Vantiv / Smarter / Faster / Easier / Payments    Print Page  |  Close Window

SEC Filings

425
FIDELITY NATIONAL INFORMATION SERVICES, INC. filed this Form 425 on 05/13/2019
Entire Document
 


Worldpay, Inc.

NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS (continued)

 

15. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS

Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The Company uses the hierarchy prescribed in ASC 820, Fair Value Measurement , based upon the available inputs to the valuation and the degree to which they are observable or not observable in the market. The three levels in the hierarchy are as follows:

 

   

Level 1 Inputs—Quoted prices (unadjusted) for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that are accessible as of the measurement date.

 

   

Level 2 Inputs—Inputs other than quoted prices within Level 1 that are observable either directly or indirectly, including but not limited to quoted prices in markets that are not active, quoted prices in active markets for similar assets or liabilities and observable inputs other than quoted prices such as interest rates or yield curves.

 

   

Level 3 Inputs—Unobservable inputs reflecting the Company’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, including assumptions about risk.

The following table summarizes assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis as of December 31, 2018 and 2017 (in millions):

 

     December 31, 2018      December 31, 2017  
     Fair Value Measurements Using  
         Level 1              Level 2              Level 3              Level 1              Level 2              Level 3      

Assets:

                 

Interest rate contracts

   $ —        $ 24.6      $ —        $ —        $ 24.4      $ —    

Deal contingent foreign currency forward

     —          —          —          —          33.1        —    

Liabilities:

                 

Interest rate contracts

   $ —        $ 10.0      $ —        $ —        $ 4.4      $ —    

Mercury TRA

     —          53.2        —          —          100.5        —    

Interest Rate Contracts

The Company uses interest rate contracts to manage interest rate risk. The fair value of interest rate swaps is determined using the market standard methodology of netting the discounted future fixed cash receipts (or payments) and the discounted expected variable cash payments (or receipts). The variable cash payments (or receipts) are based on the expectation of future interest rates (forward curves) derived from observed market interest rate curves. The fair value of the interest rate caps is determined using widely accepted valuation techniques including discounted cash flow analysis on the expected future cash flows of each interest rate cap. This analysis reflects the contractual terms of the interest rate caps, including the period to maturity, and uses observable market inputs including interest rate curves and implied volatilities. In addition, to comply with the provisions of ASC 820, Fair Value Measurement , credit valuation adjustments, which consider the impact of any credit enhancements to the contracts, are incorporated in the fair values to account for potential nonperformance risk. In adjusting the fair value of its interest rate contracts for the effect of nonperformance risk, the Company has considered any applicable credit enhancements such as collateral postings, thresholds, mutual puts, and guarantees.

Although the Company determined that the majority of the inputs used to value its interest rate contracts fell within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, the credit valuation adjustments associated with its interest rate contracts utilized Level 3 inputs, such as estimates of current credit spreads to evaluate the likelihood of default by itself and its counterparties. However, as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, the Company assessed the significance of the impact of the credit valuation adjustments on the overall valuation of its interest rate contracts and determined that the credit valuation adjustment was not significant to the overall valuation of its interest rate contracts. As a result, the Company classified its interest rate contract valuations in Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy. See Note 9—Derivatives and Hedging Activities for further discussion of the Company’s interest rate contracts.

 

- 47 -