MIV Rating - MFR · 3. Social value: social performance management, responsible investment and...

MIV Rating

METHODOLOGY

MFR – All rights reserved 2/14

MIV Rating Methodology

Table of Contents

i. MFR – Company Profile and Experience ........................................................................................ 3

ii. MFR MIV Rating: definition and scope ............................................................................................ 4

iii. MIV Rating Framework ............................................................................................................................. 4

iv. MIV Rating : methodology ....................................................................................................................... 5

v. Benchmark Analysis .................................................................................................................................... 9

vi. MIV Rating : process ................................................................................................................................... 10

vii. MFR MIV Rating: output .......................................................................................................................... 11

viii. Alignment to the international assessment standards ...................................................... 12



i. MFR – Company Profile and Experience

MicroFinanza Rating (MFR) is a global rating agency specialized in responsible inclusive finance. Created in 2000 as a dedicated department of Microfinanza Srl, MFR was spun off as an independent Limited Liability Company in 2006.

Headquartered in Italy, MFR operates through a network of 5 regional offices (Ecuador, Mexico, Kenya, Kyrgyz Republic and the Philippines) and 2 country offices (Bolivia and Peru) across 4 continents, boasting the largest global geographical coverage among specialized rating agencies.

MFR leverages on a well-founded credibility. MFR was the first specialized rating agency to be licensed by a Supervisory Authority to carry out mandatory ratings (2007, in Ecuador) and it is currently the only one to be licenced in 2 countries (since 2014, also in Bolivia). Over the years, MFR has been accredited by 2 global rating funds (RF I) and initiatives (Rating Initiative), and a number of regional funds (e.g. Latin America RF II, Moroccan APP) and initiatives (e.g. European Jasmine Initiative, EASI).

MFR is licensed by To conduct Ecuador local central bank/ Regulator (SBS& SEPS)

Credit Rating of regulated financial institutions (FSPs)

Bolivia local central bank/ Regulator (ASFI)

Credit Rating, Social Rating and Issue Rating of regulated FSPs specialized in microfinance

MFR is registered with As Philippines local central bank/Regulator

Microfinance Institutions Rating Agency (MIRA)

MFR is accredited by To conduct Smart Campaign Client Protection Certification of FSPs GSMA Mobile Money Certification Truelift Truelift Assessment of FSPs IPA PPI Certification of any institution using the PPI* Cerise SPI4 and SPI4 Alinus audits

*currently discontinued

Its credibility and technical expertise are further proven by the relations and partnerships established with some of the leading private social investors and fund managers (e.g. responsAbility, OikoCredit, Blue Orchard, Incofin, Triple Jump, Symbiotics, Triodos etc.), DFIs (e.g. KfW, EBRD, EIB, IFC/WB, IFAD, FMO, IADB, UNDP/UNCDF, USAid, OPIC, AfD, CDC Group, etc.), and specialized hedging funds (e.g. TCX, MFX).

As of December 2017, MFR has conducted more than 2,016 assignments in 106 countries worldwide.

Our mission is to provide the responsible inclusive finance industry with independent, high quality ratings and information services, aiming at enhancing transparency, facilitating

investments and promoting best practices worldwide.

https://www.mf-rating.com/



MFR MIV Rating is the methodology adopted by MicroFinanza Rating to carry out the assessment of microfinance investment vehicles (MIVs). The definition of MIVs includes Fixed Income Funds, Equity Funds, Mixed Funds, Public Placement Funds, Private Placement Funds, Cooperative and NGOs, Collateralized Debt Obligations (CDOs).

▪ Quantitative and qualitative analysis of the risk profile, financial and social performance ▪ External and independent evaluation ▪ Applies international standards ▪ Compares with other MIVs (use of available benchmarks) MFR MIV Rating can be used internally by the MIV management as well as by external stakeholders such as investors & investees.

Applying its MIV Rating methodology, MicroFinanza Rating focuses its analysis on three main levels which have significant interrelations, namely RISK POSITION, PERFORMANCE and SOCIAL VALUE. 1. Risk: MicroFinanza Rating focuses on both quantitative indicators and on the qualitative capacity

of the MFI to manage the risks. 2. Performance: assessed through trend analysis over a period of 3 years. 3. Social value: social performance management, responsible investment and social results are

essential to assess the MIV efforts in achieving the mission. Social accountability and transparency distinguish social MIVs and reinforce their reputation.

iii. MIV Rating Framework

iv. PLUS: methodology

▪ To provide an independent assessment of the risk &

performance ▪ To compare to benchmarks

ii. MFR MIV Rating: definition and scope

MIV management

Prospective Investors & Investees

The MIV Rating provides an opinion on the MIV’s capacity to manage impact funds, on the achieved performance and social value.



iv. MIV Rating : methodology

MFR undertakes a dynamic analysis grounded on the last three full business years (as opposed, for example, to one single period of the PIIF reporting). MFR MIV Rating methodology places a strong focus on the capacity and reliability of the Asset Manager.

It may be worth mentioning that MFR’s analysis reckons the different financial instruments used for the investment operations (particularly, equity or debt investment). MFR’s methodology also takes into account microfinance and non-microfinance segments of investment.

Multiple funds: as objectives, policies and data reporting may differ across the different funds managed, the analysis will detail differences between the funds where appropriate.

The following dimensions are analyzed in terms of performance and risk assessment, resulting in a balanced mix of qualitative and quantitative factors:



Legend ✓ Core indicators, analyzed at MIV level only Core indicators, analyzed at investees level with data from the MIV and from MFR’s ratings (see infra,

Benchmark Analysis). PIIF validation * Benchmark available

Dimension Sub-dimension

✓ Institutional experience and track record ✓ Business franchise and corporate reputation ✓ Financial standing of the asset manager ✓ Reliability of the service providers ✓ Adequacy & effectiveness of the corporate structure & governance ✓ Conflict of interests management Governance practices directly applied to investees (equity) Good governance promoted among investees (capacity building)

✓ Quality of the management team & investment committee✓ Professional experience and track record of the fund manager✓ Key person & succession and staffing


✓ Targeted investor base✓ Investors concentration (concentration of subscriptions)✓ Ability to retain or develop the investor base ✓ Subscription & redemption mechanisms (terms of the vehicle)

✓ Nature of the fund & liquidity management✓ Leverage


✓ Mission & investment objectives✓ Consistency & adequacy of the investment approach✓ Consistent target returns & projections✓ Compliance with PPM & covenants

✓ Authorized financial instruments (equity, debt, guarantees, etc.)

✓ Eligible & targeted investees (tier & charter)✓ Exit strategy approach (equity)

✓ Portfolio structure (expected & actual):▪ Concentration in single exposures

* ▪ concentration by region & country

▪ concentration by segment (MF & others)

▪ concentration by currency

✓ Country risk & regulatory risk✓ Hedging strategy

* ✓ Average Maturity of Debt Investments (gaps) & unhedged positions

* Credit risk of the investees

* Risk management of investees, including % MFIs by rating grade and by risk management score

1.1 Shareholding & governance

3.1 Investment approach

3.2 Risk management

3. INVESTMENT STRATEGY & RISK

MANAGEMENT

KEY FACTORS/INDICATORS

1.2 Management



MFR's ultimate objective in this dimension is to assess the soundness of the governance & management

structure (focus is on the Asset Management Company), able to ensure endurance & viability of the business.

2. FUNDING & DISTRIBUTION

1. GOVERNANCE & MANAGEMENT

2.1 Distribution

2.2 Funding

MFR aims at assessing the distribution strategy, implied risk exposure & the stability of the funding structure of

the MIV.

MFR's objective is to give an opinion on the consistency & adequacy of the investment approach of the Fund,

compliance with investors' expectations and soundness of its rik management approach in relation to the

investment strategy. MFR also gives an opinion on the portfolio quality of the underlying investees.



The following dimensions (6, 7, and 7) focus on the responsible investment and social performance of the MIV and can be added as a module to the assessment.


✓ Sourcing and screening✓ Due diligence process, credit analysis✓ Investment decision-making & credit approval✓ Investment risk monitoring systems✓ Early warning system & crisis management

✓ MIS, IT & reporting✓ Back-office systems & administration✓ Controls ✓ Investment administration (reporting)


* ✓ ROE & yields: trends & stress test

* ✓ Growth of net asset value (NAV) per share

✓ Net Yield on Direct Debt Microfinance Portfolio

* ✓ TER (Operating Expenses / Total Assets)

✓ Management fees

* ✓ Average Investment Size

* ✓ Adequacy of provisioning

* ✓ Write-offs

5.4 Growth ✓ Net subscritions



4. OPERATIONS

4.1 Portfolio management

4.2 Systems

5.3 Quality

MFR aims at assessing the adequacy & soundness of front- and back-office operations at the Asset Manager

level.

MFR aims at giving an overview on the performance of the Fund under a profitability, efficiency and quality

point of view. 3-year trends are analyzed. Relevant benchmarks are used where available.

5.1 Returns

5.2 Efficiency5. FUND PERFORMANCE


Investors alignment to the mission, clarity of the mission

Social goals and social risk limits

Monitoring system of the MIV and investees social performance

SPM capacity building provided to the investees

* SPM performance of investees, including % MFIs by social rating grade and by SPM score

ESG and other responsible investment policies Social aspects integrated in the screening, due-diligence, investment

decision making and monitoring Approach to ESG covenants HR strategy to implement social performance management

6.1 Social mission, objectives and monitoring

6.2 Social implementation systems

6. SOCIAL PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT

MFR aims at giving an opinion on the MIV capacity to manage its social performance through clear and

shared social goals, monitoring system and investment and HR policies in place to implement the social




Dimension Sub-dimension Endorsement of the Client Protection Principles (CPP) Integration of client protection into investment policies, due diligence

processes and financing or shareholder agreements Appropriateness of the currency and tenor of financing provided Support of a diversified funding base among investees Over-indebteddness prevention for investees and end-clients

Transparency and fairness of the terms and conditions negotiated Client protection promotion and capacity building for investees

* Client protection performance of investees, including % MFIs by client protection score from social ratings, CPP endorsement, MFTranparency effective interest rate.

Balance between social and financial risk-adjusted long term returns, recognizing clients, investees and investors interests

Consideration in decision making of the investees’ social performance,

financial returns, executives remuneration, growth rates and pricing to the final clients

Social and financial balance in staff incentive schemes Responsible approach to exit strategy (equity)

✓ Coordination with other MIVs to manage distressed investees

Transparency promoted with investees (e.g. MIX, ratings) and adopted with investors (e.g. reporting on social performance and client protection progress)

Participation to responsible investment sector initiatives


✓Investees: # partner MFIs, % investees by size and charter type, % fair trade organizations, % production cooperatives

* # end-clients reached; % clients by region, and by HDI of Countries

* % female clients, % female headed client households; % female clients with control over the loan; % investee female staff, management and BoD members

* % rural clients, % clients in the poorest provinces of the Country

* % clients by sector, % clients without access to basic services

* % end-clients under national poverty line (versus national rate)

Promotion of investees products answering to clients’ needs

Promotion of investees innovations for disadvantaged clients

Promotion of investees channels for remote and vulnerable areas

Product development capacity building provided to investees

* Appropriateness of the investees' services to clients’ needs, including %

MFIs offering saving, insurance or non financial services, % MFIs by service quality score from social ratings, % clients perceiving a good quality, client drop-out rate

Evidence of positive change in clients lives from PPI results and impact assessments, including change in poverty levels

* % clients who used the loan for income-generation; # jobs supported; % clients with start-up businesses; % clients who used the loan for education, health or housing

* % clients who used savings for education, health or housing

* % clients who first accessed formal finance thanks to the MFI

* % end-clients who stopped borrowing from moneylenders

MFR aims at giving an opinion on the MIV progress towards the achievement of its mission goals in terms of

outreach to vulnerable people, meeting their needs and contributing to a positive change in their lives.

8.3 Positive chance in clients lives

8. SOCIAL RESULTS

7. RESPONSIBLE INVESTMENT

7.2 Balanced returns

8.1 Outreach the disadvantaged

8.2 Services meeting clients’

needs

7.1 Client protection

7.3 Contribution to a responsible sector

MFR aims at giving an opinion on the MIV responsible investment, reviewing the cleint protection practices

promoted, the balanced returns approach and the contribution to responsible practices in the sector





v. Benchmark Analysis

MIV level benchmark

The rated MIV main characteristics and performances are compared within the most appropriate peer group among: Fixed Income Funds, Mixed Funds, Equity Fund).

The source of information for the benchmarking analysis is the Syminvest Annual Benchmarking (www.syminvest.com).

The benchmarking analysis will be conducted on the three main dimensions:

FINANCIAL STRUCTURE

▪ Total Assets (value) ▪ %, value Microfinance portfolio Geo

concentration of investments ▪ Average size of direct investments ▪ Average maturity of direct

investments

FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE

▪ Annual TA growth ▪ LLP ratio ▪ write-off ratio ▪ NAV growth per share ▪ coupon payment ▪ Total Expense Ratio ▪ ROE

SOCIAL PERFORMANCE

▪ Number of MFIs attended ▪ Number of end-clients attended ▪ % by size of MFIs investee (Tier 2,

Tier 3) ▪ Average loan size of MFIs to active

borrowers (USD) ▪ Rural active clients as a % of total

active clients ▪ Women active borrowers as a % of

total active borrowers ▪ % of MFIs’ portfolio in

microenterprise loans ▪ % of MFIs’ portfolio in loans for

immediate household needs ▪ % of MFIs in the MIV direct portfolio

offering savings products ▪ % of MFIs in the MIV direct portfolio

offering insurance products ▪ % of MFIs in the MIV direct portfolio

offering other financial services ▪ % of MFIs in the MIV direct portfolio

offering non-financial services

Investees level benchmark

The main characteristics and performances of the MIV investees are compared/benchmarked within the universe of MFIs rated by MFR.

http://www.syminvest.com/



vi. MIV Rating : process

*MFR’s final report review are sealed by the Rating Committee Unit (RCU). Four senior members (two are MFR top managers) constitute the RCU and are in charge of supervising the rating process, while ensuring high quality standards to the deliverables. **Not including FSP’s feedback

Confidentiality MFR commits itself to treat all the information received from the MIV as confidential. The information shall only be used for the rating purpose and shall not be shared with third parties.

Preliminary Phase

Onsite Visit

Draft Report and Quality Control

• Data collection and desk analysis

• The MIV fills in and send MFR's preliminary forms

• Interviews with fund managers & staff • Assessment of the due diligence process

2 weeks

• Reporting and quality control

4-5 days

3 weeks

Feedback

• Draft report is sent to the MIV for feedback

5 weeks**

1 week Final Report

• Draft report and MIV's feedback discussed at RCU*level • Finalization of the report

1 week



Rating report: The rating process results in an independent third-party evaluation report. The report is structured as follows:

▪ Profile: main features on the management company & fund, classification, regional breakdown, main financial features;

▪ Detailed analysis of the 8 rating areas and related opinion; ▪ Synthetic opinion on the 3 dimensions of the analysis: RISK, PERFORMANCE, SOCIAL VALUE; ▪ Benchmarking: MIV and investees level; ▪ Annexes: definitions & ratios; alignment to international standards.

Modularity clause: the areas of analysis are structured to provide an opinion on the complete financial and social performance and risk of the MIV. However, following the client preferences, the following modules can be isolated in stand-alone reports: ▪ Investees level analysis; ▪ Social performance; ▪ PIIF assessment.

Synthetic opinion: MFR indicates strengths and weaknesses as well as provides a synthetic classification per each of the three dimensions of analysis: risk, performance and social values. The synthetic classifications used are: Excellent, Good, Adequate, Fair, Poor.

Classification Definition

Excellent Excellent capacity, policies and systems to manage microfinance/impact investment funds and related risks. Ability to achieve high performance

compared to relevant benchmarks

Good Good capacity, policies and systems to manage microfinance/impact

investment funds and related risks. Ability to achieve good performance compared to relevant benchmarks

Adequate Adequate capacity, policies and systems to manage microfinance/impact

investment funds and related risks. Ability to achieve performance at least in line with relevant benchmarks

Fair Fair capacity, policies and systems to manage microfinance/impact

investment funds and related risks. Ability to achieve performance not fully in line with relevant benchmarks

Poor

Poor capacity, policies and systems to manage microfinance/impact investment funds and related risks. At this time, the inadequate management processes prevent the achievement of consistent

performance compared to relevant benchmarks

.

vii. MFR MIV Rating: output



The rating structure includes, but it is not limited to, several international standards. The methodology “speaks the same language” of the main assessment and reporting standards used in the industry, by integrating indicators aligned to:

1. CGAP MIV disclosure guidelines

CGAP disclosure guideline Rating area of analysis

Authorized Financial Instrument 2.2 Portfolio structure and risk

Geographical Focus 2.2 Portfolio structure and risk

Eligible partners 1.3 Portfolio management

Hedging strategy 3.2 Liabilities and ALM

Term of the vehicle 3.1 Equity

Target investors 3.1 Equity

Redemption Gates 3.1 Equity

Levels of seniority 3.2 Liabilities and ALM

Types of return 4.1 Returns

Indicators Rating area of analysis TER = Operating Expenses / Total Assets 4.3 Efficiency

Net subscriptions = Total subscriptions during the year – Total redemptions during the year

2.1 Size and growth

Direct Microfinance Portfolio (debt, equity, guarantees)

2.1 Size and growth

Indirect Microfinance Portfolio (debt, equity)

2.1 Size and growth

Average (equity) Investment Size by Microfinance Service Provider (direct)

4.3 Efficiency

Average Maturity of Debt Investments (Guarantee)

3.2 Liabilities and ALM

Direct (unhedged) Debt Microfinance Portfolio in Local (accounting) Currency


Net Yield on Direct Debt Microfinance Portfolio

4.2 Portfolio yield

Largest country exposure in the MIV’s microfinance portfolio (and top 5 countries)

2.2 Portfolio structure and risk

Largest microfinance investment exposure of the MIV (top 5)

2.2 Portfolio structure and risk

Largest microfinance investment unhedged currency exposure of the MIV


Loan loss provisions 2.3 Asset quality

Write-offs 2.3 Asset quality

Leverage = Total liabilities / Total Equity 3.2 Liabilities and ALM

Largest Subscription (top 5, 10) 3.1 Equity

Management fees, others 4.3 Efficiency

Operating expenses 4.3 Efficiency

Yearly return 4.1 Returns

viii. Alignment to the international assessment standards



2. PIIF1 reporting framework of the (the PIIF framework has taken a number of indicators from

the MIV disclosure guidelines of the CGAP); please find below the table showing which areas of social performance analysis cover the PIIF principles.

PIIF indicator Rating area of analysis

Overarching approach 5 Social performance management

Inclusive finance, PIIF indicator 1, range of services

7.2 Services meeting clients’ needs

Inclusive finance, PIIF indicator 2, client protection


Inclusive finance, PIIF indicator 3, fair treatment


Inclusive finance, PIIF indicator 4, responsible investment

1.1 Shareholding & governance, 5.2 Social implementation systems

Inclusive finance, PIIF indicator 5, transparency


Inclusive finance, PIIF indicator 6, balanced returns

6.2 Balanced returns

Inclusive finance, PIIF indicator 7, standards

6.3 Contribution to a responsible sector

3. Client protection principles (6.1 Client protection)

4. MFTransparency (6.1 Client protection)

1 A methodology for the assessment of the indicators reported under the PIIF framework is not available yet; however, several social

aspects of the methodology proposed by MicroFinanza Rating are directly linked with the PIIF reporting framework.

MFR Head Office Via R. Rigola 7, 20159 Milan, Italy

Tel. +39 02 3656 5019 [email protected] www.mf-rating.com

Date post:	25-Sep-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

MIV Rating - MFR · 3. Social value: social performance management, responsible investment and...

Documents