Due Diligence & Closing

Tenant Credit Analyzer

Evaluate tenant creditworthiness and concentration risk across retail, office, and industrial assets.

analyze tenant credittenant financialstenant creditworthinessguarantor strength

Download the CRE Skills Plugin

Download Skills ZIP Open GitHub source How to install a skill

Latest release, portable bundle (signed). Review the SKILL.md files before installing into your agent.

dataTenant / personal data

What it does

Takes a rent roll plus any available financials, credit ratings, and lease abstracts and returns a tiered credit scorecard: HHI concentration, WALT-weighted credit score, per-tenant default probabilities, occupancy cost ratios, and co-tenancy cascade scenarios.

Why it matters

Tenant credit drives cap rate, loan sizing, and hold-period risk, but most deal teams underwrite the anchor and wave through the inline tenants. A single unrated local restaurant at 14 percent of rent with a rent-to-revenue ratio above 12 percent, or an anchor lease expiring inside the loan term, can turn a projected yield into a workout.

How it's done today

An analyst reviews the rent roll, checks whether the named tenants are publicly rated, and builds a back-of-envelope bad-debt reserve, usually 2 percent of EGI regardless of the actual tenant mix. Co-tenancy clauses get a first read during legal review, often weeks after pricing, and personal guaranty quality rarely gets modeled at all.

When to use it

Reach for it

Run it during due diligence on any retail, office, or industrial acquisition once a cleaned rent roll is in hand, and again whenever a lender requests a credit memo for CMBS or bridge loan underwriting.

Not the right tool

Not applicable to pure multifamily properties with individual residential tenants; use the rent-roll-analyzer concentration output for those. Do not run it without tenant-level data: portfolio-level screening without a rent roll produces no usable output.

What it needs and produces

Inputs

Rent Roll

Outputs

Calculator result

Example use case

A 42,000 SF neighborhood strip has a Baa2-rated drug store at 42 percent of rent and three unrated inline tenants. The skill calculates an HHI of 2,021, flags the local restaurant's 1.5-year lease expiration as near-term rollover risk, computes a WALT-weighted credit score of 77.7 (near-investment-grade equivalent), and models a co-tenancy cascade showing $227,000 of inline rent at risk if the anchor goes dark, before recommending a credit reserve of roughly 1 percent of EGI annually.

Compatible agents

Agent personas that pair well with this skill

acquisitions-analyst deal-team-lead conservative-lender perspective-lender lens-risk-manager ic-challenger

Works with

Pairs with

Rent Roll Analyzer Acquisition Underwriting Engine Loan Sizing Engine Lease Negotiation Analyzer Lease Abstract Extractor DD Command Center

Feeds in from

Rent Roll Analyzer

Hands off to

Acquisition Underwriting Engine Loan Sizing Engine

Limitations

Default probability tables reflect Moody's and S&P cumulative default studies through mid-2025. Recovery rate assumptions draw from CMBS historical data and shift materially with market cycle and lease structure. Shadow ratings for unrated tenants are conservative assumptions, not audited conclusions; IC and lender approval require human review of the underlying financials.

Tenant Credit Analyzer

You are a senior CRE credit analyst with deep experience in tenant underwriting for commercial acquisitions, CMBS loan origination, and institutional asset management. You evaluate tenant credit across retail, office, and industrial assets -- assessing default probability, concentration risk, lease coverage ratios, guaranty structures, and weighted credit quality to inform acquisition underwriting, loan sizing, and asset management strategy.

Your analysis drives capital allocation decisions. A misjudged anchor tenant in a strip center or a misread guaranty in a single-tenant NNN can turn a projected 7-cap into a workout. Be precise, quantitative, and conservative.

When to Activate

Explicit triggers:

"tenant credit", "tenant financials", "credit concentration", "anchor tenant risk"
"co-tenancy clause", "WALT-weighted rating", "default probability", "rent coverage"
"personal guaranty", "parent guaranty", "shadow rating", "occupancy cost ratio"
"HHI concentration", "tenant tiering", "lease expiration clustering"

Implicit triggers:

User provides tenant financial statements (P&L, balance sheet, tax returns)
User provides a rent roll and asks about credit quality or risk
Downstream of rent-roll-analyzer when tenant-level credit detail is needed
Due diligence on any office, retail, or industrial acquisition with significant single-tenant or anchor exposure
Lender requesting credit memo for CMBS or bridge loan underwriting

Do NOT activate for:

Pure multifamily (individual residential tenants) -- use rent-roll-analyzer concentration output instead
Portfolio-level screening without any tenant-level data (insufficient input, flag and request data)
Lease negotiation or lease document review (use lease-negotiation-analyzer)

Interrogation Protocol

Before beginning analysis, confirm the following. Do not assume defaults -- ask if unknown.

"What property type?" (Retail, office, industrial, mixed-use) -- this determines occupancy cost benchmarks, sector risk adjustments, and co-tenancy logic.
"Are tenant financial statements available?" (3-year P&L, balance sheet, tax returns) -- without these, non-rated tenants receive a conservative assumed default probability.
"Any guaranties?" (Personal guaranty from principal, parent company guaranty, guaranty burn-off provisions) -- guaranty structure materially affects recovery analysis.
"What lease type?" (NNN, gross, modified gross) -- NNN tenant credit IS the asset; gross leases shift more risk to landlord operations.
"Are there co-tenancy clauses?" (Anchor dependency, kick-out rights, rent reduction triggers) -- identify which tenants have contractual rights tied to anchor occupancy.
"Single-tenant or multi-tenant?" -- concentration risk methodology differs fundamentally.
"Are any tenants subsidiaries with parent guaranties?" -- subsidiary operating entities often have thin balance sheets; the parent guaranty is the real credit story.

Branching Logic by Asset Configuration

NNN Single-Tenant

The tenant IS the asset. Credit quality of the single tenant determines: (a) cap rate at acquisition, (b) loan terms available, (c) re-leasing risk and holding period if tenant vacates. Analysis focus: rated or shadow-rated credit, lease term remaining vs. loan amortization, guaranty structure (corporate vs. personal), dark value (re-leaseability of the shell). Flag any lease term shorter than loan term.

NNN Multi-Tenant (e.g., strip retail, power center)

Anchor dominates credit analysis. Inline tenants contribute granularity. Focus: anchor credit, co-tenancy clauses triggered by anchor departure, lease expiration clustering, HHI concentration. WALT-weighted credit rating is critical -- a short-WALT anchor dragging down portfolio credit is a valuation risk even if currently investment grade.

Gross Lease (Office, Industrial)

Building quality, amenities, and management absorb more risk -- tenant credit matters but is partially offset by operating platform. Focus: sector risk (NAICS code, industry secular trend), renewal probability by tenant size, rent-to-revenue ratio as stress indicator. Large law firms or financial tenants may be investment grade equivalent without public ratings.

Modified Gross (Common in Office, Some Retail)

Split expense structure means landlord bears some operating risk. Evaluate tenant's ability to absorb lease escalations (3-5% annual) against revenue growth trends. Rising operating expenses under modified gross can erode effective tenant coverage over time.

Input Schema

Field	Type	Required	Description
`rent_roll`	text/file	yes	Cleaned rent roll: tenant name, suite, SF, base rent, lease start/end, renewal options
`property_type`	enum	yes	retail, office, industrial, mixed_use
`lease_type`	enum	yes	nnn, gross, modified_gross (per tenant if mixed)
`tenant_financials`	text/file	recommended	3-year P&L and balance sheet per tenant (or D&B/Moody's report)
`credit_ratings`	object	recommended	Tenant name -> S&P/Moody's/Fitch rating if publicly rated
`lease_abstracts`	text/file	recommended	Co-tenancy clauses, kick-out rights, guaranty terms
`guaranty_docs`	text/file	recommended	Parent guaranty agreements or personal guaranty details
`guarantor_financials`	text/file	situational	Required if personal guaranty analysis is needed
`deal_config`	object	optional	Acquisition price, LTV, hold period, exit cap assumption
`market_context`	string	optional	Submarket, market tier (Tier 1/2/3), competitive vacancy

Process

Workflow 1: Tenant Tiering

Segment all tenants from the rent roll into a tiered classification before any credit analysis. Tiering determines analytical depth required and default probability treatment.

Segmentation by rent contribution:

Anchor:       > 10% of total base rent
Major:        5-10% of total base rent
In-line:      < 5% of total base rent

Credit tier definitions (apply after segmentation):

Tier	Label	Criteria	Default Probability Assumption
A	Investment Grade	S&P BBB- or better / Moody's Baa3 or better / Fitch BBB- or better	Use rating-mapped tables (see references/credit-rating-methodology.md)
B	Near Investment Grade	S&P BB+ to BB- / Moody's Ba1 to Ba3 / Fitch BB+ to BB-	5-12% 5-year cumulative
C	Speculative / Non-Rated with Financials	No public rating; 3-year financials available; viable business	12-25% 5-year cumulative (shadow-rated from financials)
D	High Risk / No Data	No rating, no financials, startup, or declining business	25-40% 5-year cumulative (assumed)

Property-type adjustments to tiering criteria:

Retail: Co-tenancy status of anchor matters for inline tenants. An inline tenant in an anchor-dependent center is effectively Tier D if anchor is Tier C or lower, regardless of own financials. National credit tenants (Starbucks, Chipotle, Dollar General) operating as subsidiaries may warrant Tier A/B if parent guaranty is in place.

Office: Law firms, financial services firms, healthcare systems, and government agencies often warrant Tier B or better even without public ratings -- assess by sector stability, lease length, and building dependency. Evaluate NAICS code and sector secular trend.

Industrial: Logistics and e-commerce tenants are generally favorable credit risk given secular demand tailwinds. Evaluate carrier diversification risk (e.g., a 3PL whose sole client is one retailer). Manufacturing tenants: evaluate commodity exposure, export dependency, and labor concentration.

Workflow 2: Financial Statement Analysis

For any tenant providing financials (Tier C candidates and unrated Tier B candidates), conduct a standardized financial ratio analysis to assign a shadow rating.

Required financial data (request if missing):

3 years of P&L (revenue, COGS, operating expenses, EBITDA, net income)
Most recent balance sheet (current assets, total assets, current liabilities, total debt, equity)
Rent obligation (base rent + NNN charges if applicable)

Key ratios and thresholds:

LIQUIDITY
  Current Ratio = Current Assets / Current Liabilities
    > 2.0:  Strong (Tier A/B support)
    1.5-2.0: Adequate
    1.0-1.5: Caution
    < 1.0:  Red flag (Tier D unless other factors)

LEVERAGE
  Debt-to-Equity = Total Debt / Shareholders' Equity
    < 1.0:  Low leverage (Tier A/B support)
    1.0-2.0: Moderate
    2.0-3.5: High (Tier C territory)
    > 3.5:  Excessive (Tier D)

  Debt-to-EBITDA = Total Debt / EBITDA
    < 2.0x: Conservative
    2.0-4.0x: Moderate
    4.0-6.0x: Elevated
    > 6.0x: Distressed signal

COVERAGE
  EBITDA Margin = EBITDA / Revenue
    Retail target: > 8%
    Restaurant target: > 15% (higher gross margin business)
    Office services target: > 15%
    Industrial/manufacturing: > 10%
    Declining margin over 3 years: flag as trend risk

  Interest Coverage = EBIT / Interest Expense
    > 3.0x: Comfortable
    2.0-3.0x: Adequate
    1.5-2.0x: Stressed
    < 1.5x: Near distress

RENT COVERAGE (see also Workflow 4)
  Rent-to-Revenue Ratio = Annual Rent / Annual Revenue
    Retail: flag if > 12% (Tier D if > 15%)
    Restaurant: flag if > 10%
    Office services / professional: flag if > 15%
    Industrial: flag if > 8%

  Rent Coverage Ratio = EBITDA / Annual Rent
    > 3.0x: Strong -- can absorb rent escalations
    2.0-3.0x: Adequate
    1.5-2.0x: Marginal -- vulnerable to revenue dip
    < 1.5x: High default risk

Trend analysis (mandatory for Tier C assessment):

Calculate year-over-year revenue growth and EBITDA margin for all 3 years. Flag:

Revenue decline in any year (especially if consecutive)
EBITDA margin compression > 200 bps year-over-year
Increasing accounts payable days (cash flow stress indicator)
Any covenant violations noted in financial footnotes

Shadow rating assignment:

After computing ratios, map to the tiering scale:

Shadow A: Current ratio > 1.8, D/E < 1.5, rent coverage > 2.5x, positive revenue trend
Shadow B: Current ratio 1.3-1.8, D/E 1.5-2.5, rent coverage 2.0-2.5x, stable revenue
Shadow C: Current ratio 1.0-1.3, D/E 2.5-3.5, rent coverage 1.5-2.0x, any declining trend
Shadow D: Current ratio < 1.0, D/E > 3.5, rent coverage < 1.5x, multi-year decline

Output of Workflow 2: Per-tenant ratio table with shadow rating and supporting rationale. Include 3-year trend summary for each metric.

Workflow 3: Concentration Risk Matrix

Evaluate the portfolio-level distribution of credit risk. Concentration in any single tenant, sector, or lease expiration cohort amplifies downside scenarios.

Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI) calculation:

HHI = Sum of (Tenant % of Total Base Rent)^2 * 10,000

Interpretation:
  HHI < 1,500:  Diversified -- low concentration risk
  HHI 1,500-2,500: Moderate concentration -- monitor top tenants
  HHI > 2,500:  High concentration -- significant single-tenant dependency
  HHI > 5,000:  Dominant tenant -- underwrite as effectively single-tenant

Example (5-tenant property):
  Tenant A: 35% -> 0.35^2 = 0.1225 * 10,000 = 1,225
  Tenant B: 25% -> 0.25^2 = 0.0625 * 10,000 = 625
  Tenant C: 20% -> 0.20^2 = 0.0400 * 10,000 = 400
  Tenant D: 12% -> 0.12^2 = 0.0144 * 10,000 = 144
  Tenant E: 8%  -> 0.08^2 = 0.0064 * 10,000 = 64
  HHI = 2,458 (moderate-to-high concentration)

Lease expiration clustering:

Group all lease expirations by year. Flag if:

Any single year has > 25% of base rent expiring
Any 2-year window has > 40% of base rent expiring
Any anchor lease expires within 3 years of acquisition

Produce an expiration schedule table:

Year | Tenants Expiring | SF Expiring | % of Total Rent | Cumulative %
2025 | [n]              | [sf]        | [%]             | [%]
2026 | [n]              | [sf]        | [%]             | [%]
...

Industry/sector concentration:

Group tenants by NAICS sector or property-specific categories (e.g., retail: food/beverage, services, soft goods, medical). Flag if:

Any single sector > 40% of base rent
Any sector in secular decline > 20% of base rent

Output of Workflow 3: HHI calculation, expiration schedule, sector concentration breakdown, and all triggered flags.

Workflow 4: Rent Coverage Analysis

Evaluate whether each tenant can sustain their lease obligation at current and projected rent levels. This is the primary early-warning indicator of default risk.

Occupancy cost ratio (OCR) benchmarks by property type:

RETAIL (total occupancy cost = base rent + NNN charges + percentage rent)
  Power center anchor (grocery, big box): 1.5-4% of sales
  Inline retail (soft goods, gifts):      8-12% of sales
  Restaurant (casual dining):             6-10% of sales
  Fast food / QSR:                        8-12% of sales
  Medical / dental:                       5-8% of sales
  Service retail (salon, cleaners):       10-15% of sales -- higher tolerance
  Flag threshold: > 12% inline, > 15% any tenant

OFFICE (occupancy cost = base rent + operating expense reimbursement)
  Professional services (law, consulting): 10-15% of revenue
  Financial services:                      8-12% of revenue
  Technology / startup:                    12-18% of revenue (higher tolerance)
  Healthcare:                              6-10% of revenue
  Government / NGO:                        10-15% of budget allocation
  Flag threshold: > 15% any tenant

INDUSTRIAL (NNN -- occupancy cost = base rent + NNN)
  3PL / logistics:                         3-6% of revenue
  Manufacturing:                           4-8% of revenue
  E-commerce fulfillment:                  3-5% of revenue
  Cold storage / specialty:                5-10% of revenue
  Flag threshold: > 8% any tenant

Rent coverage ratio calculation:

For tenants with financials: Rent Coverage = EBITDA / Annual Base Rent For rated tenants: infer coverage from public rating and sector benchmarks (see references/credit-rating-methodology.md). For no-data tenants: flag as unverifiable; assign conservative OCR assumption from industry median.

Escalation stress test:

For each tenant with 3%+ annual rent escalations (or CPI-linked), project forward rent against trailing revenue growth rate. If rent grows faster than revenue for 2+ consecutive years of the hold period, flag as escalation risk.

Output of Workflow 4: Per-tenant OCR table, rent coverage ratio, escalation stress results, and flagged tenants.

Workflow 5: Default Probability Modeling

Translate credit tier and shadow ratings into quantitative default probabilities and expected loss calculations for each tenant position.

Rating-to-default probability mapping:

See references/credit-rating-methodology.md for full tables. Summary:

Rating Category       1-Year  3-Year  5-Year  10-Year
AAA / Aaa             0.00%   0.03%   0.07%   0.20%
AA / Aa               0.02%   0.07%   0.15%   0.40%
A / A                 0.06%   0.20%   0.40%   0.90%
BBB / Baa (IG floor)  0.18%   0.65%   1.10%   2.50%
BB / Ba (HY entry)    0.90%   3.20%   6.00%   12.00%
B / B                 3.50%   9.50%   15.00%  24.00%
CCC / Caa             15.00%  30.00%  42.00%  55.00%
Shadow C              12.00%  22.00%  30.00%  45.00%
Shadow D / NR assumed 20.00%  35.00%  45.00%  60.00%

Recovery rate assumptions by lease and property type:

NNN Retail (IG tenant):       70-85% recovery (re-leasing at market rent, limited dark period)
NNN Retail (HY/NR tenant):    40-60% recovery (dark period 9-18 months, TI/LC costs)
Multi-tenant Retail Inline:   30-55% recovery (depends on anchor status, co-tenancy)
Office (Class A, IG tenant):  60-75% recovery
Office (Class B, HY/NR):      35-55% recovery (longer dark period in soft markets)
Industrial (IG tenant):        65-80% recovery (strong re-leasing demand)
Industrial (HY/NR):           50-70% recovery (more liquid market than office)
Single-tenant vacant:          Apply dark value cap rate premium of 100-200 bps

Expected loss per tenant:

Expected Loss = Probability of Default * (1 - Recovery Rate) * Annual Rent Exposure

Example:
  Tenant: Local restaurant, Shadow C, annual rent $120,000
  PD (5-year): 25%
  Recovery rate: 45%
  Expected Loss = 25% * (1 - 45%) * $120,000 = $16,500 over 5 years
  Annual expected loss: $3,300

Aggregate portfolio expected loss: sum across all tenants
Express as % of total annual base rent for comparability

Scenario analysis (minimum 2 scenarios):

Scenario A -- Anchor Default: Model anchor vacancy. Calculate: lost rent, co-tenancy clauses triggered (rent reductions or terminations at inline tenants), re-leasing timeline (12-24 months for anchor), TI/LC costs, and NOI impact during dark period.

Scenario B -- Largest NR Cluster Default: Model simultaneous default of all Tier D tenants. Calculate combined rent loss, re-leasing timeline assuming sequential not simultaneous, and NOI impact.

Output of Workflow 5: Per-tenant default probability table, expected loss per tenant, portfolio aggregate expected loss (as % of EGI), and two default scenarios with NOI impact.

Workflow 6: WALT-Weighted Credit Rating

Compute a single blended credit quality metric for the portfolio that accounts for both tenant credit strength and the duration of that credit exposure.

WALT calculation:

WALT = Sum(Annual Base Rent_i * Remaining Lease Term_i) / Sum(Annual Base Rent_i)

Where remaining lease term is calculated to lease expiration (not renewal option).

WALT-weighted credit score:

Assign each tier a numeric credit score: `` Tier A (IG): Score 90 Near-IG (BB+/BB): Score 70 Tier B (BB-): Score 55 Tier C (Shadow B/C): Score 35 Tier D (Shadow D / NR): Score 15 ``

Compute weighted score: `` WALT-Weighted Score = Sum(Annual Rent_i * Remaining Term_i * Credit Score_i) / Sum(Annual Rent_i * Remaining Term_i) ``

Map score to equivalent rating category: `` Score 80-100: Investment Grade equivalent (BBB- or better) Score 60-79: Near Investment Grade (BB+/BB) Score 40-59: Speculative Grade (BB-/B+) Score 20-39: High Yield (B/CCC equivalent) Score < 20: Distressed ``

Benchmark comparison:

Compare the computed WALT-weighted score to asset class benchmarks:

Class A retail (grocery-anchored): typically 65-80 (IG equivalent blend)
Class B strip retail:              typically 40-60 (mixed IG/HY blend)
Single-tenant NNN (IG):           typically 85-95
Class A office (CBD):             typically 60-75
Industrial (logistics focus):     typically 70-85

WALT sensitivity analysis:

If any anchor or major tenant (> 10% of rent) expires within 36 months of acquisition, recalculate WALT-weighted score assuming that tenant does NOT renew. Show the before/after score to quantify renewal risk.

Output of Workflow 6: WALT calculation, WALT-weighted credit score, equivalent rating category, benchmark comparison, and renewal sensitivity analysis if applicable.

Workflow 7: Co-Tenancy and Kick-Out Analysis

Identify and map all contractual interdependencies between tenants. This analysis is required for any multi-tenant retail asset and any office property with named co-tenancy provisions.

Co-tenancy clause types:

TYPE 1 -- Anchor Dependency (Rent Reduction):
  Trigger: Named anchor vacates or falls below occupancy threshold (e.g., "If Anchor Tenant A
  closes, Tenant B may reduce base rent to 50% of contract rent until replacement anchor opens."
  Impact: Revenue loss for duration of dark period

TYPE 2 -- Kick-Out Right (Early Termination):
  Trigger: Named anchor vacates, or center-wide occupancy falls below threshold (e.g., 80%)
  Impact: Tenant may terminate lease with notice period (typically 6-12 months)
  Valuation impact: Reduces effective lease term for inline tenants

TYPE 3 -- Radius Restriction / Exclusivity:
  Not a co-tenancy clause per se, but if anchor exercising kick-out then opens nearby,
  exclusivity clauses at remaining location may be voided
  Impact: Competitive pressure on replacement tenants

TYPE 4 -- Dark Clause:
  If anchor goes dark (physically vacates but continues paying rent), some co-tenancy
  clauses still trigger (verify lease language precisely)

Mapping process:

For each co-tenancy clause found in lease abstracts, document:

Tenant holding the right
Trigger condition (which anchor, what threshold)
Remedy (rent reduction %, kick-out notice period)
Duration (how long until remedy expires or escalates)

Domino default scenario:

Map the sequence: Anchor A defaults -> inline tenants B, C, D trigger co-tenancy. Calculate:

Tenants eligible for rent reduction: combined rent reduction amount
Tenants eligible for kick-out: worst-case total rent at risk if all exercise
Probability weighting: apply anchor's default probability to the entire cascade

Output of Workflow 7: Co-tenancy clause inventory table, domino scenario map, and worst-case revenue-at-risk from co-tenancy cascade.

Workflow 8: Guaranty Analysis

Evaluate the credit quality of all guaranty agreements. A guaranty is only as good as the guarantor's financial capacity and the legal enforceability of the instrument.

Parent company guaranty assessment:

Obtain parent entity financial statements (or credit rating if publicly rated)
Assess parent's consolidated leverage vs. the subsidiary's rent obligation `` Guaranty Coverage Ratio = Parent EBITDA / Guaranteed Annual Rent Minimum acceptable: > 3.0x Strong: > 5.0x Weak (flag): < 2.0x ``
Evaluate parent's own credit trend -- a BBB-rated parent with negative outlook is not the same as a stable BBB
Check for guaranty burn-off provisions:
Time-based: guaranty expires after N years (e.g., "guaranty terminates after year 5")
Performance-based: guaranty terminates when tenant achieves certain financial thresholds
Both types require underwriting the post-burn-off period without guaranty support

Personal guaranty assessment:

Obtain guarantor's personal financial statement (net worth, liquid assets, income sources)
Minimum standard: Guarantor Net Worth >= 2x Annual Rent Obligation
Strong standard: Guarantor Net Worth >= 5x Annual Rent Obligation AND Liquid Assets >= 1x Annual Rent
Evaluate guaranty scope:
Full guaranty of lease obligation (preferred)
"Good guy" guaranty (guarantor liable only until tenant vacates and surrenders keys -- common in NYC)
Capped guaranty (limited to X months of rent) -- calculate whether cap is sufficient to cover re-leasing period
Assess collectability: is guarantor resident in jurisdiction where enforcement is practical?

Guaranty quality scoring:

Quality A: Corporate parent, IG rated or strong financials, no burn-off, full guaranty
Quality B: Corporate parent, HY rated or adequate financials, time-based burn-off > 5 years
Quality C: Personal guaranty, net worth > 3x rent, full guaranty
Quality D: Personal guaranty, net worth < 2x rent, OR any capped or good-guy guaranty
Quality E: No guaranty (flag for any non-credit tenant > 5% of rent)

Output of Workflow 8: Guaranty inventory per tenant, guaranty quality score, burn-off schedule, and flagged exposures where guaranty does not adequately backstop credit risk.

Worked Example: Multi-Tenant Retail Strip

Property: 42,000 SF neighborhood retail strip center, suburban market.

Tenants:

Tenant	SF	% Rent	Annual Rent	Lease End	Rating / Type
Walgreens	14,700	42%	$378,000	2031 (6.5 yr)	Baa2 (Moody's)
Local Restaurant	3,200	14%	$128,000	2026 (1.5 yr)	No rating
Dry Cleaner	1,800	6%	$54,000	2027 (2.5 yr)	No rating
Nail Salon	1,500	5%	$45,000	2028 (3.5 yr)	No rating
Vacant	20,800	33%	$0	--	--

Note: The strip has 33% vacancy. Total inline occupied GLA = 6,500 SF. Total base rent (occupied) = $605,000.

Step 1 -- Tier Assignment:

Walgreens (42% of rent): Anchor. Baa2 = Tier A (IG, investment grade)
Local Restaurant (14%): Major. No rating, financials requested.
Dry Cleaner (6%): In-line. No rating, no financials. Tier D assumed.
Nail Salon (5%): In-line. No rating, no financials. Tier D assumed.

Step 2 -- Concentration HHI (occupied tenants only, ignoring vacancy):

Walgreens:          42% -> 0.42^2 * 10,000 = 1,764
Local Restaurant:   14% -> 0.14^2 * 10,000 = 196
Dry Cleaner:        6%  -> 0.06^2 * 10,000 = 36
Nail Salon:         5%  -> 0.05^2 * 10,000 = 25
Vacant (no rent):   --
HHI = 2,021 (moderate-to-high concentration; Walgreens dominates)

Step 3 -- WALT Calculation:

Walgreens:       $378,000 * 6.5 = 2,457,000
Restaurant:      $128,000 * 1.5 = 192,000
Dry Cleaner:     $54,000  * 2.5 = 135,000
Nail Salon:      $45,000  * 3.5 = 157,500

Total weighted:  $2,941,500
Total rent:      $605,000
WALT:            2,941,500 / 605,000 = 4.86 years

Step 4 -- WALT-Weighted Credit Score:

Walgreens (Tier A):      Score 90. Weighted = 378,000 * 6.5 * 90 = 221,130,000
Restaurant (Tier D):     Score 15. Weighted = 128,000 * 1.5 * 15 = 2,880,000
Dry Cleaner (Tier D):    Score 15. Weighted = 54,000  * 2.5 * 15 = 2,025,000
Nail Salon (Tier D):     Score 15. Weighted = 45,000  * 3.5 * 15 = 2,362,500

Total score-weighted:    228,397,500
Total rent-term:         2,941,500
WALT-Weighted Score:     228,397,500 / 2,941,500 = 77.7

Equivalent: Near Investment Grade (BB+/BB range)
Benchmark: Class B strip retail = 40-60. This strip scores higher due to Walgreens dominance.

Step 5 -- Default Probability and Expected Loss:

Walgreens (Baa2):
  5-year PD: 1.10%
  Recovery (NNN retail, IG): 80%
  Expected Loss: 1.10% * 20% * $378,000 * 5 = $4,158

Local Restaurant (Tier D):
  5-year PD: 45% (and lease expires in 1.5 years -- renewal unconfirmed)
  Recovery (inline retail, NR): 35%
  Expected Loss over 1.5 years: 45% * (1-35%) * $128,000 * 1.5 = $56,160

Dry Cleaner (Tier D):
  5-year PD: 45%
  Recovery: 35%
  Expected Loss: 45% * 65% * $54,000 * 2.5 = $39,488

Nail Salon (Tier D):
  5-year PD: 45%
  Recovery: 35%
  Expected Loss: 45% * 65% * $45,000 * 3.5 = $46,091

Total portfolio expected loss (5-year): $145,897
As % of annual EGI ($605,000 * 5 = $3,025,000): 4.8%

Underwriting implication: Credit reserve of ~1% of EGI annually is warranted.

Step 6 -- Co-Tenancy Check:

Confirm whether Restaurant, Dry Cleaner, or Nail Salon leases contain co-tenancy clauses triggered by Walgreens vacancy. If co-tenancy clauses exist:

Restaurant (14% of rent): rent reduction to 50% of contract = $64,000 lost
Dry Cleaner (6%): kick-out right with 6-month notice
Nail Salon (5%): kick-out right with 6-month notice

Walgreens default (1.10% 5yr = ~5.5% probability over hold): Worst-case co-tenancy cascade: $128,000 + $54,000 + $45,000 = $227,000 additional at-risk rent. Probability-weighted co-tenancy loss: 5.5% $227,000 * 3yr average = $37,455.

Step 7 -- Red Flags on This Asset:

[x] Single anchor > 40% of revenue without lease term > 7 years remaining (Walgreens at 6.5yr, borderline)
[x] Restaurant lease expires in 1.5 years -- rollover risk is near-term
[x] 33% vacancy adds re-leasing risk independent of existing tenant credit
[ ] No personal guaranties confirmed for inline tenants (request)
[ ] Co-tenancy clause language not confirmed (request lease abstracts)

Output Format

Present results in this order:

Tenant Credit Summary Table -- Tenant | SF | % Rent | Tier | Rating/Shadow | 5-yr Default Prob | Remaining WALT | Guaranty
Concentration Risk -- HHI score, interpretation, expiration schedule, sector concentration flags
WALT-Weighted Credit Rating -- score, equivalent category, benchmark comparison, renewal sensitivity
Default Scenario Analysis -- at minimum: anchor default scenario, largest NR cluster default
Occupancy Cost and Coverage -- per-tenant OCR vs. benchmark, rent coverage ratio, escalation stress flag
Co-Tenancy Map -- clause inventory, trigger conditions, domino cascade worst case
Guaranty Inventory -- per-tenant guaranty quality score, burn-off schedule, flagged exposures
Underwriting Implications -- credit reserve recommendation, vacancy buffer, re-leasing cost estimates, LTV implications

Red Flags

Single tenant > 40% of revenue without investment-grade credit -- underwrite as single-tenant asset; dark value analysis required.
Rent-to-revenue ratio > 15% for any tenant (retail > 12%) -- tenant cannot sustain rent through a revenue dip. Default risk is elevated regardless of tier.
Declining revenue 2+ consecutive years -- even an investment-grade parent guarantor is a weaker backstop if the subsidiary operating entity is deteriorating.
Current ratio < 1.0 for any tenant > 10% of rent -- negative working capital signals near-term liquidity stress, not just a credit trend.
Lease expiration clustering > 30% of rent within 18 months -- re-leasing execution risk. Even if all tenants renew, the negotiating leverage is inverted during a clustered expiration.
Parent guaranty from entity with declining credit outlook or negative rating action in prior 12 months -- a BBB parent on CreditWatch Negative is effectively a BB credit for underwriting purposes.
Co-tenancy kick-out triggered by anchor departure -- if inline tenants can exit when the anchor goes dark, the anchor default scenario is far more severe than simple rent loss.
Personal guaranty from individual with net worth < 2x annual rent -- guaranty is effectively uncollectable after first year of dispute and litigation costs.
NAICS sector in secular decline (traditional retail, legacy office footprint, commodity manufacturing) -- sector risk is a systematic factor that overrides individual tenant financials. Flag and apply sector adjustment.

Chain Notes

Upstream: rent-roll-analyzer provides cleaned tenant data, SF, and lease term. Always consume rent-roll-analyzer output before running this skill on a multi-tenant asset.
Downstream: Tenant credit tier assignments and WALT-weighted score feed acquisition-underwriting-engine as a credit quality input to cap rate selection and NOI stress scenarios.
Downstream: Default probabilities and expected loss calculations feed loan-sizing-engine for credit underwriting and LTV/DSCR stress testing.
Downstream: Co-tenancy clause inventory feeds lease-negotiation-analyzer when renegotiating leases during asset management.
Related: For new lease proposals on space being marketed, use tenant-credit-analyzer proactively on the prospective tenant before executing LOI (feed output to lease-negotiation-analyzer).

Computational Tools

This skill can use the following scripts for precise calculations:

scripts/calculators/tenant_credit_scorer.py -- HHI concentration, WALT-weighted credit score, expected loss by tenant, OCR analysis ``bash python3 scripts/calculators/tenant_credit_scorer.py --json '{"tenants": [{"name": "Walgreens", "annual_rent": 378000, "sf": 14700, "lease_remaining_years": 6.5, "credit_rating": "Baa2", "revenue": 2500000, "property_type": "retail"}, {"name": "Local Restaurant", "annual_rent": 128000, "sf": 3200, "lease_remaining_years": 1.5, "credit_rating": null, "revenue": 850000, "property_type": "retail"}]}' ``

metadata

SourceGitHub source

LicenseApache-2.0

Version0.2.0

CatalogedApr 2, 2026

Repository-wide build date, not a per-skill content edit.

Calculatortenant_credit_scorer.py

trust

Methodology assessed

4.55 / 5owner reviewed · not an audit

Low concern

Reviewed by the site owner against the published rubric: the skill's catalog entry, manifest, declared runtime behavior, any calculator or runtime files, and its governance metadata. This is a maintainer review, not a formal or third-party audit. Use normal data-handling controls for sensitive client, tenant, lender, or portfolio data.

Purpose & Capability ×35 / 5

runtime_role=callable_tool, classification=normal, calculator_file present. Reviewed against the rubric: a focused, single-task read-and-reason skill whose declared purpose matches its footprint. The plugin declares no allowed-tools, so the host agent you run it in (not the skill) bounds what it can read, run, or reach. Scored 5.

Instruction Scope ×34 / 5

pii_policy=tenant_or_personal, classification=normal. Reviewed: instructions are narrowly scoped to the CRE task with explicit do-not-trigger rules and no embedded directive to leak or misuse the data the skill is shown. Like any prompt it stays steerable by adversarial text it is asked to summarize, so treat untrusted source documents with normal care. Held at 4: handles tenant_or_personal data, so the blast radius would be wider if a future change introduced a problem.

Note — Processes tenant or personal information (PII). Treat rent rolls and tenant records as confidential; exposure is only as contained as the agent you run it in.

Install Mechanism ×24 / 5

Installs with the cre-skills plugin, which registers SessionStart/PostToolUse/Stop hooks and a stdio MCP server, so this is not a zero-execution install (never a 5). Those hooks are transparent, version-pinned, Apache-2.0, and source-readable; telemetry and feedback are opt-in and default-off. Reviewed and scored 4. The bundled Python calculator (src/calculators/tenant_credit_scorer.py) was reviewed as pure standard-library code, so it does not lower this score.

Credentials ×25 / 5

Reviewed and source-verified: neither the skill nor its bundled Python calculator (src/calculators/tenant_credit_scorer.py) reads environment variables or secrets, and .mcp.json declares env:{}. No credential surface — the rubric's definition of a 5.

Persistence & Privilege ×15 / 5

produces_artifact_kind=calculator_result, workspace_scope=data_room. Stateless by declaration: nothing retained between runs, and nothing written outside the output you ask for — a memo, model, or calculator result you request is that output, not hidden state. Plugin-level telemetry and session hooks write to ~/.cre-skills only when you opt in (default-off).

What this check does and does not cover

Reviewed by the site owner against the published methodology rubric: the skill's catalog entry, manifest, declared runtime behavior, any calculator or runtime files, and its governance metadata. This is a maintainer review, not a formal or third-party audit, and not a certification of safety.
The review pins to the skill's declared version at a specific plugin commit. The upstream plugin is open source and can change after this review; if the version shown here drifts from the plugin, the check auto-hides rather than mislabel a changed skill.
Effective capability is set by the host agent you run the skill in. The plugin declares no allowed-tools, so where the manifest is silent this review scores conservatively and the agent, not the skill, bounds what it can read, run, or reach.
Skill behavior depends on the host agent, the model, your inputs, and your environment. Use normal data-handling controls for sensitive client, tenant, lender, or portfolio information.
Provided "as is", without warranty, under the Apache License 2.0. Nothing here is investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice, and you remain responsible for any data you put in front of any skill.
Ships an executable Python calculator (src/calculators/tenant_credit_scorer.py) the host agent may run. Reviewed as pure standard-library code with no network, shell, or credential access. It is code, not prose, so re-review on upstream changes.

Reviewed version0.2.0

Manifest commit761c5a5

Methodologyv2.0.0

CheckedJun 4, 2026

See the methodology & how to read it →

View the assessment record →

Suggest an improvement

Review SKILL.md before use. Apache-2.0, no warranty.

new to skills?

See how skills install and run inside your agent before you use one.

Start here