Fitch Ratings has taken various rating actions on the notes issued by four Nelnet Student Loan Trust transactions.

All four trusts are comprised of Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP) student loans.

RATING ACTIONS

ENTITY/DEBT	RATING		PRIOR

Nelnet Student Loan Trust 2006-1

A-6 64033HAA7

LT	AAAsf 	Affirmed		AAAsf

B 64031QCU3

LT	Asf 	Affirmed		Asf

Nelnet Student Loan Trust 2012-1

A 64032AAA3

LT	AAAsf 	Affirmed		AAAsf

B 64032AAB1

LT	AAsf 	Affirmed		AAsf

Nelnet Student Loan Trust 2012-2

A 64031CAA0

LT	AAsf 	Downgrade		AAAsf

B 64031CAB8

LT	Asf 	Affirmed		Asf

Nelnet Student Loan Trust 2013-2

A 64033EAA4

LT	AAAsf 	Affirmed		AAAsf

B 64033EAB2

LT	AAsf 	Affirmed		AAsf

VIEW ADDITIONAL RATING DETAILS

TRANSACTION SUMMARY

Nelnet 2006-1 & 2012-1: The notes pass the credit and maturity stresses for their respective ratings with sufficient hard credit enhancement (CE). The transactions' performance has been in line with Fitch's expectations since last year's annual review.

Nelnet 2012-2: The downgrade of the class A notes reflects Fitch's stressed cashflow results, which indicate the bonds are not paid in full by the legal final maturity date under Fitch's 'AAAsf' and 'AAsf' maturity stress scenarios (under these rating scenarios the notes are eventually paid in full without credit loss). The transaction's maturity risk profile under Fitch's stressed assumptions worsened since the last review as shown by the slow declining weighted average remaining loan term of the portfolio, decreasing by three months since the last review on February 2020. In downgrading the ratings to 'AAsf', Fitch considered qualitative factors such as the time to maturity of the class A notes and the degree of the failure under the 'AAsf' scenario.

Nelnet 2013-2: The class A notes pass the 'AAAsf' credit and maturity stresses with sufficient hard CE. The class B notes failed Fitch's 'AAsf' credit stress scenario, but the failure was deemed immaterial and Fitch considered the length of time to maturity for the notes. The current rating is within one rating category of the rating implied by Fitch's FFELP cashflow model, in line with rating criteria.

As discussed below, Fitch reviewed assumptions under the coronavirus baseline scenario. No revisions were made to the sustainable constant default rate (sCDR). The sustainable constant prepayment rate (sCPR) assumption was lowered for Nelnet 2012-1 and 2013-2.

The Rating Outlooks for all of the 'AAAsf' rated notes were revised to Negative from Stable on Aug. 6, 2020, following Fitch's affirmation of the U.S. sovereign's 'AAA' Issuer Default Rating (IDR) and revision of its Outlook to Negative from Stable.

KEY RATING DRIVERS

U.S. Sovereign Risk: The trust collateral comprises Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP) loans, with guaranties provided by eligible guarantors and reinsurance provided by the U.S. Department of Education (ED) for at least 97% of principal and accrued interest. As of the current reporting period, approximately 11.84%, 100%, and 19.50% of the collateral are rehab loans for Nelnet 2012-1, 2012-2 and 2013-2, respectively. The U.S. sovereign rating is currently 'AAA'/Outlook Negative.

Collateral Performance:

Nelnet 2006-1: Fitch assumes a base case default rate of 13.75% and 41.25% under the 'AAAsf' credit stress scenario and a sustainable constant default rate (sCDR) of 2.20%. Fitch applies the standard default timing curve in its credit stress cash flow analysis. The claim reject rate is assumed to be 0.25% in the base case and 2.0% in the 'AAAsf' case. The trailing 12month (TTM) levels of deferment, forbearance and income-based repayment are 3.9%, 9.8%, and 15.9%, respectively, and are used as the starting point in cash flow modelling. The sustainable constant prepayment rate (voluntary and involuntary prepayments; sCPR) is assumed to be 8.5%. Subsequent declines or increases are modelled as per criteria. The borrower benefit is assumed to be approximately 0.25%, based on information provided by the sponsor.

Nelnet 2012-1: Fitch assumes a base case default rate of 22.50% and 67.50% under the 'AAAsf' credit stress scenario and a sCDR of 4.30% and revises the sCPR from 11.8% to 10.0%. Fitch applies the standard default timing curve in its credit stress cash flow analysis. The claim reject rate is assumed to be 0.25% in the base case and 2.0% in the 'AAAsf' case. The TTM levels of deferment, forbearance and income-based repayment are 7.2%, 13.0%, and 22.3% respectively, and are used as the starting point in cash flow modelling. Subsequent declines or increases are modelled as per criteria. The borrower benefit is assumed to be approximately 0.14%, based on information provided by the sponsor.

Nelnet 2012-2: Fitch assumes a base case default rate of 36.25% and 100% under the 'AAAsf' credit stress scenario and a sCDR of 6.0%. Fitch applies the standard default timing curve in its credit stress cash flow analysis. The claim reject rate is assumed to be 0.25% in the base case and 2.0% in the 'AAAsf' case. The TTM levels of deferment, forbearance and income-based repayment are 6.9%, 16.7%, and 17.4% respectively, and are used as the starting point in cash flow modelling. The sCPR is assumed to be 9.0%. Subsequent declines or increases are modelled as per criteria. The borrower benefit is assumed to be approximately 0.01%, based on information provided by the sponsor.

Nelnet 2013-2: Fitch assumes a base case default rate of 29.75% and 89.25% under the 'AAAsf' credit stress scenario and a sCDR of 4.75% and revises the sCPR from 11.5% to 10.75%. Fitch applies the standard default timing curve in its credit stress cash flow analysis. The claim reject rate is assumed to be 0.25% in the base case and 2.0% in the 'AAAsf' case. The TTM levels of deferment, forbearance and income-based repayment are 7.9%, 17.0%, and 30.0% respectively, and are used as the starting point in cash flow modelling. Subsequent declines or increases are modelled as per criteria. The borrower benefit is assumed to be approximately 0.12%, based on information provided by the sponsor.

Basis and Interest Rate Risk: Basis risk for these transactions arises from any rate and reset frequency mismatch between interest rate indices for Special Allowance Payments (SAP) and the securities. As of the current reporting period, 100%, 100%, 91.1% and 97.1% of the student loans are indexed to one-month LIBOR for Nelnet 2006-1, 2012-1, 2012-2 and 2013-2, respectively, and the balance of the loans are indexed to T-bill. All the notes are currently indexed to one-month LIBOR except for Nelnet 2006-1, which is indexed to three-month LIBOR. Fitch applies its standard basis and interest rate stresses to the transactions as per criteria.

Payment Structure: CE is provided by overcollateralization (OC), excess spread and for the class A notes and subordination. As of the current reporting period, for Nelnet 2006-1, total and senior effective parity ratios (including the reserve account) are 100.66% (0.65% CE) and 105.21% (4.95% CE), respectively. The required reserve account balance is 0.25% of the current pool balance with a floor of $2,951,197. Excess cash is currently being released from the trust.

As of the current reporting period, for Nelnet 2012-1, 2012-2 and 2013-2, respectively, total effective parity ratios (including the reserve) are: 102.09% (2.05% CE), 101.94% (1.90% CE), and 101.01% (1.0% CE). As of the current reporting period, for Nelnet 2012-1, 2012-2 and 2013-2, respectively, senior effective parity ratios (including the reserve) are: 110.92% (9.84% CE), 113.54% (11.92% CE) and 110.56% (9.55% CE). The required reserve account balance is 0.25% of the current bond balance with a floor of $343,900, $333,000 and $1,156,00 For Nelnet 2012-1, 2012-2 and 2013-2, respectively. Excess cash is currently being released from all the trusts.

Operational Capabilities: Day-to-day servicing are provided by Nelnet, Inc. Fitch believes Nelnet to be an acceptable servicer, due to its extensive track record as one of the largest servicers of FFELP loans.

Coronavirus Pandemic's Impact: Fitch's baseline (rating) scenario assumes an initial activity bounce in 3Q20 followed by a slower recovery trajectory from 4Q20 onward amid high unemployment and further pullback in private-sector investment. To assess the sustainable assumptions, Fitch assumed a decline in payment rates and an increase in defaults to previous recessionary levels for two years and then a return to recent performance for the remainder of the life of the transactions. Reflective of this analysis, Fitch maintained or adjusted the sCDR and sCPR cashflow model assumptions as indicated earlier.

The risk of negative rating actions will increase under Fitch's coronavirus downside scenario, which contemplates a more severe and prolonged period of stress with a halting recovery beginning in 2Q21. As a downside sensitivity reflecting this scenario, Fitch increased the default rate, IBR and remaining term assumptions by 50%. The results are provided in the Rating Sensitivities below.

RATING SENSITIVITIES

'AAAsf' rated tranches of most FFELP securitizations will likely move in tandem with the U.S. sovereign rating given the strong linkage to the U.S. sovereign, by nature of the reinsurance provided by the Department of Education. Aside from the U.S. sovereign rating, defaults, basis risk and loan extension risk account for the majority of the risk embedded in FFELP student loan transactions.

This section provides insight into the model-implied sensitivities the transaction faces when one assumption is modified, while holding others equal. Fitch conducts credit and maturity stress sensitivity analysis by increasing or decreasing key assumptions by 25% and 50% over the base case. The credit stress sensitivity is viewed by stressing both the base case default rate and the basis spread. The maturity stress sensitivity is viewed by stressing remaining term, IBR usage and prepayments. The results below should only be considered as one potential outcome, as the transaction is exposed to multiple dynamic risk factors. It should not be used as an indicator of possible future performance.

Nelnet Student Loan Trust 2006-1

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive rating action/upgrade:

Credit Stress Sensitivity

Default decrease 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

Basis Spread decrease 0.25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

Maturity Stress Sensitivity

CPR increase 25%: class A 'AAAsf';' class B 'AAAsf'

IBR usage decrease 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

Remaining Term decrease 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative rating action/downgrade:

Credit Stress Rating Sensitivity

Default increase 25%: class A 'AAAA 'sf'; class B 'AAsf'

Default increase 50%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'Asf'

Basis spread increase 0.25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'Asf'

Basis spread increase 0.50%: class A 'Asf'; class B 'BBsf'

Maturity Stress Rating Sensitivity

CPR decrease 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

CPR decrease 50%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

IBR usage increase 25%: class A 'AAAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

IBR usage increase 50%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

Remaining Term increase 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

Remaining Term increase 50%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

As a sensitivity under Fitch's coronavirus downside scenario, Fitch assumed a 50% increase in defaults, IBR and remaining term for the credit and maturity stresses, respectively. Under this scenario, the model-implied ratings were 'AAAsf' and 'Asf' for the class A and B notes, respectively, for the credit stress. The model-implied ratings were 'AAAsf' for both the class A and class B notes, respectively, for the maturity stress under increased IBR and 'AAAsf' for both the class A and class B notes under increased remaining term.

Nelnet Student Loan Trust 2012-1

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive rating action/upgrade:

Credit Stress Sensitivity

Default decrease 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

Basis Spread decrease 0.25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

Maturity Stress Sensitivity

CPR increase 25%: class A 'AAAsf';' class B 'AAAsf'

IBR usage decrease 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

Remaining Term decrease 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative rating action/downgrade:

Credit Stress Rating Sensitivity

Default increase 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'Asf'

Default increase 50%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'Asf'

Basis spread increase 0.25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'Asf'

Basis spread increase 0.50%: class A 'AAAsf; class B 'BBBsf'

Maturity Stress Rating Sensitivity

CPR decrease 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

CPR decrease 50%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

IBR usage increase 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

IBR usage increase 50%: class A 'AAAsf; class B 'AAAsf'

Remaining Term increase 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

Remaining Term increase 50%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'.

As a sensitivity under Fitch's coronavirus downside scenario, Fitch assumed a 50% increase in defaults, IBR and remaining term for the credit and maturity stresses, respectively. Under this scenario, the model-implied ratings were 'AAAsf' and 'Asf' for the class A and B notes, respectively, for the credit stress. The model-implied ratings were 'AAAsf' for both the class A and class B notes, respectively, for the maturity stress under increased IBR and 'AAAsf' for both the class A and class B notes under increased remaining term.

Nelnet Student Loan Trust 2012-2

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive rating action/upgrade:

Credit Stress Sensitivity

Default decrease 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAsf'

Basis Spread decrease 0.25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAsf'

Maturity Stress Sensitivity

CPR increase 25%: class A 'AAsf'; class B 'AAsf'

IBR usage decrease 25%: class A 'Asf'; class B 'Asf'

Remaining Term decrease 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative rating action/downgrade:

Credit Stress Rating Sensitivity

Default increase 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'BBBsf'

Default increase 50%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'Asf'

Basis spread increase 0.25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'Asf'

Basis spread increase 0.50%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'BBBsf'

Maturity Stress Rating Sensitivity

CPR decrease 25%: class A 'Bsf'; class B 'Bsf'

CPR decrease 50%: class A 'CCCsf'; class B 'CCCsf'

IBR usage increase 25%: class A 'BBBsf'; class B 'BBBsf'

IBR usage increase 50%: class A 'BBBsf'; class B 'BBBsf'

Remaining Term increase 25%: class A 'Bsf'; class B 'Bsf'

Remaining Term increase 50%: class A 'CCCsf'; class B 'CCCsf'

As a sensitivity under Fitch's coronavirus downside scenario, Fitch assumed a 50% increase in defaults, IBR and remaining term for the credit and maturity stresses, respectively. Under this scenario, the model-implied ratings were 'AAAsf' and 'Asf' for the class A and B notes, respectively, for the credit stress. The model-implied ratings were 'BBBsf' for both the class A and class B notes, respectively, for the maturity stress under increased IBR and 'CCCsf' for both the class A and class B notes under increased remaining term.

Nelnet Student Loan Trust 2013-2

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to positive rating action/upgrade:

Credit Stress Sensitivity

Default decrease 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

Basis Spread decrease 0.25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAsf'

Maturity Stress Sensitivity

CPR increase 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

IBR usage decrease 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

Remaining Term decrease 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

Factors that could, individually or collectively, lead to negative rating action/downgrade:

Credit Stress Rating Sensitivity

Default increase 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'Asf'

Default increase 50%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'BBBsf'

Basis spread increase 0.25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'Asf'

Basis spread increase 0.50%: class A 'AAAsf; class B 'Asf'

Maturity Stress Rating Sensitivity

CPR decrease 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

CPR decrease 50%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

IBR usage increase 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

IBR usage increase 50%: class A 'AAAsf; class B 'AAAsf'

Remaining Term increase 25%: class A 'AAAsf'; class B 'AAAsf'

Remaining Term increase 50%: class A 'AAsf'; class B 'Asf'

As a sensitivity under Fitch's coronavirus downside scenario, Fitch assumed a 50% increase in defaults, IBR and remaining term for the credit and maturity stresses, respectively. Under this scenario, the model-implied ratings were 'AAAsf' and 'BBBsf' for the class A and B notes, respectively, for the credit stress. The model-implied ratings were 'AAAsf' for both the class A and class B notes, respectively, for the maturity stress under increased IBR and 'AAAsf' and 'Asf' for the class A and class B notes under increased remaining term.

BEST/WORST CASE RATING SCENARIO

International scale credit ratings of Structured Finance transactions have a best-case rating upgrade scenario (defined as the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a positive direction) of seven notches over a three-year rating horizon; and a worst-case rating downgrade scenario (defined as the 99th percentile of rating transitions, measured in a negative direction) of seven notches over three years. The complete span of best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings for all rating categories ranges from 'AAAsf' to 'Dsf'. Best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings are based on historical performance. For more information about the methodology used to determine sector-specific best- and worst-case scenario credit ratings, visit https://www.fitchratings.com/site/re/10111579.

USE OF THIRD PARTY DUE DILIGENCE PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 17G -10

Form ABS Due Diligence-15E was not provided to, or reviewed by, Fitch in relation to this rating action.

REFERENCES FOR SUBSTANTIALLY MATERIAL SOURCE CITED AS KEY DRIVER OF RATING

The principal sources of information used in the analysis are described in the Applicable Criteria.

ESG CONSIDERATIONS

Unless otherwise disclosed in this section, the highest level of ESG credit relevance is a score of '3'. This means ESG issues are credit-neutral or have only a minimal credit impact on the entity, either due to their nature or the way in which they are being managed by the entity. For more information on Fitch's ESG Relevance Scores, visit www.fitchratings.com/esg

Additional information is available on www.fitchratings.com

(C) 2021 Electronic News Publishing, source ENP Newswire