Thursday, February 20, 2014

The Chinese Dominoes Are About To Fall: Complete List Of Upcoming Trust Defaults - 12 major potential defaults looming in the trust industry , will the PBOC through the big China Banks bail all of these trust products investors out ?


“If something cannot go on forever, it will stop.”


Herbert Stein 



China Faces "Vicious Circle" As Commodity Collateral Collapses

Tyler Durden's picture





 
As we warned last week, stockpiles of iron-ore have reached record levels in China as end-demand slumps but, as Bloomberg notes, this is potentially creating massive dislocations in other markets. Record imports of iron ore and copper, driven by traders who use them as loan collateral, risk repeating the vicious cycle of repayment difficulties and falling prices already seen in the steel-trading market. A stunning 40 percent of the iron ore at China’s ports are part of finance deals (having replaced copper after China's last shadow-banking crackdown) and with the glut, prices drop (driving down the value of collateral on loans) and "borrowers, forced by their bankers to repay loans or to top up collateral, will have to sell the metals, sinking market prices even further and begetting a vicious cycle."

As we noted last week, Bloomberg reportsChina’s record imports of iron ore and copper, driven by traders who use them as loan collateral, risk repeating the vicious cycle of repayment difficulties and falling prices already seen in the steel-trading market.
Iron Ore stockpiles ar record highs...

But Lenders seeking repayment are finding irregularities, including the same pile of materials used as collateral for multiple borrowings, China International Capital Corp. said.
Xiao Jiashou, known as the “steel-trading king” in Shanghai, had his assets frozen as China Minsheng Banking Corp. sues for money owed.
...
About 40 percent of the iron ore at China’s ports are part of finance deals, Mysteel Research estimates.
“The risk comes when metal prices fall by a large magnitude within a short time, driving down the value of the collateral,” Yang Changhua, a researcher with Beijing Antaike Information Development Co., said in a Feb. 19 interview. “Borrowers, forced by their bankers to repay loans or to top up collateral, will have to sell the metals, sinking market prices even further and begetting a vicious cycle.”
And those prices are tumbling:
Steel reinforcement-bar futures in Shanghai have fallen 19 percent in the past year, while iron ore delivered to China’s Tianjin port dropped 22 percent
And non-performing loans are therefore - exploding (as we noted here)...
Traders began having trouble repaying loans when steel prices in China slumped 38 percent in the seven months through August 2012 as the economy slowed. In the southern city of Foshan alone, local banks have given 100 billion yuan in credit to steel traders, Caijing magazine reported this week, citing a local banker it didn’t name. Loans to the sector helped drive non-performing loans in Yunnan province to 5.86 percent as of November 2013...

At China Citic Bank Corp., bad assets surged from 2011 to 2013 mainly because of non-performing loans to the steel-trade industry, Moneyweek magazine reported on Feb. 17, citing bank President Zhu Xiaohuang. The lender said on Dec. 12 that it plans to write off 5.2 billion yuan of bad debt for 2013.

At least a third of China’s 200,000 steel-trading firms will collapse as part of the credit crisis which started at the end of 2011, the official Xinhua news agency said Feb. 7, citing industry estimates. Nanjing Iron & Steel Co. said last month its 2018 bonds may stop trading due to losses.

Everyone should also know that like a metastatic cancer, the amount ofnon-performing, bad loans within the Chinese financial system isgrowing at an exponential pace.
But no matter how much the PBOC cracks down, only one thing matters:
Those cash-starved steel mills or trading firms don’t care whether steel or iron-ore prices are falling,” said Zhang Jizhou, a trader at Ningbo Future Import & Export Co. “Their priority is to get cash flow so they can survive.”

So the shadow-banking system filled the gap as prime lenders disappeared...

Which means, howevere well intended, thePBOC is exacerbating the situation that many have drawn ugly comaprisons to the subprime-lending bubble in the US.
Simply put, the 'clever' people in China - having had their copper financind taken away, have shifted to steel - as the following diagram explains (just replace Copper warrants with Iron Ore...)


Which will end just as disastrously... unless of course, China once again unleashes the ghost cities building spree. Which it inevitably will: after all it has become all too clear that not one nation - neither Developing nor Emerging - will dare deviate from the current status quo course of unsustainable, superglued house of cards "muddle-through" until external, and internal, instability finally forces events into a world where everyone now has their head in the proverbial sand.

The big question is then, does China re-ignite huge inflation in an attempt to save its vicious-circle-facing economy or does the "pig in the python" get expelled first as fast-money carry leaves en masse and crushes collateral values...




















"The Pig In The Python Is About To Be Expelled": A Walk Thru Of China's Hard Landing, And The Upcoming Global Harder Reset

Tyler Durden's picture






By now everyone knows that the Chinese credit bubble has hit unprecedented proportions. If they don't, we remind them with the following chart of total bank "assets" (read debt) added since the collapse of Lehman: China literally puts the US to shame, where in addition to everything, the only actual source of incremental credit growth over the same time period has been the Fed as banks have used reserves as margin for risk purchases instead of lending. 

Everyone should also know that like a metastatic cancer, the amount of non-performing, bad loans within the Chinese financial system is growing at an exponential pace.

Finally, what everyone learned over the past month, is that as the two massive, and unresolvable forces, come to a head, the first cracks in the facade are starting to appear as first one then another shadow-banking Trust product failed and had to be bailed out in the last minute.
However, as we showed last week, and then again last night, the default party in China is only just beginning as Trust failures in the coming months are set to accelerate at a breakneck pace.

The $64K question is will the various forms of government be able to intercept and bail these out in time, as they have been doing so far despite their hollow promises of cracking down on moral hazard: after all, everyone certainly knows what happened when Lehman was allowed to meet its destiny without a bailout - to say that the CNY10 trillion Chinese shadow banking industry will not have far more dire consequences if allowed to fall without government support is simply idiotic.
But what could be the catalyst for this outcome which inevitably would unleash the long-overdue Chinese hard landing, and with it, a new global depression?
Ironically, the culprit may be none other than the Fed with the recently instituted taper, and the gradual, at first, then quite rapid unwind of the global carry trade.
Bank of America explains:
QE and the Emerging Markets carry trade

The QE channel has worked through Emerging Markets and China is a key vehicle. By lowering the US government bond yields to a bare minimum, and zero –ish at the short end, a search for yield globally ensued. Emerging market banks and corporates have gone on an international leverage binge, yet another carry trade, the third in 20 years. The first one was driven by European banks, financing East Asian capex – that ended in 1997. The second one was global banks and equity-FDI supporting mainly capex in the BRICs. That ended in 2008. This time, it is increasingly non-equity: commercial banks and more importantly, the bond market – often undercounted in the BoP and external debt statistics that conventional analysis looks at.

Chart 9 shows the rise of EM external loans and bond issuance (both by residence and nationality). Since, end-3Q2008 to end-3Q2013, external borrowing from banks and bonds has risen USD1.9tn. Bank loans have risen by USD855bn and bond issuance in foreign currencies by nationality is up USD1,042bn. In the prior five-year period (i.e. end-3Q2003 – end-3Q2008), forex bond issuance rose only USD432bn. Clearly, the importance of external bond issuance is rising. See Table 5 for details.

In China, since, end-3Q2008 to end-3Q2013, outstanding external borrowing from banks and bonds has gone from USD207bn to USD849n – a net rise of USD655bn. Outstanding bank loans are up from USD161bn to USD609bn – a net rise of USD464bn. Bond issuance in foreign currencies by nationality is up from USD46bn to USD240bn – a net rise of USD191bn. In the prior five-year period (ie, end-3Q2003 – end-3Q2008), forex bond issuance rose only USD28bn in China. Clearly, the importance of external bond issuance is rising in China.


There is more to this story.

As mentioned earlier, for externally-issued bonds, USD1,042bn has been raised by the nationality of the EM borrower since end-3Q 2008, but USD724bn by residence of the borrower – a gap of USD318bn, or 44%. This undercount is USD165bn in China, USD100bn in Brazil, USD62bn in Russia, and USD37bn in India. The carry trade this time around was helped substantially by access to the bond market, especially from overseas affiliates of EM banks and corporations.

There are a lot of moving parts in the balance of payments that finally affect the change in international reserves at any EM central bank – eg, the current account, portfolio equity investment and direct equity investment, and debt flows – both from the bond market and lending from banks. We focus on the link between these debt flows and the international reserves in China. As Table 5 below shows, China’s external debt – from bond issuance and forex borrowing from banks – rose USD655bn during 3Q08-3013.


We posit that this large rise was in part driven by the carry trade offered up by QE – China banks and corporates issued substantial forex-denominated bonds, and borrowed straight loans from international banks. We recognize the caveat that correlation does not imply causation. The USD655bn rise in China debt issuance is highly correlated to the Fed’s balance sheet since late-2008. As Chart 11 shows, the rise in China debt issuance of USD 655bn has (along with FDI and the C/A surplus), boosted international reserves by USD1,773bn since late-2008. Also, as Chart 11 shows, the USD1,773bn rise in China international reserves mirrors the rise of USD2,585bn in the EM monetary base. Lastly, the rise of China’s monetary base of USD2,585bn correlates well with the USD10.9tr rise in China’s broad money expansion.

 

As the Fed tapers, and the size of its balance sheet stabilizes/contracts, we should expect this sequence to reverse. Confidence is a fragile membrane. Not only does the Fed’s balance sheet matter as a source of funds, but we believe so does the attractiveness of the recipient of the carry trade – and the trust in its collateral. As Gary Gorton puts it...

The output of banks is money, in the form of short-term debt which is used to store value or used as a transaction medium. Such money is backed by a portfolio of bank loans in the case of demand deposits, or by collateral in the form of a specific bond in the case of repo. The backing is designed to make the bank debt as close to riskless as possible — in fact, so close to riskless than nobody wants to really do any due diligence on the money, just transact with it. But the private sector cannot produce riskless debt and so it can happen that the backing collateral is questioned. This typically happens at the peak of the business cycle. If its value is questioned, it loses its “moneyness” so no one wants it, and cash is preferred. But as we know, if everyone wants their cash at the same moment, their demands cannot be satisfied. In this sense, the financial system is insolvent. (interview with the FT) 

What makes sense for an individual carry trade - borrow low, invest at higher rates - falls prey to the fallacy of composition, when too many engage in the same carry trade. And eventually question the underlying collateral, now huge, and potentially suspect. China is a case in point. If our colleagues David Cui and Bin Gao are right, the trust sector in China could create rollover risks that reverse a gluttonous carry trade within China, but partly financed overseas. In China's case, this trade was between low global interest rates, low Chinese deposit rates, expectations of perpetual RMB appreciation on the one hand, and higher investment returns promised by Trusts on the other. A part of the debt funds raised overseas, we suspect were put to work in this Trust carry trade. The HK-based banks are big participants in intermediating the China carry trade - as Chart 12 shows, their net lending to China went from 18% of HK GDP in 2007 to 148% in late-2013.

There are always fancy names given to carry trades – financial liberalization of capital accounts, the Bangkok International Banking Facility, currency internationalization, etc. We remain skeptics of these buzzwords.

 

The potential consequences of Trust defaults and a China carry trade unwind

1. If the EM carry trade diminishes as a consequence of a changed Fed policy and/or less attractive risk-adjusted returns in EMs as collateral quality is questioned, the sources of China’s forex reserve accumulation will need to change. Perhaps to bigger current account surpluses, more equity FDI and portfolio investment through privatization and more open equity markets. If that does not happen, expanding the Chinese monetary base might require PBOC to increase net lending to the financial system and/or monetize fiscal deficits (this last part has not worked so well in EMs).

2. Potential asset deflation is a risk, as the carry trades diminish/unwind. Property prices are at risk – the collateral value for China’s financial systems. This is not a dire projection – it simply seeks to isolate the US QE as a key driver of China’s monetary policy and asset inflation, and highlights the magnitudes involved, and the transmission mechanism. Investors should not imbue stock-price movements and property price inflation in China with too much local flavor – this is mainly a US QE-driven story, in our view.

3. Currently, China’s real effective exchange rate is one of the strongest in the world. Concerns about China’s Trust sector, and its underlying collateral value, sees some of this carry trade unwound, the RMB could be under pressure.


4. Given HK’s role in the China carry trade, HK property prices and its banking system should be watched carefully for signs of stress.

5. UK, US, and Japan banking systems have been active lenders to China since QE. They should be on watch if the Trust rollover risk materializes and creates a growth shock in China. See Chart 15.

 

6. Safe haven bids for DM government bonds, overseas property and precious metals might emerge from China.

Could the party go on? Yes, if for some reason a significant deterioration in the US labor market, or a deflationary shock from China, or any other surprise that could lead to a cessation of the US tapering could prolong this carry trade.This is not the house base case. We believe it is better to start preparing for a post-QE world. As one of our smartest clients told us: “the main theme in the past five years was QE. If that is coming to an end, investments and themes that worked in the past five years must therefore be questioned.” We agree.
* * *
Yes, Bank of America said all of the above - every brutally honest last word of it.
The question, however, in addition to "why", is whether the Fed also agrees with BofA's stunningly frank, and quite disturbing conclusion, perhaps finally realizing that aside from the US, the biggest house of cards that would topple once the "flow"-free emperor is exposed in his nudity, is that of the world's largest "growth" (and credit) dynamo of the past two decades - China.Because, as noted above, if Lehman's collapse was bad, a deflationary collapse brought on by Chinese hard landing coupled with a full unwind of the global carry trade, would be disastrous and send the world into a depression the likes of which have never before been seen.
Finally, for those who want the blow by blow, here is BofA's tentative take of what the preliminary steps of the next global great depression will look like:
If we do experience a sizable default, the knee-jerk market reaction will be cash hoarding since it will strike as a big surprise. Thus, we expect the repo rate to rise first, while the long term government bond would get bid due to risk aversion flows.

However, what follows will be quite uncertain, aside from PBoC injecting liquidity and easing monetary policy to help short term rate come down. It has been proven again and again the Chinese government will get involved and be proactive. The bond market reaction will be different depending on the government solution.
Alas, at that point, not even the world's largest bazooka will be enough.
At this point one should conclude that reality - through massive, unprecedented liquidity injections - has been deferred long enough. It is time to let the markets finally return to some semblance of uncentrally-planned normalcy: there is a reason why nature abhors a vacuum. Even if it means the eruption of the very painful grand reset, washing away decades of capital misallocation, lies and ill-gotten wealth, so very overdue.

















http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-02-19/chinese-dominoes-are-about-fall-complete-list-upcoming-trust-defaults



The Chinese Dominoes Are About To Fall: Complete List Of Upcoming Trust Defaults

Tyler Durden's picture





As has been widely reported on these pages in the past month, after a near-reality experience almost claimed the first material Chinese shadow banking default, the Chinese government and central bank did what they do best: a mysterious "white knight" emerged out of nowhere, and bailed out the Credit Equals Gold #1 Trust. A few days later, we reported that China Development Bank lent 2 billion yuan to coal company Shanxi Liansheng, which owes almost 30b yuan to lenders including banks, trusts and asset management firms. And while we know how "difficult" it was for China to do the wrong thing and encourage moral hazard, despite repeated assurances by one after another PBOC director that this time the central bank means business, we have good news: these two narrowly averted Trust defaults are just the beginning - it is all downhill from here.
As Bank of America reports in an analysis by David Cui, the Trust defaults are about to get hot and heavy. To wit:
We believe that during April to July the market may see many trust products threatening to default, especially those related to coal mines. By our estimate, the first real default most likely could happen in May with a Sichuan lead/zinc trust product worth Rmb140mn. This is because the product is relatively small (so the government may use it as a test case), the underlying asset is not attractive (so little chance of 3rd parties taking it over) and we also have heard very little on parties involved trying to work things out. Whether this will trigger an avalanche of future trust defaults remains to be seen and this presents a key risk to the market in our opinion.

... it’s still possible that many of the upcoming cases in Apr-July may get worked out one way or the other. Nevertheless, as we believe that many of the underlying assets of the trust products are insolvent, it’s a matter of time that many products will ultimately default, in our view. Various bail-outs will only delay the inevitable.
From BofA's David Cui
12 potential defaults reported by the media
Table 1 summarizes the information on the 12 major potential defaults in the trust industry that have been reported by the media. Most of them are coal mine related and heavily concentrated in one area, Shanxi Province. So far it seems to us that most of them may get extended upon the due date. The only exception over the next few months appears to be a product issued by China Credit Trust for a lead and zinc miner in Sichuan, Nonggeshan. Even without any major default over the next few months, the process of debt restructuring can be messy and weigh heavily on market sentiment.
19 Feb 2014, Rmb109mn borrowed by Liansheng & arranged by Jilin Trust
  • Details: This Rmb109mn tranche is part of a six-tranche trust product worth a total of Rmb973mn arranged by Jilin Trust for Liansheng, a Shanxi coal miner. The other five tranches have matured since 2H 2013 and remain overdue.
  • Potential outcome: Repayment may be extended.
  • Reason: Liansheng is undergoing a debt restructuring coordinated by the Shanxi provincial government. 1) The provincial government plans to help out involved financial institutions to ensure the region’s access to ongoing financing. According to people close to the situation, the implicit guarantee practice will most likely continue with the Liansheng’s case. 2) Trust companies may have to follow banks to help the miner out. Banks have agreed to extend their mid/long term loans by three years. Top 3 banks have total debts of Rmb10.6bn to Liansheng; top 3 trust lenders, Rmb3.7bn.
(Shanghai Securities News, 2/11; Economic Information, 2/13)
21 Feb 2014, Rmb500mn borrowed by Liansheng & arranged by Shanxi Trust
  • Potential outcome: repayment may be extended.
  • Reason: Same as the Jilin Trust case.
(Caiing 1/27; China Securities Journal, 1/27; 21st Century Business Herald, 2/14)
07 Mar 2014, Rmb664mn borrowed by Liansheng & arranged by Changan Trust
  • Details: Other than the Rmb664mn product to mature on Mar 7, Changan Trust arranged another two products for Liansheng, totaling Rmb536mn which matured in Nov 2013. Both products remain overdue.
  • Potential outcome: repayment may be extended.
  • Reason: Same as the other Liansheng cases.
(Caiing 1/27; China Securities Journal, 1/27; 21st Century Business Herald, 2/14)
31 Mar 2014, Rmb196mn borrowed by Magic Property & arranged by CITIC Trust
  • Details: invested in an office building in Chongqing. The Chongqing developer ran into financial problems in mid-2013. CITIC Trust tried to auction the collateral but failed to do so because the developer has sold the collateral and also mortgaged it to a few other lenders.
  • Potential outcome: The developer and the trust company may share the repayment.
  • Reasons: 1) When CITIC Trust sold the product, it did not specify the underlying investment project. 2) The local government has intervened, fearing social unrest. A local buyer of a unit in the office building committed suicide as he/she could not obtain the title to the property due to the title dispute between the trust and the developer.
(Source: Financial Planning Weekly, 3/6/2013; Guangzhou Daily, 4/6/2013, Boxun, 5/10/2013)
14 May 2014, Rmb1.5bn borrowed by Liansheng & arranged by China Jiangxi International Trust
  • Potential outcome: repayment may be extended.
  • Reason: Same as the other three Liansheng cases.
(Caiing 1/27; China Securities Journal, 1/27; 21st Century Business Herald, 2/14)
30 May 2014, Rmb140mn borrowed by Nonggeshan & arranged by China Credit Trust
  • Details: invested in a lead and zinc mine in Sichuan.
  • Potential outcome: Likely to default.
  • Reasons: 1) Compared to coal mines of Zhenfu and Liansheng, the lead and zinc mine is a much less attractive asset: it is located in the mountains over 5,000 meters in altitude, inaccessible for 6 months of the year due to weather conditions, with low lead/zinc content; 2) According to an unnamed regulator, the central government is comfortable with trust defaults in the range of Rmb100-200mn.
(Source: 21st Century Business Herald, 31/7/2012; Caiing, 1/27)
25 Jul 2014, Rmb1.3bn borrowed by Xinbeifang & arranged by China Credit Trust
  • Details: Xinbeifang is another Shanxi coal miner.
  • Potential outcome: repayment may be extended.
  • Reason: Xinbeifang is negotiating with an SOE to sell some of its coal mine assets.
(Source: China Securities Journal, 1/15)
27 Jul 2014, Rmb319mn borrowed by Hongsheng & arranged by Huarong Trust
  • Details: Hongsheng is a Shanxi coal miner. Huarong sold another trust product for it which will mature in 4 September 2014, worth Rmb63mn.
  • Potential outcome: repayment may be extended.
  • Reason: Hongsheng may have assets to secure more financing. It issued these two trust products to replace another trust product that matured in Q3 2012. The owner also issued other trust products using his personal property assets as collateral and raised Rmb1.2bn.
(21st Century Business Herald, 20/12/2013)
7 Sept 2014: Rmb400mn borrowed by Zengdai & arranged by CCB Trust
  • Details: 1) The proceeds of the product were invested in financial markets. 2) Its 1st tranche, worth Rmb400mn, matured in Mar 2013 with a 38% loss vs. an expected return of 20-30%. Investors agreed to extend the maturity of the product to Sept 2014. 3) Its 2nd tranche, worth Rmb359mn, matured in June 2013 with a 31% loss vs. an expected return of 20-30%. Investors agreed to extend the maturity of the 2nd tranche to Dec 2014.
  • Potential outcome: The trust company and the investment company may share the losses.
  • Reasons: 1) The investment company refused to repay investors in full at the original due date so the trust company may have to chip in; 2) By Jan 2014, the 1st tranche reported a narrower loss of 24%, and the 2nd tranche, also a narrower loss of 13%; 3) Zengdai may pay on behalf of its investment company for reputation’s sake.
(Source: Securities Daily, 9/7/2013; CCB Trust)
20 Nov 2014, Rmb600mn borrowed by Liansheng & arranged by China Jiangxi Int'l Trust
  • Potential outcome: repayment may be extended.
  • Reason: Same as the other Liansheng cases.
(Caiing 1/27; China Securities Journal, 1/27; 21st Century Business Herald, 2/14)
23 Dec2014: Rmb1.1bn borrowed by Xiaoyi Dewei & arranged by China Resources Trust
  • Details: Xiaoyi Dewei is a Shanxi coal miner. The trust product originally matured in Dec 2013 but repayment was extended to Dec 2014.
  • Potential outcome: Likely to default.
  • Reason: Both the miner and the trust company refused to repay investors in full at the original due date. There has been no reporting on asset sales by Xiaoyi Dewei.
(Source: Financial Planning Weekly, 11 Nov 2013)
15 Jan 2015, Rmb1.2bn borrowed by Hongsheng’s owner & arranged by Minmetals Trust
  • Details: the collateral is the Shanxi coal miner’s personal property assets.
  • Potential outcome: May be replaced by a new trust product.
  • Reason: Same as the July 2014 Rmb319mn trust product issued by Huarong Trust.
(21st Century Business Herald, 20/12/2013)
2Q/3Q 2014 – the next peak maturing period for collective trusts
We consider the trust market the most vulnerable part of the major financing channels for companies, i.e. loan, corporate bond and trust. The quality of the borrowers in the trust market tends to among the lowest. Within the trust market, collective trust products, i.e. those sold to more than one investor, tend to be risker than single trust products, i.e. those sold to a single investor. This is because investors in single trust products tend to be more substantial in resources, thus most likely more sophisticated in their risk control.
The Wind database lists close to 12,000 collective trust products, worth Rmb1.34tr, which cover roughly half of the collective trust market (Rmb2.72tr as of the end of 2013). It has reasonably good quality data series on the issuing dates and amounts raised. However, data on maturing dates are sporadic. We estimate that the average duration of the trust products is around 2 years. Based on this assumption and the issuing dates, we have mapped out a rough maturing profile of the collective trust market. As we can see from Chart 1, 2Q and 3Q this year will be the next peak maturing period for this market.
Coal mine trusts maturity schedule
We went through the offering documents of the top 200 collective trust products by size (the smallest being Rmb400mn), worth some Rmb145bn in total. They represent roughly 10% of the trust products in the Wind database and 5% of the overall collective trust market. We identified the industries of the issuers, the regions where their businesses are located and the maturity dates of the products. Table 2 summarizes the results.
We believe that coal mine trusts are the most likely to default over the coming months because 1) coal price has dropped sharply in recent quarters; 2) most of the issuers are private enterprises; and 3) they tend to be from provinces whose governments rely heavily on resources related income, e.g., Shanxi and Inner Mongolia. On the other hand, the property market has been reasonably buoyant in recent times while LGFVs generally have access to re-financing until the implicit guarantee is removed (a whole different topic worthy another report later). Based on the maturing schedule of the top 200 collective trust products, we expect more noise about coal mine trust defaults around Apr, June and July (Chart 2).
Table 3 lists the coal mine trust products that are in our study.
For the trust market, we only have data on approximately half of the collective trust market, which in turn, accounts for about a quarter of the overall trust market. So essentially, we only covered about 1/8 of the total trust market with our analysis. Single trusts are less risky than collective trusts. Nevertheless, if the solvency issue is a systemic problem as we expect, many single trusts will ultimately default by our assessment.
Our analysis has largely zoomed in on coal mine trusts because they represent the clear and present danger given how depressed the coal market has been. However, property related trusts may come under increasing pressure as we sense that the property market may be turning south in small cities. As a result, some of those related products may threaten to default reasonably soon. Then we have the big unknown – LGFV trusts. Whether and when they may default is largely a political decision in our opinion.