Example - KPMG | US : 0.2 . 0.0% Interest Rate ... This analysis was performed as per 31. st....

KPMG Portfolio Intelligence Example Solution Report Portfolio Analysis and Benchmarking Exa

mple

1 © 2015 KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The name KPMG, the logo and “cutting through complexity” are registered trademarks of KPMG International.

Contents

Detail Analytics on Portfolio A

■ Spot Instruments

■ Interest Rate Derivatives

■ Credit Derivatives

IFRS Disclosures on financial instruments

1. IFRS 7: Independent Level Classification

2. IFRS 9 Chapter 4: SPPI Criteria

Appendix

1. Details on Cash Flow Modelling

Example

Details on Analytics Portfolio A

Example


Executive Summary Portfolio A Overview

Instrument Type # Instruments

provided # Instruments tested Market Value (USD,m) Coverage % Deviation to iRADAR

Benchmark (USD) Deviation as

% of NAV Deviations within expected ranges

Bonds, Loans and Convertibles 1,679 1,644 22,838 98% 12.8 0.03%

Securitizations 1,030 994 16,480 98.7% 94.9 0.24%

Credit Derivatives 1,900 1,900 60 100% 0.2 0.0%

Interest Rate Derivatives 2,970 2,970 169.5 100% 0.1 0.0%

Sum 7,579 7,508 39,548 98.3% 108.0 0.27%

Summary

The Client has provided a Portfolio A for valuation assurance purposes to KPMG. This document outlines the results of our valuation on this sample. This analysis was performed as per 31st December XXXX.

Overall iRADAR could process 7,508 out of 7,579 investments (98% coverage in market value terms). Investments which could not be processed comprise of distressed debt and other securities for which not enough information for their structure could be obtained from external information systems.

In addition to the fair value testing iRADAR performed the following analysis for which the outcome is outlined in this document:

■ IFRS 7 Fair Value Hierarchy

■ IFRS 9 Chapter 4 Classification of financial assets

■ Cash-flow-modelling of two CLO deals including scenario analysis

Figure 1: iRADAR Reference Market Value vs. Portfolio A Market Value per country of risk for fixed income securities

76,20

10,20 8,20

4,20 3,70 2,60 1,00

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

0

2.000

4.000

6.000

8.000

10.000

12.000

14.000

16.000

18.000

US UK Europe Other

China Hong Kong Africa Asia Other

Variance (U

SD

, m)

Mar

ket v

alue

(US

D,m

)

Portfolio A Market Value (USD, m) iRADAR Reference Market Value (USD, m) Deviation out of expected range (USD,m)

Example


Executive Summary Overview Spot Portfolio

Figure 2: Price Dispersion and methodology on thresholds

Figure 3: % Price Variance in relation to the absolute USD Notional amount

Summary of the valuation results

In the context of the assurance procedures performed for Portfolio A, KPMG iRADAR performed an independent revaluation of the fixed income securities as of 31 December XXXX. The results may be summarized as follows:

Overall iRADAR could process 2,638 out of the 2,709 investments achieving a coverage of 98.4% of the bonds’ submitted market value.

Out of the total netted deviation of USD 290.1 m (0.73% of the overall market value), USD 182.4 m can be directly reconciled through usual pricing uncertainties, as discussed below.

The remaining unexplained variance of USD 107.7m represents 0.27% of the overall portfolio and is within the expected range for a portfolio of this complexity.

Methodology and basis for conclusion on the observed variances Through iRADAR, KPMG continuously monitors dispersions between different prices observed for identical financial instruments contained in the portfolios of at least two KPMG clients as illustrated in Figure 2. For this purpose, iRADAR aggregates the individual observations by asset type. The resulting figures can be seen as the market inherent pricing uncertainty for different asset classes. When analysing portfolios iRADAR utilizes these market insights in order to determine thresholds for acceptable price variances. Figure 3 illustrates the price dispersion observed across Portfolio A in relation to notional amount. Each of the dots in the scatter graph is representative of a single bond. One can observe that the higher pricing deviations have small monetary impact and that the positions with high notional value have deviations close to 0. Few exceptions occur for securities with higher pricing uncertainty (not rated or non investment grade corporate bonds/ securitizations).

0,0%

5,0%

10,0%

15,0%

20,0%

Jun-07 Dec-07 Jun-08 Dec-08 Jun-09 Dec-09 Jun-10 Dec-10 Jun-11 Dec-11 Jun-12 Dec-12

Ave

rage

Pric

e D

ispe

rsio

n

ABS MBS CDO Corporate Bonds Government Bonds

-15,0%

-10,0%

-5,0%

0,0%

5,0%

10,0%

- 200 400 600 800 1.000 1.200 1.400

% P

rice

Var

ianc

e

Absolute Notional (USD,m)

Corp InvGrade Corp Non InvGrade ABS NonInv Grade

Govt G7 Countries ABS Inv Grade Govt Other Example


Portfolio Analysis – Benchmarking Spot Instruments: Comparison to the Industry

Independent iRADAR Price Analysis iRADAR PeerGroup Analysis

Type of Investment No. of securities

Portfolio A Market Value (USD, m) Coverage

Deviation out of expected range

(USD,m)

Portfolio A Average

Price

Industry Average

Price

Industry StDev

Nr. Securities with Peer group

price

Average Number of contributions

Corp InvGrade 447 5,710 100% 3.6 98.2 98.05 0.5 323 5.0

Corp Non InvGrade 612 1,878 93% 8.0 79.5 76.3 1.6 248 3.8

Govt G7-Countries 480 12,800 100% 0.2 100.4 100.37 0.10 472 14.1

Govt Other Countries 140 2,450 100% 1.0 98.4 97.9 0.60 68 4.1

Securitizations 1,030 16,480 99% 94.9 80.39 80.67 2.26 680 4.5

Total 2,709 4,876 93% 107.7 91.4 90.7 1.0 1791 6.3

Benchmarking results vs. the Industry For Portfolio A, a Peer Group Average Price could be determined for 1,791 out of the 2,709 fixed income products. On average, iRADAR compared each security with 6.3 prices within its database and determined an average standard deviation of 1.01%. The difference between the client’s average price of 91.4% and the industry average price of 90.7% lies within one standard deviation. The table below illustrates the variance distributions per type of investment. In addition, iRADAR compares the pricing of fixed income securities performed by the client with the industry average, that is other clients’ pricing the same securities as of 31 December XXXX.

Figure 4: iRADAR’s Peer Group Analysis

■ Peer Group Average Prices determined for 1,791 securities

■ On average, iRADAR compares each security with 6.3 prices within its database

■ Average standard deviation: 1.0%

1 Standard Deviation

90,4 90,7 91,0 91,3 91,6

Industry Average

Price 91,0

Portfolio A Average

Price 90,70

Example


Portfolio Analysis Bonds, Loans, Convertibles

Figure 5: Portfolio Allocation of Corp/ Govt bonds with respect to rating

1 Shows the average prices observed for these particular instruments based on iRADAR’s database

iRADAR Price and Peer Group Analysis1

Spotlight – Corporate Bond Price Deviation A-TEC INDUSTRIES 8.75% 27-OCT-2014

■ Non InvGrade Corporate Bond

■ Notional 19.2 Mio USD

■ Deviation Market Value 2.3 Mio USD

■ Client Price 39.50 %

■ KPMG Reference Price 27.50 % (Based on 5 observed third party prices in range of 25% to 38%)

■ Industry Average Price 30.87 % (Std. Dev 4.77%, 6 Contributions)

Instrument Type Number Market Value

Mio USD Market Value Absolute

Mio USD Market Value Tested

Mio USD Coverage Deviation

Market Value Mio USD

Deviation %

Portfolio A Average

Price

Industry Average

Price

Standard Deviation

Government Bonds 620 15,250 15,250 15,250 100.0% 1.2 0.01% 99.4 99.1 0.35

Corporate Bonds 840 6,490 6,490 6,386 98.4% 9.8 0.15% 93.1 92.9 0.8

Convertibles 154 820 820 804 98.1% 1.5 0.19% 84.7 81.4 1.3

Preferred Debt 6 28 28 23 83.3% 0.0 0.16%

Loans 59 250 250 237 94.9% 0.3 0.11%

Total 1679 22,838 22,838 22,701 97.7% 12.8 0.06% 92.4 91.13 0.8

0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900

1000

Inv Grade Non-Inv Grade Defaulted Not Rated

Num

ber o

f Ins

trum

ents

Government Bonds Loans

Corporate Bonds Preferred Debt

Convertibles

Example


Portfolio Analysis Securitizations

Figure 6: Portfolio Allocation of Securitizations with respect to rating

Spotlight – CLO Deviation Duchess IV CLO, Class D / Jubilee CDO I-R, Class E

■ Collateralised Loan Obligations

■ Notional 156.7 Mio USD

■ Deviation Market Value 36.2 Mio USD

■ Client Price 79.90 %/ 80.9%

■ KPMG Reference Price 54.6%/ 47.4% (Based on mark-to-model calculation)

■ Industry Average Price 50.3%/ 46.2%

Instrument Type Number Market Value

Mio USD Market Value Absolute

Mio USD Market Value Tested

Mio USD Coverage Deviation

Market Value Mio USD

Deviation %

Portfolio A Average

Price

Industry Average

Price

Standard Deviation

ABS 200 1,000 1,000 980 98.0% 7.6 0.8% 99.85 99.62 0.35

CDO 220 1,200 1,200 1,100 91.7% 13.0 1.2% 58.40 53.20 4.30

CLO 280 6,830 6,830 6,830 100.0% 146.0 2.1% 93.20 92.60 1.20

CMBS 150 3,450 3,450 3,450 100.0% -36.7 -1.1% 78.50 82.10 2.10

RMBS Prime 100 2,500 2,500 2,500 100.0% -12.9 -0.5% 89.20 90.90 2.20

RMBS Sub Prime 80 1,500 1,500 1,400 93.3% -22.1 -1.6% 63.20 65.60 3.40

Total 1,030 16,480 16,480 16,260 98.7% 94.9 0.58% 80.39 80.67 2.26

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Inv Grade Non-Inv Grade Defaulted Not Rated

Num

ber o

f Ins

trum

ents

RMBS CMBS CLO

CDO ABS


iRADAR Price and Peer Group Analysis1

Example


Portfolio Analysis Special Focus: CLOs

Summary

During the analysis of the CLO asset class, iRADAR detected significant differences resulting from the two particular deals specified in the table below. Therefore, we applied a fundamental valuation in which the performance of the underlying loan pool was simulated and the resulting cash flows were applied according to the waterfall structure. The expected cash flows per tranche were discounted by the corresponding market rate. Within such an analysis the most relevant input parameters are default, recovery and prepayment rates as well as the discount margin.

The chart on the right, shows the sensitivity of the tranche’s value for each of the selected transaction towards the expected default rate. As the scope of the analysis includes mezzanine tranches only, the effect of changes in parameters may only be material if rather extreme scenarios are considered.

Results CLO Modelling – 60% Recovery Rate

Independent iRADAR Price Analysis iRADAR’s Peer Group Analysis1

ISIN Name S&P Category

Original/ Current Rating

S&P Notional USD Market Value

Deviation USD Client Price

iRADAR Reference

Price

Industry Average

Price Standard Deviation

Number of Contributions

XS0159688935 Duchess IV CLO, Class D

Cash Flow Corporate Loan CLO BBB-/B 101,553,561 1,765 79.9 54.63 50.33 7.6 3

XS0292634267 Jubilee CDO I-R, Class E

Cash Flow Corporate Loan CLO BB-/CCC- 55,200,000 32,479 80.9 47.38 46.2 4.3 3

Valuation Results for CLOs


20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

55%

60%

65%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Valu

e of t

he C

lass

in %

Default Rate in % p.a

Duchess IV Class D

Jubilee I Class E

Example


Interest Rate Derivatives Vanilla Swaps & FRAs

Average DV01 shift and number of IR Derivatives per cluster „out of range“ and „in range“ vs. the tolerance threshold

Summary of Vanilla Swaps, OIS Swaps and FRAs The submitted portfolio holds 1,800 vanilla interest rate swaps and 270 FRAs. Through this analysis iRADAR achieved a coverage of 100% on this investment class. iRADAR adopted the following discounting methodology: ■ OIS discounting for all vanilla swaps with available overnight swap rate curves. ■ IBOR discounting for the FRAs On portfolio level the absolute market value variance amounts to USD 57m out of which USD 51.5m can be traced back to market inherent valuation uncertainties. The remaining deviation of USD 5.5m (USD 0.4 netted) is mainly contributed to: ■ #5 AUD FRAs due to the time stamp of the input parameters (USD 0.1m) ■ #5 EUR 4X7 FRAs due to difference between direct FRA quotations and the ones

derived from the swap rates term structure (USD -0.2m) ■ #45 GBP 6M Swaps, mostly maturing in ca. 10 years: high dispersion of 10 year swap

rate between contributors (USD 300 k) ■ #10 USD and 10 EUR (USD 200 k) maturing in 8 months due to different choice of mid

points for the construction of the swap term structure ( FRAs vs. Futures)

Type Notional Abs (USD, m)

# Deals total

Portfolio A MtM

(USD, m)

Portfolio A MtM Abs total

(USD, m)

Coverage (% abs MtM)

# Deals tested

Deviation Total Abs (USD, m)

Deviation out of range Abs (USD, m)

Deviation out of range netted (USD, m)

# Deals out of Range

Forward Rate Agreement 120,000 270 4.0 200 100% 270 6.0 0.5 -0.1 10

Vanilla Swaps 520,000 1,800 66.0 10,500 100% 1,800 51.0 5 0.5 75

Total 640,000 2,070 70.0 10,700 100% 2,070 57.0 5.5 0.4 85

Overview of Coverage and Variances

5 45

10 15

30 500

650

815

-

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

AUD GBP USD EUR

DV

01 S

hift

Average shift & #deals (out of range) Average Tolerance range Average shift & #deals (in range)

Example


Swap Curve Shift (bps)

Vega Shift (%)

<1 1-3 3-6 6-10 >10

<3 18.7 5.6 2.5 0.2 0.3

3-6 16.7 7.3 3.8 - 0.2

6-9 2.6 1.1 0.0 0.1 6.4

9-12 2.9 1.2 2.5 - 0.8

>12 0 0.4 1.7 - 0.9

Interest Rate Derivatives Interest rate options

Swaption Absolute Market Value Deviations by Parameter Shift (USD,m) Summary of Swaptions The submitted portfolio holds 900 swaptions. iRADAR achieved a coverage of 100% OIS discounting methodology was applied for swaptions denominated in EUR, GBP and USD. On portfolio level the absolute market value variance amounts to USD 76m out of which USD 74.3m can be traces back to market inherent valuation uncertainties. The table on the right illustrates the distribution of the total deviations in relation to the required volatility and swap rate shift. ■ 77% of these differences can be explained by a vega shift of less than 3% or a DV01

shift of less than 6 bps ■ The USD 6.4m deviation highlighted in yellow result from GBP swaptions with a tenor

of 20 years where the swap rates show a intraday fluctuation of 16bps. ■ The differences highlighted in red mostly result from short running USD and EUR

swaptions where at year end high volatility fluctuation was observed between contributors.

Type Notional Abs (USD,m)

# Deals total

Portfolio A MtM

(USD, m)


(USD, m)


# Deals tested



Deviation out of range netted (USD,

m)


EUR Swaption 60,000 100 23.5 1,300 100% 235 30.0 1.2 -0.7 3

GBP Swaption 100,000 300 13.5 2,100 100% 130 41.0 - - -

USD Swaption 120,000 500 62.5 3,100 100% 135 5.0 0.5 0.4 2

Total 280,000 900 99.5 6,500 100% 500 76.0 1.7 -0.3 5


Example


380

190

54 39 15

620 (10 deals)

290 (3 Deals)

78 ( 5 Deals) 80 (2 Deals) 27 (25 Deals)

-

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

<6M 6M 6M-1Y 1Y-3Y 3Y-5Y

Average Spread shift in range

Average Spread shift (out of range)

Credit Derivatives Single Name & Index CDS

Average Spread shift and # deals within vs. outside the tolerance range

Summary of Single Name & Index CDS iRADAR performed an independent valuation for all 1400 single name CDS on 280 reference entities and for all 500 Index CDS on 58 reference entities, achieving a coverage of 100%. Overall, the absolute variance between the submitted market values and the ones derived by iRADAR amounts to USD 135m from which USD 129.5 M can be traced back to market inherent uncertainties (intraday fluctuation of CDS spreads and choice of contributor). The remaining absolute deviation of USD 5.5 M results 45 deals:

■ 25 Index CDS on CDX HY S19 most of which are back-to-back positions and netting effect is 100k

■ 20 Single Name CDS on MBIA with maturity up to 3 years. Here, the major monetary impact is resulting from short dated CDS where the client is obtaining direct quotations from market participants whereas iRADAR has extrapolated the value based on observable quotes from 6 months on.

The chart on the right outlines the average spread shift required for the CDS assessed to be within the expected range compared to the CDS in the same maturity cluster which have been set as being outside our tolerance ranges together with the reference entities being the main deviation drivers.


CDX HY S19: USD 3.5M abs/ 0.1m netted

Type Notional Abs (USD, m)

# Deals total

Portfolio A MtM

(USD, m)


(USD, m)


# Deals tested



Deviation out of range netted (USD, m)


Single Name 152,000 1,400 28.5 1,000 100% 1,400 100.0 2 0.1 20

Index CDS 110,000 500 31.5 1,200 100% 500 35.0 3.5 0.1 25

Total 262,000 1,900 60.0 2,200 100% 1,900 135.0 5.5 0.2 45

MBIA: USD 2M abs/ 0.1m netted

Example

Assurance on Disclosures

Example


IFRS Disclosures on financial instruments Independent Level Classification

Approach The independent verification of the fair value hierarchy in accordance with ASC 820 has been conducted for the sample. Hereby, each asset is independently analysed and classified based on the standards in correspondence with market information available for each asset. For all investments a reference classification could be derived.

For the spot instruments, the level 1 classification deviates by EUR 675M. 64% of this variance can be attributed to three government bills which are listed in the table below. While the client classifies them as level1 we cannot observe any traded volume around the valuation date and thus would classifiy them as level 2. Regarding the derivatives the main part of the deviations results from the 15 CDS bespoke tranches of which one is listed in the table below. The fair value approach deducted by iRADAR for these assets required input parameters which could not directly be derived as market implied parameters and we would classify them as level 3. Furthermore the table includes one option for which we can observe traded volume while the client classifies it as level 2.

Asset type

Client classification in market value

Reference classification in market value

Total difference in market value

Spot instruments

Level I 38,376,121,387 37,701,297,983 674,823,404

Level II 2,192,166,940 2,812,819,972 - 620,653,032

Level III 87,193,552 141,363,924 - 54,170,372

Derivatives

Level I -10,781,524,048 -10,771,858,540 - 9,665,508

Level II -38,101,959 138,041,369 - 176,143,329

Level III 0 -185,808,837 185,808,837

Sum 29,835,855,871 29,835,855,871

Identifier Asset type Name Nominal Client market value

Client classification

Reference classification Reasoning for reference classification

MX0MGO0000J5 Fixed income Mexiko MN-Bonos 2009(38) 143,189,035 155,728,528 Level 1 Level 2 Observable broker indications but no observable traded volume. Classification depends on market insight.

HK0000085768 Fixed income HKTB 0 02/01/12 182 154,395,445 154,453,344 Level 1 Level 2 Observable broker indications but no observable traded volume. Classification depends on market insight.

HK0000093341 Fixed income HKTB 0 05/16/12 182 123,516,356 123,610,229 Level 1 Level 2 Observable broker indications but no observable traded volume. Classification depends on market insight.

5000082 CDS bespoke tranche HAMILTDEC14_0_3 20,000,000 -14,053,228 Level 2 Level 3 Unobservable market parameters/ judgment required

Option EURO$ 1YR MID-CRV MAR 12 99.25 C 40,000 7,250,000 Level 2 Level 1 Observable traded volume on exchange.

Five selected securities with differences in level classification

Example


IFRS Disclosures on financial instruments IFRS 9 Phase I: Classification and Measurement

Example

Appendix- Details on Cash Flow

Modelling

Example


Appendix CLO Analysis – Duchess IV Class D

Summary of the transaction and results

The transaction is a EUR 513 million European leveraged loan CLO issued in 2005 with a final legal maturity in 2020.The underlying portfolio mainly holds senior secured loans with additional exposure to mezzanine loans. As per the valuation date, defaults are amounting to a nominal value of EUR 6 million on portfolio level. The annualized default rate since inception amounts to 2.7 %. There has been a trigger breach on the E-Class overcollateralization tests (O/C-Test) as per the reporting date. During 2010 the D and E O/C test have been repeatedly breached so that cash diversion has set in.

We calculated a value of 54.6 % compared to 79.9 % (Client price) for Class D with a discount margin (DM) of 10.5 %. The right graph shows the sensitivity to changes in the default and recovery rate.

Overall we assess the resulting deviations to be within the expected range for this asset class.

Class D1 – Stress Case: Recovery and Default Rate

Input Parameters

The Input Parameters applied to the transaction have been derived on the basis of external market information from rating agencies, investment banks and market insights. The following input parameters have been applied:

Assumptions Recovery Rate

Recovery Lag

Prepayment Rate

Default Rate

Discount Margin in bp

Base Case •65% (Senior Secured)

•25% (Mezzanine )

12 Months

10% p.a.

5-year forecast default vector

1050

BBB range: 800-1050

Stress Case +/- 10% of the Recovery Rate

12 Months

10% p.a.

1-10% p.a. 1050

5- Year Forecast Default Vector

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57 61

Fore

cast

ed Y

early

Def

ault

Rate

Months

50%

52%

54%

56%

58%

60%

62%

64%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Valu

e of

the

Cla

ss in

%

Default Rate in % p.a.

70% Rec. Rate60% Rec. Rate50% Rec. Rate

Example


Appendix CLO Analysis – Jubilee I Class E

Summary of the transaction and results

The transaction is a EUR 875 million European leveraged loan CLO issued in 2007 with a final legal maturity in 2024.The underlying portfolio mainly holds senior secured loans with additional exposure to mezzanine loans. As of the valuation date, there are no defaults in the portfolio. Furthermore, there have been no trigger breaches during the lifetime of the deal.

We derived a value of 47.4% compared to 80.9% (Client price) for Class E with a discount margin (DM) of 13 %. The graph on the right illustrates the sensitivity of the value of the tranche towards changes in default and recovery rates. In certain scenarios a cash diversion sets in which leads to actual losses on the outstanding principal of the tranche. However, such scenarios appear rather extreme considering current market expectations.

Overall we assess the resulting deviations to be within the expected range for this asset class.

Class E– Stress Case: Recovery and Default Rate

Input Parameters

The Input Parameters applied to the transaction have been derived on the basis of external market information from rating agencies, investment banks and market insights. The following input parameters have been applied:

Assumptions Recovery Rate

Recovery Lag

Prepayment Rate

Default Rate

Discount Margin in bp

Base Case •65% (Senior Secured)

•25% (Mezzanine )

12 Months

10% p.a.

5-year forecast default vector

1300

BB range: 1300-1500

Stress Case +/- 10% of the Recovery Rate

12 Months

10% p.a.

1-10% p.a. 1300

5- Year Forecast Default Vector

2%

3%

4%

5%

6%

7%

8%

1 5 9 13 17 21 25 29 33 37 41 45 49 53 57 61

Fore

cast

ed Y

early

Def

ault

Rate

Months

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Valu

e of t

he C

lass

in %

Default Rate in % p.a.

70% Rec. Rate60% Rec. Rate50% Rec. Rate

Example

Christoph Michel Partner, Audit Tel: +49 69 9587-4562 Mobile: +49 173 576 4639 [email protected]

KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft,

Example

This report has been produced for illustration purpose only.

© 2015 KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft, a member firm of the KPMG network of independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (“KPMG International”), a Swiss entity. All rights reserved. The name KPMG, the logo and “cutting through complexity” are registered trademarks of KPMG International.

The KPMG name, logo and ‘cutting through complexity’ are registered trademarks or trademarks of KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International).

Example

Date post:	21-Mar-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	donhan
View:	215 times
Download:	3 times

Example - KPMG | US : 0.2 . 0.0% Interest Rate ... This analysis was performed as per 31. st....

Documents