; assets around $108 billion at
June 2013
o FCE Bank PLC is BBB/Neg; Negative outlook reflects S&Ps view of UK banking risks

Chrysler
We view Chrysler's lack of a captive finance unit as a strategic complication; no obvious impact from
lack of a captive so far
Synthetic approach: third-party financial institutions provide financing (including lease financing) for
the majority of consumers and dealers
o We assume less bank interest for sub-prime and leasing segment than for prime customers
o Private label (Chrysler Capital brand) financing agreement with Santander (SCUSA) launched May 1, 2013
110
Summary U.S. Automakers
Ford compared to GM:
Many similarities; both are now profitable and generating cash in N.A.
Debt burden for both is largely pension-related; both have plans to reduce pension and funded debt
Ford traction with consumers and margin in N.A. > GM
GMs presence in Brazil and China > Ford
GMs perceived challenges in Europe at least equal to Fords
Ford Motor Credit strategy well tested. GMs finance strategy evolving but clarifying
Fords track record of management continuity and strategy execution > GM
Biggest risks for the sector
Economies in major markets falter or worse (U.S., China, EU) sending sales lower
Volatility returns! Automakers lose production to sales discipline and incentives increase
Maintaining traction with customers and pricing power in light of competition and large capital
expenditures on product
What to watch
Pace of U.S. economic recovery; sales have been recovering in U.S. at 7%+ unemployment
Europe restructuring pace
SAAR level, dealer inventories, automaker production
Financial policy allocation of cash to shareholders/growth/debt reduction
111
U.S. SAAR Trend
112
Pick-Up Truck Sales Estimates
113
114
North American Auto
Suppliers
Global Auto Supplier Ranking (76 Public Ratings; April 25, 2013)
As of April 25, 2013
Rank Company Name Corporate credit rating Business Risk Financial Risk Liquidity
1 Robert Bosch GmbH AA-/Stable/A-1+ Strong Minimal Exceptional
2 Denso Corp. AA-/Stable/A-1+ Strong Minimal Exceptional
3 Toyota Industries Corp. AA-/Negative/A-1+ Strong Intermediate Strong
4 Aisin Seiki Co. Ltd. A+/Stable/A-1 Strong Modest Strong
5 Knorr-Bremse AG A-/Stable/-- Satisfactory Modest Strong
6 Magna International Inc.* BBB+/Stable/-- Satisfactory Modest Strong
7 Hyundai Mobis Co. Ltd. BBB+/Stable/-- Satisfactory Modest Strong
8 Autoliv Inc.* BBB+/Stable/A-2 Satisfactory Intermediate Strong
9 BorgWarner Inc. BBB+/Stable/-- Satisfactory Intermediate Strong
10 Compagnie Generale des Etablissements Michelin S.C.A. BBB+/Stable/A-2 Satisfactory Intermediate Strong
11 Johnson Controls Inc. BBB+/Stable/A-2 Satisfactory Intermediate Adequate
12 Valeo S.A. BBB/Stable/A-2 Satisfactory Intermediate Strong
13 Harman International Industries Inc. BBB-/Stable/-- Satisfactory Intermediate Strong
14 AutoNation Inc. BBB-/Stable/-- Satisfactory Significant Adequate
15 TRW Automotive Inc.* BB+/Positive/-- Fair Intermediate Strong
16 Delphi Automotive PLC BB+/Positive/-- Fair Intermediate Adequate
17 LKQ Corp. BB+/Stable/-- Fair Intermediate Strong
18 Lear Corp. BB+/Stable/-- Weak Intermediate Strong
19 Metalsa S.A. de C.V. BB+/Stable/-- Weak Intermediate Strong
20 GKN Holdings PLC BB+/Stable/-- Satisfactory Significant Adequate
Issuer Ranking: Global Auto Suppliers
*Rating/Outlook/CreditWatch Actions since April 25, 2013
Company To From Date
Autoliv Inc. BBB+/Positive/A-2 BBB+/Stable/A-2 30-May-13
Magna International Inc. BBB+/Positive/-- BBB+/Stable/-- 11-Jun-13
TRW Automotive Inc. BBB-/Stable/-- BB+/Positive/-- 13-Sep-13
Global Auto Supplier Ranking Continued
21 Group 1 Automotive Inc. BB/Positive/-- Fair Significant Adequate
22 Dana Holding Corp. BB/Positive/-- Weak Significant Adequate
23 Tenneco Inc. BB/Positive/-- Weak Significant Adequate
24 Asbury Automotive Group Inc. BB/Stable/-- Fair Significant Adequate
25 Gestamp Automocion BB/Stable/-- Fair Significant Adequate
26 Continental AG* BB-/Positive/B Satisfactory Highly Leveraged Adequate
27 Shiloh Industries Inc. BB-/Stable/-- Weak Significant Adequate
28 Stoneridge Inc.* BB-/Stable/-- Weak Significant Adequate
29 Cooper Tire & Rubber Co.* BB-/Stable/-- Weak Significant Adequate
30 Penske Automotive Group Inc.* BB-/Stable/-- Fair Aggressive Adequate
31 Piaggio & C. SpA BB-/Stable/-- Fair Aggressive Adequate
32 Sonic Automotive Inc.* BB-/Stable/-- Fair Aggressive Adequate
33 The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. BB-/Stable/-- Fair Aggressive Adequate
34 Pinafore Holdings B.V. BB-/Stable/-- Fair Aggressive Adequate
35 American Axle & Manufacturing Holdings Inc. BB-/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
36 Tenedora Nemak S.A. de C.V.* BB-/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
37 TMD Friction Group S.A.* BB-/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
38 China Zhengtong Auto Services Holding Ltd. BB-/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
39 Baoxin Auto Group Ltd. BB-/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
40 Cooper-Standard Holdings Inc. BB-/Negative/-- Weak Significant Adequate

Continental AG BB/Stable/B BB-/Positive/B 24-May-13
Sonic Automotive Inc. BB/Stable/-- BB-/Stable/-- 06-May-13
TMD Friction Group S.A. NR BB-/Stable/-- 31-May-13
Tenedora Nemak S.A. de C.V. BB-/Positive/-- BB-/Stable/-- 07-Jun-13
Stoneridge Inc. BB-/Positive/-- BB-/Stable/-- 20-Jun-13
Penske Automotive Group Inc. BB-/Positive/-- BB-/Stable/-- 27-Jun-13
Cooper Tire & Rubber Co. BB-/WatchNeg/-- BB-/Stable/-- 27-Jun-13
116
41 Remy International Inc. B+/Positive/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
42 Tower International Inc. B+/Positive/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
43 Allison Transmission Inc. B+/Stable/-- Fair Aggressive Adequate
44 KAR Auction Services Inc. B+/Stable/-- Fair Aggressive Adequate
45 Visteon Corp. B+/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
46 ASP HHI Intermediate Holdings Inc. B+/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
47 Mark IV LLC B+/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
48 Metaldyne LLC B+/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
49 Wabash National Corp. B+ /Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
50 Grede Holdings LLC B+/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
51 Waupaca Foundry Inc. B+/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
52 Pittsburgh Glass Works LLC B+/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
53 KSS Holdings Inc. B+/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
54 Pendragon PLC B+/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
55 PT Gajah Tunggal Tbk. B+/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
56 ARCAS Intermediate-Holdings Entity B+/Stable/-- Weak Aggressive Adequate
57 Schaeffler AG B+/Stable/-- Satisfactory Highly Leveraged Adequate
58 International Automotive Components Group S.A. B+/Negative/-- Vulnerable Aggressive Adequate
117
59 Commercial Vehicle Group Inc.* B/Positive/-- Vulnerable Aggressive Adequate
60 Europcar Groupe S.A. B/Stable/-- Fair Highly Leveraged Adequate
61 Autoparts Holdings Ltd.* B/Stable/-- Fair Highly Leveraged Less than adequate
62 American Tire Distributors Inc. B/Stable/-- Weak Highly Leveraged Adequate
63 Transtar Holding Co. B/Stable/-- Weak Highly Leveraged Adequate
64 Fastlane Holding Co. Inc. B/Stable/-- Weak Highly Leveraged Adequate
65 August Cayman Intermediate Holdco, Inc B/Stable/-- Weak Highly Leveraged Adequate
66 Meritor Inc. B/Stable/-- Weak Highly Leveraged Adequate
67 Affinia Group Intermediate Holdings Inc. B/Stable/-- Weak Highly Leveraged Adequate
68 SANLUIS Rassini S.A. de C.V.* B/Stable/-- Weak Highly Leveraged Adequate
69 Neenah Enterprises, Inc. B/Stable/-- Vulnerable Aggressive Adequate
70 UC Holdings Inc. B/Stable/-- Vulnerable Highly Leveraged Adequate
71 UCI Holdings Ltd.* B/Negative/-- Fair Highly Leveraged Adequate
72 Federal-Mogul Corp. B/Negative/-- Weak Highly Leveraged Adequate
73 Hyva Global B.V. B/Negative/-- Weak Highly Leveraged Adequate
74 Accuride Corp. B-/Negative/-- Vulnerable Highly Leveraged Adequate
75 Exide Technologies* B-/WatchNeg/-- Vulnerable Highly Leveraged Less than adequate
76 A.T.U. Auto-Teile-Unger Holding GmbH* CCC+/Negative/-- Weak Highly Leveraged Weak
Exide Technologies CCC+/WatchNeg/-- B-/WatchNeg/-- 03-May-13
Exide Technologies D/--/-- CCC+/WatchNeg/-- 11-Jun-13
A.T.U. Auto-Teile-Unger Holding GmbH CCC-/WatchNeg/-- CCC+/Negative/-- 23-May-13
Servus HoldCo Sarl (Stabilus) B(prelim)/Stable/-- New 28-May-13
Falcon (BC) Germany Holding 3 GmbH B(prelim)/Stable/-- New 02-Jul-13
Commercial Vehicle Group Inc. B/Stable/-- B/Positive/-- 22-Jul-13
UCI Holdings Ltd. B-/Stable/-- B/Negative/-- 13-Aug-13
SANLUIS Rassini, S.A. de C.V. B+/Stable/-- B/Stable/-- 21-Aug-13
Autoparts Holdings Ltd. B-/Stable/-- B/Stable/-- 28-Aug-13
118
Auto Suppliers/Retailers Business & Financial Risk Profile
Business Risk Profile
Minimal Modest Intermediate Significant Aggressive Highly Leveraged
Excellent -- -- -- -- -- --
Strong Bosch,
Denso
Aisin Seiki Toyota
Industries
-- -- --
Satisfactory -- Knorr-
Bremse,
Hyundai
Mobis,
Magna,
Autoliv
JCI, Michelin,
BorgWarner,
Valeo, Harman,
TRW
Autonation,
GKN,
Gestamp
Continental Schaeffler AG
Fair -- -- Delphi, LKQ Group 1,
Asbury, Sonic
Piaggio, Goodyear Tire, KAR,
Pinafore, Penske, Allison,
Falcon
Europcar, Servus
Weak -- -- Lear, Metalsa Tenneco,
Dana, Shiloh,
Stoneridge,
Cooper-
Standard,
Cooper Tire,
Tenedora
Axle, Visteon, ASP HHI, Mark IV,
Metaldyne, PGW, Remy,
Tower, Grede, Waupaca,
Wabash, China Zhengtong,
Baoxin, ARCAS, PT Gajah,
KSS, Pendragon, SANLUIS
Meritor, Affinia, August
Cayman, A.T.U Auto-Teile
Unger Handels, Transtar,
Fed-Mog, American Tire,
Fastlane, Hyva, UCI,
Autoparts Holdings
Vulnerable -- -- -- -- International Automotive
Components, Neenah
UC Holdings, Accuride,
Commercial Vehicle
Business And Financial Risk Profile Matrix
Financial Risk Profile
As of September 16, 2013
119
Supplier Margins Flattening Out
120
11.6%
10.4%
9.6%
10.4%
8.5%
8.6%
11.7%
11.6%
11.0%
8.7%
8.0%
9.9%
10.8%
7.7%
7.3%
9.3%
9.1%
8.6%
0.0%
2.0%
4.0%
6.0%
8.0%
10.0%
12.0%
14.0%
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Suppliers
OEMs
S&P 2013 & 2014 Assumption Summary
Key Factors S&P Base-Case Assumptions
Light Vehicles (millions) 2013 2014
U.S. Light Vehicle Sales * 15.6 ( 8% YoY) 16.0 ( 3% )
North American Production 16.0 ( 4% ) 16.5 ( 3% )
Europe Production 18.9 ( 3% ) 19.3 ( 2% )
China Production 20.2 ( 11% ) 23.1 ( 14% )
Commercial Vehicles - Class 8 (000s)
North American Production 252 ( 10% ) 281 ( 11% )
W. Europe Production 299 ( 1% ) 291 ( 3% )
China Production 638 ( 8%) 707 ( 11% )
S&P Projections
Revenue Growth (midspread) 2.0% to 5.0% 3.0% to 6.5%
Adjusted EBITDA margins (midspread) 8.5% - 13.5% 9.0% - 14.0%
Adj. FOCF/Debt (median) ~ 5.0% ~ 6.5%
Adj. Debt to EBITDA (median) ~ 3.8x ~ 3.4x
source: LMC Automotive September 2013 (previously, a forecasting division of J.D. Power);
* Standard & Poors estimates

121
Is Credit Quality Improvement Flattening Out?
Upgrades (mid-2009 YE 2009) from crisis lows driven by improved liquidity
Another round of upgrades (2010 - 2011) reflected evidence that profitability can be
sustained
A few upgrades in 2012; Some upgrades in 2013
Business risk is a key focus
Navigating Europe
For 2013 and 2014 we are watching:
Pace of economic recovery or decline (Europe) by region
SAAR level, Dealer inventories, Automaker production
Commodity cost exposure and recovery power
Profitability margin compression?
Financial Policy Many have cash and are starting to spend it. Spend with caution given somewhat
fragile economic outlook?
Capital allocation possibilities: shareholder friendly actions (outright sale/recap/dividend
reinstatement); acquisitions; maintain excess liquidity?

122
European Global Auto Makers Investment Grade
BMW AG A/Stable/A-1
Company Focus
Business
Strong
Financials
Modest
Rating leeway
Low High
Leading manufacturer in the
luxury autos segment
Broad geographic diversification
and strong track record of
successful products
Conservative financial policy, low
leverage, strong FOCF generation
and low dividend payments
Positive demand momentum for
luxury cars
High demand volatility of the
auto sector
Stringent environmental
requirements may challenge
product development
Short-Term Credit Factors Stable Outlook
We view liquidity as strong
BMW does not report a
standalone full set of results for the
financial service units; financing
activities of the industrial and
financial divisions are common

Auto EBIT margin maintained in
the 8-10% range and FFO to Debt
in the 50%-60% range. We expect
the company to continue to
generate FOCF.
Volkswagen AG A- /Positive/A-2
Company Focus
Business
Strong
Financials
Modest
Rating leeway
Low High
Multibrand strategy, offering wide
product and geographic diversity
>50% of earnings from premium
12% global market share, strong
in Trucks, strong in China and
several other EM
Above-European average
profitability and cash flow
generation
Commitment to a moderate
financial leverage

Aggressive Capex plans and
ambitious growth objectives
Importance of ongoing costs
optimization
Market positioning of Seat
North American operations not
contributing much to earnings
Complex Corporate governance
Short-Term Credit Factors Positive Outlook
VW group has strong liquidity and
financial flexibility

1-year time horizon
Adjusted FFO to debt close to
60% and debt/EBITDA < 1.5x; 6%
operating margin

Scania (publ), AB A- /Positive/A-2 (a- SACP)
Company Focus
Business
Satisfactory
Financials
Modest
Rating leeway
Low High
Leading market positions in
Europe and South America in heavy
trucks and buses
Up-to-date product range and the
highest degree of component
commonality in the global truck
industry
A conservative financial policy and
a modest financial risk profile, very
strong profitability relative to peers'
Operations within industries
characterized by high volatility and
high capital intensity
Risk from sizable operations in
economically and politically
unstable regions (Latin America)
Lesser market diversity than
some larger peers

Short-Term Dev Stable Outlook
Softening order intake
Pre-buy effect for Euro 6?
Strong net cash position
Declining but still high profitability
and cash generation

Outlook linked to Volkswagen
Daimler AG A-/Stable/A-2
Company Focus
Business
Satisfactory
Financials
Modest
Rating leeway
Low High
Leading position in the luxury
auto segment
Broad geographic and product
diversity with historically
successful product range
Good financial flexibility

Volatile demand in the auto,
truck, and bus sectors,
High operational gearing,
Stringent environmental
requirements and still some way
to go to achieve the EU new
targets

We view liquidity as strong.
FOCF slightly below dividends
in 2013 (excl. EADS disposal)

FFO/debt 50%-60% and
debt/EBITDA < 1.5x even in
difficult years
Financials currently above
indicative ratios headroom for
3%-4% sales drop
Volvo (publ), AB BBB /Negative/A-2
Company Focus
Business
Satisfactory
Financials
Intermediate
Rating leeway
Low High
Leading market positions in
Heavy CV, buses, and construction
equipment
Broad geographic diversity and
up-to-date product line
Strong liquidity, also in
economic downturns

Highly volatile, cyclical and
capital intensive industry
High operational gearing and
fixed costs base
Large historical swings in
profitability

Short-Term Development Negative Outlook
Softening order intake (Weak US
and APAC surprising)
Strong liquidity
Solid profitability and cash flow
expected in 2012

Performing below ratios
commensurate with rating
FFO/Debt > 35%
EBIT margin to be restored to
6%
European Global Auto Makers Non-Investment Grade
Renault S.A. BB+/Stable/B
Company Focus
Business
Fair
Financials
Intermediate
Rating leeway
Low High
Good market shares in Europe
with a focus on small cars and the
entry segment
Location of industrial footprint
(Romania, Turkey, Morocco)
Except S. Korea, non-Europe
contributing to earnings
Strategic alliance with Nissan
Solid financing arm (RCI Banque
BBB-rated)
Weak profitability
Relatively small size on its own
Still high concentration on the
European market, no direct presence
in China
Limited product offer in premium
segments
Low volumes in EV, meaningful
capex
Adequate liquidity
Generating positive FOCF
Financial flexibility, stakes in
Nissan and AvtoVAZ

Current credit ratios leave some
leeway for the ratings
Improvement in core profitability as
key rating driver going forward
Jaguar Land Rover PLC BB/Stable/--
Company Focus
Business
Fair
Financials
Intermediate
Rating leeway
Low High
Well recognized brands in the
premium segment
Positive momentum of the
demand for luxury cars
Positive track record of product
renewals within the Land Rover
brand
Currently solid operating margin
Strong credit measures
High demand volatility of the auto
sector
Need to continue to invest
significantly to relaunch Jaguar and
to enlarge LR product range
Still limited diversification when
compared with larger peers
We view liquidity as adequate

Reflects Tata Motors outlook
Some weakening in operating
profit and FOCF generation is
foreseen
Rating upside linked to Tata
Motors
Fiat S.p.A. BB-/Stable/B
Company Focus
Business
Fair
Financials
Aggressive
Rating leeway
Low High
Strong market positions and
sustained profitability in Brazil and
in the U.S. through 58.5%-owned
Chrysler
Positive contribution from less
cyclical luxury brands and to a
lesser degree from components
Reputed powertrain technology
that could be leveraged further
across brands
Low capacity utilization and
large trading losses in a
structurally oversupplied Southern
European market
High debt burden
Our expectation of negative free
operating cash flows over the
rating horizon
Limited access to Chryslers
cash due to borrowing covenants
We view liquidity as adequate
Uncertainty associated with the
timing of cash outflows related to a
potential increase in the Chrysler
stake

Target ratios of 12% to 20%
adjusted FFO-to-debt and 4.5x to
5x Debt-to-EBITDA
Improvement in EMEA
profitability and leverage as key
rating drivers going forward
Peugeot S.A. BB-/Negative/B
Company Focus
Business
Fair
Financials
Aggressive
Rating leeway
Low High
No. 2 market position in
Western Europe, 1
st
in LCV
Diversifiction benefits from
Faurecia (supplier) and captive
BPF
Track record of a moderate
financial policy
Severely loss-making in automotive
activities
No consolidated earnings benefit from
improving revenue diversification
outside Europe
Exposure to volume decline, excess
capacity and competitive pressure in a
structurally oversupplied Southern
European market
Execution risks around 2nd
restructuring plan
Short-Term Credit Factors Negative Outlook
We still view liquidity as
adequate
Unsustainably high rate of
cash depletation

Target ratios of >12% adjusted FFO to
debt and 5x Debt to EBITDA
Turnaround in FOCF expected to start
in 2013 and to be confirmed in 2014
Aston Martin Holdings (UK) Ltd. B+/Stable/--
Company Focus
Business
Fair
Financials
Aggressive
Rating leeway
Low High
Strong brand in niche market for
high luxury sports cars affording
pricing power
Good production flexibility,
agreement with AMG
Promising model pipeline
(Vanquish) supporting volume
growth
Equity capital increase
completed - inflow of
125 million in April 2013
Highly cyclical end markets
Niche position for high-end
luxury sports cars / low product
diversity
Highly variable earnings
Short-Term Credit Factors Outlook
Adequate liquidity
Negative FOCF in 2013

Rating pressure when FFO/debt
sustainably below 12%
FFO/debt 2013: 10%-12% (base-
case)
Copyright 2013 by Standard & Poors Financial Services LLC. All rights reserved.
No content (including ratings, credit-related analyses and data, valuations, model, software or other application or output therefrom) or any part thereof (Content) may be modified,
reverse engineered, reproduced or distributed in any form by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, without the prior written permission of Standard & Poors
Financial Services LLC or its affiliates (collectively, S&P). The Content shall not be used for any unlawful or unauthorized purposes. S&P and any third-party providers, as well as their
directors, officers, shareholders, employees or agents (collectively S&P Parties) do not guarantee the accuracy, completeness, timeliness or availability of the Content. S&P Parties
are not responsible for any errors or omissions (negligent or otherwise), regardless of the cause, for the results obtained from the use of the Content, or for the security or
maintenance of any data input by the user. The Content is provided on an as is basis. S&P PARTIES DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES,
INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE OR USE, FREEDOM FROM BUGS,
SOFTWARE ERRORS OR DEFECTS, THAT THE CONTENTS FUNCTIONING WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR THAT THE CONTENT WILL OPERATE WITH ANY SOFTWARE
OR HARDWARE CONFIGURATION. In no event shall S&P Parties be liable to any party for any direct, indirect, incidental, exemplary, compensatory, punitive, special or
consequential damages, costs, expenses, legal fees, or losses (including, without limitation, lost income or lost profits and opportunity costs or losses caused by negligence) in
connection with any use of the Content even if advised of the possibility of such damages.
Credit-related and other analyses, including ratings, and statements in the Content are statements of opinion as of the date they are expressed and not statements of fact. S&Ps
opinions, analyses and rating acknowledgment decisions (described below) are not recommendations to purchase, hold, or sell any securities or to make any investment decisions,
and do not address the suitability of any security. S&P assumes no obligation to update the Content following publication in any form or format. The Content should not be relied on
and is not a substitute for the skill, judgment and experience of the user, its management, employees, advisors and/or clients when making investment and other business decisions.
S&P does not act as a fiduciary or an investment advisor except where registered as such. While S&P has obtained information from sources it believes to be reliable, S&P does not
perform an audit and undertakes no duty of due diligence or independent verification of any information it receives.
To the extent that regulatory authorities allow a rating agency to acknowledge in one jurisdiction a rating issued in another jurisdiction for certain regulatory purposes, S&P reserves
the right to assign, withdraw or suspend such acknowledgement at any time and in its sole discretion. S&P Parties disclaim any duty whatsoever arising out of the assignment,
withdrawal or suspension of an acknowledgment as well as any liability for any damage alleged to have been suffered on account thereof.
S&P keeps certain activities of its business units separate from each other in order to preserve the independence and objectivity of their respective activities. As a result, certain
business units of S&P may have information that is not available to other S&P business units. S&P has established policies and procedures to maintain the confidentiality of certain
non-public information received in connection with each analytical process.
S&P may receive compensation for its ratings and certain analyses, normally from issuers or underwriters of securities or from obligors. S&P reserves the right to disseminate its
opinions and analyses. S&P's public ratings and analyses are made available on its Web sites, www.standardandpoors.com (free of charge), and www.ratingsdirect.com and
www.globalcreditportal.com (subscription), and may be distributed through other means, including via S&P publications and third-party redistributors. Additional information about our
ratings fees is available at www.standardandpoors.com/usratingsfees.
STANDARD & POORS, S&P, GLOBAL CREDIT PORTAL and RATINGSDIRECT are registered trademarks of Standard & Poors Financial Services LLC.
135

S&P Light Vehicles Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

S&P Light Vehicles Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Permission to reprint or distribute any content from this presentation

You might also like

S&amp;P Light Vehicles Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

S&amp;P Light Vehicles Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Permission to reprint or distribute any content from this presentation

You might also like

S&P Light Vehicles Report

S&P Light Vehicles Report