· In October 2023, Singapore REITs saw a decline in share prices due to challenges in the current interest rate environment and rising refinancing risks.
· Higher capitalisation rates are affecting property valuations and pushing leverage closer to regulatory limits.
· S-REITs that secured low-cost debt in the past now face higher refinancing risks and increased interest expenses. This could subject them to a lower leverage threshold, leading to financial implications like distressed property sales, equity fundraising, and abandonment of distribution policy.
· One of the implications was evidenced by Manulife US REIT. We believe that more S-REITs are also at risk of following suit and it is only a matter of time before it actualises.
· We believe that markets are underpricing the risks highlighted above and recommend investors to be selective on S-REITs. We prefer REITs that possess robust balance sheets.
Many Singaporeans may dream of building a portfolio of investment properties to generate a steady stream of income. This, however, can be a challenging feat for many. With Singapore REITs (S-REITs), the opportunity to become landlords and own a piece of the property market is presented to investors. However, what seems like a dream investment may, in reality, turn into a nightmare.
Take Manulife US REIT (SGX:BTOU) as an example. Its portfolio valuation fell to USD 1.63 billion on 30 June 2023 – a 14.6% decline relative to its value of USD 1.91 billion on 31 December 2022. This decline in its portfolio valuation caused its aggregate leverage to spike to 57%, breaching the MAS’ regulatory threshold. Thereafter, it also breached its debt covenants which led to the abandonment of its distribution policy.
In October 2023, we saw declining share price performance in the S-REIT sector, with some S-REITs hitting their 52-week lows. Keppel REIT (SGX:K71U), ARA US Hospitality Trust (SGX:XZL) and Capitaland China Trust (SGX:AU8U) saw their share prices tank by 6%, 17%, and 11% respectively for the month of October.
We recommend investors to be selective on S-REITs despite their seemingly attractive share prices in view of further downside risks due to elevated interest rates that would result in even poorer performances moving forward.
Figure 1: 52-week share price
Higher capitalisation rates to dilute property values and increase leverage
To illustrate the potential downside risks, we first looked into the impact of a 1% increase in capitalisation rates on property values. We stress-tested the top 10 S-REITs by market capitalisation as shown in Table 1 below.
Table 1: Top 10 S-REITs by market capitalisation
|
Name |
Market Cap (SGD billion) |
|
Capitaland Integrated Commercial Trust (CICT) |
11.38 |
|
Capitaland Ascendas REIT (CLAR) |
10.98 |
|
Mapletree Logistics Trust (MLT) |
7.29 |
|
Mapletree Pan Asia Commercial Trust (MPACT) |
6.82 |
|
Mapletree Industrial Trust (MINT) |
6.03 |
|
Frasers Logistics & Commercial Trust (FLT) |
3.73 |
|
Frasers Centrepoint Trust (FCT) |
3.50 |
|
Capitaland Ascott Trust (CLAS) |
3.35 |
|
Suntec REIT (SUN) |
3.22 |
|
Keppel REIT (KREIT) |
3.00 |
|
Source: Bloomberg Finance L.P., iFAST compilations. Data as of 30 Oct 2023. |
|
We found that a 1% expansion in cap rates will result in property valuations falling by an average of -20%. Despite this, we recognise that Mapletree Industrial Trust (SGX:ME8U) and Capitaland Ascendas REIT (SGX:A17U) are less vulnerable against cap rate expansion. On the other hand, a greater impact on property valuations was seen in Keppel REIT due to its lower existing implied cap rate.
Figure 2: Adjusted property valuation after cap rate expansion
A lower value of assets will automatically increase a REIT’s leverage. Thus, we computed the adjusted property values and then calculated the amount of buffer available for these REITs before they will breach the regulatory gearing limit of 50%.
We note that the average available buffer stands at only 4%, which is likely to be insufficient. That said, Frasers Logistics & Commercial Trust (SGX:BUOU) would have the largest buffer of 29%, largely attributed to the fact that it has the lowest reported leverage of 27.8% (as of 1HFY2023) relative to the average peer gearing ratio of 38.5%.
On the flip side, S-REITs with no buffer are Mapletree Pan Asia Commercial Trust (SGX:N2IU), Suntec REIT (SGX:T82U), and Keppel REIT due to their high gearing ratio of 40.7%, 42.6%, and 39.2% respectively in 1HFY2023.
This may sound like bad news for investors. We caution that this is only the tip of the iceberg as we look to capture the near-term refinancing risks in the next layer of our stress test.
Figure 3: Buffer available before breaching threshold
Refinancing risks persist, dragging down interest coverage ratios
In this layer of stress test, we estimate S-REITs’ new cost of debt in accordance with the prevailing high interest rate environment. We compute the cost of debt after refinancing in 2025, with interest rates based on a credit spread over the MAS Singapore Overnight Rate (SORA).
Through our analysis, we find that some S-REITs who locked in a low cost of debt a few years ago and have a huge proportion of their debt maturing in the next two years would face the greatest refinancing risks. These include Frasers Logistics & Commercial Trust and Capitaland Ascott Trust (SGX:HMN), which would both see an increase of over 50% in their cost of debt.
Figure 4: Cost of debt after refinancing
Thereafter, we estimate the higher interest expense that will be incurred, assuming that no new debt would be taken on. It is worth highlighting that higher interest expense lowers the interest coverage ratio (ICR).
It is crucial to look into the ICR as it determines which leverage threshold a REIT would be subjected to. On 16 April 2020, MAS announced that it would raise with immediate effect the leverage limit for S-REITs from 45% to 50%, to provide S-REITs greater flexibility to manage their capital structure amid the challenging environment created by the COVID-19 pandemic. MAS also proposed to require S-REITs to have a minimum ICR of 2.5 times before they are allowed to increase their leverage to beyond the prevailing 45% limit (up to 50%).
We note that Suntec REIT is currently subjected to a limit of 45% due to its ICR of 2.1X (as of 1HFY2023). Our findings have also shown that some S-REITs would see their ICR fall below 2.5X because of higher interest expenses, which would lower their leverage limit from 50% to 45%. They are Mapletree Pan Asia Commercial REIT, Capitaland Ascott Trust, and Keppel REIT, as highlighted in red in Figure 5.
So, the next question would be if these S-REITs have enough buffer for their property valuations to fall, relative to the new threshold of 45%.
The short answer is no.
Suntec REIT, Mapletree Pan Asia Commercial REIT, and Keppel REIT already have no buffer at a threshold limit of 50% after adjusting for cap rate expansion. On the 45% limit, we note that Capitaland Ascott Trust would also have no buffer. Hence, as we estimate that the ICRs will fall below 2.5X for these S-REITs, the downside risks now appear even larger.
Figure 5: Interest coverage ratio after refinancing
Financial implications upon breaching the threshold
Upon breaching the regulatory gearing limit, the financial implications faced by these S-REITs include distressed sales of properties, equity fundraising, and abandonment of distribution policy.
In the event of distressed sales of properties, it could potentially cause a ripple effect in the market and widespread falling property valuations. Meanwhile, net property income will be reduced.
Moreover, to further lower its leverage, a REIT may seek equity fundraising, which may not be desirable at the current low share price. This move could also dilute the equity value of its existing shareholders.
Lastly, S-REITs are also at risk of eventually breaching other debt covenants, forcing them to abandon their distribution policy.
An example is Manulife US REIT, which breached its debt covenants, leading to the abandonment of its distribution policy. More S-REITs are also at risk of following suit, and we believe it is only a matter of time before it actualises.
Conclusion
After running stress tests involving cap rate expansion and refinancing risks on the 10 largest S-REITs by market cap, we believe investors should be selective on S-REITs as the downside risks have not been fully priced in.
Based on our analysis, we recommend investors to consider S-REITs with greater resiliency such as Capitaland Ascendas REIT and Mapletree Industrial Trust, which have a greater buffer against cap rate expansion and would experience a relatively smaller increase in cost of debt after adjusting for refinancing.
On the other hand, we advise investors to avoid Mapletree Pan Asia Commercial REIT, Capitaland Ascott Trust, Suntec REIT, Keppel REIT as we believe that these S-REITs would suffer greatly from cap rate expansion and near-term refinancing risks.
Declaration:
For specific disclosure, at the time of publication of this report, IFPL (via its connected and associated entities) and the analyst who produced this report hold a NIL position in the abovementioned securities.
All materials and contents found in this site are strictly for general circulation and informational purposes only and should not be considered as an offer, or solicitation, to deal in any of the funds or products found/identified in this site. While iFAST Financial Pte Ltd ("IFPL") has tried to provide accurate and timely information, there may be inadvertent delays, omissions, technical or factual inaccuracies and typographical errors. Any opinion or estimate contained in this report is made on a general basis and neither IFPL nor any of its servants or agents have given any consideration to nor have they or any of them made any investigation of the investment objective, financial situation or particular need of any user or reader, any specific person or group of persons. You should consider carefully if the products you are going to purchase are suitable for your investment objective, investment experience, risk tolerance and other personal circumstances. If you are uncertain about the suitability of the investment product, please seek advice from a financial adviser, before making a decision to purchase the investment product. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. The value of the investment products and the income from them may fall as well as rise. Opinions expressed herein are subject to change without notice. In respect of any matters arising from, or in connection with the said research analyses or research reports, recipients of the report are to contact IFPL at 10 Collyer Quay, #26-01 Ocean Financial Centre Building, Singapore 049315, or by telephone at +65 6557 2853. Where the report contains research analyses or research reports from a foreign research house and if the recipient of such research analyses or research reports is not an accredited investor, expert investor, institutional investor or an ex-accredited investor, IFPL accepts legal responsibility for the contents of such analyses or reports to such persons only to the extent as required by law. Please note that only certain security(ies) herein are available to all investors, while the rest are only available for certain persons to invest in, such as Accredited Investors (as defined in the Securities and Futures Act) or one who invests at least S$200,000 (or its equivalent currency) per transaction. To qualify as an Accredited Investor, one needs to submit a declaration form and certain relevant supporting documents, according to iFAST’s prevailing policies and procedures.
Please read our full disclaimers on the website at ( https://secure.fundsupermart.com/fsmone/policies/328125/investment-account-terms-&-conditions).
iFAST Financial Pte Ltd (IFPL) (registered address: 10 Collyer Quay #26-01 Ocean Financial Centre Singapore 049315, Telephone: 6557 2000) holds the Financial Advisers Licence issued by the Monetary Authority of Singapore ('MAS') to conduct regulated activities of advising on securities, marketing of collective investment schemes and arranging of any contract of insurance in respect of life policies, other than a contract of reinsurance and the Capital Markets Services Licence issued by the MAS to conduct regulated activities of dealing in securities and providing custodial services for securities. While IFPL has made every effort to ensure the independence of the report's contents, IFPL's nature of business is such that IFPL and its connected and associated entities together with their respective directors, officers and staff may be involved in providing dealing or investment-related services in the abovementioned securities, and have taken or may take positions in the securities mentioned in this report, and may also act as the principal for any buy or sell trades.