KBRA ABS SolarCity LMC Series IV LLC Series 2015-1 New Issue Report

U.S.
Structured Finance
ABS New Issue Report
SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC,

Series 2015-1
$123,500,000 Residential Distributed Generation Solar Securitization
Analytical Contacts:
Cecil Smart, Jr., Senior Director
csmart@kbra.com, (646) 731-2381
Lenny Giltman, Senior Director

lgiltman@kbra.com, (646) 731-2378
Andrew Giudici, Managing Director

agiudici@kbra.com, (646) 731-2372
August 14, 2015
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ..................................................................................................................... 3
Key Credit Considerations .......................................................................................................... 4
Transaction Overview ................................................................................................................... 8
ABS Structure .......................................................................................................................... 8
Tax Equity Structure ................................................................................................................. 8
Originator and Manager Review ................................................................................................... 11
Management .......................................................................................................................... 11
Customer Acquisition & Development............................................................................................ 13
Underwriting .......................................................................................................................... 13
Site Audit .............................................................................................................................. 14
Engineering Design ................................................................................................................. 14
Contract Verification ................................................................................................................ 14
Installation ............................................................................................................................ 14
Monitoring & Maintenance ........................................................................................................ 15
Collections Policy .................................................................................................................... 15
Contract Reassignments .......................................................................................................... 16
Production Estimate ................................................................................................................... 18
KBRA Production Estimate ........................................................................................................ 18
Operations & Maintenance........................................................................................................... 27
Cash Flow Assumptions .............................................................................................................. 29
Base Case Scenario ................................................................................................................. 29
KBRA Stress Scenarios ............................................................................................................ 30
Transaction Structure ................................................................................................................. 33

Series 2015-1
Page 2
August 14, 2015
Executive Summary
This new issue report is based on information regarding the underlying solar equipment, power purchase
agreements, leases, insurance policy and the terms of the securitization as of July 22, 2015. This report
does not constitute a recommendation to buy, hold, or sell securities. Kroll Bond Rating Agencys (KBRA)
rating represents timely payment of interest and full payment of principal by the transactions legal final
maturity date.
Rated Notes
Class
Initial Amount
($)
Interest
Rate (%)
Anticipated
Repayment Date
Final Maturity
Date
KBRA
Rating
A Notes
103,500,000
4.18%
February 21, 2022
August 21, 2045
A (sf)
B Notes
20,000,000
5.58%
February 21, 2022
August 21, 2045
BBB (sf)
Total
123,500,000
The total aggregate solar discounted asset balance (ASDAB), consisting of the discounted payments of
the leases and power purchase agreements (PPA), is approximately $214.1 million. The securitization
share of the ADSAB is approximately $182.0 million. The portfolio consists of approximately 55.9% PPA
agreements and 44.1% lease agreements by ASDAB and approximately 55.3% PPA agreements and
44.7% lease agreements by number. The original tenor of each agreement is 20 years and the weighted
average remaining term of the agreements is 230.4 months. The weighted average FICO of the underlying
customers of the photovoltaic systems (PV Systems) is 742.
KBRA analyzed the transaction using the General Rating Methodology for Asset-Backed Securities
published on July 30, 2012. In applying the methodology, KBRA analyzed the historical data associated
with solar lease and PPA collections, asset performance and the legal framework of the various tax equity
structures and insurance policy. The capital structure was tested by applying stressed assumptions in
KBRAs cash flow analysis of the transaction.
Transaction Parties
Issuer
SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC
Depositor
SolarCity Series Holdings IV, LLC
Originator / Manager
SolarCity Corporation (Company)
Custodian /
Indenture Trustee /
Transition Manager
U.S. Bank National Association
Financing Funds
Blue Skies Solar I, LLC

Solar Integrated Fund I, LLC
Solar Integrated Fund II, LLC
Visigoth Solar I, LLC
Managing Members
For Blue Skies Financing Fund: Solar Ulysses Manager I, LLC

For Integrated I Financing Fund: Solar Integrated Manager I, LLC
For Integrated II Financing Fund: Solar Integrated Manager II, LLC
For Visigoth Financing Fund: Visigoth Solar Managing Member I,
LLC

Series 2015-1
Page 3
August 14, 2015
Tax Equity Investor Members
For
For
For
For
Blue Skies Financing Fund: American Honda Motor Co., Inc.

Integrated I Financing Fund: Solar TC Corp.
Integrated II Financing Fund: Solar TC Corp.
Visigoth Financing Fund: Capital One, N.A.
Tax Loss Insurers
Underwriters at Lloyds, London

Columbia Casualty Company
Key Credit Considerations

Experienced Originator / Servicer
SolarCity is an experienced and capable originator/aggregator and servicer of
residential solar leases and PPAs. The Company has been operating in the residential
solar market since 2006 and is the largest company in the industry. SolarCitys
management team is experienced and has managed the new company through the
recent financial crisis. The Companys portfolio performance has been exceptional
with average delinquencies as a percentage of total billings over its previous fiscal
year for receivables 90 and 180 days past due at 0.79% and 0.56%, respectively.
KBRA believes the portfolios strong performance is a reflection of the Companys
underwriting, loss mitigation and collection practices.
Strong Credit Profile of Underlying Customers

The weighted average FICO (by ASDAB) of the underlying customers of the PV
Systems is 742. Customers with a FICO equal to or greater than 700 represent
69.2% of the PV Systems and 68.6% of the ASDAB. Per traditional credit metrics,
these customers would be classified as prime.
Transaction Structure Credit Enhancement

KBRA believes the transaction benefits from sufficient credit enhancement and a
structure that accelerates principal payments to the Notes upon weakening asset
performance. The credit enhancement levels in the transaction are sufficient to cover
KBRAs stressed cash flow assumptions for each class under the corresponding stress
levels for the assigned ratings. Credit enhancement for the Notes consists of
overcollateralization, an interest reserve account, a supplemental reserve account,
excess cash flows and, in the case of the Class A Notes, subordination:
Subordination and Overcollateralization: The Class A Notes benefit from

subordination provided by the Class B Notes and overcollateralization resulting
from the expected payments by the underlying customers of the PV Systems.
At closing the overcollateralization relative to the securitizations share of the
ASDAB is 32.1%. The Class A Notes will also benefit from subordination from
the Class B Notes equal to approximately 11.0%.
Interest Reserve Account: At closing a liquidity reserve account will be fully

funded to cover six months of interest on both the Class A and Class B notes.
The initial deposit in the liquidity reserve will be approximately $2.8 million.

Series 2015-1
Page 4
August 14, 2015
Supplemental Reserve Account: At closing a supplemental reserve account

will be funded with $3 million. The account will accumulate additional funds
over time for future inverter replacement costs, the purchase options
associated with the related Financing Funds and the deductibles associated with
each Tax Loss Insurance Policy.
Excess cash flow: The transaction features significant excess cash flow, which
results from the difference between the discounted cash flows expected from the
aggregate distributions to the respective Managing Members and the weighted
average interest rate on the Notes.
Transaction Structure Class B Interest Payments May Be Deferred

A Class B Interest Deferral Period will commence if the aggregate outstanding balance of the
Notes is greater than zero on the anticipated repayment date (i.e. February 2022), the DSCR is
less or equal to 1.00 on any determination date or if event of default under the indenture has
occurred. All Class B Note interest that becomes due during a Class B Interest Deferral Period
will be deferred until the interest and principal on the Class A Notes and the principal on the
Class B Notes are paid in full.
+/
KBRA views the mechanism for deferral of some portion of interest on the Class B Notes as a
credit positive for the Class A Notes as these amounts are paid after principal payments on
the Class A Notes. However, KBRA views this feature as a credit negative for the Class B
Notes as a portion of the expected interest to the Class B Notes may become more deeply
subordinated. In KBRAs cash flow analysis, principal and ultimate interest of the Class B
Notes is fully repaid under all stress scenarios.
Transaction Structure Tax Loss Insurance Policies to Cover Tax Basis
Adjustments
The PV Systems were financed via tax partnerships (i.e. the Financing Funds) between
a Managing Member and the related Tax Equity Investor. Each Financing Fund holds
the right to an investment tax credit (ITC) in an amount that is based on the fair
market value (FMV) of the related PV Systems at the time of purchase. The related
Tax Equity Investor retains a substantial interest in the Financing Fund, which entitles
it to 99% of the ITCs, until the flip date, which occurs on the later of a specified date
or once the Tax Equity Investor realizes a specified rate of return.
In the event the IRS subsequently determines the fair market value of the PV Systems
relating to any Financing Fund is lower than what was claimed, SolarCity has agreed
to pay the related Financing Fund the amount of any tax loss payable by the Managing
Member and Tax Equity Investor. In the event SolarCity is unable to fulfill this
reimbursement obligation, the Issuer will have the benefit of a Tax Loss Insurance
Policy for each Financing Fund, with the Indenture Trustee named as a loss payee, to
cover tax loss payments to the Tax Equity Investor up to 35% (inclusive of the
associated deductible) of the ITCs claimed by the Financing Fund with respect to the
PV Systems and fees and expenses (Contest Costs) incurred by the Financing Fund
related to its defense or appeal against such claim.
+/-
The insurers will be Underwriters at Lloyds, London and Columbia Casualty Company.
KBRA has performed credit estimates of these two insurers and does not view their
Series 2015-1
Page 5
August 14, 2015
creditworthiness to be a constraint on the rating of the Notes, although it should be

noted that the transaction documents will not require the replacement of an insurer if
an insurer is downgraded.
KBRA notes that the Tax Loss Insurance Policies only protect against tax losses and
Contest Costs in an amount up to of 35% (inclusive of the associated deductible) of
the ITCs claimed by each of the Financing Funds for the related PV Systems. Based
on KBRAs valuation approach of the PV Systems, it is not anticipated that any
adjustment to the FMV of the PV Systems would result in the sum of the Contest Costs
and tax loss payments to exceed 35% of the ITCs claimed. KBRA believes these Tax
Loss Insurance Policies act as an effective mitigant to the tax basis adjustment risk
posed by partnership flip structures that are sometimes used in solar securitizations.
Refund Payments May Reduce Available Cash Flow
The majority of PV Systems under lease agreements contain a minimum performance
guaranty that entitles the underlying customer to a performance guaranty payment
from SolarCity to the extent that the cumulative energy production for the PV System
during a calendar year is less than the contractual guaranteed amount. Moreover, the
amount of the payment usually contains an annual escalator to account for the
anticipated annual increase in costs associated with obtaining energy from a
traditional utility provider to supplement the energy deficit. While performance
guaranty payments are obligations of SolarCity (other than in the case of the Blue
Skies Solar I, LLC), KBRA assumed in its analysis that cash flow from the transaction
would be used for these payments. Consequently, prolonged underperformance of PV
Systems under lease agreements will lead to increasing performance guaranty
payments over time, which would adversely impact available cash flow to service
interest and principal of the Notes.
The expected performance of the PV Systems was estimated by DNV GL, an

independent engineer. Per the independent engineers report, the PV Systems
average energy production is 103% of expected output, while the annual degradation
of this output is 0.5% per annum. However, KBRAs rating scenarios assume the PV
Systems will operate at a P90 generation profile with an annual degradation rate of
1.3%, which results in performance guaranty payments of approximately $25.6 million
and $26.1 million, respectively, under KBRAs BBB and A rating scenarios.
Lack of Historical Static Pool Data
Although SolarCity began offering leases and PPAs to homeowners in 2006,
approximately 50% of its installations were completed in the last year. SolarCity has
experienced significant growth over a short period of time, which could negatively
impact its business by straining resources and increasing expenses as it attempts to
manage a growing number of systems.
Further, residential solar systems are a relatively new asset class and the business
model for solar developers continues to evolve. As such, only limited performance
data is available for this sector. As a proxy, KBRA employed elements of its RMBS
methodologies to forecast payment defaults.

Series 2015-1
Page 6
August 14, 2015
Geographical Concentration
California residents represent approximately 46.3% by number of obligors on the
underlying PV Systems in the transaction and the top three states (CA, AZ, CO)
account for approximately 70.4% of obligors.
KBRA believes that geographic
concentration for the subject transaction is significant as the top three states (CA, AZ,
CO) account for 76.5% of the portfolio by ASDAB. Transactions with greater
geographic diversity are better insulated from regional home price decline relative to
pools with higher geographic concentration. A regional downturn may result in
increased defaults and reduced cash flow.
Write-off Policy Atypical for Consumer Assets

A PV System is deemed defaulted if the underlying customer is 120 days past due on
any portion of the lease or PPA agreement and the PV System has not been removed
and redeployed within 240 days after the end of 120-day period. The total period of
360 days until recognition of a default is twice as long as the generally accepted
standard for most consumer assets. Once a default is recognized, on the next
payment date 90% of the expected discounted cash flow from the defaulted PV
System prior to the recognition of the default is payable to the Notes.
Despite the atypical default recognition policy, the impact of non-payment by any
underlying customer is captured in the debt service coverage ratio (DSCR)
calculation, which is calculated on every determination date. This transaction features
DSCR-related triggers for the following events: (i) an early amortization period will
commence if the DSCR falls below 1.15 for two consecutive determination dates; (ii) a
Class B Interest Deferral Period will commence if the DSCR falls below 1.00 for any
determination date; and (iii) a DSCR/Insurance Sweep Period will commence if the
DSCR falls below 1.25 on any determination date.

Series 2015-1
Page 7
August 14, 2015
Transaction Overview
ABS Structure
The transaction is secured by the equity interests of the managing members (Managing Members) in
the related Financing Funds that in the aggregate own a portfolio of 16,400 leases and PPAs associated
with residential solar photovoltaic installations (PV Systems) and any proceeds received from draws
under any tax loss insurance policy (Tax Loss Insurance Policy) supporting the transaction. Portfolio
cash flow shall include payments from the underlying customers of the PV Systems and any payments due
from a utility or federal, state or local government authority under a performance based incentive (PBI)
program. However, the cash flow shall be net of operations and maintenance (O&M) expenses,
administrative and insurance expenses and any distributions to a tax equity investor (Tax Equity
Investor) per the contractual schedule for the respective Financing Fund.
The transaction is structured such that interest is paid sequentially on the Class A Notes and then the
Class B Notes (together with the Class A Notes, the Notes) and then principal is paid sequentially on the
Notes. If the DSCR drops below 1.00 for any determination date, interest on the Class B Notes will be
deferred and subordinated to principal payments due to the Class A Notes and will remain in effect until
the DSCR again rises above 1.00.
To the extent the aggregate principal balance of the Notes is unpaid after the anticipated repayment date
(ARD), additional interest (step-up interest) will accrue on the Notes at 5.0% per annum. Post-ARD
step-up interest is subordinated to the interest calculated at the rate as of the closing date for the
transaction and any principal payments due on the Notes. Moreover, any unpaid post-ARD step-up
interest in any collection period is not capitalized. KBRAs rating does not cover the payment of post-ARD
step-up interest.
The transaction benefits from credit enhancement in the form of overcollateralization, excess spread, an
interest reserve account, a supplemental reserve account and, in the case of the Class A Notes,
subordination. Proceeds deposited in the supplemental reserve account will be used to fund replacement
of active inverters in the portfolio, the purchase option associated with the respective Financing Funds and
the respective deductibles of the Tax Loss Insurance Policies.
Tax Equity Structure

The PV Systems were financed using four separate Financing Funds. SolarCity Corporation (SolarCity
or the Company) sold the PV Systems to the Financings Fund at fair market value (FMV). Each
Financing Fund is jointly owned via a partnership between a Tax Equity Investor and a Managing Member
that is an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of SolarCity. The Tax Equity Investor has a substantial interest
(99%) in the Financing Fund, which permits the Tax Equity Investor to retain 99% of both the investment
tax credits (ITCs) granted and a majority of the associated depreciation in its Financing Fund. At
closing the Managing Members will become subsidiaries of SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC (the Issuer).
The total ITCs are equal to 30% of the aggregate purchase price (i.e. FMV) of the PV Systems sold to the
Financing Funds. Moreover, any rebates, PBIs or solar renewable energy credits (SRECs) are paid to
the Financing Fund.
SolarCity relies on a third-party appraisal to determine the FMV of the PV Systems.
calculates the FMV of the PV Systems using the lowest of the following approaches:
The appraisal
Income method (discounted cash flows of the net cash and tax benefits to the system owner)

Series 2015-1
Page 8
August 14, 2015
Market method (precedent sales of comparable properties)

Cost method (replacement costs of the PV Systems)
The purchase price of the PV Systems is the appraised FMV at the time it was sold to the Financing Fund.
The aggregate appraised FMV for the Financing Funds is $544.3 million.
Partnership Flip
PPA and lease payments, PBI payments and monetized SRECs less O&M, administrative and insurance
expenses (Distributable Cash) are distributed in accordance with a contractual schedule for the
respective Financing Fund. Each Tax Equity Investor receives a priority return. The Tax Equity Investor in
Visigoth Solar I, LLC receives a pro rata return. Priority distributions to the Tax Equity Investors are
usually a preferred return based on each Tax Equity Investors capital contribution. Pro rata distributions
are based on a contractual fixed percentage of Distributable Cash set forth in the partnership agreement.
When a Tax Equity Investor reaches a contractual IRR, its partnership interest reduces or flips. After the
flip the Managing Member has a call option to purchase all of the Tax Equity Investors partnership interest
in the Financing Fund after the flip date has occurred, except in the case of Visigoth Solar I, LLC a
specified date prior to a flip date. The timing of the purchase is either within 90 days after the projected
flip date or within six months after the actual flip date.
The option price is the generally the greater of:
the FMV of the Tax Equity Investors 99% interest at the time of the purchase; and
the amount of cash SolarCity would have to distribute to the Tax Equity Investor for it to reach the
buyout IRR.
The FMV is determined by an agreement between the Managing Member and Tax Equity Investor or by a
third-party appraisal.
Financing Fund
Solar Integrated I Fund, LLC
Visigoth Solar I, LLC
Solar Integrated II Fund, LLC
Projected Flip Date

3/31/2020
6/30/2020
12/31/2020
12/31/2020
ITCs assigned to the respective Financing Funds are subject to a five-year compliance period. Recapture
of the ITCs is triggered if:
the property ceases to be a qualified energy facility; or

a change in ownership interest occurs.
To avoid ITC recapture, the members of the partnership must retain ownership of the PV Systems for the
five-year period following the year the system is placed in service.
Tax Loss Insurance Policy

The IRS may attempt to recapture a portion of the ITCs of a Financing Fund to the extent it concludes the
claimed FMV of the PV Systems on the Financing Funds tax return was overstated. The FMV serves as
the basis for the amount of the ITCs granted. The ITCs allowed are equal to 30% of the FMV. The ITCs
claimed by a Financing Fund are equal to 30% of the purchase price of the PV Systems sold to the
Financing Fund. If the IRS suspects the claimed valuation overstates the value of the PV Systems at the
time of the sale to a Financing Fund, it may audit the Financing Funds tax return.

Series 2015-1
Page 9
August 14, 2015
Following the audit the IRS may formally challenge the FMV calculation. The IRS must submit its
challenge within 3 years following the filing of a Tax Equity Investors tax return. If a challenge is made
during this period, the statute of limitations tolls until a decision is made regarding the challenge. The
minimum expected duration of an ITC challenge until resolution is approximately four years. Cash flow
received by the Issuer from payments under the lease and PPA agreements would still be available to
service interest and principal payments on the Notes during an IRS challenge.
To the extent an IRS challenge results in an adjustment in the FMV, the Financing Fund will have to repay
30 for every $1 reduction in the FMV. To mitigate against any reduction in the distributions to the
Managing Members associated with potential IRS recapture of ITCs, at closing the Issuer will purchase a
Tax Loss Insurance Policy for each Financing Fund with the Indenture Trustee named as loss payee under
the policy. The policy premiums will be paid at closing with proceeds from the transaction. If a policy
payment is required under a Tax Loss Insurance Policy, the associated deductible will be paid by the
Issuer via proceeds deposited in the supplemental reserve account. The aggregate deductibles of the Tax
Loss Insurance Policies will be funded on each Payment Date via deposits to the supplemental reserve
account.
The maximum protection provided by each Tax Loss Insurance Policy represents 35% (inclusive of the
associated deductible) of the ITCs claimed by each Financing Fund. After a review of SolarCitys value
chain and the associated cost per kilowatt to manufacture a PV System, KBRA concluded that the potential
sum of tax loss payments and Contest Costs equal to 35% of the ITCs claimed is an appropriate A level
stress to the FMV.
Underwriters at Lloyds, London and Columbia Casualty Company will provide coverage for all of the Tax
Loss Insurance Policies. The coverage provided by the insurance providers will be split 62.5%/37.5%,
respectively. KBRA performed a credit assessment of the insurance providers and currently does not view
the providers as a constraint on the proposed ratings of the Notes. However, the transaction does not
provide for a replacement mechanism or any structural protections in the event one or both of the
insurance providers are downgraded.

Series 2015-1
Page 10
August 14, 2015
Originator and Manager Review

As part of the rating process, KBRA completed an operational review at SolarCitys San Mateo, CA
headquarters with satisfactory results.
Founded in 2006, SolarCity is a publicly traded (NASDAQ: SCTY) vertically integrated renewable energy
company engaged in originating, installing and servicing solar energy systems. The Company primarily
serves customers in 16 states and the District of Columbia. Per GTM Research, SolarCity is currently
installing approximately one out of every three solar energy systems installed in the U.S. and is the
largest employer in the U.S. solar industry. SolarCity has provided or has contracted to provide systems
or services to more than 200,000 customers.
SolarCity structures the vast majority of its customer agreements as leases, PPAs or customer loans. For
the year ended December 31, 2014, approximately 98% of new customers chose to enter into financed
lease, power purchase agreements or customer loans rather than buying a solar energy system for cash.
Lease customers pay a fixed monthly fee with an electricity production guarantee. PPA customers pay a
fee based on the amount of electricity the solar energy system produces. SolarCitys consumer loan
product, MyPower, offers the benefits of customer-owned systems financed by SolarCity.
Management
KBRA has met with management and believes the team has the knowledge and industry experience to
service the securitized pool.
Lyndon Rive, Chief Executive Officer
Mr. Rive co-founded SolarCity in 2006 and is responsible for the overall direction of the Company. Mr.
Rive has led the Companys efforts to raise sufficient funds to finance more than $4 billion on solar
projects from a range of investors. He has also helped the Company enter a range of new markets to
serve more than 300 schools and universities, more than 100 regional and national homebuilders and
major organizations. Mr. Rive co-founded Everdream, an industry leader in software services for large
scale, distributed computer management. He negotiated Everdreams partnership with Dell Computer,
which acquired the company in 2007.
Peter Rive, Chief Technology Officer
Mr. Rive is SolarCitys co-founder and Chief Technology Officer, overseeing the Companys development of
next generation software and hardware technologies, including battery systems and solar mounting
hardware. Mr. Rive has held several senior technology positions throughout his career focused on
streamlining operational activities through the use of advanced software. Prior to co-founding SolarCity,
Mr. Rive was the chief technology officer at Everdream, where he designed a software platform to
centralize computer management. Everdream was acquired by Dell in 2007.
Hayes Barnard, Chief Revenue Officer
As Chief Revenue Officer, Mr. Barnard focuses on the ways in which consumers, businesses and
government organizations can switch to cleaner energy at a lower cost, through a range of integrated
solutions. Prior to joining SolarCity, Hayes was the chairman and CEO of Paramount Equity, a consumer
finance company specializing in mortgage, insurance, and residential solar. By mid-year 2013, Paramount
Equity had funded more than $12 billion in consumer financing, and helped over 55,000 families achieve
greater savings since 2003. Mr. Barnard serves on the board of directors of Paramount G|R Holdings, LLC
and also serves as President of the GivePower Foundation, SolarCitys initiative to provide light via
renewable energy to schools that lack access to electricity. Mr. Barnard holds a bachelors degree in
business management and marketing from the University of Missouri.
Series 2015-1
Page 11
August 14, 2015
Tanguy Serra, Chief Operating Officer

As Chief Operating Officer, Mr. Serra oversees SolarCity's residential solar service delivery, including
installation, maintenance and customer account management. Prior to SolarCity, Mr. Serra was the CEO
of Vivint Solar, a company he co-founded in 2011 and grew into one of the largest residential solar
providers in the U.S. in less than two years. Vivint Solar was acquired by the Blackstone Group in October
2012. Prior to his time at Vivint, Mr. Serra served for seven years as a vice president at TPG Capital, a
global private investment firm with $48 billion of capital under management. He led TPG Capital's
investments in a range of companies in Europe, Asia and North America during his tenure. Prior to joining
TPG Capital, Mr. Serra successively served on Merrill Lynch's energy investment banking team and Morgan
Stanley Capital Partners, the bank's private equity division. He has served on the boards of the TDF
Group, an operator of shared facilities and terrestrial networks in Europe and HKE, a leading Chinese
renewable energy company. Mr. Serra holds a bachelor's degree from ESCP in Paris.
Brad Buss, Chief Financial Officer
Mr. Buss is SolarCitys Chief Financial Officer and oversees SolarCitys global finance, accounting,
structured finance and investor relations organizations. Mr. Buss has an extensive background in finance
and operations, including experience in mergers and acquisitions, project finance and capital market
transactions for both public and private companies. Prior to joining SolarCity, Mr. Buss served Cypress
Semiconductor as chief financial officer from August 2005 to June 2014 and oversaw a range of significant
achievements, including the IPO of the companys SunPower subsidiary. Prior to joining Cypress, Mr. Buss
served as vice president of finance at Altera Corp., and prior to that was CFO of Wyle Electronics Atlas
Services Division. He also served as a member of Cisco Systems worldwide sales finance team, and as
chief financial officer at Zaffire Inc. Mr. Buss is currently a member of the board of directors of Tesla
Motors and Cafepress. Mr. Buss holds a bachelors degree in economics from McMaster University and an
honors business administration degree in finance and accounting from the University of Windsor.

Series 2015-1
Page 12
August 14, 2015
Customer Acquisition & Development

SolarCity markets and sells its products and services through a national sales organization that includes a
direct outside sales force, call centers, a door-to-door sales team, a channel partner network and a robust
customer referral program. SolarCity has structured its sales organization to efficiently engage prospective
customers from initial interest to customized proposals to signed contracts.
Once a lead is generated, a salesperson typically schedules a call with the prospective customer. During
the call, the salesperson obtains utility bill information (usage and pricing tiers), designs a system and
generates a formal proposal. The customer remains on the phone throughout this process and views the
salespersons computer desktop over the internet, enabling the customer to participate interactively
during the system design process. A typical call takes approximately 30 minutes and culminates in a
proposal contract being emailed to the customer.
Initial system design occurs in conjunction with this highly interactive contract generation process, as
enabled by SolarCitys custom software tools, Energy Designer (ED) and SolarBid. Customer information
is imported from SalesForce (used for lead management) into EdLite (a version of ED), which leverages
satellite imagery (purchased separately) to allow rapid design of PV Systems. ED serves as an overlay for
design software in order to rapidly generate engineering drawings and to rapidly generate energy
production forecasts. ED automates an array of basic electrical and structural engineering calculations
which streamlines the design process. The energy forecast, system specifications, and utility information
flow from ED to SolarBid, a software tool which automates pricing and creation of customer contracts.
Underwriting
SolarCitys general underwriting criteria require a minimum FICO of 650 for a prospective customer.
However, the specific credit underwriting policy with respect to the Financing Funds required that a
customer met the following conditions:
Under Blue Skies Solar I, LLC

o
o
Under Solar Integrated I Fund, LLC

o
o
o
Customer has a FICO score greater than or equal to 680;

Customer has a FICO score between 650 and 679 and no more than 5% of the total kW for
all systems and projects have customers with a FICO score between 650 and 679; or
Customer fully prepays its agreement.
Under Solar Integrated II Fund, LLC

o
o
Customer has a FICO score greater than or equal to 680; or

Customer fully prepays its agreement.
Customer has a FICO score greater than or equal to 650; or

Customer fully prepays its agreement
Under Visigoth Solar I, LLC

o
o
o
Customer has a FICO score greater than or equal to 650;

Customers with a FICO score between 650 and 679 limited to 20% of total customers; and
The average FICO score of all customers in the fund is 700 or greater.

Series 2015-1
Page 13
August 14, 2015
Site Audit
Site auditors based at each of SolarCitys regional operating centers visit each site to verify assumptions
made by the salesperson when generating a proposal. An audit involves verification of the following:
Key dimensions and measurements (to make corrections to the initial 3D model, which is created
based on multi-view aerial photography);
Obstructions and shading;
Characteristics of the mounting plane(s) (roof surface, protrusions, etc.);
Structural characteristics (including an attic entry to verify rafter size, spacing, truss design);
Electrical characteristics (service panel location/age/rating, code compliance); and
Safety hazards.
Auditors record information in EdLite, an internet-enabled tablet computer. The auditor executes a photo
checklist so that attributes of the mounting plane, structure, obstructions, and electrical system are
documented visually.
Engineering Design
Following the site audit, the engineering design team performs a series of technical checks on the design
and finalizes drawings and the bill of materials. These checks include finalizing equipment selection,
module placement, and racking layout. Basic structural and electrical engineering checks are integrated
into the ED and are performed on every design.
The Sponsors staff includes licensed professional civil and electrical engineers who can manually verify
those PV systems which require more complex calculations and can also certify drawings for certain
jurisdictions if required.
Contract Verification
A dedicated contract verification team compares the final design to the assumptions in the executed
customer contract. If a material change to the design has occurred, then a customer contract amendment
is executed. Common reasons for amendments include changes in assumed shade or sun exposure;
changes to module layout; and accommodation of customer requests. An amendment will be executed if
the forecasted electrical output varies by more than 20% or more for non-full prepay PPAs or by more
than 10% or more for leases, relative to the original estimate.
Installation
Installation is performed by a team of 2-3 persons. SolarCity obtained all necessary building permits prior
to installation. The Company is a licensed contractor or uses licensed subcontractors in every community
it services and is responsible for every customer installation. For substantially all of its residential
projects, SolarCity is the general contractor, construction manager and installer. To assist installers while
onsite, the Company also provides a technical support hotline, which installers may call to obtain real-time
advice to remedy installation issues. As of May 2014 less than 5% of SolarCitys residential installations
were installed by subcontractors.

Series 2015-1
Page 14
August 14, 2015
Monitoring & Maintenance

SolarCitys proprietary monitoring software provides its customers with a real-time view of their energy
generation and consumption. SolarCitys monitoring systems collect, monitor and display critical
performance data from its solar energy systems, including production levels, local weather, electricity
usage and environmental impacts. These monitoring systems allow SolarCity to confirm the continuing
proper operation of its solar energy systems, identify maintenance issues and provide its customers with
an understanding of their energy usage, allowing them the opportunity to modify their usage accordingly.
SolarCitys proprietary MySolarCity application offers a graphical display available on smartphones and any
device with a Web browser; its proprietary EnergyExplorer provides homeowners a self-guided tour of
their energy usage; and MySystem allows customers to track PV System installation throughout the
process.
Collections Policy
SolarCity has implemented the following collections policy with respect to lease agreements and PPAs. This
policy was designed to identify payment problems early enough to address delinquencies quickly and,
when necessary, remove, redeploy and reassign solar energy systems to preserve the value of solar
energy systems:
Day 1:
Customer payment due and not made.
Day 10:
Customer payment is officially late.
Day 15:
Contact customer to understand why payment has not been made.
Day 31:
Send reminder letter to notify customer of late payment that is due.
Day 61:
Contact customer again to inquire about late payment and advise that SolarCity will
turn off his/her system on Day 70 if payment is not received.
Day 65:
Send letter to customer stating the same.
Day 65:
Coordinate internally to arrange for system shutdown.
Day 65:
Contact customer to inform him/her that SolarCity will shut down system within the
next five days.
Day 69:
Confirm system ready to shut down.
Day 70:
Commence the process to shut down system. Send note to customer that the
system has been turned off and if he/she does not bring their account current within
20 days, SolarCity will invoice the customer for all amounts outstanding, including
penalty payments in the agreement, and suspend performance under the contract
until receipt of such payments.
Day 90:
Send suspension notice and the aforementioned invoice.
Following system shut down, customers have the option to pay the entire outstanding balance to have the
system turned on again.
Below are SolarCitys receivables aging data from January 2014 through April 2015.

Series 2015-1
Page 15
August 14, 2015
Receivables Aging as % of Total Billed

1.00%
0.90%
0.85%
0.90%
0.80%
0.79% 0.76%
0.77%
0.80% 0.75%
0.66%
0.70%
0.60%
0.60%
0.61%
0.57%
0.60%
0.53%
0.51% 0.54%
0.48%
0.50%
0.40%
0.30%
0.20%
0.10%
0.00%
Past Due 90+ Days
Past Due 180+ Days
Contract Reassignments
SolarCity has the right to remove PV Systems upon default or failure of the customer to pay all amounts
outstanding and costs incurred. System removals are extremely rare and account for a small percentage
of the Companys portfolio. The redeployment process of systems is managed by SolarCitys asset
management group (AMG).
Generally, contract reassignments are the result of customer financial distress (short sale, foreclosure,
divorce, death of the customer, or sale of the home). In cases of death and divorce the agreement is
reassigned to surviving spouse or heir, where the system is installed. In other cases, AMG attempts to
redeploy a system by offering it at a discount to a prospective customer who has similar energy and
engineering requirements to the repossessed system.

Series 2015-1
Page 16
August 14, 2015
Below are the Companys reassignment and recovery data.
Reason for Reassignment

Divorce, 1.6%
Foreclosure, 1.1%
Other, 0.3%
Short Sale, 2.7%

Death, 3.2%
Normal Sale,
91.1%
Reassignment Resolution
Discounted,
2.3%
Full Prepay,
2.8%
Partial Prepay,
0.9%
Other, 0.2%
Title Transfer,
2.8%
Normal
Transfer, 91.0%

Series 2015-1
Page 17
August 14, 2015
Cumulative Reassignment Recoveries
Standard Transfer
Discounted Transfer
Total
# of Completed
Reassignments
% of
Completed
Reassignments
3,950
97.7%
$49,572,462
$49,572,462
($1,539)
92
2.3%
$2,098,485
$2,098,485
$599,121
71.4%
4,042
100.0%
$51,670,947
$51,670,947
$597,582
98.8%
PV of Contract
PV of
Amount of
Cash Flows
Contract Cash
Loss / (Gain)
(Before)
Flows (After)
Recovery
100.0%
Production Estimate
The amount of energy output from a solar system is dependent upon the solar resource. SolarCity
engaged DNV GL (Independent Engineer or IE) to evaluate its solar resource assessment that is a
primary input into its pro forma forecast. The solar resource assessment is based on using the PVWatts
forecasting engine, developed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. The data used by the
PVWatts forecasting engine are derived from the 1961 1990 National Solar Radiation Database and
include solar radiation and other meteorological elements for one year intended to represent typical
conditions over a long period of time. Given the background of these data, the IE considers the
uncertainty of SolarCitys solar radiation data to be higher than a well calibrated ground measurement
station or newer satellite based measurements. However, per the IE the lack of accuracy for a given
home is reduced for a particular portfolio depending on the large number of PV Systems being
aggregated.
The IE evaluated the PV Systems financed by the Financing Funds. The production data obtained by the
IE was then compared to SolarCitys original forecast, which is consistent with a P50 generation profile.
P50 production is the median expected production of a PV System. Based on the IEs findings, the
average production of the portfolio of PV Systems was 103% of the Companys P50 production estimate.
The standard deviation of the production data is 10.7%. Approximately 17% of the portfolio produced at
levels that are less than 95% of the Companys P50 production estimate, which accounts for the large
dispersion of the production data and suggests performance may vary greatly from one PV System to the
next.
KBRA Production Estimate

Probability of exceedance values (P-values) provide insight into the volatility of the solar resource over
a given period. Monte Carlo simulations are used to calculate P-values for the portfolios energy
production. A one-year P-value represents the probability of exceedance for any given individual year. For
example, the actual energy production for any given year is equally likely to be higher or lower than the
P50 value. Similarly, a multi-year P-value represents the probability of exceedance for any given multiyear (i.e. the average energy production for a given 10-year period is 90% likely to exceed to the 10-year
P90). KBRA analyzed the securitizations cash flows under a one-year P90 to account for the use of
satellite data and uncertainty imbedded in the solar resource forecast. However, unlike large scale utility
projects, the securitization benefits from a portfolio effect, which should result in a reduction in interannual variability as poor production in one region might be offset by stronger production in another area.
KBRAs rating stress incorporates a reduction in each systems availability rate in order to account for the
risk that the systems are offline for a given period of time and unable to produce power. KBRA uses a
1.3% degradation assumption under each rating scenario to account for the risk that the amount of
energy the system can produce deteriorates over time. It should be noted that KBRAs 1.3% degradation
assumption is substantially higher than the IEs base case assumption of 0.5%.
Series 2015-1
Page 18
August 14, 2015
P-50 Production Estimates

Year
AZ
CA
CO
CT
DC
DE
HI
MA
MD
NJ
NV
NY
OR
TX
1
102.9%
101.6%
94.2%
100.3%
100.5%
95.2%
93.3%
99.1%
97.4%
98.4%
99.4%
96.9%
104.4%
97.4%
Year
11
AZ
96.7%
CA
95.5%
CO
88.6%
CT
94.3%
DC
94.5%
DE
89.5%
HI
87.7%
MA
93.2%
MD
91.6%
NJ
92.5%
NV
93.4%
NY
91.1%
OR
98.1%
TX
91.6%
* Source: DNV GL
Visigoth Solar I, LLC P-50 Production for One Year Period*

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
102.3% 101.7% 101.1% 100.5%
99.9%
99.3%
98.7%
101.0% 100.4%
99.8%
99.2%
98.6%
98.0%
97.4%
93.6%
93.1%
92.5%
92.0%
91.4%
90.9%
90.3%
99.7%
99.1%
98.5%
97.9%
97.4%
96.8%
96.2%
99.9%
99.3%
98.7%
98.1%
97.6%
97.0%
96.4%
94.7%
94.1%
93.5%
93.0%
92.4%
91.9%
91.3%
92.7%
92.2%
91.6%
91.1%
90.5%
90.0%
89.4%
98.5%
97.9%
97.3%
96.8%
96.2%
95.6%
95.0%
96.9%
96.3%
95.7%
95.1%
94.6%
94.0%
93.4%
97.8%
97.2%
96.6%
96.0%
95.4%
94.9%
94.3%
98.8%
98.2%
97.6%
97.0%
96.4%
95.9%
95.3%
96.4%
95.8%
95.2%
94.6%
94.1%
93.5%
92.9%
103.7% 103.1% 102.5% 101.9% 101.3% 100.7% 100.1%
96.9%
96.3%
95.7%
95.1%
94.6%
94.0%
93.4%
9
98.1%
96.8%
89.8%
95.6%
95.8%
90.8%
88.9%
94.5%
92.9%
93.7%
94.7%
92.4%
99.5%
92.9%
10
97.5%
96.2%
89.2%
95.0%
95.2%
90.2%
88.4%
93.9%
92.3%
93.2%
94.1%
91.8%
98.9%
92.3%
12
94.7%
93.5%
86.7%
92.3%
92.5%
87.6%
85.8%
91.2%
89.7%
90.5%
91.5%
89.2%
96.0%
89.7%
19
92.3%
91.1%
84.5%
90.0%
90.2%
85.5%
83.7%
88.9%
87.4%
88.3%
89.2%
87.0%
93.7%
87.4%
20
91.8%
90.6%
84.0%
89.5%
89.7%
84.9%
83.2%
88.4%
86.9%
87.7%
88.6%
86.5%
93.1%
86.9%

Series 2015-1
13
93.5%
92.3%
85.6%
91.1%
91.3%
86.5%
84.7%
90.0%
88.5%
89.4%
90.3%
88.1%
94.8%
88.5%
14
93.6%
92.3%
85.7%
91.2%
91.4%
86.6%
84.8%
90.1%
88.6%
89.4%
90.4%
88.1%
94.9%
88.6%
15
94.0%
92.7%
86.0%
91.6%
91.8%
86.9%
85.2%
90.5%
89.0%
89.8%
90.7%
88.5%
95.3%
89.0%
16
93.9%
92.6%
85.9%
91.5%
91.7%
86.9%
85.1%
90.4%
88.9%
89.7%
90.7%
88.4%
95.2%
88.9%
Page 19
17
93.5%
92.2%
85.6%
91.1%
91.3%
86.5%
84.7%
90.0%
88.5%
89.3%
90.3%
88.0%
94.8%
88.5%
18
92.9%
91.7%
85.0%
90.6%
90.8%
86.0%
84.2%
89.5%
88.0%
88.8%
89.7%
87.5%
94.2%
88.0%
August 14, 2015
Year
AZ
CA
CO
CT
DC
DE
HI
MA
MD
NJ
NY
OR
PA
TX
1
104.8%
103.8%
93.9%
101.0%
100.5%
98.7%
94.1%
100.5%
98.3%
98.4%
98.4%
103.2%
98.2%
100.1%
Year
11
AZ
98.5%
CA
97.6%
CO
88.3%
CT
95.0%
DC
94.5%
DE
92.8%
HI
88.4%
MA
94.5%
MD
92.4%
NJ
92.5%
NY
92.5%
OR
97.0%
PA
92.3%
TX
94.1%
* Source: DNV GL

2
3
4
104.1% 103.5% 102.9%
103.2% 102.5% 101.9%
93.4%
92.8%
92.2%
100.4%
99.8%
99.2%
99.9%
99.3%
98.7%
98.2%
97.6%
97.0%
93.5%
92.9%
92.4%
99.9%
99.3%
98.7%
97.7%
97.1%
96.5%
97.8%
97.2%
96.6%
97.8%
97.2%
96.6%
102.6% 102.0% 101.4%
97.6%
97.0%
96.5%
99.5%
98.9%
98.3%
12
96.4%
95.5%
86.4%
93.0%
92.5%
90.9%
86.6%
92.5%
90.5%
90.5%
90.5%
95.0%
90.4%
92.1%

Series 2015-1
13
95.2%
94.3%
85.3%
91.8%
91.3%
89.7%
85.5%
91.3%
89.3%
89.4%
89.4%
93.8%
89.2%
91.0%
14
95.3%
94.4%
85.4%
91.9%
91.4%
89.8%
85.5%
91.4%
89.4%
89.5%
89.4%
93.8%
89.3%
91.0%
P-50 Production for One Year*

5
6
7
8
102.3% 101.7% 101.1% 100.5%
101.3% 100.7% 100.1%
99.5%
91.7%
91.1%
90.6%
90.0%
98.6%
98.0%
97.5%
96.9%
98.1%
97.6%
97.0%
96.4%
96.4%
95.8%
95.2%
94.7%
91.8%
91.3%
90.7%
90.2%
98.1%
97.5%
97.0%
96.4%
96.0%
95.4%
94.8%
94.3%
96.0%
95.5%
94.9%
94.3%
96.0%
95.5%
94.9%
94.3%
100.7% 100.1%
99.5%
98.9%
95.9%
95.3%
94.7%
94.2%
97.7%
97.2%
96.6%
96.0%
15
95.7%
94.8%
85.7%
92.3%
91.8%
90.2%
85.9%
91.8%
89.8%
89.8%
89.8%
94.2%
89.7%
91.4%
16
95.6%
94.7%
85.7%
92.2%
91.7%
90.1%
85.8%
91.7%
89.7%
89.7%
89.7%
94.1%
89.6%
91.3%
Page 20
17
95.2%
94.3%
85.3%
91.8%
91.3%
89.7%
85.4%
91.3%
89.3%
89.3%
89.3%
93.7%
89.2%
90.9%
18
94.6%
93.7%
84.8%
91.2%
90.8%
89.1%
84.9%
90.7%
88.7%
88.8%
88.8%
93.2%
88.7%
90.4%
9
99.9%
98.9%
89.5%
96.3%
95.8%
94.1%
89.7%
95.8%
93.7%
93.8%
93.8%
98.4%
93.6%
95.4%
10
99.3%
98.3%
89.0%
95.7%
95.2%
93.5%
89.1%
95.2%
93.1%
93.2%
93.2%
97.8%
93.0%
94.8%
19
94.0%
93.1%
84.3%
90.7%
90.2%
88.6%
84.4%
90.2%
88.2%
88.3%
88.3%
92.6%
88.1%
89.8%
20
93.5%
92.6%
83.8%
90.1%
89.7%
88.1%
83.9%
89.7%
87.7%
87.8%
87.7%
92.1%
87.6%
89.3%
August 14, 2015
Year
AZ
CA
CO
CT
DC
DE
MA
MD
NJ
NY
OR
PA
TX
1
105.0%
103.7%
95.8%
100.6%
100.5%
97.7%
100.9%
98.2%
99.0%
98.4%
104.4%
98.2%
100.4%
Year
11
AZ
98.7%
CA
97.4%
CO
90.1%
CT
94.6%
DC
94.5%
DE
91.9%
MA
94.8%
MD
92.4%
NJ
93.1%
NY
92.5%
OR
98.1%
PA
92.3%
TX
94.4%
* Source: DNV GL
Solar Integrated I Fund, LLC P-50 Production for One Year*

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
104.4% 103.7% 103.1% 102.5% 101.9% 101.3% 100.7%
103.0% 102.4% 101.8% 101.2% 100.6% 100.0%
99.4%
95.3%
94.7%
94.1%
93.6%
93.0%
92.4%
91.9%
100.0%
99.4%
98.8%
98.2%
97.6%
97.0%
96.5%
99.9%
99.3%
98.7%
98.1%
97.6%
97.0%
96.4%
97.1%
96.5%
96.0%
95.4%
94.8%
94.2%
93.7%
100.3%
99.7%
99.1%
98.5%
97.9%
97.3%
96.7%
97.7%
97.1%
96.5%
95.9%
95.3%
94.8%
94.2%
98.4%
97.8%
97.2%
96.7%
96.1%
95.5%
94.9%
97.8%
97.2%
96.6%
96.0%
95.5%
94.9%
94.3%
103.7% 103.1% 102.5% 101.9% 101.3% 100.7% 100.1%
97.6%
97.0%
96.5%
95.9%
95.3%
94.7%
94.2%
99.8%
99.2%
98.6%
98.0%
97.5%
96.9%
96.3%
9
100.1%
98.8%
91.3%
95.9%
95.8%
93.1%
96.1%
93.6%
94.4%
93.8%
99.5%
93.6%
95.7%
10
99.5%
98.2%
90.8%
95.3%
95.2%
92.6%
95.6%
93.1%
93.8%
93.2%
98.9%
93.0%
95.1%
12
96.6%
95.4%
88.2%
92.6%
92.5%
89.9%
92.8%
90.4%
91.1%
90.5%
96.0%
90.4%
92.4%
19
94.2%
93.0%
86.0%
90.3%
90.2%
87.7%
90.5%
88.2%
88.8%
88.3%
93.7%
88.1%
90.1%
20
93.7%
92.5%
85.5%
89.7%
89.7%
87.2%
90.0%
87.6%
88.3%
87.8%
93.1%
87.6%
89.6%

Series 2015-1
13
95.4%
94.2%
87.1%
91.4%
91.3%
88.8%
91.6%
89.3%
89.9%
89.4%
94.8%
89.2%
91.2%
14
95.5%
94.2%
87.1%
91.5%
91.4%
88.8%
91.7%
89.3%
90.0%
89.5%
94.9%
89.3%
91.3%
15
95.9%
94.6%
87.5%
91.9%
91.8%
89.2%
92.1%
89.7%
90.4%
89.8%
95.3%
89.7%
91.7%
16
95.8%
94.5%
87.4%
91.8%
91.7%
89.1%
92.0%
89.6%
90.3%
89.7%
95.2%
89.6%
91.6%
Page 21
17
95.4%
94.1%
87.0%
91.4%
91.3%
88.7%
91.6%
89.2%
89.9%
89.4%
94.8%
89.2%
91.2%
18
94.8%
93.6%
86.5%
90.8%
90.8%
88.2%
91.1%
88.7%
89.4%
88.8%
94.2%
88.7%
90.7%
August 14, 2015
Year
AZ
CA
CO
CT
DC
DE
MA
MD
NJ
NV
NY
OR
TX
1
102.2%
101.2%
93.8%
100.3%
100.5%
95.2%
98.2%
97.3%
98.4%
101.0%
96.0%
104.4%
96.7%
Year
11
AZ
96.1%
CA
95.1%
CO
88.2%
CT
94.3%
DC
94.5%
DE
89.5%
MA
92.3%
MD
91.4%
NJ
92.5%
NV
95.0%
NY
90.3%
OR
98.1%
TX
90.9%
* Source: DNV GL
Solar Integrated
2
3
101.6% 101.0%
100.6% 100.0%
93.2%
92.7%
99.7%
99.1%
99.9%
99.3%
94.7%
94.1%
97.6%
97.0%
96.7%
96.1%
97.8%
97.2%
100.4%
99.8%
95.4%
94.9%
103.7% 103.1%
96.1%
95.5%
12
94.0%
93.1%
86.3%
92.3%
92.5%
87.6%
90.4%
89.5%
90.6%
93.0%
88.4%
96.0%
88.9%

Series 2015-1
13
92.8%
92.0%
85.2%
91.2%
91.3%
86.5%
89.2%
88.4%
89.4%
91.8%
87.2%
94.8%
87.8%
II Fund, LLC P-50 Production for One

4
5
6
7
100.4%
99.8%
99.2%
98.6%
99.4%
98.8%
98.2%
97.6%
92.1%
91.6%
91.0%
90.5%
98.6%
98.0%
97.4%
96.8%
98.7%
98.1%
97.6%
97.0%
93.5%
93.0%
92.4%
91.9%
96.4%
95.9%
95.3%
94.7%
95.5%
94.9%
94.4%
93.8%
96.6%
96.1%
95.5%
94.9%
99.2%
98.6%
98.0%
97.4%
94.3%
93.7%
93.2%
92.6%
102.5% 101.9% 101.3% 100.7%
94.9%
94.4%
93.8%
93.2%
14
92.9%
92.0%
85.3%
91.2%
91.4%
86.6%
89.3%
88.4%
89.5%
91.8%
87.3%
94.9%
87.9%
15
93.3%
92.4%
85.7%
91.6%
91.8%
86.9%
89.7%
88.8%
89.8%
92.2%
87.7%
95.3%
88.2%
16
93.2%
92.3%
85.6%
91.5%
91.7%
86.9%
89.6%
88.7%
89.8%
92.1%
87.6%
95.2%
88.2%
Page 22
17
92.8%
91.9%
85.2%
91.1%
91.3%
86.5%
89.2%
88.3%
89.4%
91.7%
87.2%
94.8%
87.8%
Year*
8
98.0%
97.0%
89.9%
96.2%
96.4%
91.3%
94.1%
93.2%
94.3%
96.8%
92.1%
100.1%
92.7%
9
97.4%
96.5%
89.4%
95.6%
95.8%
90.8%
93.6%
92.7%
93.8%
96.3%
91.5%
99.5%
92.1%
10
96.8%
95.9%
88.9%
95.1%
95.2%
90.2%
93.0%
92.1%
93.2%
95.7%
91.0%
98.9%
91.6%
18
92.2%
91.4%
84.7%
90.6%
90.8%
86.0%
88.6%
87.8%
88.8%
91.2%
86.7%
94.2%
87.3%
19
91.7%
90.8%
84.2%
90.0%
90.2%
85.5%
88.1%
87.3%
88.3%
90.6%
86.2%
93.7%
86.7%
20
91.1%
90.3%
83.7%
89.5%
89.7%
84.9%
87.6%
86.7%
87.8%
90.1%
85.6%
93.1%
86.2%
August 14, 2015
P-90 Production Estimates

Year
AZ
CA
CO
CT
DC
DE
HI
MA
MD
NJ
NV
NY
OR
TX
1
98.4%
96.4%
89.3%
93.0%
91.4%
84.9%
87.1%
91.4%
90.5%
90.6%
88.2%
89.1%
98.9%
90.4%
Year
11
AZ
87.1%
CA
85.3%
CO
79.0%
CT
82.3%
DC
80.9%
DE
75.2%
HI
77.1%
MA
80.9%
MD
80.0%
NJ
80.2%
NV
78.0%
NY
78.9%
OR
87.5%
TX
80.0%
* Source: DNV GL
Visigoth Solar I, LLC P-90

2
3
4
97.2%
96.1%
94.9%
95.3%
94.1%
93.0%
88.3%
87.2%
86.2%
91.9%
90.8%
89.7%
90.3%
89.3%
88.2%
83.9%
82.9%
81.9%
86.1%
85.1%
84.0%
90.3%
89.3%
88.2%
89.4%
88.3%
87.3%
89.5%
88.5%
87.4%
87.1%
86.1%
85.0%
88.1%
87.0%
86.0%
97.7%
96.5%
95.4%
89.4%
88.3%
87.2%
Production for One Year Period*

5
6
7
8
93.8%
92.7%
91.5%
90.4%
91.9%
90.8%
89.7%
88.6%
85.1%
84.1%
83.1%
82.1%
88.6%
87.6%
86.5%
85.5%
87.1%
86.1%
85.1%
84.0%
80.9%
80.0%
79.0%
78.1%
83.0%
82.0%
81.0%
80.1%
87.1%
86.1%
85.0%
84.0%
86.2%
85.2%
84.2%
83.1%
86.4%
85.3%
84.3%
83.3%
84.0%
83.0%
82.0%
81.0%
84.9%
83.9%
82.9%
81.9%
94.2%
93.1%
92.0%
90.9%
86.2%
85.1%
84.1%
83.1%
9
89.4%
87.6%
81.1%
84.5%
83.0%
77.1%
79.1%
83.0%
82.1%
82.3%
80.1%
80.9%
89.8%
82.1%
10
88.3%
86.5%
80.1%
83.4%
82.0%
76.2%
78.2%
82.0%
81.2%
81.3%
79.1%
80.0%
88.7%
81.1%
12
84.7%
83.0%
76.9%
80.1%
78.7%
73.1%
75.0%
78.7%
77.9%
78.0%
75.9%
76.7%
85.1%
77.9%
15
82.6%
80.9%
74.9%
78.0%
76.7%
71.3%
73.1%
76.7%
75.9%
76.0%
74.0%
74.8%
82.9%
75.9%
19
79.2%
77.6%
71.9%
74.9%
73.6%
68.4%
70.1%
73.6%
72.8%
72.9%
71.0%
71.7%
79.6%
72.8%
20
78.2%
76.7%
71.0%
74.0%
72.7%
67.5%
69.3%
72.7%
71.9%
72.0%
70.1%
70.9%
78.6%
71.9%

Series 2015-1
13
83.1%
81.5%
75.5%
78.6%
77.3%
71.8%
73.6%
77.2%
76.4%
76.6%
74.5%
75.3%
83.5%
76.4%
14
82.7%
81.1%
75.1%
78.2%
76.9%
71.4%
73.2%
76.8%
76.0%
76.2%
74.1%
74.9%
83.1%
76.0%
16
82.0%
80.3%
74.4%
77.5%
76.2%
70.8%
72.6%
76.2%
75.4%
75.5%
73.4%
74.2%
82.4%
75.3%
Page 23
17
81.1%
79.5%
73.6%
76.7%
75.4%
70.0%
71.8%
75.4%
74.6%
74.7%
72.7%
73.5%
81.5%
74.6%
18
80.2%
78.5%
72.8%
75.8%
74.5%
69.2%
71.0%
74.5%
73.7%
73.8%
71.8%
72.6%
80.5%
73.7%
August 14, 2015
Year
AZ
CA
CO
CT
DC
DE
HI
MA
MD
NJ
NY
OR
PA
TX
1
101.3%
99.7%
90.8%
93.9%
90.6%
88.2%
88.1%
93.0%
92.1%
90.7%
90.7%
98.1%
89.2%
94.1%
Year
11
AZ
89.7%
CA
88.2%
CO
80.3%
CT
83.0%
DC
80.2%
DE
78.1%
HI
77.9%
MA
82.3%
MD
81.5%
NJ
80.2%
NY
80.3%
OR
86.8%
PA
79.0%
TX
83.3%
* Source: DNV GL

2
3
4
100.1%
98.9%
97.7%
98.5%
97.3%
96.2%
89.7%
88.6%
87.5%
92.7%
91.6%
90.5%
89.5%
88.5%
87.4%
87.2%
86.1%
85.1%
87.0%
86.0%
85.0%
91.8%
90.7%
89.7%
91.0%
89.9%
88.8%
89.6%
88.5%
87.4%
89.6%
88.6%
87.5%
96.9%
95.7%
94.6%
88.2%
87.1%
86.1%
93.0%
91.8%
90.7%
12
87.2%
85.8%
78.1%
80.8%
78.0%
76.0%
75.8%
80.0%
79.3%
78.0%
78.1%
84.4%
76.8%
81.0%

Series 2015-1
13
85.6%
84.2%
76.7%
79.3%
76.6%
74.5%
74.4%
78.5%
77.8%
76.6%
76.7%
82.9%
75.4%
79.5%
14
85.2%
83.8%
76.3%
78.9%
76.2%
74.1%
74.0%
78.1%
77.4%
76.2%
76.3%
82.4%
75.0%
79.1%
P-90 Production for One Year*

5
6
7
8
96.6%
95.4%
94.3%
93.1%
95.0%
93.9%
92.7%
91.6%
86.5%
85.4%
84.4%
83.4%
89.4%
88.4%
87.3%
86.3%
86.3%
85.3%
84.3%
83.3%
84.1%
83.1%
82.1%
81.1%
83.9%
82.9%
81.9%
80.9%
88.6%
87.5%
86.5%
85.4%
87.7%
86.7%
85.6%
84.6%
86.4%
85.3%
84.3%
83.3%
86.5%
85.4%
84.4%
83.4%
93.5%
92.3%
91.2%
90.1%
85.0%
84.0%
83.0%
82.0%
89.7%
88.6%
87.5%
86.5%
15
85.0%
83.6%
76.1%
78.7%
76.0%
74.0%
73.9%
78.0%
77.2%
76.0%
76.1%
82.3%
74.9%
78.9%
16
84.4%
83.0%
75.6%
78.2%
75.5%
73.5%
73.4%
77.4%
76.7%
75.5%
75.6%
81.7%
74.3%
78.4%
Page 24
17
83.5%
82.2%
74.8%
77.4%
74.7%
72.7%
72.6%
76.6%
75.9%
74.7%
74.8%
80.9%
73.6%
77.6%
18
82.5%
81.2%
73.9%
76.4%
73.8%
71.9%
71.7%
75.7%
75.0%
73.8%
73.9%
79.9%
72.7%
76.6%
9
92.0%
90.5%
82.4%
85.2%
82.3%
80.1%
80.0%
84.4%
83.6%
82.3%
82.4%
89.0%
81.0%
85.4%
10
90.9%
89.4%
81.4%
84.2%
81.3%
79.1%
79.0%
83.4%
82.6%
81.3%
81.4%
88.0%
80.1%
84.4%
19
81.5%
80.2%
73.0%
75.5%
72.9%
71.0%
70.9%
74.8%
74.1%
72.9%
73.0%
78.9%
71.8%
75.7%
20
80.6%
79.3%
72.2%
74.6%
72.0%
70.1%
70.0%
73.9%
73.2%
72.1%
72.1%
78.0%
71.0%
74.8%
August 14, 2015
Year
AZ
CA
CO
CT
DC
DE
MA
MD
NJ
NY
OR
PA
TX
1
101.3%
99.3%
91.6%
93.3%
88.5%
87.7%
93.5%
91.6%
91.3%
90.7%
98.9%
85.4%
94.1%
Year
11
AZ
89.6%
CA
87.8%
CO
81.0%
CT
82.6%
DC
78.3%
DE
77.6%
MA
82.7%
MD
81.1%
NJ
80.8%
NY
80.2%
OR
87.5%
PA
75.6%
TX
83.3%
* Source: DNV GL
Solar Integrated I Fund, LLC P-90 Production for One Year*

2
3
4
5
6
7
8
100.1%
98.9%
97.7%
96.5%
95.3%
94.2%
93.1%
98.1%
96.9%
95.8%
94.6%
93.5%
92.4%
91.2%
90.5%
89.4%
88.3%
87.3%
86.2%
85.2%
84.2%
92.2%
91.1%
90.0%
88.9%
87.8%
86.8%
85.8%
87.4%
86.4%
85.3%
84.3%
83.3%
82.3%
81.3%
86.7%
85.6%
84.6%
83.6%
82.6%
81.6%
80.6%
92.4%
91.3%
90.2%
89.1%
88.0%
87.0%
85.9%
90.5%
89.4%
88.4%
87.3%
86.3%
85.2%
84.2%
90.2%
89.1%
88.0%
87.0%
85.9%
84.9%
83.9%
89.6%
88.5%
87.5%
86.4%
85.4%
84.4%
83.3%
97.7%
96.6%
95.4%
94.3%
93.1%
92.0%
90.9%
84.4%
83.4%
82.4%
81.4%
80.4%
79.4%
78.5%
93.0%
91.9%
90.8%
89.7%
88.6%
87.6%
86.5%
9
92.0%
90.1%
83.2%
84.7%
80.3%
79.6%
84.9%
83.2%
82.9%
82.3%
89.8%
77.5%
85.5%
10
90.9%
89.1%
82.2%
83.7%
79.4%
78.7%
83.9%
82.2%
81.9%
81.4%
88.7%
76.6%
84.4%
12
87.2%
85.5%
78.9%
80.3%
76.2%
75.5%
80.5%
78.9%
78.6%
78.1%
85.2%
73.5%
81.0%
19
81.5%
79.9%
73.7%
75.1%
71.2%
70.6%
75.2%
73.7%
73.5%
73.0%
79.6%
68.7%
75.7%
20
80.5%
78.9%
72.8%
74.2%
70.3%
69.7%
74.3%
72.8%
72.6%
72.1%
78.6%
67.9%
74.8%

Series 2015-1
13
85.6%
83.9%
77.4%
78.8%
74.7%
74.1%
79.0%
77.4%
77.1%
76.6%
83.6%
72.1%
79.5%
14
85.1%
83.4%
77.0%
78.4%
74.4%
73.7%
78.6%
77.0%
76.7%
76.2%
83.1%
71.8%
79.1%
15
85.0%
83.3%
76.8%
78.3%
74.2%
73.6%
78.4%
76.9%
76.6%
76.1%
83.0%
71.6%
79.0%
16
84.4%
82.7%
76.3%
77.7%
73.7%
73.1%
77.9%
76.3%
76.0%
75.5%
82.4%
71.1%
78.4%
Page 25
17
83.5%
81.8%
75.5%
76.9%
72.9%
72.3%
77.1%
75.5%
75.3%
74.8%
81.5%
70.4%
77.6%
18
82.5%
80.9%
74.6%
76.0%
72.1%
71.4%
76.2%
74.6%
74.3%
73.9%
80.6%
69.6%
76.7%
August 14, 2015
Year
AZ
CA
CO
CT
DC
DE
MA
MD
NJ
NV
NY
OR
TX
1
97.5%
96.2%
89.0%
93.0%
92.2%
84.9%
90.4%
90.3%
90.7%
94.8%
88.1%
98.5%
89.4%
Year
11
AZ
86.3%
CA
85.1%
CO
78.7%
CT
82.3%
DC
81.6%
DE
75.1%
MA
80.0%
MD
79.9%
NJ
80.2%
NV
83.9%
NY
78.0%
OR
87.2%
TX
79.1%
* Source: DNV GL
Solar Integrated II Fund, LLC P-90 Production for One

2
3
4
5
6
7
96.4%
95.2%
94.1%
92.9%
91.8%
90.7%
95.0%
93.9%
92.8%
91.7%
90.6%
89.5%
87.9%
86.8%
85.8%
84.8%
83.7%
82.7%
91.9%
90.8%
89.7%
88.6%
87.6%
86.5%
91.1%
90.0%
88.9%
87.9%
86.8%
85.8%
83.9%
82.9%
81.9%
80.9%
79.9%
79.0%
89.3%
88.3%
87.2%
86.2%
85.1%
84.1%
89.2%
88.2%
87.1%
86.1%
85.0%
84.0%
89.6%
88.5%
87.4%
86.4%
85.3%
84.3%
93.7%
92.5%
91.4%
90.3%
89.2%
88.2%
87.1%
86.0%
85.0%
84.0%
83.0%
82.0%
97.3%
96.2%
95.0%
93.9%
92.7%
91.6%
88.3%
87.3%
86.2%
85.2%
84.2%
83.2%
12
84.0%
82.8%
76.6%
80.1%
79.4%
73.1%
77.9%
77.8%
78.0%
81.6%
75.9%
84.8%
77.0%

Series 2015-1
13
82.4%
81.3%
75.2%
78.6%
77.9%
71.7%
76.4%
76.3%
76.6%
80.1%
74.5%
83.2%
75.5%
14
82.0%
80.9%
74.8%
78.2%
77.5%
71.4%
76.0%
75.9%
76.2%
79.7%
74.1%
82.8%
75.1%
15
81.8%
80.7%
74.6%
78.0%
77.4%
71.2%
75.9%
75.8%
76.0%
79.5%
73.9%
82.6%
75.0%
16
81.2%
80.1%
74.1%
77.5%
76.8%
70.7%
75.3%
75.2%
75.5%
79.0%
73.4%
82.1%
74.5%
Page 26
17
80.4%
79.3%
73.3%
76.7%
76.0%
70.0%
74.5%
74.5%
74.7%
78.1%
72.7%
81.2%
73.7%
Year*
8
89.6%
88.4%
81.7%
85.5%
84.7%
78.0%
83.1%
83.0%
83.3%
87.1%
81.0%
90.5%
82.2%
9
88.5%
87.3%
80.8%
84.5%
83.7%
77.1%
82.1%
82.0%
82.3%
86.1%
80.0%
89.4%
81.2%
10
87.5%
86.3%
79.8%
83.4%
82.7%
76.2%
81.1%
81.0%
81.3%
85.0%
79.1%
88.4%
80.2%
18
79.4%
78.4%
72.5%
75.8%
75.1%
69.1%
73.7%
73.6%
73.8%
77.2%
71.8%
80.2%
72.8%
19
78.5%
77.4%
71.6%
74.9%
74.2%
68.3%
72.8%
72.7%
72.9%
76.3%
70.9%
79.3%
72.0%
20
77.5%
76.5%
70.7%
74.0%
73.3%
67.5%
71.9%
71.8%
72.1%
75.4%
70.1%
78.3%
71.1%
August 14, 2015
Operations & Maintenance

SolarCity is responsible for performing operations and maintenance services for all PV Systems in the pool.
Each Financing Fund entered into a maintenance services agreement (MSA) with SolarCity at such
Financing Funds inception. Under the terms of the MSAs, SolarCity provides all services necessary to
operate, maintain, and repair each PV System. These services include normal maintenance, reporting,
monitoring and administrative services.
In addition to providing routine maintenance, SolarCity is responsible for replacing defective equipment,
such as panels, inverters and/or meters. All inverters are expected to be replaced over the tenor of the
transaction given KBRAs useful life assumption of 10-15 years. While it is likely that SolarCitys MSA fee
payment compensates it for this expense, KBRA has made the assumption that SolarCitys credit quality is
weaker than the Notes and at some point SolarCity is replaced. As such, KBRA believes the Issuer will be
responsible for these expenses and has included this as an expense in its ratings stresses.
SolarCitys MSAs with the Financing Funds provide for a fixed annual fee of $15/kW escalating at 2.5%
each year. However, KBRAs rating scenarios utilize higher rates (A stress scenario: $27.5/kW; BBB
stress scenario: $25/kW) which we believe are needed to attract a new O&M provider in a distressed
scenario. U.S. Bank National Association will serve as the Transition Manager and will have the
responsibility of identifying a replacement manager in a default scenario. Noteholder approval of the new
manager is also required. KBRA views the inclusion of the Transition Manager favorably as it allows the
securitization to continue to operate as expected if SolarCity as manager needs to be replaced.

Series 2015-1
Page 27
August 14, 2015
Summary of Collateral
Portfolio Summary
Total PV Systems
ADSAB ($ millions)
Average ADSAB
Range of ADSAB
Aggregate PV System size (kW DC)
WA PV System Size (kW DC)
Range of PV System Sizes (kw DC)
WA Customer Agreement Initial Term (months)
WA Customer Agreement Remaining Initial Term (months)
WA Customer Agreement Seasoning (months)
Range of Customer Agreement Seasoning (months)
WA Price per kWh
WA Annual Customer Agreement Price per kWh Fee Escalator
Expected PBI Payments (% of ADSAB)
WA FICO Score
Range of FICO Scores
Number of Lease agreements
Number of PPA Agreements
Percentage of PPA agreements (by ADSAB)
Percentage of Lease agreements (by ADSAB)
Fund Data
PV Systems
Aggregate PV System size (MW DC)
Weighted average FICO
ADSAB ($ millions)
Average Discounted Solar Asset Balance
Range of customer agreements - Months remaining
Weighted average customer agreement - Months remaining
State (% of ADSAB)
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
District of Columbia
Delaware
Hawaii
Massachusetts
Maryland
Nevada
New Jersey
New York
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Texas

Series 2015-1
16,400
$214.1
$13,054
$(7,680) to $91,954
108,168
6.60
1.47 to 99.96
240
230
8.0
0 to 22
$0.14
2.02%
3.14%
742
558 to 850
9,075
7,325
55.9%
44.1%
Financing
Fund A
3,840
24.6
752
46.0
$11,968
225 to 239
231
Financing
Fund B
3,841
26.3
731
51.0
$13,266
230 to 240
234
Financing
Fund C
1,658
11.1
743
19.3
$11,654
218 to 240
222
Financing
Fund D
7,061
46.2
743
97.9
$13,858
229 to 240
234
17.7%
53.9%
6.4%
3.1%
0.0%
0.5%
0.0%
4.4%
7.4%
0.0%
1.7%
2.0%
1.0%
0.1%
1.8%
17.9%
50.9%
5.6%
3.9%
0.0%
0.7%
0.0%
7.0%
4.8%
0.1%
2.3%
6.0%
0.2%
0.0%
0.6%
15.0%
36.9%
21.6%
3.9%
0.0%
0.5%
3.3%
1.5%
8.1%
0.0%
2.3%
1.7%
2.9%
0.5%
1.8%
13.6%
60.7%
3.3%
4.0%
0.0%
0.5%
0.6%
5.4%
4.5%
0.0%
2.2%
4.0%
0.4%
0.0%
0.7%
Page 28
August 14, 2015
Cash Flow Assumptions

Base Case Scenario
KBRA performed cash flow modeling on the SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC, Series 2015-1 transaction to
determine whether the projected cash flow from the PPAs and leases were sufficient to warrant the
requested rating levels.
KBRAs base case assumes the following:
P50 energy production

No defaults or renegotiations
Management fee of $23/kW DC increasing at 2% annually
All inverters are replaced at $1,300 during years 10-12
Flip date occurs as scheduled
Module degradation rate: 1.3% per annum
System availability of 99%
Notes are not refinanced on the ARD
Under the base case scenario, the Class A Notes are repaid in period 26 (year 13) and the Class B Notes
are repaid in period 28 (year 14). The chart below illustrates KBRAs base case scenario projections.
KBRA Base Case

SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC Series 2015-1
$120,000,000
$100,000,000
$80,000,000
$60,000,000
$40,000,000
$20,000,000
$0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Period
Class A Notes

Series 2015-1
Class B Notes
Page 29
August 14, 2015
KBRA Stress Scenarios

KBRA ran a number of sensitivities to test the transaction structure to test stresses related to timing of
defaults, cumulative net losses, energy production and reduced contract rates. The scenarios detailed
below were analyzed to determine if the transaction structure and cash flows could sustain the requested
ratings. Based on the analysis, the transaction appears to be able to withstand such stresses.
Scenario 1: A Stress
Under Scenario 1 the following stresses were applied to the structure:

15.8% of residential leases/PPAs default and never pay again. Lease/PPA defaults were based on
the lowest FICO scores defaulting first and defaults were spread evenly over 10 years. The default
rates were determined by doubling the probability of default output determined by KBRAs RMBS
model, based on each obligors FICO score.
KBRA assumed in years 5, 10, and 15, a portion (30%/40%/50%) of residential customers would
default and not make payments for 12 months. After 12 months, the defaulting customers would
renegotiate their lease/PPA rate to 20% below the prevailing utility rate in their respective states at
that time. KBRA used current utility rate data found on www.EIA.gov and grew the current rate by
1% annually. The contracts that were most out of the money were modified first. Renegotiated
contract rates grow at 1% annually. Based on the above stresses it was assumed:
o 659 contracts were renegotiated in year 5
Management fee of $27.5/kW DC increasing at 2% annually
Flip date for Visigoth Solar I, LLC extended by 12 months
Flip dates for other Financing Funds are same as Base Case
Aggregate purchase option prices associated with flip dates increased by 8.1% relative to Base
Case
All Tax Loss Insurance Policies are triggered requiring full payment of deductibles

Series 2015-1
Page 30
August 14, 2015
KBRA 'A' Stress Case

$120,000,000
$100,000,000
$80,000,000
$60,000,000
$40,000,000
$20,000,000
$0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Period
Class A Notes (Base Case)
Class B Notes (Base Case)
Class A Notes (A Stress)
Class B Notes (A Stress)
In Scenario 1, the Class A Notes were repaid in period 35 (year 18) and the Class B Notes were repaid in
period 38 (year 19).

Series 2015-1
Page 31
August 14, 2015
Scenario 2: BBB Stress

Under Scenario 2 the following stresses were applied to the structure:

9.4% of residential leases/PPAs default and never pay again. Lease/PPA defaults were based on
the lowest FICO scores defaulting first and defaults were spread evenly over 10 years. The default
rates were determined by doubling the probability of default output determined by KBRAs RMBS
model, based on each obligors FICO score.
KBRA assumed in years 5, 10, and 15, a portion (22.5%/30%/37.5%) of residential customers
would default and not make payments for 9 months. After 9 months, the customers would
renegotiate their lease/PPA rate to 15% below the prevailing utility rate in their respective states at
that time. KBRA used current utility rate data found on www.EIA.gov and grew the current rate by
1% annually. The contracts that were most out of the money were modified first. Renegotiated
contract rates grow at 1% annually. Based on the above stresses it was assumed:
Management fee of $25/kW DC increasing at 2% annually
Flip date for Visigoth Solar I, LLC extended by 6 months
Flip dates for other Financing Funds are same as Base Case
Aggregate purchase option prices associated with flip dates increased by 0.2% relative to Base
Case
All Tax Loss Insurance Policies are triggered requiring full payment of deductibles
KBRA BBB Stress Case

$120,000,000
$100,000,000
$80,000,000
$60,000,000
$40,000,000
$20,000,000
$0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Period
Class A Notes (Base Case)
Class B Notes (Base Case)
Class A Notes (BBB Stress)
Class B Notes (BBB Stress)
In Scenario 2, the Class A Notes were repaid in period 30 (year 15) and the Class B Notes were repaid in
period 32 (year 16).

Series 2015-1
Page 32
August 14, 2015
Transaction Structure
Legal Structure
Transaction
Structure
The SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC, Series 2015-1 Class A Notes and Class B Notes are
newly issued asset-backed notes secured by the equity interests of the Managing
Members in the related Financing Funds that own a portfolio of PV Systems and any
proceeds received under the Tax Loss Insurance Policies. The following diagram
illustrates the basic securitization structure:
SolarCity
Corporation
Originator
100%
Ownership
Note
Proceeds
SolarCity LMC
Holdings IV. LLC
Depositor
Contribution Agreement
(Class A Membership Interests of

each Managing Member)
100%
Ownership
Series 2015-1 Notes
Semi-annual Payments
Note Proceeds
100%
Ownership
Tax
Equity
Investor
100% Class A
Member
Solar Integrated
Manager I, LLC
Managing Member
100% Class B
Member
Managing
Member
Distributions
100% Class A
Member
Blue Skies
Solar I, LLC
Financing Fund
Manager Transition
Agreement
US Bank
Transition Manager
Managing Member
Distributions
Solar Integrated
Manager II, LLC
Managing Member
100% Class B
Member
Tax
Equity
Investor
100% Class A
Member
Solar Integrated
Fund I, LLC
Financing Fund
Page 33
Tax
Equity
Investor
100% Class A
Member
100% Class B
Member
Managing
Member
Distributions
Solar Integrated
Fund II, LLC
Financing Fund
Customer Payments
PBI Payments & Rebates
Leases/PPAs
PV Systems
Visigoth Solar
Managing
Manager I, LLC
Managing Member
100% Class B
Member
Managing
Member
Distributions
Customer Payments
Leases/PPAs
PV Systems

Series 2015-1
Tax
Equity
Investor
Managing
Member
Distributions
Customer Payments
US Bank
Indenture Trustee
and Custodian
SolarCity LMC
Series IV. LLC
Issuer
Noteholders
Solar Ulysses
Manager I, LLC
Managing Member
Indenture
Custodial Agreement
Visigoth
Solar I, LLC
Financing Fund
Customer Payments
Leases/PPAs
PV Systems
Leases/PPAs
PV Systems
August 14, 2015
Priority of
Payments
On each payment date, available funds will be distributed to pay the following
amounts in the following order:
i.
Capped Indenture Trustee fee and expenses (although uncapped if theres an

event of default);
ii.
Custodian fee;
iii.
Manager fee;
iv.
Capped Transition Manager fee and expenses (although uncapped if theres an

event of default);
v.
Interest on the Class A Notes;
vi.
Interest on the Class B Notes;
vii.
To the liquidity reserve account up to the required amount;
viii.
To the supplemental reserve account up to the required amount;
ix.
To the Noteholders:
1. During a regular amortization period in the following order:,
a) Class A Scheduled Note Principal Payment;
b) Class A Unscheduled Note Principal Payment*, until the
outstanding note balance of Class A Notes is zero;
c) Class B Scheduled Note Principal Payment;
d) Class B Unscheduled Note Principal Payment*, until the
outstanding note balance of Class B Notes is zero;
e) Class B Deferred Interest
2. During an Early Amortization Period, first to the Class A Notes until
paid in full, and then to the Class B Notes to (1) reduce the outstanding
Class B Note balance to zero and (2) to pay any unpaid Class B
Deferred Interest;
x.
if a DSCR/insurance sweep period is in effect, to the liquidity reserve account

up to the required amount;
xi.
Indenture Trustee extraordinary expenses not paid in clause i. above;
xii.
Transition Manager expenses not paid in clause iv. above;
xiii.
Sequentially to the Class A and Class B Noteholders, any make whole amount;
xiv.
Sequentially to the Class A and Class B Noteholders, any Post-ARD step-up

interest due and unpaid; and
xv.
To the Issuer.

Series 2015-1
Page 34
August 14, 2015
* Unscheduled Note Principal Payments generally include payments by customers or

recoveries on PV Systems relating to the following categories:
Early
Amortization
Period
Terminated solar assets

Defaulted solar assets
Customers who have exercised purchase options prior to expiry of the
customer agreement
Prepayments
Liquidated damages payable by the Depositor for breaches of assetlevel representations or warranties
Solar assets subject to modifications
Certain material events occurring with respect to a Financing Fund,
such as bankruptcy or being deemed an investment company
An "Early Amortization Period" will commence if:

(i)
the DSCR is less than or equal to 1.15 for two consecutive determination
dates; and
(ii)
a Class B Interest Deferral Period is not in effect.
An Early Amortization Period will continue until the DSCR is greater than 1.15 for two
consecutive determination dates.
Class B Interest
Deferral Period
A "Class B Interest Deferral Period" will commence if:

(i)
the DSCR is less than or equal to 1.00 for any determination date;
(ii)
an Event of Default has occurred; or
(iii)
on the Anticipated Repayment Date, the Class A Notes and Class B Notes have
not been reduced to zero.
During a Class B Interest Deferral Period, so long as the Class A Notes are still
outstanding, interest and principal will be paid on the Class A Notes before interest
and principal will be paid on the Class B Notes. A Class B Interest Deferral Period
caused by an event described in clause (i) above will continue until the next
determination date on which the DSCR is greater than 1.00. A Class B Interest
Deferral Period caused by an event described in clause (ii) above will continue until all
Events of Default have been cured or waived. A Class B Interest Deferral Period
caused by an event described in clause (iii) above will continue until the Class A
Notes and Class B Notes have been reduced to zero.
DSCR/Insurance
Sweep Period
The DSCR/Insurance Sweep Period will commence if:

(i)
the DSCR is less than or equal to 1.25 for any determination date occurring
during a Regular Amortization Period; or
(ii)
insurance required to be maintained by any Financing Fund under the such
Financing Funds operating agreement

Series 2015-1
Page 35
August 14, 2015
During a DSCR/Insurance Sweep Period, the required liquidity reserve amount will
equal the aggregate outstanding note balance. A DSCR/Insurance Sweep Period will
continue until the DSCR is greater than 1.25 for one determination date and all
required insurance is obtained by the related Financing Fund.
Events of
Default
The occurrence of any of the following events will be an Event of Default under the
indenture:
1. failure to pay any note interest (excluding Class B Deferred Interest or PostARD Additional Note Interest) when due for three business days;
2. failure to pay the aggregate outstanding note balance of the Class A and Class
B Notes at the legal final maturity date;
3. certain bankruptcy or insolvency events occur with respect to the Issuer;
4. failure by the Issuer to perform certain covenants set forth in the indenture
which has not been cured within 30 days;
5. certain representations, warranties or statements of the Issuer (other than
certain representations and warranties relating to the eligibility of the solar
assets) prove to be incorrect in any material respect as of the time when the
same shall have been made and such condition is not remedied within 30 days
after notice;
6. failure of the Indenture Trustee to have a first perfected priority security
interest in the trust estate in favor of the Indenture Trustee;
7. the Issuer, all Financing Funds or all Managing Members become subject to
registration as an "investment company";
8. the Issuer, all Financing Funds or all Managing Members become taxable as an
association or publicly traded partnership taxable as a corporation;
9. the Originator or Depositor fails to pay the liquidated damages amount for a
defective solar asset; or
10. there remains in force, undischarged, unsatisfied, and unstayed for more than
30 consecutive days, any final non-appealable judgment in the amount of
$100,000 or more against the Issuer not covered by insurance.
Manager
Termination
Events
The occurrence of any of the following events will constitute a "Manager Termination
Event" under the Management Agreement:
(i)
failure by the Manager to make any required payment, transfer or deposit
within three business days of being due;
(ii)
failure by the Manager to deliver to the Indenture Trustee the quarterly
Manager report within five business days of being due;
(iii)
failure by the Manager to perform in any material respect any covenant of the
Manager which failure continues beyond any applicable cure periods and has a
material adverse effect on the Noteholders;

Series 2015-1
Page 36
August 14, 2015
(iv)
certain events of bankruptcy or insolvency with respect to the Manager;
(v)
certain representations, warranties or statement of the Manager prove
incorrect in any material respect as of the time when the same shall have been
resulting in a material adverse effect on the Noteholders, and such condition
material adverse effect on the collateral or the Noteholders, subject to certain
periods set forth in the Management Agreement;
to be
made
has a
grace
(vi)
the Manager ceases to be engaged in the business of monitoring or
maintaining energy equipment of a type comparable to the related PV Systems;
(vii)
if SolarCity is the Manager, an Event of Default shall have occurred and is
continuing; or
(viii)
Representations
and Warranties
the DSCR is less than 1.05 on any Determination Dates.
For more detailed information regarding the representations, warranties and

enforcement mechanisms available under the transaction documents, please see
KBRAs SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC, Representations and Warranties Disclosure,
which is being published contemporaneously with this Presale Report. The
Representations
and
Warranties
Disclosure
is
available
at:
https://www.krollbondratings.com/show_report/2681

Series 2015-1
Page 37
August 14, 2015
Copyright 2015, Kroll Bond Rating Agency, Inc., and/or its licensors and affiliates (together, "KBRA). All rights reserved. All
information contained herein is proprietary to KBRA and is protected by copyright and other intellectual property law, and none of
such information may be copied or otherwise reproduced, further transmitted, redistributed, repackaged or resold, in whole or in
part, by any person, without KBRAs prior express written consent. Ratings are licensed by KBRA under these conditions.
Misappropriation or misuse of KBRA ratings may cause serious damage to KBRA for which money damages may not constitute a
sufficient remedy; KBRA shall have the right to obtain an injunction or other equitable relief in addition to any other remedies. The
statements contained in this report are based solely upon the opinions of KBRA and the data and information available to the authors
at the time of publication of this report. All information contained herein is obtained by KBRA from sources believed by it to be
accurate and reliable; however, KBRA ratings are provided AS IS. No warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy, timeliness,
completeness, merchantability, or fitness for any particular purpose of any rating or other opinion or information is given or made by
KBRA. Under no circumstances shall KBRA have any liability resulting from the use of any such information, including without
limitation, for any indirect, special, consequential, incidental or compensatory damages whatsoever (including without limitation, loss
of profits, revenue or goodwill), even if KBRA is advised of the possibility of such damages. The credit ratings, if any, and analysis
constituting part of the information contained herein are, and must be construed solely as, statements of opinion and not statements
of fact or recommendations to purchase, sell or hold any securities. KBRA receives compensation for its rating activities from issuers,
insurers, guarantors and/or underwriters of debt securities for assigning ratings and from subscribers to its website.

Series 2015-1
Page 38
August 14, 2015

KBRA ABS SolarCity LMC Series IV LLC Series 2015-1 New Issue Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

KBRA ABS SolarCity LMC Series IV LLC Series 2015-1 New Issue Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

KBRA ABS SolarCity LMC Series IV LLC Series 2015-1 New Issue Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

U.S.

SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC,

Lenny Giltman, Senior Director

Andrew Giudici, Managing Director

August 14, 2015

SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC,

August 14, 2015

February 21, 2022

August 21, 2045

February 21, 2022

August 21, 2045

SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC

SolarCity Series Holdings IV, LLC

SolarCity Corporation (Company)

U.S. Bank National Association

Blue Skies Solar I, LLC

For Blue Skies Financing Fund: Solar Ulysses Manager I, LLC

SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC,

August 14, 2015

Tax Equity Investor Members

Blue Skies Financing Fund: American Honda Motor Co., Inc.

Tax Loss Insurers

Underwriters at Lloyds, London

Key Credit Considerations

Strong Credit Profile of Underlying Customers

Transaction Structure Credit Enhancement

Subordination and Overcollateralization: The Class A Notes benefit from

Interest Reserve Account: At closing a liquidity reserve account will be fully

SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC,

August 14, 2015

Supplemental Reserve Account: At closing a supplemental reserve account

Transaction Structure Class B Interest Payments May Be Deferred

August 14, 2015

creditworthiness to be a constraint on the rating of the Notes, although it should be

The expected performance of the PV Systems was estimated by DNV GL, an

SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC,

August 14, 2015

Write-off Policy Atypical for Consumer Assets

SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC,

August 14, 2015

Tax Equity Structure

SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC,

August 14, 2015

Market method (precedent sales of comparable properties)

Projected Flip Date

the property ceases to be a qualified energy facility; or

Tax Loss Insurance Policy

SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC,

August 14, 2015

SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC,

August 14, 2015

Originator and Manager Review

August 14, 2015

Tanguy Serra, Chief Operating Officer

SolarCity LMC Series IV, LLC,

August 14, 2015

Customer Acquisition & Development

Under Blue Skies Solar I, LLC

Under Solar Integrated I Fund, LLC

Customer has a FICO score greater than or equal to 680;