Once again the nationwide Existing Home Sales numbers are grim, and once again the West is moving in the opposite direction. The headlines say that last month saw the sharpest decline in home sales on record and that the prices are also down by 13.2%, the largest percentage since they began keeping track.
A closer look at the data shows two very different trends blending together to give these numbers. The West was the only region to show an increase in existing home sales once again. In fact, the single family numbers in the west are up 19.8% over last year, which is actually pretty impressive.
Of course a lot of this is the result of dramatically lower prices as bank owned properties begin to move. Single Family Home prices were off by 25.5%, which is by far the most for any region.
Once again this looks like a "first in, first out" scenario. The super heated California markets that crashed first seem to be about a year ahead of the rest of the country and, hopefully, are already moving toward a recovery.
Once those markets burn through some of their inventory and find some stable footing, our own little market should bounce back as well since most of the new buyers in Southern Oregon are the sellers from California.
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Friday, December 19, 2008
Rates Hit 37 Year Low
If you've been paying attention this week you know that mortgage rates fell to some pretty impressive levels. For a few hours on Wednesday you could lock in a rate lower than 4.5%, which is certainly something I've never seen. Apparently I'm not the only one. This weeks average is the lowest since Freddie Mac began tracking it in 1971, so it's definitely a big deal.
The interesting thing is that the amazing rates seem to be confined to the 30 year fixed. I don't know why lenders even show the hybrid ARM rates anymore. Why get a loan fixed for three to five years if the 30 year fixed rate is more than a point better?
Even the 15 year fixed rate is no better than a 30 year in this market. 15 year rates are usually at least 1/2% better than the 30 year, but this week there have been days where the 15 was actually worse.
This may reflect the secondary market's aversion to anything that isn't a traditional 30 year fixed rate loan. The interest only, adjustable, negative amortization type loans that have been making all the headlines have soured investors appetite for anything out of the ordinary. When some of the more exotic loans started going bad investors fled to the more conventional.
Fortunately for us, the 30 year fixed really is the best loan for most people in most circumstances. This week the phones are ringing with people wanting to refinance into a lower rate. Hopefully this will also bring some new buyers into the market, but even if all it does is to save homeowners a lot of money it might end up being a much needed stimulus for the economy.
The interesting thing is that the amazing rates seem to be confined to the 30 year fixed. I don't know why lenders even show the hybrid ARM rates anymore. Why get a loan fixed for three to five years if the 30 year fixed rate is more than a point better?
Even the 15 year fixed rate is no better than a 30 year in this market. 15 year rates are usually at least 1/2% better than the 30 year, but this week there have been days where the 15 was actually worse.
This may reflect the secondary market's aversion to anything that isn't a traditional 30 year fixed rate loan. The interest only, adjustable, negative amortization type loans that have been making all the headlines have soured investors appetite for anything out of the ordinary. When some of the more exotic loans started going bad investors fled to the more conventional.
Fortunately for us, the 30 year fixed really is the best loan for most people in most circumstances. This week the phones are ringing with people wanting to refinance into a lower rate. Hopefully this will also bring some new buyers into the market, but even if all it does is to save homeowners a lot of money it might end up being a much needed stimulus for the economy.
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Doom + Gloom = Time to Buy?
Once again all the economic headlines today are glum. The Consumer Price Index was down 1.7% and flat when you exclude food and energy. This is the largest decline since they started seasonally adjusting the number in 1947. Housing starts also set a record today by dropping 18.9% to the lowest level since they started keeping track in 1959.
Of course this is all bad news for the larger economy. However, there are some glimmers here for housing. First, the CPI numbers hint at deflation and certainly show no signs of inflation, which is the best possible news for mortgage rates. Rates have been falling lately and this news makes it likely that they will continue or at least hold steady at these low levels.
Housing starts indicate that builders are not very confident, and less construction will mean painful job losses. In the long term it also means fewer new houses going into an already glutted market. Inventories of unsold homes are a big part of the problem with the housing market, so fewer new homes means at least we're not adding to the problem.
All this gloom does create an opportunity for buyers. Prices are low, there's plenty of selection, and mortgage rates are great. If these factors are enough to bring first time buyers into the market it could go a long way to fixing the housing market. Locally we are starting to see some of the first time buyers who had been priced out of the market during the peak.
Years from now I imagine people will be looking back thinking "if I'd only bought back then..." Aside from the investment angle, housing is actually affordable again for people living here in Southern Oregon, which was really not the case when prices were high. Sure, people who owned a home could sell it and buy another, but the new buyers were almost all from out of state. Now, between the prices and the rates, may be time again for renters to become buyers.
Of course this is all bad news for the larger economy. However, there are some glimmers here for housing. First, the CPI numbers hint at deflation and certainly show no signs of inflation, which is the best possible news for mortgage rates. Rates have been falling lately and this news makes it likely that they will continue or at least hold steady at these low levels.
Housing starts indicate that builders are not very confident, and less construction will mean painful job losses. In the long term it also means fewer new houses going into an already glutted market. Inventories of unsold homes are a big part of the problem with the housing market, so fewer new homes means at least we're not adding to the problem.
All this gloom does create an opportunity for buyers. Prices are low, there's plenty of selection, and mortgage rates are great. If these factors are enough to bring first time buyers into the market it could go a long way to fixing the housing market. Locally we are starting to see some of the first time buyers who had been priced out of the market during the peak.
Years from now I imagine people will be looking back thinking "if I'd only bought back then..." Aside from the investment angle, housing is actually affordable again for people living here in Southern Oregon, which was really not the case when prices were high. Sure, people who owned a home could sell it and buy another, but the new buyers were almost all from out of state. Now, between the prices and the rates, may be time again for renters to become buyers.
Monday, December 8, 2008
4.5% Mortgage Rates?
By now everyone has heard that the Treasury Department is considering plans to push mortgage rates to 4.5% in an effort to stimulate the housing market. While this sounds like a good idea, there are some real problems with it.
The biggest problem is that the government doesn't control mortgage rates. Mortgage rates are set by the market based on what investors will buy and sell mortgage backed securities for. It's kind of like the government saying they plan to move the Dow Jones back over 10,000. Maybe they could do it by buying enough stock, or in the case of interest rates buying enough mortgage backed securities, to move the overall market. Maybe that would work, but maybe it wouldn't. It's not like the Fed Funds rate that can be arbitrarily set.
Beyond that you have to wonder how much it would even help. Mortgage rates are already hovering around 5%. Would an extra 1/2% (about $60 a month on a $200,000 loan) really be enough to bring out the buyers? If you can't afford a $1,200 PITI payment, would $1,140 make a difference?
This plan was floated as a way to help struggling homeowners, but apparently the 4.5% is only for new purchases. People who need to refinance to be able to stay in their homes won't benefit, unless of course some new buyer comes along to save the day.
Of course, as a mortgage broker I am all in favor of lower rates. I just don't think lower rates will fix the housing market. Rates have actually been pretty good through this whole crisis. I'm sure a 4.5% rate wouldn't hurt, but I don't think it's worth the cost in taxpayer dollars.
Borrowing and spending money the government doesn't have is not only expensive, it leads to inflation down the road, which is a real long term threat to interest rates. I also have some concerns about what happens when the crisis is over and the Treasury Department decides to dump all these securities. It seems like there's the potential to do a lot of long term damage for a potentially insignificant short term gain.
The biggest problem is that the government doesn't control mortgage rates. Mortgage rates are set by the market based on what investors will buy and sell mortgage backed securities for. It's kind of like the government saying they plan to move the Dow Jones back over 10,000. Maybe they could do it by buying enough stock, or in the case of interest rates buying enough mortgage backed securities, to move the overall market. Maybe that would work, but maybe it wouldn't. It's not like the Fed Funds rate that can be arbitrarily set.
Beyond that you have to wonder how much it would even help. Mortgage rates are already hovering around 5%. Would an extra 1/2% (about $60 a month on a $200,000 loan) really be enough to bring out the buyers? If you can't afford a $1,200 PITI payment, would $1,140 make a difference?
This plan was floated as a way to help struggling homeowners, but apparently the 4.5% is only for new purchases. People who need to refinance to be able to stay in their homes won't benefit, unless of course some new buyer comes along to save the day.
Of course, as a mortgage broker I am all in favor of lower rates. I just don't think lower rates will fix the housing market. Rates have actually been pretty good through this whole crisis. I'm sure a 4.5% rate wouldn't hurt, but I don't think it's worth the cost in taxpayer dollars.
Borrowing and spending money the government doesn't have is not only expensive, it leads to inflation down the road, which is a real long term threat to interest rates. I also have some concerns about what happens when the crisis is over and the Treasury Department decides to dump all these securities. It seems like there's the potential to do a lot of long term damage for a potentially insignificant short term gain.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Another Solid Month for Home Sales
The October existing home sales numbers look a lot like September: flat overall but with big gains in the west. Across the country existing homes sales were down 1.6% versus last year and were flat at 0% for single family homes only. However, the west saw a 37.5% increase overall and 38.8% for single family homes.
Of course this means that the rest of the country is doing worse than they were at this time last year, but we're focusing on Oregon so we'll call it good news. Last month's numbers were very similar, so now we have two solid months of sales growth in a row.
There's still a lot of inventory out there, but these are the kind of sales numbers we need to burn through it. Prices are still down significantly, but once again selling through the inventory is the only way to bring the market back in balance to where we can see prices recover.
It seems possible now that the volatile markets out west that were the first to fall may also be the first to recover. Let's hope the trend continues as the big California markets are a good part of what drives our small Oregon market.
Of course this means that the rest of the country is doing worse than they were at this time last year, but we're focusing on Oregon so we'll call it good news. Last month's numbers were very similar, so now we have two solid months of sales growth in a row.
There's still a lot of inventory out there, but these are the kind of sales numbers we need to burn through it. Prices are still down significantly, but once again selling through the inventory is the only way to bring the market back in balance to where we can see prices recover.
It seems possible now that the volatile markets out west that were the first to fall may also be the first to recover. Let's hope the trend continues as the big California markets are a good part of what drives our small Oregon market.
Friday, November 21, 2008
New Good Faith Estimate
In an effort to help consumers better understand the terms of their mortgages before they close, HUD has come up with a new standardized Good Faith Estimate for everyone to use by January of 2010. The goal is to make sure that all the terms of the loan are clearly disclosed.
Here is a link so you can see the proposed form for yourself.
This new form includes everything from the old GFE plus a lot of other information already disclosed on other required forms. There are check boxes to indicate if your loan is adjustable or has features like a balloon payment or a prepayment penalty. It also groups different categories of fees in ways that make more sense and further clarifies the total amount of broker compensation.
One new bit of information is the Tradeoff Table. This table compares the loan you are actually getting to two other available options. First is the same loan with lower fees (and therefore a higher rate), and the other is the same loan with a lower rate (and therefore higher fees). It's an interesting comparison and will help to demystify the famous "no-fee" loans by clearly showing how you pay those fees through a higher rate.
While I'm certain the regulators mean well, they clearly haven't spent enough time in the real world with actual borrowers to be able to do it well. If the problem is that consumers are taking loans that they don't fully understand, adding more paperwork is not the solution.
Anyone who has been through a package of loan documents can tell you that the reason people don't read and understand everything is that there is simply too much of it. Many concepts, like the need to maintain homeowners insurance, are covered by at least three separate forms. There are disclosures on everything imaginable, including my favorite form which advises borrowers that failing to make payments on time may result in negative information being reported to credit bureaus. Wow! Who knew!
The only way to make sure that borrowers are getting loans that they understand and that are the best loans for their particular circumstances is for them to work with a trustworthy loan officer. Since that's impossible to legislate, we have to make due with better disclosure. However, more paperwork does not necessarily result in better disclosure.
A better solution might be to get rid of 90% of the current pile of required forms in favor of 5 or 10 new ones that are clear, easy to understand, and cover all the important issues. That way critical information wouldn't be buried under an endless stack of disclosures. I'm interested to hear your thoughts on this.
Here is a link so you can see the proposed form for yourself.
This new form includes everything from the old GFE plus a lot of other information already disclosed on other required forms. There are check boxes to indicate if your loan is adjustable or has features like a balloon payment or a prepayment penalty. It also groups different categories of fees in ways that make more sense and further clarifies the total amount of broker compensation.
One new bit of information is the Tradeoff Table. This table compares the loan you are actually getting to two other available options. First is the same loan with lower fees (and therefore a higher rate), and the other is the same loan with a lower rate (and therefore higher fees). It's an interesting comparison and will help to demystify the famous "no-fee" loans by clearly showing how you pay those fees through a higher rate.
While I'm certain the regulators mean well, they clearly haven't spent enough time in the real world with actual borrowers to be able to do it well. If the problem is that consumers are taking loans that they don't fully understand, adding more paperwork is not the solution.
Anyone who has been through a package of loan documents can tell you that the reason people don't read and understand everything is that there is simply too much of it. Many concepts, like the need to maintain homeowners insurance, are covered by at least three separate forms. There are disclosures on everything imaginable, including my favorite form which advises borrowers that failing to make payments on time may result in negative information being reported to credit bureaus. Wow! Who knew!
The only way to make sure that borrowers are getting loans that they understand and that are the best loans for their particular circumstances is for them to work with a trustworthy loan officer. Since that's impossible to legislate, we have to make due with better disclosure. However, more paperwork does not necessarily result in better disclosure.
A better solution might be to get rid of 90% of the current pile of required forms in favor of 5 or 10 new ones that are clear, easy to understand, and cover all the important issues. That way critical information wouldn't be buried under an endless stack of disclosures. I'm interested to hear your thoughts on this.
What is Yield Spread Premium?
Yield Spread Premium (YSP) is a fee paid by the lender to the originator when a loan closes. There has been a lot of talk lately about this once obscure topic as regulators look for ways to reign in predatory lending. While YSP can be abused, it is not always bad and has many consumer-friendly uses.
First, it's useful to understand the way mortgages are priced at the wholesale level. There is no such thing as "the rate" on any given day. Here is a sample of an interest rate grid for a conventional 30 year fixed mortgage:
The numbers to the right of each rate represent the cost (discount points) or rebate (YSP) for that rate and lock term (15 or 30 days) expressed in points. A point is one percent of the loan amount ($1,000 on a $100,000 loan). So at it's simplest, the rate today would be 6.375% if you were to lock for 30 days. The zero in that column means that there is no cost or rebate for that rate. If you wanted to buy your rate down to 6.0%, you would have to pay an additional 1 point as a discount fee at closing. If, on the other hand, you were to lock at 6.75%, the originator would have 1.125 points rebate to play with.
Of course, nothing is ever as simple as it seems. There are nearly always pricing adjusters having to do with the particulars of each loan. Some examples of factors that can affect pricing include loan-to-value ratio, credit score, loan amount, occupancy, and many others. Those pricing adjustments are given in points as well, so one good use of YSP is to offset those adjustments. The non-owner-occupied adjustment, for example, is 1.75 points, which can be several thousand dollars on an average sized loan. Most borrowers would prefer to take the 7.125% interest rate, which pays that 1.75 point fee, rather than paying it out of pocket.
Another legitimate use can be offering a "no-fee loan." No-fee loans are not for everyone, in fact they are not for most consumers, but that's a topic for another day. A no-fee loan is where you pay a higher interest rate and that YSP, the negative numbers on the chart above, is used to pay some or all of your closing costs.
The problems arise when you pay the higher rate and don't get any benefit. In these cases it's the loan originator who pockets the money. On the chart above, for example, if you paid your 1 point origination fee and still got a 7.0% rate, that lender would gross 2.5 points total on your loan. This can create an incentive for unscrupulous loan officers to sell higher rates than the borrower qualifies for which, of course, is a real problem.
I'll leave ideas on how to solve this problem for another day. For now I think understanding what Yield Spread Premium is and how it works is enough for one post, and of course this is just a very basic outline. I welcome your comments and questions.
First, it's useful to understand the way mortgages are priced at the wholesale level. There is no such thing as "the rate" on any given day. Here is a sample of an interest rate grid for a conventional 30 year fixed mortgage:
The numbers to the right of each rate represent the cost (discount points) or rebate (YSP) for that rate and lock term (15 or 30 days) expressed in points. A point is one percent of the loan amount ($1,000 on a $100,000 loan). So at it's simplest, the rate today would be 6.375% if you were to lock for 30 days. The zero in that column means that there is no cost or rebate for that rate. If you wanted to buy your rate down to 6.0%, you would have to pay an additional 1 point as a discount fee at closing. If, on the other hand, you were to lock at 6.75%, the originator would have 1.125 points rebate to play with.Of course, nothing is ever as simple as it seems. There are nearly always pricing adjusters having to do with the particulars of each loan. Some examples of factors that can affect pricing include loan-to-value ratio, credit score, loan amount, occupancy, and many others. Those pricing adjustments are given in points as well, so one good use of YSP is to offset those adjustments. The non-owner-occupied adjustment, for example, is 1.75 points, which can be several thousand dollars on an average sized loan. Most borrowers would prefer to take the 7.125% interest rate, which pays that 1.75 point fee, rather than paying it out of pocket.
Another legitimate use can be offering a "no-fee loan." No-fee loans are not for everyone, in fact they are not for most consumers, but that's a topic for another day. A no-fee loan is where you pay a higher interest rate and that YSP, the negative numbers on the chart above, is used to pay some or all of your closing costs.
The problems arise when you pay the higher rate and don't get any benefit. In these cases it's the loan originator who pockets the money. On the chart above, for example, if you paid your 1 point origination fee and still got a 7.0% rate, that lender would gross 2.5 points total on your loan. This can create an incentive for unscrupulous loan officers to sell higher rates than the borrower qualifies for which, of course, is a real problem.
I'll leave ideas on how to solve this problem for another day. For now I think understanding what Yield Spread Premium is and how it works is enough for one post, and of course this is just a very basic outline. I welcome your comments and questions.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
