Precise sculptural timber structure

Underwriting · Control · Recovery

Returns can be modelled. Repayment must be evidenced.

EcoTrust's Investment Framework combines real estate analysis, credit assessment, legal enforceability and portfolio management within a single decision architecture. Only when four levels align can market access become an investable credit position.

Decision Architecture

A convincing transaction is not yet an investment decision.

Real estate financings are usually presented from the base case: expected completion, planned letting, projected sale, intended refinancing. For EcoTrust that is not enough. A credit decision must also answer which assumption can fail first, when debt service comes under pressure, how long the liquidity buffer lasts, and what value actually remains for the Fund after costs, delay and legal enforcement. The Framework therefore separates rigorously between four cases:

01

Asset Case

Economic quality and marketability of the property: use, location, rental income, technical condition, capex need and exit liquidity.

02

Credit Case

Viability of the financing: debt service, leverage, sponsor equity, tenor, covenants and repayment sources.

03

Recovery Case

Economic recovery under deviation: ranking, collateral, process duration, enforcement costs, market-value haircuts and legal enforceability.

04

Portfolio Case

Impact of the single investment on concentration, liquidity, maturities, correlations and the Fund's risk-bearing capacity.

A position can be attractive at asset level and still unsuitable as credit. It can be viable as a single loan and still wrongly sized for the portfolio.

Origination

Origination is the first risk function.

Access to situations that are not broadly marketed is essential to the strategy — but it replaces no investment discipline. EcoTrust reviews opportunities from bank and credit portfolios, workout and risk departments, the direct sponsor network, servicing contexts and selected adviser and intermediary relationships.

Capital-structure dislocations typically carry significant information asymmetry: sellers and borrowers know more about project progress, costs, collateral and conflicts within the capital structure. The first review therefore concentrates not on the offered coupon, but on the origin of the opportunity.

An opportunity is pursued only if the financing trigger is understood, the collateral value is fundamentally plausible and a realistic path to control and repayment is visible.

The first questions

Why is this position becoming available now?
Which economic or regulatory constraint acts on seller and borrower?
Which party needs time, liquidity or balance-sheet relief?
Which assumptions of the existing financing concept failed?
What value remains defensible, independent of the seller's narrative?

Underwriting

Going concern and recovery are calculated separately.

Going-concern analysis

Can the financing be repaid from the planned economic development? The aim is not to recompute the sponsor's business plan, but to identify the assumptions on which repayment of the Fund's capital actually depends.

Sustainable rental income and debt-service capacity
Project and completion status
Remaining cost and liquidity requirements
Sponsor equity and capacity for further contributions
Letting, sale or refinancing progress
Permitting and execution risks
A realistic timeline to repayment

Recovery analysis

A different question: what recovery is achievable if the planned development does not materialise? The recovery value is not a market value less a flat haircut — it is the expected net proceeds after ranking, time, costs and enforceability.

Conservatively realisable property value
Position and enforceability of collateral
Prior-ranking rights and other encumbrances
Costs and duration of restructuring or enforcement
Liquidity need until realisation
Potential third-party-bidder and insolvency risks
Alternative disposal and loan-sale scenarios

A transaction does not become investable merely because the base case works. It must remain controllable in the downside and economically defensible in recovery.

Collateral Analysis

Collateral means enforceable rights — not reported values.

A land charge is not yet full security. What matters are its legal validity, its ranking, the volume of prior-ranking encumbrances and the practical ability to realise it economically. The review does not end with the formal existence of a security: EcoTrust also assesses whether it could be enforced in time — legally and economically — in the relevant adverse scenario.

Unclear ranking, invalid creation, uncontrollable payment flows or unrealisable guarantees cannot be compensated by a higher coupon.

Depending on the transaction, the security package may comprise

First- or junior-ranking land charges
Abstract acknowledgements of debt
Pledges over shares in the property company
Assignment of rental and sale proceeds
Assignment of insurance claims
Control or pledge of project and proceeds accounts
Sponsor or completion guarantees
Hard letters of comfort
Cross-collateral structures
Cash-trap and cash-sweep mechanisms

Stress and Breakpoint Analysis

What matters is not only the stress result, but the point at which the structure breaks.

Classic sensitivity analysis shows how individual metrics move under changed assumptions. EcoTrust additionally examines at which change debt service fails, covenants are breached or the collateral value no longer sufficiently covers the invested capital.

Indicative stress assumptions

Interest rates+200 bps
Property value−15% to −25%
Rental income−10% to −20%
Completion6–12 months delay
Construction and capex coststransaction-specific increase
Refinancinghigher exit rate, lower LTV,
longer marketing period

Breakpoints derived from these scenarios

Maximum sustainable loss of value
Maximum sustainable cost increase
Liquidity runway under delay
Covenant headroom
Additional sponsor funds required
Expected net recovery on enforcement

A large discount is a risk buffer only if it survives time, costs and loss of value.

Quantitative Guardrails

Metrics limit risk. They replace no judgement.

Quantitative guardrails make credit decisions comparable and keep deviations visible. They are not a mechanical approval: a low LTV cannot cure a weak legal position; a high DSCR cannot compensate an unmarketable location or an unrealistic exit assumption.

Deviations are permissible only where offset by additional collateral, a larger discount, extended control rights or other concretely quantifiable buffers — and explicitly approved. All guardrails are indicative and subject to the final fund and transaction documentation.

Senior LTVgenerally ≤ 65%
Whole loan / combined senior + mezzanine LTV≤ 75%
Bridge LTVgenerally ≤ 70%
Sponsor equitygenerally ≥ 25%
DSCR, base case≥ 1.30x
Stressed DSCR≥ 1.10x at +200 bps
ICR, development financings≥ 1.50x stabilised
Senior share of the loan bookgenerally ≥ 70%

Investment Committee

The Investment Committee is a challenge function.

The Committee does not merely confirm the deal team's work. It tests whether investment thesis, risk analysis, contractual structure and portfolio impact are internally consistent. The decision paper must disclose in particular:

Why the opportunity became available
What protects the economic entry basis
Which assumptions repayment depends on
Which risks cannot be fully secured
How base, downside and recovery cases diverge
Which covenants and control rights are required
How the position affects the overall portfolio
Which conditions must be met before drawdown

The Committee may approve, approve with conditions, return for further review or reject. Conditional approval is no licence for later dilution of the structure — material changes to ranking, collateral, use of funds, covenants or repayment require a fresh decision. Conflicts of interest, abstentions, conditions and dissenting views are documented.

Documentation

Underwriting protects only when translated into rights.

Careful analysis loses its value if the protective mechanisms derived from it are not fully anchored in the transaction documentation. The documentation must ensure in particular:

Unambiguous use of funds
Effective creation of all collateral
Clearly defined covenants and test dates
Information and audit rights
Consent requirements for material measures
Distribution restrictions
Progress-linked, controlled drawdowns
Cost-overrun provisions and sponsor support
Cash-trap and cash-sweep mechanisms
Defined events for intensification, acceleration or enforcement

Drawdown occurs only once the approved conditions are met and collateral is validly created in the intended ranking. Speed at closing justifies no deviation from the approved credit structure.

Control of Contingent Income

Upside must not be diluted by cost shifting.

Where financings carry a contingent exit participation, the calculation basis is fixed unambiguously at signing. Net Project Upside may arise exclusively from actually realised proceeds — book-value increases, internal valuations or unexecuted sale assumptions create no payment claim.

An approved project budget and a conclusively defined cost basis
Evidence of sponsor equity actually paid in, and a clearly calculated sponsor hurdle
Caps on sponsor, development and asset-management fees; arm's-length testing of affiliate transactions
Anti-leakage and anti-avoidance provisions
Audit and information rights and independent review of the final account

The contingent participation is never underwritten as a reliable repayment source. The investment must stand on interest, fees, collateral and principal repayment alone.

Portfolio Construction

A good single loan can still be an unsuitable fund investment.

Beyond transaction quality, EcoTrust reviews how an investment affects concentration, liquidity, maturity structure and loss correlation of the portfolio. Indicative portfolio limits:

Single borrower≤ 12% of NAV
Single asset≤ 8% of NAV
Germany Top-7≤ 70%
Residential-led positionsgenerally ≥ 60%
Commercial positions≤ 40%
Senior sharegenerally ≥ 70%

Sponsor groups, repayment dates, refinancing clusters, use types, regional dependencies and shared risk drivers are considered alongside. Several formally distinct loans can represent the same economic risk if they depend on the same sponsor, the same exit liquidity or the same submarket. Diversification is judged by the true independence of repayment sources — not by the number of investments. These limits are indicative and to be confirmed by the final fund documents.

Life of the Position

Monitoring is continuous re-underwriting.

Monitoring

After drawdown, the original credit decision is not merely administered — it is regularly reconciled with actual development: current LTV against defensible valuation, DSCR and ICR against the original underwriting, covenant status and headroom, actual versus planned use of funds, construction, letting and sale progress, liquidity and debt-service reserve, sponsor development, collateral condition and value, tenor and refinancing progress. The central question is not only whether a covenant has been breached, but whether the probability of a future breach is rising and whether the available options still suffice. Defined early-warning indicators trigger intensified reporting, additional information requirements, watchlist classification or formal escalation.

Restructuring and workout

Extra time is valuable only if it improves repayment. A tenor extension solves no economic problem if it merely postpones its realisation. Waivers, extensions or restructurings are considered only where they improve the Fund's expected position — regularly against concrete consideration: additional sponsor equity, partial repayment, additional or improved collateral, higher remuneration or exit fee, cash sweep, distribution stop, tighter covenants, controlled use of funds, binding letting, sale or refinancing milestones, or changes in project governance. The objective is not avoiding a formal default, but maximising the risk-adjusted recovery to the Fund.

Enforcement

Enforcement is an option — not a business model. The ability to enforce creates negotiating power and protects the creditor position, but must not be confused with a guaranteed takeover of the property: enforcement involves time, costs, legal risks, potential third-party bidders and, where applicable, additional liquidity need. Before any enforcement decision, EcoTrust compares consensual restructuring, private-treaty sale, loan sale, controlled change of ownership and formal enforcement. Decisive is not the formally hardest measure, but the route with the highest expected net recovery considering time, cost and execution risk.

Valuation

Value is not a static number.

Credit positions and property collateral respond differently to market, rate and credit-quality changes. Portfolio valuation therefore reflects both the expected cash flows of the credit position and the development of credit quality, market spreads, collateral value and recovery expectation.

Depending on position and accounting framework, methods may include amortised cost with impairment testing, discounted-cash-flow valuation, market-based credit-spread adjustment and model-based valuation where credit or collateral quality changes. Underlying property values are re-examined regularly and upon material events. External valuations and the annual audit add control — without replacing the Manager's ongoing responsibility for a proper NAV.

Investor Reporting

Reporting must make risk development visible.

Institutional investors need more than a retrospective performance figure. Reporting shows whether the original investment thesis still holds, which positions have moved against the underwriting and where risks concentrate in the portfolio.

NAV and capital development
Credit positions and outstanding balances
LTV, DSCR and ICR
Weighted tenor and expected repayments
Sector and geographic concentrations
Covenant status and watchlist positions
Cash-flow and liquidity outlook
Material deviations from the original underwriting

The annual report adds audited financials, valuation, a risk report and further disclosures per the final fund documents. Material events — defaults, restructurings, enforcement measures, significant valuation changes, conflicts of interest — are not held back until the next regular report.

Investment Discipline

The quality of the Framework shows in the transactions it rejects.

A high nominal coupon can compensate none of these deficiencies. The Framework cannot exclude losses — but it ensures that risks are not merely described: each is assigned to an accountable decision, a contractual protection structure and a binding escalation path.

Robust underwriting. Enforceable rights. Active risk management.

EcoTrust does not invest when

The collateral position is not legally or economically robust
The discount does not sufficiently cover the identified risks
Sponsor equity is not evidenced or not effectively subordinated
The repayment route rests solely on rising property values
Material due-diligence gaps can be neither closed nor priced
A potential upside participation is needed to justify the base investment
Necessary control rights cannot be enforceably documented
The investment would create an unacceptable portfolio concentration

This page is addressed exclusively to professional investors. It constitutes neither an offer nor investment advice. Indicative parameters are subject to the final fund and transaction documentation. An investment involves substantial risks, up to and including total loss. See Regulatory Disclosures.