Fannie and Freddie Didn’t Do It!

Financial FAQs

As if further confirmation was needed that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were not even a minor cause of the housing bubble and consequent bust, the latest judgment against Nomura Securities for selling fraudulent mortgages to Fannie and Freddie should be icing on the cake; settlements that now total more than $14 billion in fines for almost all the major banks and lending institutions.

The charge is old. Critics, (mainly those caught selling fraudulent loans to Fannie and Freddie) have long maintained that the GSE’s encouraged too many people to buy homes by offering all manner of payment assistance, and even guaranteeing subprime mortgages from the likes of Countrywide Financial (that was subsequently bought by Bank of America).

A U.S. judge on Monday ruled that two more large financial entities, including Nomura Holdings Inc., made false statements in selling mortgage-backed securities to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ahead of the 2008 financial crisis.

U.S. District Judge Denise Cote in Manhattan ruled for the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the conservator for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, in a ruling that could allow the U.S. regulator to recover around $450 million.

This is one more example of how almost all of the major financial institutions jumped on the bandwagon that encouraged the housing bubble—lending money to both qualified and unqualified borrowers and then misrepresenting their quality to the main guarantors of US housing finance.

Cote, who presided over a non-jury trial, said the FHFA was entitled to judgment against Nomura and the Royal Bank of Scotland Plc, which underwrote some of the $2 billion in mortgage-backed securities, in light of misstatements they made in offering documents.

Such originators were the real problem. Nomura Securities is just one of a growing list of mortgage lenders that have had to settle fraud charges that the loans submitted to Fannie and Freddie weren’t the quality loans they had certified—16 at last count totaling more than $14 billion in fines, as we said. Their loans had not in fact conformed or even followed Fannie and Freddie’s qualification standards, including verification of income and even whether they held real jobs, when they sought their guarantee insurance.

The result was the demonization of the GSEs as undercapitalized and incapable of fulfilling their mandate to make housing more affordable to Main Street Americans. I have been writing about the resistance of US Treasury—and maybe White House—to any recapitalization of Fannie and Freddie’s corporations to cushion them from another such housing downturn, corporations that were set up in the 1930s and 40s respectively to encourage home owning.

And in successfully fulfilling their mandate, they were a major factor in creating middle class Americans’ wealth, much of which was destroyed during the Great Recession. FDR’s Home Loan Corporation came to the rescue during the Great Depression, and we should be doing the same for housing in order to aid our recovery from the Great Recession.

Then why does Treasury, and even the White House oppose recapitalizing them, in spite of their now record-breaking profits? Because Treasury seems to believe there is a better alternative. However, that is yet to be seen and the GSEs are guaranteeing more than 60 percent of originations these days, while making the Treasury literally $$billions.

The Federal Housing and Finance Authority has just issued an update on their plans to ‘reform’ the GSEs. It is a proposal to form a Common Securitizing Platform (CSP) to replace competing Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac platforms that securitize its mortgage pools.

“The objectives in developing a Single Security are to establish a single, liquid market for the mortgage-backed securities issued by both Enterprises that are backed by fixed-rate loans and to maintain the liquidity of this market over time,” says the FHFA. “Achievement of those objectives would enhance the liquidity of the TBA market and further FHFA’s statutory obligation to ensure the liquidity of the nation’s housing finance markets.”

The question then is what comes next? The Treasury says their overall objective of not recapitalizing Fannie and Freddie is to induce private originators to guarantee a larger majority of mortgages. So will Banks and other private loan originators then step up to the plate and issue pools that can be either purchased or guaranteed by the CSP, which up to now they have been reluctant to do, without the GSEs’ guarantee?

And if the Treasury dissolves the GSEs, as it says it ultimately intends in order to put, “private capital at risk ahead of taxpayers,” can private issuers of said mortgage-backed-securities be the guarantors, without substantially raising their fees and profit margins, which will raise interest rates, as well? There was a reason Fannie and Freddie conforming mortgage rates were so affordable. They had lower capitalization requirements, in part because of the superior quality of their mortgage underwriting standards, and consequent low delinquency rates.

Graph: Calculated Risk

Then who will enforce the very successful underwriting standards now required by Fannie and Freddie that has brought down the default rates close to historical standards? It is the real issue that was exposed in the lawsuits. Who will police the banks and private mortgage originators that the record shows will evade those standards when it suits them?

Harlan Green © 2015

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: https://twitter.com/HarlanGreen

Existing-Home Sales and Interest Rates

The Mortgage Corner

The National Association of Realtors reported after four consecutive months of gains, existing-home sales slipped in August, as all-cash paying investors retreated from the market. Sales increases in the Northeast and Midwest were outweighed by declines in the South and West. There are fewer bargains that appeal to investors, in other words—such as foreclosures and short sales available.

So it’s now up to genuine home buyers looking for a home to increase sales, and that will happen more frequently as rents continue to skyrocket and vacancies decline. Total existing-home sales, which are completed transactions that include single-family homes, townhomes, condominiums and co-ops, decreased 1.8 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 5.05 million in August from a slight downwardly-revised 5.14 million in July. Sales are at the second-highest pace of 2014, but remain 5.3 percent below the 5.33 million-unit level from last August, which was also the second-highest sales level of 2013.

Graph: Calculated Risk

NAR chief economist Lawrence Yun says sales activity remains stronger than earlier in the year, but fell last month. "There was a marked decline in all-cash sales from investors,” he said. "On the positive side, first-time buyers have a better chance of purchasing a home now that bidding wars are receding and supply constraints have significantly eased in many parts of the country.” Yun adds, "As long as solid job growth continues, wages should eventually pick up to steadily improve purchasing power and help fully release the pent-up demand for buying.”

The major reason for less investor demand is the fall in foreclosures and delinquent mortgages, as we said. Fannie Mae reported that the Single-Family Serious Delinquency rate declined in July to 2.00 percent from 2.05 percent in June. The serious delinquency rate is down from 2.70 percent in July 2013, and this is the lowest level since October 2008.

Freddie Mac also reported that the Single-Family serious delinquency rate declined in July to 2.02 percent from 2.07 percent in June. Freddie's rate is down from 2.70 percent in July 2013, and is at the lowest level since January 2009. Freddie's serious delinquency rate peaked in February 2010 at 4.20 percent. We are therefore closer to the longer term default rates, as shown in the accompanying graph.

Graph: Calculated Risk

And rental vacancies continue to fall, which means both rising prices, and less available rental units, another incentive for home seekers to buy. The best vacancy survey is by Reis, the apartment info data site. Vacancy was unchanged during the second quarter at 4.1 percent, said Reis, a slight worsening versus last quarter. But over the last twelve months the national vacancy rate has declined by 20 basis points, slightly below the pace of the last few quarters.

“We have been anticipating this slowdown in vacancy compression as demand moderates while supply growth accelerates,” said Reis, but that won’t deter those who study longer term trends from wanting to buy. The national vacancy rate now stands 390 basis points below the cyclical peak of 8.0 percent observed right after the recession concluded in late 2009.

Graph: Calculated Risk

That’s because at 4.1 percent, the national vacancy rate remains low by historical standards. The only time vacancy in the US was lower was during the dot.com boom‐and‐bust days of 1999 and 2000. Asking and effective rents both grew by 0.8 percent during the second quarter. This is an increase from growth during the first quarter which now appears to be just a temporary slowdown, likely due to seasonal factors. Rent growth, though weak by historical standards given such a low vacancy rate, continues to accelerate.

So we seem to have returned to historical levels of mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures, as well as rental vacancies, which means housing sales should also return to more normal levels. The shortage in inventories is the major problem, at present. This also means lots of pent up demand for new housing, which housing construction and new-home sales must eventually fill.

Harlan Green © 2014

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: https://twitter.com/HarlanGreen

Lower Household Debt, Housing, Now Boosting Growth

The Mortgage Corner

In another sign that this could be a better growth year, builder confidence in the market for newly built, single-family homes rose two points to 55 on the National Association of Home Builders/Wells Fargo Housing Market Index (HMI) for August, and housing starts surged. This third consecutive monthly gain brings builder optimism to its highest level since January, and housing starts to the highest level in 8 months.

And housing has been the missing component of GDP growth since the end of the Great Recession, which is another sign that 3 percent plus GDP growth is in the cards for the rest of this year and maybe next year as household formation (mainly the millennial generation of 18 to 36 year-olds finally leaving home) returns to normal levels.

Graph: Wrightson ICAP

All three HMI components posted gains in August. The indices gauging current sales conditions and expectations for future sales each rose two points to 58 and 65, respectively. The index gauging traffic of prospective buyers increased three points to 42.

"Each of the three components of the HMI registered consecutive gains for the past three months, which is a positive sign that builder confidence appears to be firming following an uneven spring," said NAHB Chief Economist David Crowe. "Factors contributing to this rise include sustained job growth, historically low mortgage rates and affordable home prices, which are helping to unleash pent-up demand."

Based in part on the strength in the NAHB index last month, Wrightson ICAP, a leading financial market data provider, expects a third straight solid increase in single-family building permits in today’s July report. Today’s NAHB data suggest that the uptrend in permits will continue into August.

And sure enough, U.S. housing starts jumped 15.7 percent in July, hitting the highest level in eight months. The 1.09 million annual rate of new housing starts topped economist expectations of 975,000. And permits for new construction, a sign of future demand, rose 8.1 percent to an annual rate of 1.05 million from 973,000 in June.

Some lenders are getting around the tight lending conditions and higher risk fees imposed by the Fed on conventional mortgages guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, in particular. For instance, they are beginning to offer interest only mortgages again, though borrowers have to be qualified at the fully amortized interest rate, rather than the lower interest only payment.

And, the July 2014 Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey on Bank Lending Practices showed a continued easing of lending standards and terms for many types of loan categories amid a broad-based pickup in loan demand. “Although many banks reported having eased standards for prime residential real estate (RRE) loans,” said the report, “respondents generally indicated little change in standards and terms for other types of loans to households.”

However, a few large banks had eased standards, increased credit limits, and reduced the minimum required credit score for credit card loans. Banks also reported having experienced stronger demand over the past three months, on net, for many more loan categories than on the April survey.

The good news, though, was that many of the new Quality Mortgage standards imposed by the CPFB (i.e., 43 percent maximum debt-to-income ratios, no interest only provisions) don’t apply to GSE guaranteed mortgages, if they meet the stricter conforming underwriting criteria.

What all this means is that banks are willing to lend again, which should put some of that cash savings’ hoard back to work that is held by banks and wealthy individuals. Market Watch’s Rex Nutting has reported on this extensively.

Graph: Marketwatch

“The majority of Americans are doing their patriotic bit, spending nearly everything they earn,” writes Nutting. “ A recent report from the Fed showed that little more than a third of families are able to save any money at all after they pay their bills each month. More than 60 percent say they couldn’t come up with $400 in an emergency without borrowing or pawning something.”

The bottom line is that most people are saving next to nothing, while just a few are saving a large amount of their personal disposable income (i.e., after taxes). A recent bankrate.com survey found that the top 1 percent save some 36 percent of their income, whereas the overall personal savings rate for all Americans is still not much more the 5 percent at present.

It speaks to the unequal income distribution since the end of the Great Recession, with lower and middle class income earners actually losing income—in part due to the housing bust—and those able to profit from the rise in financial markets garnering almost 100 percent of the income gain since then. Those who do save are saving a ton — more than $1.2 trillion a year of the $10.8 trillion held in financial assets, rather than investing in productive capacity.

Harlan Green © 2014

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: https://twitter.com/HarlanGreen

Why the Growth Slowdown—It’s Housing, Stupid

Popular Economics Weekly

Dean Baker, a noted economist with the Center for Economic Policy and Research (NEPR), has probably given the best and most understandable reason for the Great Recession and ultra-slow recovery—it’s the lousy housing market. The economy is growing at slightly over 2 percent, when we would expect 3 percent growth 5 years after the end of the Great Recession.

“The basic story of the Great Recession is about as simple as they come,” says Baker. “The economy was being driven by a housing bubble and the bubble burst. The combination of the loss of housing construction, due to the enormous overbuilding of the bubble years, and the loss of the consumption that had been driven by bubble generated housing wealth, created a gap in annual demand of more than $1 trillion. That's all simple and easy.”

So the weak housing market, even with the Fed doing all it can do to keep interest rates at rock bottom, hasn’t boosted US growth sufficiently to approach full employment. Why? The housing market would be recovering sooner if government was allowed to do more, because of austerity policies prevalent both here and in Europe. And the results are easy to see in this Paul Krugman graph.

Graph: Paul Krugman

Those countries with the lowest growth rates have the most stringent austerity measures—i.e., most drastic budget cuts and highest interest rates when government should be keeping interest rates as low as possible. And they are the United Kingdom, Spain, Portugal and Greece, of course. But the US isn’t far behind, in line with France that is having its own budget problems.

What should be done? We know the government has to help, either with mortgage relief (buy up the bad mortgages and hold them until the market improves), or buying the underwater housing as was done during the Great Depression, and selling them back when conditions improved.

The Home Owners’ Loan Corporation was set up in 1933 under the New Deal. It made more than one million loans to homeowners, sometimes bought the underwater homes, and otherwise supported homeowners who were behind on their payments. Sound familiar?

Graph: FHFA

The HARP and HAMP loan programs were current attempts to do the same and they have refinanced 3 million of the 16 million homes guaranteed by Fannie Mae and Freddie, according to The Housing Wire and FHFA, the Federal Housing Finance Authority that supervises Fannie and Freddie.

“…what did economists think would fill a trillion dollar gap in annual spending?” laments Baker. “Of course the government could do it with more spending and/or tax cuts, but since we have a religious cult in Washington that says it is better to keep millions out of work than to run deficits, this was a political impossibility.”

So 8 million more homes are eligible, according to the FHFA, and the White House has done little to promote HARP 3.0, a newer version that would loosen qualification standards to increase eligibility for those behind on their payments, which would allow more homes to be refinanced. It doesn’t look like another New Deal for housing is in the offing.

Harlan Green © 2014

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: https://twitter.com/HarlanGreen

So Fannie and Freddie Weren’t the Problem…

Popular Economics Weekly

We are learning just how much mortgage fraud was committed by 17 national and international banks and other financial entities that the Federal Housing Finance Authority (FHFA) originally sued to recover some $200 billion in losses to the GSEs that it regulates, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

This tells us where the real faults lies for the credit bubble that led to the housing bubble.  The once private stock corporations and now wards of the government, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, didn’t precipitate the housing bust.  They weren’t even the main issuers of faulty mortgages that imploded with the Great Recession. It was the federally-supervised commercial banks themselves that misrepresented many of the mortgages it sold to Fannie and Freddie, thereby giving them the cover of AAA rated assets, when they were much closer to junk bond quality.

Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan had lowered short term interest rates below what was the inflation rate at that time—some 3 percent—whereas his fed funds rate was as low as 0.5 percent.  (That meant if money was lent at below the inflation rate, it was basically free money because inflation would eat away at the amount owed so that it was actually worth less when paid off, or sold, than the face amount of the debt.)

And banks jumped into the housing bubble that resulted, almost ignoring the most basic lending safeguards from such ‘free’ money, such as verifying income and assets of the borrowers that Fannie and Freddie required.  In other words, Fannie and Freddie guaranteed that nothing was “stated” on the loan application that wasn’t verified.

The GSEs themselves were also at fault for allowing mortgage banks such as Countrywide Financial (acquired by Bank of America) to package and sell Mortgage Backed Securities to Fannie and Freddie that mainly consisted of negatively amortized ‘liar’ loans with very low initial payment rates, and little or no income and asset verification.  But that was a small portion of the defaulted loans, and in fact Fannie and Freddie guaranteed mortgages have far and away the lowest default rates.

Wall Street insiders now believe that up to $50B could be the tab to settle all the pending cases, according to the New York Times.  Some $1.96 Trillion in so-called private-label mortgages were issued by banks from 2005 to 2008 during the height of the housing bubble, according to the latest figures.

As of January, the FHFA has settled six of the private-label RMBS cases, recovering nearly $8 billion for taxpayers.  Whether due to a lack of adequate supervision, or outright fraudulent misrepresentation of the credit quality of those mortgages, these banks sold Fannie and Freddie mortgages that didn’t meet the strict credit standards of the GSEs.

Graph: NY Times

Banks such as JP Morgan Chase ($5.1B), Deutsche Bank ($1.9B) and now Credit Suisse ($885B) have settled, while admitting they had inadequate oversight.  But Bank of America and Goldman Sachs are holding out, so are going to trial sometime in midyear 2014. 

Others that have settled include, GE (Ally Bank), United Bank of Switzerland and Citigroup.  They had failed to prove in federal court that the mortgages underlying their Mortgage Backed Securities sold to Fannie and Freddie were due to the busted housing bubble that caused the loss of some $5 Trillion in real estate values, rather than their faulty underwriting practices.

Twelve of the cases remain, including FHFA’s lawsuits against Barclays Bank (BCS), Bank of America (BAC), Credit Suisse Holdings (CS), First Horizon National Corp., Goldman Sachs & Co. (GS), HSBC North America (HSBC), Merrill Lynch & Co., Morgan Stanley (MS), Nomura Holding America (NMR), SG Americas (Societe Generale), The Royal Bank of Scotland Group (RBS) and Countrywide Financial Corp.

So don’t blame Fannie and Freddie for wanting to expand home ownership, as those who oppose government ownership or regulation of anything have contended, and seem to have convinced the Obama administration.  They were as much a victim of deceptive lending practices as the borrowers and homeowners who lost out due to the resulting Great Recession.

Harlan Green © 2014

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: https://twitter.com/HarlanGreen

Losing Fannie and Freddie—A Terrible Idea

Financial FAQs

There was a reason Fannie Mae (Federal National Mortgage Association) and Freddy Mac (Federal Home loan Mortgage Corporation) were government created entities, before they became private corporations in the 1970s.  They encouraged homeownership at a time when owning a home was only for the wealthiest.  Though Fannie Mae—the  Federal National Mortgage Association—was created in 1938 as part of the New Deal, it became important after WWII when the most basic 50 percent down payment on a 15-year fixed rate loan was available.  Payments were prohibitively expensive for those just entering the middle class.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, Government-Sponsored Enterprises, or GSEs, filled the void with 30-year fixed rate mortgages, loans that private banks thought too risky.  Banks have always preferred short-term construction loans, or lines of credit that shortened their risk profiles.

And so the federal government created hybrid agencies that set up strict standards for so-called conventional, conforming mortgages.  These were mortgages that conformed to stricter underwriting standards set up by Fannie and Freddie.

And now some in Congress want to abolish them altogether, and replace them with what is basically a privately-funded secondary market mechanism for packaging and selling guaranteed mortgages with sky-high capital requirements that will raise interest rates, putting even more consumers out of the housing market.

Firstly, the only problem with the GSEs in their current form was that they were undercapitalized.  And because they were undercapitalized they suffered the same fate as all the undercapitalized major banks bailed out by TARP funds.  The only difference was that they were made wards of the government, which is what they were prior to the ‘70s, anyway.  And they are now pouring $billions back into the US Treasury, some $203 billion to date since the recovery, when they were lent $188 billion.

So there is no reason to dissolve them and every reason to keep them as viable GSEs.  This is mainly because their underwriting criteria have been the gold standard for borrower qualification, requiring income and asset verification, and assessing the likelihood this condition would continue, as we said.

That is why their default rates have about returned to historical levels, while so-called Private-Label mortgages—those originated by banks that don’t meet the stricter conforming standards—have default rates still in the 6 percent rage, 3 times the Fannie/Freddie rate.

The latest proposal, by committee chairmen, Tim Johnson, a Democrat from South Dakota, and Mike Crapo of Idaho, the ranking Republican, have come up with a compromise that provides an explicit government guarantee for mortgages, but only after private investors have taken the first losses. The plan would set up a new federal regulator, called the Federal Mortgage Insurance Corporation, to provide the guarantee and regulate the system.

Having private investors take first losses, in lieu of Fannie and Freddie’s current stockholders, is a terrible idea because banks are much more risk averse.  That’s why Fannie and Freddie currently originate some 60 percent of all residential mortgages since the end of the Great Recession.

Graph: WSJ/Inside Mortgage Finance

The new agreement would establish the Federal Mortgage Insurance Corporation as the insurer of last resort, but would require 10 percent private capital reserves, which is the rub. The guarantee, provided for a fee equivalent to 0.1 percent interest, would not kick in until the private reserves were wiped out. Fannie and Freddie would have remained solvent during the housing crisis if they had kept 4 percent of their capital in reserve.

The bill would create a single platform to standardize mortgage-backed securities, which are investment vehicles created by bundling mortgages and then selling off pieces of the bundle to spread the risk of default.

The bill would also set a minimum down payment of 5 percent, except for first-time home buyers, who would have to put down 3.5 percent for the mortgage to qualify for the guarantee. Some advocates have said they would prefer that the down payment amounts be left to the new regulator, who could adjust them in response to economic conditions.

The increased capital requirements and the government guarantee would raise the cost of borrowing for homeowners, said economist Mark Zandi, because the risks of the system would no longer be borne by all taxpayers. He estimated that interest rates would increase by 0.4 to 0.5 percentage points. 

This would put Fannie/Freddie fixed rate conforming mortgages at or above 5 percent at rates that prevailed on the runup to the housing bust, when households hadn’t lost so much income and accumulated record debts.  That is not the case today, for most Americans, needless to say.

The bill could therefore eliminate the affordable housing goals that governed Fannie and Freddie, which required them to make a certain number of loans to people with low incomes but which some advocates said were easily gamed and worked to discourage lending in particularly expensive markets.

John Taylor, president and chief executive of the National Community Reinvestment Coalition, said he had been assured that lenders would be encouraged to offer loans to low-income families through incentive pricing or would be required to do so by the regulator.

Really?  It depends on the types of “encouragement” given to banks.  They don’t have public service goals unless required to, such as the Community Reinvest Act, that combatted red-lining, because lenders tended to avoid lending in lower-income neighborhoods.  This is because they are required to maximize their profits, and affordable loans are by their nature very low profit margin entities.

So if not allowed to return as private corporations with stockholders bearing the risk, then at least keep them under some form of government control—there are many forms this can take, including strict regulations to protect their underwriting standards.  But there has to be enough capital, as is the lesson learned with commercial banks, as well.

Harlan Green © 2014

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: https://twitter.com/HarlanGreen

Home Equity Increasing

The Mortgage Corner

CoreLogic, a real estate analytics firm, today released new analysis showing approximately 791,000 more residential properties returned to a state of positive equity during the third quarter of 2013, and the total number of mortgaged residential properties with equity currently stands at 42.6 million.

This is helping November home sales in the South Coast, with closed transactions holding strong and huge price increases year-over-year, reports Gary Woods for MLS.

“Year over year sales are up just slightly from 2012 with the median sales price up to about $940,000 for approximately a 19 percent rise. The average sales price is also up going from about $1.36 million in 2012 to approximately $1.43 million in 2013 for a 5 percent rise while the numbers of escrows are down with 1,203 in ’12 to 1,168 in ‘13 with the median list price on those escrows up about 15 percent to approximately $960,000.”

The CoreLogic analysis indicates that nearly 6.4 million homes, or 13 percent of all residential properties with a mortgage, were still in negative equity at the end of the third quarter of 2013. This figure is down from 7.2 million homes, or 14.7 percent of all residential properties with a mortgage, at the end of the second quarter of 2013.

Graph: Calculated Risk

This is a result of the sharp rise in housing values this year. Of the 42.6 million residential properties with positive equity, 10 million have less than 20 percent equity. Borrowers with less than 20 percent equity, referred to as “under-equitied,” may have a more difficult time obtaining new financing for their homes due to underwriting constraints.

Under-equitied mortgages accounted for 20.4 percent of all residential properties with a mortgage nationwide in the third quarter of 2013, with more than 1.5 million residential properties at less than 5 percent equity, referred to as near-negative equity. Properties that are near negative equity are considered at risk should home prices fall.

“Rising home prices continued to help homeowners regain their lost equity in the third quarter of 2013,” said Mark Fleming, chief economist for CoreLogic. “Fewer than 7 million homeowners are underwater, with a total mortgage debt of $1.6 trillion. Negative equity will decline even further in the coming quarters as the housing market continues to improve.”

California has the twelfth worst negative equity with 13.2 percent of those homes holding mortgages. Nevada had the highest percentage of mortgaged properties in negative equity at 32.2 percent, followed by Florida (28.8 percent), Arizona (22.5 percent), Ohio (18.0 percent) and Georgia (17.8 percent). These top five states combined accounted for 36.4 percent of negative equity in the U.S.

Harlan Green © 2013

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: www.twitter.com/HarlanGreen

Case-Shiller Home Prices Take Off

The Mortgage Corner

The July S&P Case-Shiller home price index shows home prices are in full recovery mode. Over the last 12 months, prices rose 12.3 percent and 12.4 percent as measured by the 10- and 20-City Composites in the major cities and metro areas, which are a 3-month average of same-home increases. And because the Fed still in full credit easing mode with its September decision to maintain QE3 securities’ purchases at $85 billion per month, interest rates are beginning to decline

Graph: Calculated Risk

Data through July 2013, released today by S&P Dow Jones Indices for its S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Indices showed increases of 1.9 percent and 1.8 percent from June for the 10- and 20-City Composites. For at least four months in a row, all 20 cities showed monthly gains. Phoenix posted 22 consecutive months of positive returns. Although home prices in all the cities increased, 15 cities and both Composites those increases slowed in July versus June.

“Home prices gains are holding their 12 percent annual rate of gain established by the two Composite indices in April,” says Chairman David M. Blitzer, of the S&P Dow Jones Indices. “The Southwest continues to lead the housing recovery. Las Vegas home prices are up 27.5 percent year-over-year; in California, San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego are up 24.8, 20.8 and 20.4 percent, respectively. However, all remain far below their peak levels.”

The result of lower mortgage rates is mortgage applications are also increasing, after falling sharply in May when the Fed first hinted it would begin to tighten credit in the fall. Mortgage applications increased 5.5 percent from one week earlier, according to data from the Mortgage Bankers Association’s (MBA) Weekly Mortgage Applications Survey for the week ending September 20, 2013.

The Refinance Index increased 5 percent from the previous week. The seasonally adjusted Purchase Index increased 7 percent from one week earlier. The Purchase Index was at its highest level since July 2013.

Graph: Calculated Risk

The HARP share of refinance applications increased to 41 percent from 40 percent the week before, and is the highest since MBA started tracking this measure in early 2012. So there is the feeling that many home owners with negative home equity are only now taking advantage of refinancing their underwater mortgages at current interest rates. The HARP program allows mortgage holders to refinance when debt can be as much as 150 percent of their home’s value.
So the Federal Housing Finance Authority has stepped up its campaign to encourage more homebuyers to apply for HARP refinancing. Acting FHFA Director Edward J. DeMarco said that 2.8 million homeowners have refinanced through HARP but with mortgage rates still historically low and HARP eligibility requirements expanded, other qualified homeowners could reduce their monthly mortgage payments or build their equity faster with a shorter term mortgage through the program.

DeMarco told Bloomberg News in an interview this weekend that FHFA used focus groups to find out why borrowers with high rates hadn't yet tried to refinance through HARP. They found many didn't realize they were eligible. They thought they had to be delinquent on their mortgages before the government would help them. DeMarco said he hoped the educational outreach would bring in an additional 2 million HARP borrowers.

This is while total existing-home sales, which are completed transactions that include single-family homes, townhomes, condominiums and co-ops, rose to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 5.48 million in August from 5.39 million in July, and are 13.2 percent higher than the 4.84 million-unit level in August 2012, reported the National Association of Realtors.

Harlan Green © 2013

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: www.twitter.com/HarlanGreen

Shadow Inventory of Bad Loans Still Too High

Financial FAQs

The shadow inventory of troubled homes fell to about 2 million in April, down 18 percent from the same period in the prior year, and down 34 percent from a peak of 3 million in early 2010. But that is still too many homes in trouble for the Fed to begin to reduce its asset purchases.

Shadow home inventory includes properties with seriously delinquent mortgages, in foreclosure or held by mortgage servicers, but not yet listed, according to CoreLogic, an Irvine, Calif.-based analysis firm. Bad loans are working their way out of the system, and new mortgages for borrowers with better credit are taking their place. Also, rising home prices and low interest rates are helping troubled owners sell or refinance their homes, reducing the pipeline of foreclosures.

Graph: WSJ Marketwatch

This is when interest rates have risen to 2-year highs. A gauge of mortgage applications has contracted almost every week since mortgage rates started climbing more than two months ago, according to data released Wednesday. For the week that ended July 5, the Mortgage Bankers Association’s barometer of mortgage loan application volume fell 4 percent as rates hit the highest level in two years.

Graph: WSJ Marketwatch

Interest rates have risen some 1 percent since April, which means some consumers will have a tougher time affording monthly mortgage payments. With a $417,000 conforming loan, that 1 percent rise means either a borrower needs 8.6 percent more income, or a home worth 8.6 percent less. With 20 percent down and a $417,000 loan, that would mean a reduction of $41,000 in what a prospective buyer could afford.

This will not encourage middle class buyers who now have to earn some $74,664 per year to afford a home in that price range. This has to slow down housing activity to some extent, which is another reason for the Fed to stand pat at present.

Harlan Green © 2013

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: www.twitter.com/HarlanGreen

Saving Fannie and Freddie—Part II

Financial FAQs

The Federal Housing Finance Authority that supervises the so-called Government Supervised Enterprises (GSE), now including Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, just announced restrictions that not only weaken Fannie and Freddie’s mandate, but the mortgage and housing markets in general. The FHFA just announced that it will no longer allow Fannie and Freddie to purchase or guarantee so-called “non-qualified” mortgages with more than 30 years amortization or that have interest only payments, among other restrictions.

Fannie and Freddie’s mission is to “Ensure that the housing GSEs operate in a safe and sound manner so that they serve as a reliable source of liquidity and funding for housing finance and community investment”. So why has it just made a ruling that will restrict their ability to be the most “reliable source of liquidity and funding”, and so real estate in general?

FHFA’s answer is the “Adoption of these new limitations by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac is in keeping with FHFA’s goal of gradually contracting their market footprint and protecting borrowers and taxpayers,” said the announcement.

Yet Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are the gold standard for mortgage underwriting, with the toughest qualification criteria, which is why these GSEs have the lowest default rates—some 3.13 percent vs. 6.7 percent for all private label mortgages, as I said in a past column (Saving Fannie and Freddie). That means first time home buyers and those with lower incomes will have to depend on portfolio lenders for those programs. These lenders therefore tend to use weaker qualification criteria and so either have to keep those mortgages on their books, or who package them as less credit worthy securities.

So Fannie and Freddie are the most “reliable source of liquidity and funding for housing”. There are really no other viable mortgage programs to sustain the housing market, in particular. They now guarantee some 90 percent of mortgage originations precisely because private label lenders have not come back into the market, even as housing prices have risen.

FHFA’s actual announcement said, “Beginning January 10, 2014, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will no longer purchase a loan that is subject to the “ability to repay” rule if the loan:

· is not fully amortizing,

· has a term of longer than 30 years, or

·includes points and fees in excess of three percent of the total loan amount, or such

other limits for low balance loans as set forth in the rule.

“Effectively, this means Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will not purchase interest-only loans, loans with 40-year terms, or those with points and fees exceeding the thresholds established by the rule, said its announcement.”

Yet both interest only and 40-year amortized mortgage lower the payments for first time homebuyers, in particular. It also means shutting out lower-income buyers, even though Fannie and Freddie qualify them at the fully amortized rate.

There is no other way to interpret this ruling, other than another attempt to lower the overall quality of mortgage lending at a time when housing and real estate in general is at the beginning of its recovery.

Fannie Mae just reported pre-tax income of $8.1 billion for the first quarter of 2013, compared with pre-tax income of $2.7 billion in the first quarter of 2012 and pre-tax income of $7.6 billion in the fourth quarter of 2012. Fannie Mae’s pre-tax income for the first quarter of 2013 was the largest quarterly pre-tax income in the company’s history.

Need we say more? A financially sound Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will continue to be the mainstay of housing finance, unless those who do not want or support a healthy mortgage market for all home buyers succeed in limiting their mission to “serve as a reliable source of liquidity and funding for housing finance and community investment.”

Harlan Green © 2013

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: www.twitter.com/HarlanGreen

Bank Lending Still Stingy

The Mortgage Corner

The Federal Reserve just published its quarterly Senior Loan Officer survey on lending standards by the largest banks. They basically adhere to the strictest Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac guidelines for residential loans, such as minimum 620 credit score and debt-to-income ratios around 45 percent. Banks were a bit more liberal with commercial and industrial loans—apartment lending in particular, which is red hot due to dropping vacancy rates.

The banks“…on balance, reported having eased their lending standards and having experienced stronger demand in several loan categories over the past three months,” said the report.

But not in housing, perhaps the largest segment and one that gives consumers the greatest feeling of financial well-being. Even with record low interest rates banks are being stingy, which is why there is a record some $1.76 trillion in excess reserves sitting at the Fed. Banks’ overall lending has increased just 3 percent per annum of late, versus the historical 6 percent during good times, as in this Federal Reserve graph that dates from 1987 Q1 to 2013 Q1.

Graph: Federal Reserve

This could change, however, as loan delinquency rates continue to decline and banks become less risk averse. Calculated Risk just reported Processing Services (LPS) released their Mortgage Monitor report for March. According to LPS, 6.59 percent of mortgages were delinquent in March, down from 6.80 percent in February. LPS reports that 3.37 percent of mortgages were in the foreclosure process, down from 4.19 percent in March 2012.

This gives a total of 9.96 percent delinquent or in foreclosure. It breaks down as:
• 1,842,000 properties that are 30 or more days, and less than 90 days past due, but not in foreclosure.
• 1,466,000 properties that are 90 or more days delinquent, but not in foreclosure.
• 1,689,000 loans in foreclosure process.
It is a total of ​​4,997,000 loans delinquent or in foreclosure in March, down from 5,589,000 in March 2012.

The March Mortgage Monitor report also found that new problem loan rates (seriously delinquent mortgages that were current six months ago) have fallen below 1 percent for the first time since 2007. At 0.84 percent, the March new problem loan rate is approaching pre-crisis levels, and nearing the conditions of 2000-2004 when the rate averaged 0.55 percent. However, as LPS Applied Analytics Senior Vice President Herb Blecher explained, a borrower’s equity position is still a key indicator of his or her propensity to default.

“There has always been a clear correlation between higher levels of negative equity and new problem loan rates,” Blecher said. “Looking at the March data, we see that borrowers with equity are actually outperforming the national average -- at 0.6 percent, this group is quite close to pre-crisis norms. The further underwater a borrower gets, the higher those problem rates rise. Borrowers with loan-to-value (LTV) ratios of just 100-110 percent are actually defaulting at more than twice the national average. For those 50 percent or more underwater, we see new problem rates of 4 percent.

Graph: LPS

“Still, the overall equity trend has been a very positive one,” Blecher continued. “LPS’ latest data shows that the share of loans with LTVs greater than 100 percent has fallen 41 percent from a year ago. In total, there were approximately 9 million such loans, or about 18 percent of active mortgages. Some states, including the so-called ‘sand states’ (Arizona, Florida, Nevada and California), are still well above the national level, at an average 28 percent, but they, too, have seen improvement over the last year, with negative equity dropping over 40 percent across those four states since January 2012.”

So we know that rising housing values will continue to benefit homeowners and lenders. As foreclosure rates continue to fall, there is less downward pressure on housing values, since foreclosed homes sell on average some 33 percent below market prices.

Corelogic just reported that home prices nationwide, including distressed sales, increased 10.5 percent on a year-over-year basis in March 2013 compared to March 2012. This change represents the biggest year-over-year increase since March 2006 and the 13th consecutive monthly increase in home prices nationally. On a month-over-month basis, including distressed sales, home prices increased by 1.9 percent in March 2013 compared to February 2013.

Banks are not doing much for the housing market, in particular, leaving Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to guarantee 90 percent of current home loans originated by lending institutions. Meanwhile, the Federal Housing Finance Authority has just announced it will no longer allow Fannie and Freddie to guarantee so-called ‘non-qualified’ loans after 2013, which are basically those loans that don’t amortize principal to be paid off in 30 years or less, such as interest only mortgages.

The hugely excess reserves held by banks once again highlight their conservative nature. And with Fannie and Freddie withdrawing from all but the most basic mortgages, we can only hope that other lending institutions—such as Mortgage Banks and Credit Unions—will recognize the lending opportunities that rising housing prices afford, if the housing recovery is to continue.

Harlan Green © 2013

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter:www.twitter.com/HarlanGreen

California Foreclosures Plunging, Sales Rising

The Mortgage Corner

The number of California homeowners entering the foreclosure process plunged to the lowest level in more than seven years last quarter, reports DataQuick. The unusually sharp drop in the number of mortgage default notices filed by lenders stems mainly from rising home values, a strengthening economy and government efforts to reduce foreclosures, says DQ.

No wonder, as the median price paid for a California home last quarter was $297,000, up 22.7 percent from a year ago, according to DataQuick. During first-quarter 2013 lenders recorded 18,567 Notices of Default (NODs) on California houses and condos. That was down 51.4 percent from 38,212 during the prior three months, and down 67.0 percent from 56,258 in first-quarter 2012.

Graph: Econoday

Most of the loans going into default are still from the 2005-2007 period, per DQ. The median origination quarter for defaulted loans is still third-quarter 2006. That has been the case for more than three years, indicating that weak underwriting standards peaked then. The most active creditors in the formal foreclosure process last quarter were Wells Fargo (5,546), JP Morgan Chase (3,863) and Bank of America (2,565).

And Calculated Risk’s Bill McBride has become very sanguine about real estate’s role in boosting economic growth. He maintains that new home sales will pick up due to unfilled demand, due to the big jump in household formation—to 1.3 million new households last year and the prediction this level will be maintained over the next decade. He sees the so-called existing-to-new home sales ratio trending back down to its historical average of 6 to 1 from its current heightened ratio, in this very interesting graph. It was the “flood’ of depressed sales from foreclosures that depressed new home sales because of the plunge in housing prices brought on by the foreclosures.

Graph: Econoday

According to the Census Bureau, there were 104 thousand new homes sold in Q1 2013, up about 19.5 percent from the 87 thousand sold in Q1 2012. That is a solid increase in sales, and this was the highest sales for Q1 since 2008, per Calculated Risk.

“Although there has been a large increase in the sales rate, sales are still near the lows for previous recessions” said McBride. “This suggests significant upside over the next few years.  Based on estimates of household formation and demographics, I expect sales to increase to 750 to 800 thousand over the next several years. Also housing is historically the best leading indicator for the economy, and this is one of the reasons I think The future's so bright, I gotta wear shades.”

Harlan Green © 2013

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: www.twitter.com/HarlanGreen

Saving Fannie and Freddie Mac

The Mortgage Corner

Fannie Mae (FNMA), or Federal National Mortgage Association, reported a record profit for 2012, a good reason to save the mortgage giant from dissolution, as the banking industry in particular has lobbied for. The government-sponsored enterprise had net income of $17.2 billion for 2012, outpacing profits at S&P 500 companies such as Wal-Mart Stores Inc. (WMT), General Electric Co. and Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A).

Fannie Mae’s net income for 2012 compared with a loss of $16.9 billion in 2011, the company said in a statement. Profits totaled $7.6 billion for the three months ended Dec. 31 after accounting for a $4.2 billion dividend payment to the Treasury Department for the government’s stake. So it can begin to payoff the $188 billion borrowed from the U.S. Treasury to keep the mortgage industry—and so housing—afloat.

There is another reason to save Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from complete dissolution. Their underwriting standards are the highest and have resulted in the lowest default rates of all mortgages. Fannie Mae reported that the Single-Family Serious Delinquency rate declined in February to 3.13 percent from 3.18 percent in January. The serious delinquency rate is down from 3.82 percent in February 2012, and this is the lowest level since February 2009. Its serious delinquency rate peaked in February 2010 at 5.59 percent.

Graph: Calculated Risk

Fannie Mae serious delinquencies averaged below 1 percent until 2008, the beginning of the housing bubble bust. Whereas the average delinquency rate for all Private Label Mortgages today is 6.8 percent, as many of them are the so-called liar loans that didn’t require either income for asset verification.

Earlier Freddie Mac (FHLMC), or Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, the other GSE under government conservatorship, reported that the Single-Family serious delinquency rate declined in February to 3.15 percent from 3.20 percent in January. Freddie's rate is down from 3.57 percent in February 2012, and this is the lowest level since July 2009. Freddie's serious delinquency rate peaked in February 2010 at 4.20 percent.

Banks have been lobbying for years to either downsize or abolish the government-owned GSEs, as we said. But that would be throwing out the baby with the bathwater. For it was subprime lending that created the housing bubble with it minimal or nonexistent qualifying criteria, such as the ‘stated income’, or ‘no income’ verification requirements of so-called Option ARMs that allowed minimal payments for the first 4 years, before payments rose enough to begin to pay down principal balance.

Their argument has been that Fannie and Freddie are taking business away from private banking. They have claimed that the “implicit” government guarantee against default of the GSEs has given them a profit edge. But without Fannie and Freddie, there would be no viable housing market. We know this because of what banks did in the 1980s, when Fed Chairman Paul Volcker raised interest rates into double digits.

Banks then withdrew almost completely from mortgage lending, so the GSEs stepped in by creating a secondary market that packaged and sold mortgages to investors—either to Wall Street, or Main Street pension funds. That enabled the real estate industry to recover from the 1981 and 1983 Reagan recessions.

So the banking industry has been very fickle when it comes to mortgage lending. In fact, the subprime fiasco resulted from overleveraged banks taking advantage of soaring housing prices at the same time that financial markets were deregulating. Banks created the so-called shadow banking system outside of any regulatory oversight, which is responsible for much of the shadow housing inventory still on their books—an estimated 5 million homes either delinquent or with negative equity in their homes in danger of foreclosure.

There is in fact good reason for banks to lend again with interest rates still at record lows and housing prices beginning to rise again. A mortgage banking industry has grown around the secondary market, and as long as banks will adhere to the same gold standard underwriting as Fannie and Freddie, there is no reason they shouldn’t be generating record profits, as well.

Harlan Green © 2013

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: www.twitter.com/HarlanGreen

2013 Home Prices Soaring

The Mortgage Corner

Housing prices are soaring, with both the S&P Case-Shiller Home Price Index 3-month average (for November, December and January) and FHFA conforming loan indexes accelerating. Mortgage delinquencies also continue to decline, which should help depleted inventories.

The S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Indices showed average home prices increased 7.3 percent for the 10-City Composite and 8.1 percent for the 20-City Composite in the 12 months ending in January 2013.

“The two headline composites posted their highest year-over-year increases since summer 2006,” says David M. Blitzer, Chairman of the Index Committee at S&P Dow Jones Indices. “This marks the highest increase since the housing bubble burst."

In January 2013, nine cities -- Atlanta, Charlotte, Las Vegas, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, Phoenix, San Francisco and Tampa -- and both Composites posted positive monthly returns. Dallas was the only Metro Area where the level remained flat.

Graph: Calculated Risk

The FHFA price index for January increased 0.6 percent, following a rise of 0.5 percent the prior month.  The January gain was led by the Pacific region, increasing 1.6 cent.  The weakest region was New England, down 0.7 percent for the month. But the index is up 6.5 percent year-over-year.

Graph: Econoday

More good news was the continuing decline in mortgage delinquencies, according to LPS lenders’s services, as reported by Calculated Risk. LPS reported the U.S. mortgage delinquency rate (loans 30 or more days past due, but not in foreclosure) decreased to 6.80 percent from 7.03 percent in January. The percent of loans in the foreclosure process declined to 3.38 percent in February in January. 

Both numbers are still high, with 4.25 percent being the long term delinquency rate and 1 to 2 percent the historical foreclosure rate. This decline is already showing up in increasing for sale inventories, with Calculated Risk also reporting that through March 25th - inventory is increasing faster than in 2011 and 2012. But Housing Tracker reports inventory is down -21.2 percent compared to the same week in 2012—still a rapid year-over-year decline (2013 is red line in graph).

Graph: Calculated Risk

What does all this mean? As delinquency/foreclosure rates continue to decline, inventory should continue to increase, which means more housing sales. Although new-home sales declined slightly in February, sales are still 12.3 percent higher than February 2012.

And February existing home sales rose 0.8 percent to an annualized pace of 4.98 million units.  January was revised to up 0.8 percent from the initial estimate of 0.4 percent. Low supply had been holding down sales but that appears to be changing as higher prices are bringing more homes into the market.  Supply jumped 9.6 percent to 1.94 million units.  Months’ supply rose to 4.7 months from 4.3 months in January.

Harlan Green © 2013

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: www.twitter.com/HarlanGreen

Mortgage Delinquencies Lowest Since 2008

The Mortgage Corner

The delinquency rate for mortgage loans on one-to-four-unit residential properties fell to a seasonally adjusted rate of 7.09 percent of all loans outstanding at the end of the fourth quarter of 2012, the lowest level since 2008, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association’s (MBA) National Delinquency Survey.

The delinquency rate includes loans that are at least one payment past due but does not include loans in the process of foreclosure. The percentage of loans in the foreclosure process at the end of the fourth quarter was 3.74 percent, the lowest level since the fourth quarter of 2008, down 33 basis points from the third quarter and 64 basis points lower than one year ago.

“We are seeing large improvements in mortgage performance nationally and in almost every state.  The 30 day delinquency rate decreased 21 basis points to its lowest level since mid-2007. With fewer new delinquencies, the foreclosure start rate and foreclosure inventory rates continue to fall and are at their lowest levels since 2007 and 2008 respectively,”   said Jay Brinkmann, MBA’s Chief Economist and Senior Vice President of Research.

The foreclosure starts rate decreased by the largest amount ever in the MBA survey and now stands at half of its peak in 2009. Similarly, the 33 basis point drop in the foreclosure inventory rate is also the largest in the history of the survey.   

Brinkman said the two biggest factors impacting the number of loans in the foreclosure process still are the magnitude of the problem in Florida and the judicial foreclosure systems in some states.  12 percent of the mortgages in Florida are in the process of foreclosure, down from a peak of 14.5 percent last year but still an extraordinarily high rate that is impacting the national rate.  In addition, while the percentages of loans in foreclosure dropped in almost all states, the average rate for judicial states was 6.2 percent, triple the average rate of 2.1 percent for nonjudicial states.

And RealtyTrac reported foreclosure-related sales accounted for 21 percent of all U.S. residential sales during 2012, down from 23 percent of all sales in 2011 and down from 28 percent of all sales in 2010.

Graph: RealtyTrac

Properties not in foreclosure that sold as short sales in 2012 accounted for an estimated 22 percent of all residential sales — bringing the total share of distressed sales to 43 percent including both foreclosure-related sales and non-foreclosure short sales.

California, Georgia, Nevada posted highest percentage of foreclosure sales in 2012. Foreclosure sales accounted for more than 38 percent of all residential sales in California in 2012, the highest percentage of any state but down from 44 percent of all sales in 2011 and down from 49 percent of all sales in 2010. California pre-foreclosure sales in 2012 increased 12 percent from 2011 while California REO sales decreased 27 percent over the same time period.

Home prices continue to recover, rising gradually. The FHFA price index for December for homes with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac conventional mortgages gained 0.6 percent, following a rise of 0.4 percent the prior month. The December advance was led by the East South Central region, increasing 2.3 percent, with the Middle Atlantic region down 0.1 percent.

Graph: Econoday

The year-on-year rate posted at plus 5.8 percent versus 5.4 percent in November.
The FHFA report combined this morning with a favorable Case-Shiller report, point to further progress in restoring home prices toward pre-recession levels. Much of the price rise comes from the decline in for sale inventories to a low 4 month supply at current sales rates for both new and existing-home sales.

And as the number of foreclosure and short sale transactions continue to decline, prices could rise even faster, further boosting the real estate recovery.

Harlan Green © 2013

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: www.twitter.com/HarlanGreen

Mortgage Quality Highest in Decade

The Mortgage Corner

Record low interest rates and low prices, are making housing more affordable than ever. This is also helping lower default rates, as average credit scores have soared, and Debt to Income Ratios used to quality borrowers have plunged since the end of the Great Recession. This tells us that the Fed’s efforts to hold down interest rates until at least 2015 is producing results.

The National Association of Realtors’ Housing Affordability Index showed that housing affordability is expected to set a record in 2012. The trade association is forecasting that its index of housing affordability will hit a record level of 194 in 2012, up from 186 in 2011, when the prior record was reached. NAR data go back to 1970.

A reading of 100 means that a household with median income would have exactly enough income to qualify for buying a median-priced existing single-family home. A level of 194 for last year means that families had almost double the income needed for buying a median-priced existing single-family home. However, skeptics might note that NAR’s index didn’t fall below 100 even during the recent bubble. Indeed, the last time the index reached under 100 was in 1985, when mortgage rates were in double digits.

Graph: WSJ Marketwatch

This is while average credit scores for so-called conforming loans purchased by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac started rising in 2008 and remain high. In the third quarter, the weighted average credit score of single-family mortgages purchased by Fannie reached 761, while the score was 762 for Freddie-acquired loans. Those levels are up from the 730s in 2008. Consumer confidence in the housing sector grew last month, marked by continued positive attitudes toward home price, rental price, and mortgage rate expectations, according to Fannie Mae’s December National Housing Survey results.

Graph: WSJ Marketwatch

While credit-score standards have increased post-bubble, debt-to-income ratios have been falling. For home-purchase loans, the weighted average debt-to-income ratio at the time of origination is currently around 34 percent, down from a bubble high of about 40 percent. “The average debt-to-income ratios are back to basically the early 2000 levels for reasonable, sustainable mortgage payments,” said Mark Fleming, chief economist for analysis firm CoreLogic. “Apart from credit scores maybe being a little bit too tight, all of the other aspects of the traditional metrics on which you underwrite mortgage loans are really back to reasonable and tried and true levels.”

Continued price improvement is dependent on interest rates maintaining their lows for a sustained period. Fed Chairman Bernanke has promised to maintain such low rates until the unemployment rate has declined to 6.5 percent, which won’t probably happen until 2015, as I’ve said.

More mortgage relief is also coming from the $8.5 billion settlement with 10 major loan servicers. The firms involved in this agreement are Aurora, Bank of America, Citibank, JPMorgan Chase, MetLife Bank, PNC, Sovereign, SunTrust, U.S. Bank, and Wells Fargo. Roughly 3.8 million borrowers whose homes were in foreclosure in 2009 and 2010 will receive cash compensation under the settlement, with payments ranging from a few hundred dollars to potentially as much as $125,000 in a small percentage of cases. Those eligible are expected to be contacted by the end of March, regulators said.

Harlan Green © 2012

Follow Harlan Green on Twitter: www.twitter.com/HarlanGreen

Home Sales Surging

The Mortgage Corner

Total existing home sales are accelerating, and prices are rising along with declining inventories. Sales that include single-family homes, townhomes, condominiums and co-ops, rose 5.9 percent to a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 5.04 million in November from a downwardly revised 4.76 million in October. They are 14.5 percent higher than the 4.40 million-unit pace in November 2011. Sales are at the highest level since November 2009 when the annual pace spiked at 5.44 million.

NAR chief economist Lawrence Yun said there is healthy market demand. "Momentum continues to build in the housing market from growing jobs and a bursting out of household formation," he said. "With lower rental vacancy rates and rising rents, combined with still historically favorable affordability conditions, more people are buying homes. Areas impacted by Hurricane Sandy show storm-related disruptions but overall activity in the Northeast is up, offset by gains in unaffected areas."

Graph: Calculated Risk

The problem now is inventory, as months of supply have been falling as lenders work off their shadow inventory of defaulted properties. Supply fell sharply to 4.8 months at the current sales rate from 5.3 months in October which was already a multi-year low. The number of existing homes on the market, at 2.03 million, is the lowest since 2001.The good news is that it is boosting home prices.

The national median existing-home price for all housing types was $180,600 in November, up 10.1 percent from November 2011. This is the ninth consecutive monthly year-over-year price gain, which last occurred from September 2005 to May 2006.

October FHFA home prices, a better measure of affordable homes with Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac conforming loans were up a better than expected 0.5 percent nationally after remaining virtually unchanged in September. On the year, the index was up 5.6 percent after increasing 4.1 percent the month before.

Graph: Econoday

Distressed homes - foreclosures and short sales sold at deep discounts - accounted for 22 percent of November sales (12 percent were foreclosures and 10 percent were short sales), down from 24 percent in October and 29 percent in November 2011. Foreclosures sold for an average discount of 20 percent below market value in November, while short sales were discounted 16 percent.

Graph: Econoday

LPS reports that delinquencies continue to decline. The total delinquency rate has fallen to 7.03 percent from the peak in July 2010 of 10.57 percent. A normal rate is probably in the 4 to 5 percent range, so there is a long ways to go. The in-foreclosure rate was at 4.08 percent. There are still a large number of loans in this category (about 1.96 million).

"The market share of distressed property sales will fall into the teens next year based on a diminishing number of seriously delinquent mortgages," said the NAR’s Yun.

Well, it does look like 2013 will fulfill predictions that housing will be in full recovery. The Fed has said it will hold interest rates at record lows through 2015, so what more could prospective home buyers wish for? Maybe a few more new homes under construction.

Harlan Green © 2012