Representatives of market infrastructure participants discussed the current state and development prospects of Russian securitization for the Encyclopedia of Russian Securitization

Representatives of market infrastructure participants discussed the current state and development prospects of Russian securitization for the Encyclopedia of Russian Securitization – 2026 Cbonds

April 15, 2026

Tags:#Publications

In the new issue of the Encyclopedia of Russian Securitization – 2026 Cbonds, representatives of market infrastructure participants discussed the current state and development prospects of Russian securitization.

The editorial team’s questions were answered by Ivan Makhalin, Partner at LECAP, and Anna Gorelova, Chief Executive Officer of Focus Management:

— Which changes in the 2025 regulatory framework had the greatest impact on the infrastructure of the Russian securitization market?

Anna Gorelova: in 2025, securitization regulation in Russia changed significantly thanks to Federal Law No. 355-FZ of October 26, 2024, which, as of April 25, 2025, allowed the Bank of Russia, in certain cases, to reduce the minimum risk retention requirement for the originator from 20% to 5% of the amount of liabilities under SPV bonds. The aim is to stimulate non-mortgage securitization, reduce issuer costs, and improve market liquidity while maintaining asset quality requirements. The complementary Bank of Russia Directive No. 7043-U of April 11, 2025 established the criteria under which 5% risk retention is possible. In many respects, these criteria are similar to the requirements for “simple, transparent and comparable” (STC) securitization under Bank of Russia Regulation No. 647-P: the securitized receivables must be homogeneous, arise no later than 6 months before the transaction, obligations must be performed at least once every 6 months, and so on. At the same time, the key requirement for 5% risk retention — the presence of a rating for the senior tranche — is, unfortunately, still impossible to satisfy. The minimum rating level must be set by the Bank of Russia Board of Directors, but no such decision has yet been adopted.

— How effective, in your view, is the interaction between infrastructure participants at present?

Ivan Makhalin: interaction between infrastructure participants in the Russian securitization market is showing progress (an increase in the number of transactions and partnerships, digitization of processes), but its effectiveness is constrained by a number of issues: low liquidity of non-mortgage securities, regulatory barriers (the need to ease capital requirements and risk weights), an insufficiently active secondary market, inadequate transparency in asset valuation, and concentration of credit risk in the banking system. We believe that a qualitative leap will require further improvements in regulation, greater data transparency, and incentives for institutional investors.

— Are changes in procedures needed to work with more complex or non-standard pools?

Anna Gorelova: to increase the number of transactions involving non-standard asset pools within securitization, changes are needed: more flexible asset quality assessment methodologies that take their specific features into account, development of risk management tools (stress testing, hedging, insurance), tax optimization for certain asset types, and also development of the secondary market for bonds issued in securitization transactions among institutional and private investors.

— Is the infrastructure ready for the entry of new originators and arrangers? Issuers?

Ivan Makhalin: the infrastructure of the Russian securitization market (exchanges, depositories, management companies) is generally ready for the entry of new originators, arrangers, and issuers: basic mechanisms are in place, there is experience working with different asset types, and there have been positive regulatory changes (for example, the previously mentioned reduction of the risk retention threshold from 20% to 5%). We are confident that the market is already ready for the emergence of non-standard non-mortgage assets.

— Is the current level of transparency in transactions sufficient?

Anna Gorelova: the current level of transparency in securitization transactions in Russia is insufficient: despite relative progress in the mortgage segment (cover registers, statistics from the Bank of Russia and DOM.RF), gaps remain in non-mortgage securitization — incomplete disclosure of data on underlying assets, restructurings, and pool quality, and the absence of standardized anonymized reports from servicing agents. A vivid example is the SPV RLO transaction, where inconsistencies were identified in the formation of the special-purpose reserve fund (RFSN) compared with the offering documentation; this became the basis for a downgrade of the senior tranches’ credit rating (from “AAA(ru.sf)” to “A−(ru.sf)”) and required additional analysis of the history of inflows and write-offs, demonstrating a lack of operational transparency and risks for investors due to discrepancies between actual actions and the stated terms.

— What regulatory changes would, in your view, be most beneficial for the market? Which key infrastructure changes are possible already this year?

Ivan Makhalin: for the development of the securitization market, the following are needed: the aforementioned reduction in the minimum risk retention by the originator, a revision of risk weights for junior tranches (elimination of 1250%), and standardization of disclosure across different asset classes. For certain assets, such as lease payments, it would be advisable to consider changes to tax legislation. To develop synthetic securitization, it is important to allow risk to be removed from the balance sheets of financial institutions and banking groups through CDS, TRS, and structured bonds. As we understand it, the Bank of Russia is already working in this direction. An expansion of the scope of application of specialized project finance companies has also long been overdue: with proper fine-tuning, this structure could be used for whole business securitization. Finally, the development of regulation and practice relating to digital financial assets (DFAs) will, in the future, make it possible to use them both for tokenizing receivables included in securitized pools and as a replacement for the bonds issued within securitization transactions. We believe that the development of these areas is an ongoing process that cannot be confined to the current year.

— What will be the main indicator of the success of the Russian securitization market in 2026?

Anna Gorelova: the main indicator of the success of the Russian securitization market in 2026 will be a notable increase in the number of non-mortgage securitization transactions — primarily involving pools of consumer loans and microloans, rental and lease payments, and credit card receivables. An increase in the volume of such transactions (according to Expert RA, in 2026 the volume of non-mortgage securitization may double the historical record of 2014, approaching RUB 500 billion) will indicate market diversification, an expansion in the range of originators and investors, and successful adaptation of the infrastructure to work with complex and heterogeneous assets.
The full version of the material with answers from all participants is available on the Cbonds website — Infrastructure of the Securitization Market: Challenges, Solutions and Prospects