The affirmation reflects Fitch’s view that the banks are likely to receive support from the Uzbekistan authorities in case of need. Support propensity stems from the government’s majority ownership of the banks, their involvement in state programmes, the significant volumes of state-directed lending and sizeable market shares. The government’s ability to provide assistance is currently also solid, considering the rather small size of the banking sector. However, the sovereign credit profile remains constrained by the economy’s structural weaknesses, including the difficult business environment, high concentration and vulnerability to external shocks, Fitch said.

UzPSB, Asakabank and Microcreditbank’s ‘B’ Long-term local currency IDRs reflect the strong track record of both liquidity and capital support, while Agrobank’s is one notch lower at ‘B-’ due to insufficient capital provided by the government after alleged asset embezzlement in 2010, although the bank still received liquidity support and regulatory forbearance.

Fitch also considers that support in foreign currency may be provided in a less timely manner compared with that in local currency in light of existing convertibility regulations. Therefore all four banks’ Long-term foreign currency IDRs are constrained at ‘B-’.

The affirmation of UzPSB, Asakabank and Microcreditbank’s Viability Ratings (VRs) at ‘b-’ and Agrobank’s at ‘ccc’ reflects the limited changes in the banks’ standalone credit profiles since their last review in August 2013.

Asset quality is reasonable in all banks with NPLs below 4% at UzPSB and Microcreditbank, and somewhat higher at Asakabank (13%) and Agrobank (7%). UzPSB fully covered its NPLs, while the three other banks’ coverage was below 55%.

Funding is generally concentrated, but sticky. High loan-to-deposit ratios of over 200% at UzPSB and Microcreditbank reflect significant dedicated state funding for specific programmes financed by the banks and a somewhat higher reliance on the interbank market in the case of Microcreditbank. Liquidity risk is also mitigated by a high share of liquid assets of over 20% (a tighter 10% at Microcreditbank). Refinancing risk is low as the banks have minimal wholesale/external obligations.

Capitalisaiton is healthy at Microcreditbank (Fitch Core capital (FCC)/ risk-weighted assets ratio of 33% at end-2013) even considering unreserved NPLs (7% of equity), and moderate at UzPSB (12%) and Asakabank (17%; undermined by unreserved NPLs equalling high 34% of equity). Agrobank’s low capitalisation (5% FCC ratio adjusted for the unreserved receivable, which appeared on the balance sheet as a result of the 2010 fraud) is a major weakness and the main reason for a lower ‘ccc’ VR.

Profitability is modest with ROAE being at about 12% at UzPSB and Asakabank (and weaker at Microcreditbank and Agrobank) reflecting the mostly directed nature of banks operations and rather weak operating efficiency. Therefore the banks would rely on the government’s capital injections in order to comply with the regulator’s requirements to grow capital by at least 20% annually.

In addition, all the banks’ VRs also factor in commercial franchise limitations, some weaknesses of the operating environment as well as weak corporate governance and potential deficiencies in internal controls, which give rise to significant operational risks.

A change of UzPSB’s, Asakabank’s and Microcreditbank’s Long-term local currency IDRs would be possible in case of a strengthening/weakening of the sovereign’s credit profile. Agrobank’s Long-term local currency IDR could be upgraded if the government replenishes its capital.

A revision of the Support Rating Floor and upgrade of the Support Rating and foreign currency IDRs would require liberalisation of foreign currency regulations.

Downward pressure on the VR could arise from deterioration of the banks’ asset quality, particularly as a result of market stress, realisation of operational risks or continuing build-up of non-core assets on their balance sheets, if this is not offset by equity injections. Potential for an upgrade of the VRs is currently limited. Agrobank’s VR could be upgraded to ‘b-’ if its capitalisation improves.

The rating actions are as follows:

UzPSB
Long-term foreign currency IDR affirmed at ‘B-’; Outlook Stable
Short-term foreign currency IDR affirmed at ‘B’
Long-term local currency IDR affirmed at ‘B’; Outlook Stable
Short-term local currency IDR affirmed at ‘B’
Viability Rating affirmed at ‘b-’
Support Rating affirmed at ‘5’
Support Rating Floor affirmed at ‘B-’

Asakabank
Long-term foreign currency IDR affirmed at ‘B-’; Outlook Stable
Short-term foreign currency IDR affirmed at ‘B’
Long-term local currency IDR affirmed at ‘B’; Outlook Stable
Short-term local currency IDR affirmed at ‘B’
Viability Rating affirmed at ‘b-’
Support Rating affirmed at ‘5’
Support Rating Floor affirmed at ‘B-’

Microcreditbank
Long-term foreign currency IDR affirmed at ‘B-’; Outlook Stable
Short-term foreign currency IDR affirmed at ‘B’
Long-term local currency IDR affirmed at ‘B’; Outlook Stable
Short-term local currency IDR affirmed at ‘B’
Viability Rating affirmed at ‘b-’
Support Rating affirmed at ‘5’
Support Rating Floor affirmed at ‘B-’

Agrobank
Long-term foreign currency IDR affirmed at ‘B-’; Outlook Stable
Short-term foreign currency IDR affirmed at ‘B’
Long-term local currency IDR affirmed at ‘B-’; Outlook Stable
Short-term local currency IDR affirmed at ‘B’
Viability Rating affirmed at ‘ccc’
Support Rating affirmed at ‘5’
Support Rating Floor affirmed at ‘B-’