Re: | American International Group, Inc. Form 10-K for the Year Ended December 31, 2007 File No. 1-8787 |
1. | Please revise your table of contractual obligations to include estimated payment obligations associated with the underlying guarantees arising from your credit default swap activities. | ||
AIG Response: |
2. | In 2007, you recognized an $11.5 billion unrealized market valuation loss related primarily to the multi-sector CDO component of your super senior credit default swap portfolio. You state that a modified version of the BET model was used to value the super senior credit default swaps, and that this model utilizes diversity scores, weighted average lives, recovery rates and discount rates, and that the most significant assumption is the pricing of the securities within the CDO collateral pools. You provide a sensitivity analysis with respect to the pricing of the securities within the CDO collateral pools, but not with respect to the other significant assumptions. Please expand your disclosure to provide sensitivity analysis that includes quantification of the impact on fair value of reasonably likely changes for each of the other key identified assumptions. Also, please revise to provide a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of your modified BET model. | ||
AIG Response: | |||
In the First Quarter 2008 Form 10-Q, AIG included additional sensitivity analysis and added further discussion on the BET model as requested by the Staff as follows (page 46): | |||
The valuation of the super senior credit derivatives has become increasingly challenging given the limitation on the availability of market observable information due to the lack of trading and price transparency in the structured finance market, particularly during and |
2
since the fourth quarter of 2007. These market conditions have increased the reliance on management estimates and judgments in arriving at an estimate of fair value for financial reporting purposes. Further, disparities in the valuation methodologies employed by market participants and the varying judgments reached by such participants when assessing volatile markets has increased the likelihood that the various parties to these instruments may arrive at significantly different estimates as to their fair values. | |||
AIGFPs valuation methodologies for the super senior credit default swap portfolio have
evolved in response to the deteriorating market conditions and the lack of sufficient market
observable information. AIG has sought to calibrate the model to market information and to
review the assumptions of the model on a regular basis. AIGFP employs a modified version of the BET model to value its credit default swap portfolio written on the super senior securities issued by CDOs, including the embedded 2a-7 Puts. The BET model uses default probabilities derived from credit spreads implied from market prices for the individual securities included in the underlying collateral pools securing the CDOs. AIGFP obtained prices on these securities from the CDO collateral managers. The BET model also uses diversity scores, weighted average lives, recovery rates and discount rates. The determination of some of these inputs requires the use of judgment and estimates, particularly in the absence of market observable data. AIGFP also employs a Monte Carlo simulation to assist in quantifying the effect on valuation of the CDO of the unique features of the CDOs structure such as triggers that divert cash flows to the most senior level of the capital structure. |
|||
AIG selected the BET model for the following reasons: |
| it is known and utilized by other institutions; | ||
| it has been studied extensively, documented and enhanced over many years; | ||
| it is transparent and relatively simple to apply; | ||
| the parameters required to run the BET model are generally observable; and | ||
| it can easily be modified to use probabilities of default and expected losses derived from the underlying collateral securities market prices instead of using rating-based historical probabilities of default. |
AIGs implementation of the BET model uses a Monte Carlo simulation of the cash flows of each underlying CDO for various scenarios of defaults by the underlying collateral securities. The Monte Carlo simulation allows the model to take into account the cash flow waterfall and to capture the benefits due to cash flow diversion within each CDO. The BET model has certain limitations. A well known limitation of the BET model is that it can understate the expected losses for super senior tranches when default correlations are high. The model uses correlations implied from diversity scores which do not capture the tendency for correlations to increase as defaults increase. Recognizing this concern, AIG tested the sensitivity of the valuations to the diversity scores. The results of the testing demonstrated that the valuations are not very sensitive to the diversity scores because the expected losses generated from the prices of the collateral pool securities are currently high, breaching the attachment point in most transactions. Once the attachment point is breached by a sufficient amount, the diversity scores, and their implied correlations, are no longer a significant driver of the valuation of a super senior tranche. | |||
The credit default swaps written by AIGFP generally cover the failure of payment on the super senior CDO security. AIGFP does not own the securities in the CDO collateral |
3
pool. The credit spreads implied from the market prices of the securities in the CDO collateral pool incorporate the risk of default (credit risk), the markets price for liquidity risk and, in distressed markets, the risk aversion costs. Spreads on credit derivatives tend to be narrower than the credit spreads implied from the market prices of the securities in the CDO collateral pool because, unlike investing in a bond, there is no need to fund the position (except when an actual credit event occurs). In times of illiquidity, the difference between spreads on cash securities and derivative instruments (the negative basis) may be even wider for high quality assets. AIGFP was unable to reliably verify this negative basis with market observable inputs due to the accelerating severe dislocation, illiquidity and lack of trading in the asset-backed securities market during the fourth quarter of 2007 and the first quarter of 2008. The valuations produced by the BET model therefore represent the valuations of the underlying super senior CDO cash securities based on AIGs assumptions about those securities, albeit with no recognition of any potential favorable effect of the basis differential on that valuation. AIGFP also considered the valuation of the super senior CDO securities provided by third parties, including counterparties to these transactions, and made adjustments as necessary. | |||
The most significant assumption used in developing the estimate is the pricing of the securities within the CDO collateral pools. These prices are used to derive default probabilities that are used in the BET model. If the actual pricing of the securities within the collateral pools differs from the pricing used in estimating the fair value of the super senior credit default swap portfolio, there is potential for material variation in the fair value estimate. A decrease by five points (for example, from 87 cents per dollar to 82 cents per dollar) in the aggregate price of the securities would cause an additional unrealized market valuation loss of approximately $3.9 billion, while an increase in the aggregate price of the securities by five points (for example, from 90 cents per dollar to 95 cents per dollar) would reduce the unrealized market valuation loss by approximately $3.7 billion. The effect on the unrealized market valuation loss is not directly proportional to the change in the aggregate price of the securities. | |||
The following table presents other key inputs used in the valuation of the credit derivative portfolio written on the super senior securities issued by multi-sector CDOs, and the potential increase (decrease) to the unrealized market valuation loss at March 31, 2008 calculated using the BET model for changes in these key inputs. The adjustments to the key inputs incorporated in the sensitivity analysis below are based on managements judgment of reasonably possible ranges for these inputs: |
Increase | ||||
(Decrease) To | ||||
Unrealized Market | ||||
(in millions) | Valuation Loss | |||
Weighted average lives |
||||
Effect of an
increase of 1 year |
$ | 375 | ||
Effect of a
decrease of 1 year |
(620 | ) | ||
Recovery rates |
||||
Effect of an
increase of 10% |
(103 | ) | ||
Effect of a
decrease of 10% |
194 |
4
Increase | ||||
(Decrease) To | ||||
Unrealized Market | ||||
(in millions) | Valuation Loss | |||
Diversity scores |
||||
Effect of an increase of 5 |
(40 | ) | ||
Effect of a decrease of 5 |
15 | |||
Discount curve |
||||
Effect of an increase of 100 basis points |
70 |
These results are calculated by stressing a particular assumption independently of changes in any other assumption. No assurance can be given that the actual levels of the key inputs will not exceed, perhaps significantly, the ranges assumed by AIG for purposes of the above analysis. No assumption should be made that results calculated from the use of other changes in these key inputs can be interpolated or extrapolated from the results set forth above. | |||
In the case of credit default swaps written on investment grade corporate debt and CLOs, AIGFP estimates the value of its obligations by reference to the relevant market indices or third-party quotes on the underlying super senior tranches where available. | |||
The following table represents the relevant market credit indices and index CDS maturity used in the valuation of the credit default swap portfolio written on investment-grade corporate debt and the increase (decrease) to the unrealized market valuation loss at March 31, 2008 corresponding to changes in these market credit indices and maturity: |
Increase (Decrease) To | ||||||||||||
(in millions) | Unrealized Market Valuation Loss | |||||||||||
CDS maturity (in years) |
5 | 7 | 10 | |||||||||
CDX Index |
||||||||||||
Effect of an increase of 10 basis points |
$ | 26 | $ | 51 | $ | 5 | ||||||
Effect of a decrease of 10 basis points |
(26 | ) | (51 | ) | (5 | ) | ||||||
iTraxx Index |
||||||||||||
Effect of an increase of 10 basis points |
11 | 37 | 13 | |||||||||
Effect of a decrease of 10 basis points |
(11 | ) | (37 | ) | (13 | ) |
These results are calculated by stressing a particular assumption independently of changes in any other assumption. No assurance can be given that the actual levels of the indices and maturity will not exceed, perhaps significantly, the ranges assumed by AIG for purposes of the above analysis. No assumption should be made that results calculated from the use of other changes in these indices and maturity can be interpolated or extrapolated from the results set forth above. |
3. | You disclose on page 124 that you believe any realized losses relating to the super senior credit default swap obligations will not be material to your consolidated financial |
5
condition, but could be material to your results of operations for any individual reporting period. Please revise your disclosures to clarify the context of this statement in relation to the $11.5 billion loss recorded during the quarter ended December 31, 2007. Clarify whether your disclosure indicates that incremental realized losses beyond the previously recorded $11.5 billion of unrealized losses may be incurred, or should be interpreted to mean that when realized losses are incurred, all or a portion of the previously recorded unrealized losses will be reversed. | |||
AIG Response: | |||
AIG believes that the losses AIGFP will ultimately realize in meeting its obligations under the super senior credit default swaps will be significantly less than the unrealized market valuation losses recognized to date. Thus, AIGs disclosure was not intended to indicate that AIGFP may incur incremental realized losses beyond the recorded unrealized losses. Rather, as your comment anticipates, the intent of AIGs disclosure was that, to the extent realized losses do not reach the level of reported unrealized losses (as AIG believes they will not), all or a portion of the previously recorded unrealized losses will be reversed. | |||
AIG has expanded the disclosure included in the First Quarter 2008 Form 10-Q as follows (page 38): | |||
The ongoing disruption in the U.S. residential mortgage and credit markets and the downgrades of residential mortgage-backed securities and CDO securities by rating agencies continue to adversely affect the fair value of the super senior credit default swap portfolio written by AIGFP. AIG expects that continuing limitations on the availability of market observable data will affect AIGs determinations of the fair value of these derivatives, including by preventing AIG, for the foreseeable future, from recognizing the beneficial effect of the differential between credit spreads used to price a credit default swap and spreads implied from prices of the CDO bonds referenced by such swap. The fair value of these derivatives is expected to continue to fluctuate, perhaps materially, in response to changing market conditions, and AIGs estimates of the value of AIGFPs super senior credit derivative portfolio at future dates could therefore be materially different from current estimates. Further declines in the fair values of these derivatives may require AIGFP to post additional collateral which may be material to AIGFPs financial condition. | |||
Under the terms of most of these credit derivatives, losses to AIG would generally result from the credit impairment of the referenced CDO bonds that AIG would acquire in satisfying its swap obligations. Based upon its most current analyses, AIG believes that any credit impairment losses which may emerge over time at AIGFP will not be material to AIGs consolidated financial condition, but could be material to the manner in which AIG manages its liquidity. In making this assessment, AIG uses a credit-based analysis to estimate potential realized credit impairment losses from AIGFPs super senior credit default swap portfolio. This analysis makes various assumptions as to estimates of future stresses on the portfolio resulting from further downgrades by the rating agencies of the CDO collateral. In addition, during the first quarter of 2008, AIG introduced another |
6
methodology called a roll rate analysis. This methodology rolls forward current and estimated future delinquencies and defaults in underlying mortgages in the CDO collateral pools to estimate potential losses in the CDOs. Due to the dislocation in the market for CDO collateral, AIG does not use the market values of the underlying CDO collateral in estimating its potential realized credit impairment losses. The use of factors derived from market-observable prices in models used to determine the estimates for future realized credit impairment losses would result in materially higher estimates of realized credit impairment losses. AIGs credit-based analyses estimate potential realized credit impairment pre-tax losses at approximately $1.2 billion to approximately $2.4 billion. Other types of analyses or models could result in materially different estimates. AIG is aware that other market participants have used different assumptions and methodologies to estimate the potential realized credit impairment losses on AIGFPs super senior credit default swap portfolio, resulting in a significantly higher estimate than that resulting from AIGs credit-based analysis. For example, a third-party analysis provided to AIG, that AIG understands uses credit and market value inputs, estimates the potential realized pre-tax losses on AIGFPs super senior credit default swap portfolio at between approximately $9 billion and approximately $11 billion. (AIG expresses no view as to the reasonableness of this third-party estimate and does not intend to seek an update of this estimate.) There can be no assurance that AIGs estimate will not change or that the ultimate realized losses on AIGFPs super senior credit default swap portfolio will not exceed any current estimates. |
4. | You disclose that various out-of-period adjustments were recorded during 2007 and 2006. Please tell us: |
- The material information that you are intending to communicate to investors about these out-of-period adjustments; |
- What constitutes an out-of-period adjustment both in terms of its nature and materiality; |
- Why you recorded each adjustment in 2006 or 2007; and |
- Whether there are any other out-of-period adjustments recorded in your financial statements during the periods presented, and if so, why they are not included in this disclosure. |
7
cc: | Frank Wyman, Staff Accountant Carl Tartar, Accounting Branch Chief (Securities and Exchange Commission) |
8