Covered bonds with extendable maturities are becoming more and more common on the covered bond market.
In the meantime, you can find them in almost every covered bond jurisdiction. The largest share goes to softbullets
where extension periods are typically 12 months. Another interesting addition to the existing soft- and
hard-bullet structures are CPTCBs. In most scenarios, the cash flows of the various redemption profiles would
be similar, all else equal. In a worst-case scenario, after issuer default and in a situation where their cover pool
is not sufficiently liquid, CPTCB promise a lower nominal loss at the expense of investors accepting a potentially
much longer deferral period compared to those of hard-bullet and typical soft-bullet structures. Hence, investors
have to make up their minds, which adverse event they are more inclined to accept, i.e. payment deferral
or technical default. From a regulatory perspective, CPTCB offer higher ratings and higher rating stability. The
higher complexity, as well as the fact that CBTCB could switch into pass-through mode, and their very long
theoretical final maturity dates, represent a big hurdle for many investors. But instead of this, we have seen
a higher acceptance for both – soft-bullets and CBTCB – in the last few months.