Showing posts with label sub-prime. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sub-prime. Show all posts

Friday, October 10, 2008

Question(s) of The Day - Enough of Subprime Already?

Will the Sub-Prime ruse ever fade away?

When will most Americans realize that everyone made huge errors when buying their homes?

Sub-prime, near-prime, prime… they all grossly overpaid and all will now face tremendous financial stress …

Will the more affluent Americans ever drop their conceit and admit that they made horrendous mistakes as well?

Friday, September 26, 2008

The Almost Daily 2¢ - Goin’ Up-Prime!

I’ve been arguing for the better part of two years that although the traditional media and apparently general consensus has focused on subprime and other “toxic” mortgage products as the source for the credit tumult, the historic deterioration would by no means be limited to these “bleeding edge” products.

To be certain, I’m not arguing that prime borrowers will default with the same rates as their sub-prime or near-prime brethren but rather that each mortgage product will inevitably experience respective historic levels of defaults.

Before this massive housing and general economic contraction is complete, I expect to see new records set for prime defaults, be they prime-Jumbo ARM loans, prime-Jumbo fixed rate loans, prime-conforming ARM loans or prime-conforming fixed rate loans… we will see historic defaults across the entire spectrum of mortgage products.

Until recently, most of my reasoning was based on a cursory study of the other periods with higher than “normal” mortgage defaults.

Although there is significant debate about the true drivers of mortgage default, most individuals in default cite unemployment as the cause while other key instigators are: risky or insufficient household financial planning (high consumer debt and low/no savings), low-equity stake and housing depreciation, and simply general recession.

The key point to consider though is that while all of these factors have contributed to creating environments of high mortgage default in the past, our current circumstances make these past periods look like walks in the park.

So, if borrowers from past periods, many of whom would likely be considered “prime” borrowers today (fully documented income, large down-payment, fixed-rate loans, etc. etc.), experienced bouts of higher mortgage defaults, what are the chances that our current cohort of “prime” borrowers will not perform the same?

In an effort to prove out this conjecture, I will track, with a quarterly recurring post, the operating performance of one of today’s most celebrated “conservative” mortgage portfolio lenders, Hudson City Bancorp (NASDAQ:HCBK), to see how their borrowers perform over the course of this economic downturn.

Hudson City is now fully recognized as the “poster child” for safe prime-only mortgage lending, stringent underwriting standards and a CEO, Ronald Hermance, who’s frequent media appearances usually come with heaping portions of high praise and accolades.

It’s important to understand that although Hudson City’s average borrower has a reasonable LTV of 61.5%, they are still seeing a precipitous increase in loan defaults.

In fact, currently the average LTV of their non-performing loans (defaulted loans) is 69% so “prime” borrowers with 31% equity at the time of origination are now defaulting in steadily increasing numbers.

The following chart plots Hudson City Bancorp’s Non-Performing Loan Ratio (defaulted loans to total loan portfolio) since Q1 2004.

Notice that defaults have been on the rise since Q2 2006 while in Q2 2007 things really started to heat up.


But how does the growth in defaults of the Hudson City Bancorp “prime” portfolio stack up compared to other well know default rates?

The Following charts compare the Hudson City default rate to that of Fannie Mae and the MBAA foreclosure rate.

The top chart compares the normalized default rates since Q1 2004 while the lower two compare the same data since Q1 2007 in order to get a sense of the respective growth over these periods.

It’s important to keep in mind that although Hudson City is not experiencing the same ratio of defaults (Fannie Mae and the general MBAA rates are worse) the growth of prime defaults is comparable and, since Q1 2007, has even been substantially higher.



The key instigators in this growth of default is likely home price depreciation and unemployment both working together to bear down on “prime” homeowners as is shown by the following charts plotting the year-over-year percent change to the New York area S&P/Case-Shiller home price index against the Hudson City default ratio as well as the unemployment in New York and New Jersey since 2004.


I will continue to update this data in coming quarters in order to see how slumping home values and rising unemployment affect the performance of “prime” borrowers.

Wednesday, February 06, 2008

Reading Rates: MBA Application Survey – February 06 2008

The Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA) publishes the results of a weekly applications survey that covers roughly 50 percent of all residential mortgage originations and tracks the average interest rate for 30 year and 15 year fixed rate mortgages, 1 year ARMs as well as application volume for both purchase and refinance applications.

The purchase application index has been highlighted as a particularly important data series as it very broadly captures the demand side of residential real estate for both new and existing home purchases.

The latest data is showing that the average rate for a 30 year fixed rate mortgage increased since last week to 5.61% while the purchase application volume increased 12.0% and the refinance application volume decreased a 1.0% compared to last week’s results.

The average fixed mortgage rate continues to remain materially below the trend of 2007 and increases to refinance application volume have clearly reflected that but it will take a few more weeks for the underlying trend to become clear particularly as the purchase application volume remains essentially unchanged (or possibly trending lower) compared to last year’s levels.

It’s important to note that all application volume values reflect only “initial” applications NOT approved applications… i.e. originations… I will post on originations on the coming weeks.

Also note that the average interest rates for 80% LTV fixed rate mortgages has now dropped firmly below the mean for the prior year and that the interest rate for an 80% LTV 1 year ARM continues to be elevated with a 1 basis point spread above the 30 year fixed rate.

It’s important to note that the data is reported (and charted) weekly and that the rate data represents average interest rates, and the index data represents mortgage loan application volume for home purchases, home refinances and a composite of all loans.

The following chart shows how the principle and interest cost and estimated annual income required to cover the PITI (using the 29% “rule of thumb”) on a $400,000 loan has changed since January 2007.

The following chart shows the average interest rate for 30 year and 15 year fixed rate mortgages over the last number of weeks (click for larger version).


The following charts show the Purchase Index, Refinance Index and Market Composite Index since January 2007 (click for larger versions).



Monday, May 28, 2007

Gettin’ Down with Toll

Toll Brothers (NYSE:TOL) reported Q2 earnings results last week confirming a $119.7 million of pretax write-downs that served to depress their net income by an astounding 79% as compared to Q2 2006.

Additionally, Toll yet again reduced its expectation for the maximum number of homes delivered for 2007 from 7300 homes last December to 7000 in Q1 now to 6900.

During the conference call, CEO Bob Toll uncharacteristically offered very little optimistic sentiment even offering some skepticism regarding recent Treasury Secretary Paulson’s “market bottom” outlook and the recent up-tick in the Census Department’s New Home Sales.

“I think what that indicates is that most new homebuilders that are large, the public homebuilders, their average product goes anywhere from about $250K up to us which is about $700,000 so obviously the increase [in sales] is taking place below our space. Which means that we’re not out of the woods yet. I took with surprise yesterday and it’s now confirmed today by this analysis when the secretary of the treasury said that we’ve got the hard times pretty much behind us I wondered how many communities he had and where he got that information but I now understand that the information he got hadn’t been pealed away, I guess, to show that it was $150,000 housing. So I would say that we have not got the bad times behind us yet though it could be… you never know.”

When asked about the April year-over-year comparisons getting less negative Toll suggested that favorably comparing against a year that “stinks” is not what he’s looking for.

“As you get further in to a down market, in terms of length of time, the comparisons are going to get better. So that, ultimately, if we stay here for a long period of time, you will see that April sales equaled April sales last year. That’s not what we’re looking for of course. So, I think the statements are a little misleading. The comparisons are good but what you’re comparing to stinks so that’s why your getting unhappiness expressed by the public home builders.”

Ivy Zelman, analyst with Credit Suisse First Boston tweaked Bob Toll in a minor skirmish over Toll’s interest in buying additional land.

Toll: “I would hope that we would increase the land portfolio somewhat from where we are now, we are actively looking and trying to buy… We have raised thresholds because we can and I think we should operate more prudently, more carefully than we did when the market was going up.”

Ivy: “You don’t feel that having almost a 10 year supply of land is enough?”

Toll: “Well, we hope that it’s not 10 years Ivy.”

The complete conference call can be listened to here.

Here are some of the interesting data points from the Q2 release:

Second Quarter Results

  • Net income was $36.7 million down 79.0% compared to Q2 2006.
  • Pre-tax land write-downs totaled $119.7 million up 897.5% compared to Q2 2006.
  • Earnings per share declined 66.7% as compared to Q2 2006.
  • Total revenues were $1.17 billion down 18.75% compared to Q2 2006.
  • Net signed contracts were $1.17 billion down 25% compared to Q2 2006.
  • Quarter end backlog was $4.15 billion down 31.6% compared to Q2 2006.
  • Signed contracts was 2031 down 14% compared to Q2 2006.
Current 2007 Projections

  • Deliver 6100 – 6900 homes (prior estimate 6000 – 7000).

Saturday, May 26, 2007

Crashachusetts Existing Home Sales: April 2007

This week, the Massachusetts Association of Realtors (MAR) released their Existing Home Sales Report for April 2007 showing further weakness to the regions residential housing market.

Along with the release, MAR President Doug Azarian continued to maintain an optimistic outlook on the trend.

“The housing market continued to trend in a positive direction for the month of April … While the number of detached single-family homes sold was down, the 1.7 percent decrease year-to-year was the lowest we’ve seen in the month of April for the past three years. … With inventory levels decreasing and interest rates still low, demand should continue to keep prices stable through the end of the spring home buying season,”

Probably the most notable data-point of the report is the continued increase of the average “days on the market” resulting in an increasing monthly supply.

Although the total residential inventory is lower now than in April of 2006, the sales pace is continuing to slow.

It’s important to remember that we are again seeing year-over-year sales declines “on the back” of last years historic sales drop-off indicating truly fundamental weakness.

This is inevitably resulting in climbing inventories that for some towns, such as Concord, are exceeding last years levels while many other towns continue to simply trend upward.

Use the PaperMoney Inventory Tracker to follow your town’s daily inventory as well as visualize the inventory changes that have occurred over the last year.

As in months past, be on the lookout for the inflation adjusted charts produced by BostonBubble.com for an even more accurate "real" view of the current market trend.

April’s Key Statistics:

  • Single family sales declined 3.5% from March and declined 1.7% as compared to April 2006
  • Single family median price increased 0.3% from March and declined 2.3% as compared to April 2006
  • Condo sales declined 0.7% from March and increased 0.7% as compared to April 2006
  • Condo Median Price declined 1.6% from February and increased 2.6% as compared to April 2006
  • The number of months supply of residential properties stands at 10.0 months.
  • The average “days on market” for single family homes stands at 150 days.
  • The average “days on market” for condos stands at 143 days.

Friday, May 25, 2007

Existing Home Sales Report: April 2007

Today, the National Association of Realtors (NAR) released their Existing Home Sales Report for March showing continued and uniform weakness of the nations housing markets.

Without missing a beat, the new “fill-in” Senior Economist Lawrence Yun continues to suggest that the weakness is indicating stabilization.

“We’ve been anticipating slower home sales because many subprime loan products are no longer available … In addition, increased scrutiny by lenders is stopping risky mortgage origination, which is good for both consumers and the lending community. Fortunately, a wide availability of conventional mortgage products and the 4.5 million jobs created over the past 24 months will help to stabilize the market going forward.”

Additionally, NAR President Pat Vredevoogd Combs continues to attempt to scare buyers into action with the threat of increased interest rates.

“Long-term financing remains favorable, but interest rates are rising … Although some buyers have a wait-and-see attitude regarding home prices, they should consider that rising interest rates later this year could offset a lower sales price when you get down to the monthly payments.”

Looking at March’s Existing Home Sales report should only result in additional confirmation that the nation’s housing markets are continuing to experience weakness with virtually all regions showing considerable declines to median price and sales as well as significant increases to inventory and monthly supply.

Sales are, in fact, down in EVERY region with the majority of declines in the double digits.

Keep in mind that we are now seeing existing home sales declines on the back of last years fairly dramatic declines further indicating that the housing markets are not bottoming as many had suggested last fall.

Below is a chart consolidating all the year-over-year changes reported by NAR in their April 2007 report.

Particularly notable are the following:

  • Majority of median prices are down.
  • ALL sales are down.
  • ALL Inventory and Months Supply show HIGH double digit increases on a year-over-year basis.

Tuesday, May 15, 2007

Boo Hoo?

Oh.. Boo Hoo.. That mean Lesley Stahl hurt the wittle twade organization’s wittle feewings…

Or so went the National Association of Realtors (NAR) sad, feeble smokescreen of a response to last Sunday’s 60 Minutes segment.

Well before you get all teary, let me remind you that the National Association of Realtors is not only Americas largest trade organization but also the most wealthy and influential Political Action Committee (PAC).

As such, they are routinely called to Capitol Hill to provide “important” testimony as well as certainly calling upon on our representatives (at least the ones they supported with campaign donations) to apply the best influence that money can buy.

Stated plainly, the NAR is far more powerful than any individual American using their campaign contributions and ongoing lobbying to virtually ensure that their interests are represented well in excess of the average consumers.

What happens if there is conflict between what would be in the best interest of the American consumer and what would be in the best interest of the NAR?

Ill let you decide.

The 60 Minutes segment merely stated the obvious, questioning the sense of the traditional 6% broker commission as well as pointing out that in the age of the Internet, the traditional real estate broker services are going the way of the buggy whip.

There were no new revelations in the segment as these are the very same issues many average consumers have asked themselves in recent years after seeing the obvious disconnect between the standard 6% commission Realtors have established and the actual work performed.

Yes, it’s true that, as NAR states, commissions are always negotiable and in fact average more like 5.1% nationally but one should use caution before jumping to the conclusion that Realtor commissions represent a free and efficient market.

The reality is that NAR has worked to prevent competition from limited service brokers who would otherwise charge minimal flat fees or commissions at or below 4% in exchange for services that generally assist sellers in listing their home with the MLS as well as providing a range of other Internet based marketing efforts.

Keep in mind that this attempt to stifle competition is really an attempt to prevent technology from doing what it does best, that is, bringing new and innovative services to the market that dramatically increase the efficiency of existing processes.

As we know very well, this efficiency is often translated to savings in the cost involved of a particular process which can be passed on to the consumer through free and unfettered competition.

Therein lies the real issue for the NAR.

The Mother of all “disruptive” technologies, namely the Internet, is bearing down on the NAR and instead of embracing the change and innovating, they are fighting it tooth and nail in an effort to maintain the status of the traditional full service broker model.

This is certainly NOT in the best interest of the consumer but is this really in the best interest of the association members?

You brokers out there ought to ask yourselves what services you have found to be most impressive recently.

The schlocky listing sites hosted by many full service agencies or the innovative services such as Zillow.com, ZipRealty.com, and Redfin.com.

Remember, it’s your future that is in flux here.

You can either choose to join the trend that will inevitably yield a host of new services and models for transacting the business of real estate, or fight it and likely be left behind in an ever dwindling cohort of “old timers” attempting to provide defunct services.

The complete 60 Minutes segment as well as Lesley Stahl’s post-segment Q&A can be viewed now on BNN!

Thursday, May 10, 2007

Toll’s Dirty Dance

Ouch!

Things have not gone well for Toll Brothers (NYSE:TOL), certainly not nearly as well as CEO Bob “Dancing on the Bottom” Toll had anticipated as 2006 drew to a close.

Back then, an optimistic Toll had suggested that the housing downturn may likely have bottomed.

“Fifteen months into the current slowdown, we may be seeing a floor in some markets where deposits and traffic, although erratic from week to week, seem to be dancing on the bottom or slightly above.”

Furthermore, at that time Toll Brothers announced that they budgeted an additional $60 million to account for all pretax write-downs for the entire year of 2007, an allotment easily surpassed by the $96.9 million actually required for only the first quarter of 2007.

Now, Toll has announced an additional $90 million to $130 million in pretax write-downs for just Q2 2007!

That brings the total of pretax write downs to somewhere between $186.9 million to $226.9 million for just the first half of 2007, a truly astounding number compared to the $152 million in write-downs taken in all of 2006.

As for the dancing, Toll now suggests that things have taken a turn for the worse.

“Virginia came back… remember when I had said, either last quarter or the quarter before that that we were dancing off the bottom.. or something opaque like that, in the northern Virginia, Maryland, Washington DC market. The market continued to improve, not much but a little bit, and [now] it’s back down a little bit.”

As for additional impairment write-downs soon to come from obviously poorly purchased property such as a very large parcel Toll purchased on the outskirts of Las Vegas in January 2006, Tool responded:

“The real answer is, you haven’t reached the point where can prove to your auditors that the value isn’t there and therefore has to be written down in order to show a profit. I mean, you could argue all day that Vegas is slow and this property is going to come on the market in 09 and if things are in 09 as they are today, when we open it, we’ll be hard pressed show a profit and they’ll want to get vary exact and say ‘hard pressed quite do it’. You’ve got to show that you’re below the line.”

When asked about his outlook for the housing market in Florida, Toll replied:

“Nice place to play golf in the winter, but not a great place to sell homes right now. There are probably great opportunistic land deals in Florida, the problem is, sometimes half-price ends up to be twice-price.”

When asked if he thought there would likely be additional future reductions of “head-count” (layoffs) Toll responded:

“I prefer to call it overhead, and the answer is yes. We haven’t stopped, but we will be looking even more seriously at reducing overheads where sales paces are reduced.”

When asked to “grade” the different markets across the nation, Toll responded:

“In our northern territories, Massachusetts and Rhode Island are ‘F’. Connecticut is a ‘B+’. New York exurbs are ‘B+’, New York urban which for us is Queens, Brooklyn and Manhattan are a ‘B+’ if not an ‘A’. Jersey City and Hoboken are a ‘B+’. New Jersey suburbs, oddly enough when you juxtapose them against the New York suburbs ... you got an ‘F’, it may be due to the tax situation in New Jersey, Michigan is an ‘F’. Chicago is surprisingly still and ‘F’ market. Minnesota is a ‘C-‘ market which is a whole lot better than it was. The Philadelphia suburbs is a ‘B’ market for us. The Poconos is an ‘F’ market. The state of Delaware is a ‘C+’ market. The mid-Maryland shore, as I said earlier, is an ‘F’ market. Washington DC, northern Virginia is probably a ‘D+’ market. Raleigh is a ‘B’ market. Charlotte is a ‘B’ market. South Carolina is a ‘D’ market as in dog. Florida, central market, Orlando, we sell a lot of homes, we get the same homes back, we sell the same homes, we get the same homes back, it’s a very hard market to figure. People, I guess are renting them without ever moving in. That’s and ‘F’ market. Florida east coast is an ‘F+’ market. Florida north, Jacksonville, pretty much an ‘F+’ market. Tampa is an ‘F’. Florida on the west coast is an ‘F’. Texas is good, Austin is a ‘B’ market, Dallas and San Antonio, we’ve got a ‘C’ market because we haven’t got our product up and running as we should yet so it’s only a ‘C’ market. I suspect it’s really a ‘B’. Northern California averages to be a ‘C’ market for us, there are some pockets that are ‘B’ and some that are ‘D’. California southern market is a ‘C’ market for us. California Palm Springs is a ‘C’ market for us. Arizona … I would rate as a ‘D-‘. Vegas is definitely an ‘F’. Reno is an ‘F’. Colorado is a ‘C’.”

During the conference call, there is extensive discussion on Toll Brothers outlook for impairments as well as their methodology and criteria used to determine and take them which can be listened to in its entirety here.

Here are some of the interesting data points from today’s preliminary release:

  • Total revenue totaled $1.17 billion, down 19% as compared to Q2 2006
  • Quarter end backlog totaled $4.15 billion, down 32% as compared to Q2 2006
  • Net signed contracts totaled $1.17 billion, down 25% as compared to Q2 2006
  • Pre-tax land write-downs totaled between $90 million and $130 million
  • Q2 cancellations totaled 384 compared to 436 in Q1 2007
Remember, these results are preliminary and Ill post a more complete summary of Tolls Q2 results when they become available on May 24.

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

Existing Home Sales Report: March 2007

Not so fast Real Estate-Wall Street Bulls.

Today, the National Association of Realtors (NAR) released their Existing Home Sales Report for March showing the LARGEST MONTHLY DROP IN HOME SALES SINCE JANUARY 1989.

Of course, NAR Chief Economist David Lereah continues to attempt to blame winter weather conditions as well as fallout from the subprime meltdown for the current drop in sales.

“For the last couple months we’ve been expecting a weather ‘hit’ on home sales finalized in March, … We also may be seeing some losses as a result of the subprime fallout. … It’s too early to measure a significant impact from tighter lending standards, which should moderately dampen activity, but we’re still looking for existing-home sales to gradually improve during the last half of 2007”

Additionally, NAR President Pat Vredevoogd Combs continues to attempt to goad unknowing home buyers into making their purchase at the top of a dramatically deflating market.

“It’s a good time to buy, in part, because home buyers are not pressured to make quick decisions,” Combs said. “We’re in a window of low interest rates with a plentiful supply homes on the market and flat prices in most areas. First-time buyers now have more power to negotiate with sellers for help on downpayment or closing costs.”

Looking at March’s Existing Home Sales report should only result in additional confirmation that the nation’s housing markets are continuing to experience weakness with virtually all regions showing considerable declines to median price and sales as well as significant increases to inventory and monthly supply.

Keep in mind that we are now seeing existing home sales declines on the back of last years fairly dramatic declines further indicating that the housing markets are not bottoming as many had suggested last fall.

Below is a chart consolidating all the year-over-year changes reported by NAR in their March 2007 report.

Particularly notable are the following:

  • Majority of median prices are down.
  • Majority of sales are down.
  • Inventory and Months Supply show double digit increases on a year-over-year basis.


Monday, April 23, 2007

Crashachusetts Existing Home Sales: March 2007

Today, the Massachusetts Association of Realtors (MAR) released their 1st quarter 2007 and March 2007 results for existing home sales, median prices and inventory along with a fresh dose of spin from President Doug Azarian and MAR President-Elect, Susan Renfrew.

Before we delve into the numbers, let me point out the truly awful quality of data reported by MAR, particularly on Azarian’s watch.

For a few months now I have noticed some strange “revisions” to the single family sales numbers for past months and after considering all the possible rational reasons for these irregularities, I can only conclude that it is sloppy reporting on the part of MAR.

I should mention, that I don’t necessarily think that there is any foul play in MAR’s reporting, instead it appears that MAR has simply fumbled and, unfortunately for us, has tainted the sales and median price results.

There are several many that exhibit questionable revisions but Ill highlight February and March of 2006 as examples.

It February 2006, MAR’s Existing Home Sales Report (EHS) reported that single family sales were 2254 units with a media sale price of $339,450.

MAR than revised this number in their March 2006 EHS report to show February 2006 single family home sales of 2265 units with a median sale price of $339,000.

Then in the February 2007 EHS, MAR reports that in February 2006 single family home sales were 2380 units with a median sale price of $339,000 while ALSO citing the 2265 unit sales number at the bottom of the very same report (first and second pages versus very last page).

Which is it … 2380 or 2254? Both numbers are used in the same report.

Furthermore, in the March 2006 EHS report, MAR reported that single family home sales were 3440 units with a median sale price of $344,000.

MAR then reaffirmed both their single family sales and median price numbers in their April 2006 EHS report.

Then in the March 2007 EHS, MAR reports that in March 2006 single family sales were 3550 units with a median selling price of $343,500.

That’s a 3.2% upward revision to single family sales yet there seems to be no evidence that the number is accurate.

Keep in mind, I looked back over MAR’s past releases to see any patterns to revisions and there are some but there are many examples where months are simply randomly altered showing totally different numbers in-between months that have numbers consistent to what was past reported.

Also, these revisions have all been made WITHOUT the customary press release providing any explanation for the changes as well as for the procedure used for revisions.

Wouldn’t it be great if “crack” reporter Kimberly Blanton of the Boston Globe could focus some attention on issues like MAR’s unusual numbers revisions rather than reporting puff pieces on the strength of the bottoming housing market?

Well good numbers or bad we are stuck with what we have and with that lets take a look at March 2007’s findings.

With the today’s release of the existing home sales, MAR president Doug Azarian suggests, “The housing market in Massachusetts is gaining momentum and we can continue to feel good about where it is headed. With prices remaining stable and supplies decreasing, we can expect the spring home buying season to be active.”

As in months past, be on the lookout for the inflation adjusted charts produced by BostonBubble.com for an even more accurate "real" view of the current market trend.

March’s Key Statistics:

  • Single family sales increased 43.2% from February and declined 2.8% as compared to March 2006
  • Single family median price increased 5.8% from February and declined 0.1% as compared to March 2006
  • Condo sales increased 39.6% from February and declined 1.4% as compared to March 2006
  • Condo Median Price increased 3.3% from February and declined 3.0% as compared to March 2006
  • The number of months supply of residential properties stands at 9.0 months.
  • The “days on market” for single family homes stands at 158 days.

Tuesday, April 17, 2007

New Residential Construction Report: March 2007

Popularly reported as an “unexpected rise” in housing starts, today’s New Residential Construction Report continues to indicate significant weakness in the nations housing markets and for residential construction.

In particular, housing permits, the report most leading of indicators, again indicates substantial weakness in future construction activity both nationally and across every reported region.

As predicted, housing completions are now declining significantly on a year-over-year basis indicating that the contraction in construction activity may soon be reflected by a substantial drop-off in construction related jobs as older projects reach completion and newer projects start at a far slower pace.

Now, we are well within the period in which permits and starts began to show significant weakness last year so the current double-digit year-over-year declines to those measures unequivocally indicate that the housing market has not yet stabilized.

Here are the statistics outlined in today’s report:

Housing Permits

Nationally

  • Single family housing permits up 1.4% from February, down 28.4% as compared to March 2006
Regionally

  • For the Northeast, single family housing up 1.3% from February, down 35.7% as compared to March 2006.
  • For the West, single family housing permits up 2.1% from February, down 22.7% as compared to March 2006.
  • For the Midwest, single family housing permits up 19.5% from February, down 29.1% as compared to March 2006.
  • For the South, single family housing permits down 3.6% from February, down 29.6% compared to March 2006.
Housing Starts

Nationally

  • Single family housing starts up 2.0% from February, down 24.6% as compared to March 2006.
Regionally

  • For the Northeast, single family housing starts down 7.8% from February, down 35.2% as compared to March 2006.
  • For the West, single family housing starts down 5.9% from February, down 26.7% as compared to March 2006.
  • For the Midwest, single family housing starts up 35.9% from February, down 17.2% as compared to March 2006.
  • For the South, single family housing starts down 0.5% from February, down 24.1% as compared to March 2006.
Housing Completions

Nationally

  • Single family housing completions up 1.5% from February, down 28.9% as compared to March 2006.
Regionally

  • For the Northeast, single family housing completions down 16.2% from February, down 35.8% as compared to March 2006.
  • For the West, single family housing completions up 17.8% from February, down 28.3% as compared to March 2006.
  • For the Midwest, single family housing completions up 7.6% from February, down 36.0% as compared to March 2006.
  • For the South, single family housing completions down 3.8% from February, down 25.9% as compared to March 2006.
Keep in mind that this particular report does NOT factor in the cancellations that have been widely reported to be occurring in new construction.

Friday, March 23, 2007

Existing Home Sales Report: February 2007

Yet again, the Bulls on Wall Street and CNBC waxed wildly optimistic with the initial “top-line” numbers of a report before delving into the details thoroughly enough to realize that they had gotten ahead of themselves.

Looking more closely at February’s Existing Home Sales report should only result in additional confirmation that the nation’s housing markets are continuing to experience weakness with the majority of regions showing considerable declines to median price and sales as well as all regions showing significant increases to inventory and monthly supply.

In an attempt to squeeze as much press out of the top-line 3.9% increase to sales nationally from January, David Lereah, Chief Economist of the National Association of Realtors (NAR), expresses some surprise but is still cautiously pointing the finger at the weather for the other weaker numbers:

“Some of the rise in home sales may be from mild weather that brought out shoppers in December, but fundamentals have improved in the housing market and buyers see a window now with historically-low mortgage interest rates and competitive pricing by sellers, … Even so, winter storms last month discouraged shopping, and buyers were chilled with the third coldest February on record. These unusual weather patterns mean home sales that close in March may decline before rebounding later this spring.”

Additionally, NAR President Pat Vredevoogd Combs offers this bit of convoluted logic mixed with consumer taunting:

“Over the last year, we’ve seen declining sales in many high-cost areas but rising activity in lower cost markets, … This change in the geographic composition of sales means we aren’t getting apples-to-apples comparisons in median home prices from a year ago.”

“What’s really happening is probably somewhere in between the different measures, but home prices are soft – a year ago we were still seeing bidding pressures and double-digit price growth, … Overall, home prices should rise slowly this year, and many buyers have an opportunity now that was only a dream during the five-year boom.”

Probably the most notable results from today’s report, beside the numerous median price declines, are the even more notable increases to inventory.

At this point, it seems fairly obvious where things are going in terms of inventory, especially in the more seasonal markets, but it will certainly be interesting to see how things shape up during March and April.

Below is a chart consolidating all the year-over-year changes reported by NAR in their February 2007 report.

Particularly notable are the following:

  • Majority of median prices are down.
  • Majority of sales are down.
  • Inventory and Months Supply show double digit increases on a year-over-year basis.



Wednesday, March 21, 2007

Crashachusetts Existing Home Sales: February 2007

So, it appears that last month’s optimistic market “rebound” sentiment was short lived.

As I had noted last month, the Northeast had experienced exceptionally warm weather in January most likely resulting in an increase in the number of days suitable for home sales when compared to an average January.

This inevitably resulted in a bump up in residential real estate activity, noticeably affecting indicators from home sales to residential construction permits.

The weather in February, on the other hand, was far more typical for winter in the Northeast with a few snow storms and lots of bitter cold days pushing single family homes sales 12.2% below January’s results and holding reasonably flat compared to the February 2006 results.

These results become even more interesting when you consider that the February’s slower sales came even as the median home price declined 4.4% from January and 4.1% as compared to February 2006.

Additionally, although February registered a 17% decrease to inventory of residential properties (single family and condos combined… unfortunately MAR seems to no longer report the inventory and supply statistics separately) as compared to February 2006, there has been a 15% increase to the number of months supply since January indicating again that the sales pace is slowing.

In fact, the average number of “days on the market” now stands at 148 days compared to 115 days for February 2006.

It now appears that the Spring market may present a pretty ugly spectacle as I believe that inventory levels may significantly exceed last years results.

It appeared to me, at least anecdotally, that an unusually large number of listings were pulled from the market during the October-November timeframe, far more that I had witnessed in the fall of 2005.

In a matter of days, the number of listings had been more than halved in virtually every town inside 128.

Those listings have yet to resurface and, although this is the typical pattern seen during this time of year, I believe that, in the face of an uncertain housing market, sellers that got stuck with stale listings last year are attempting to time their listings to a greater extent than has been seen in past seasons.

Don’t forget to use the Inventory Tracking Tool If you would like to get a “bead” on inventory.

It’s still fairly basic, but now that I have nearly a years worth of data captured, Ill soon add some more advanced analytical functionality.

Finally, the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston recently released a paper titled “Understanding Foreclosures in Massachusetts” within which the authors discuss at length the sudden increase in foreclose rates seen recently.

Massachusetts has now exceeded New England’s average for foreclosure rates and is quickly closing in on the national average as well.

The paper attributes this increase to both an increase in the use of risky loan products as well as the decline of the housing market.

“Since the 1990s, products featuring changing monthly payments have grown increasingly popular. These can include adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs), where monthly interest rates and payments size are linked to some index, such as the prime rate; or products with features like “teaser rates” where initial interest rates are low, but are set to increase after fixed time periods. While some ARMs are structured to have only moderate shifts in monthly payments, some have dramatic increases, often occurring a fairly short time after origination.”

“The weakening housing market has likely played a strong role in the recent foreclosure increase. Since 2004, rates of housing price appreciation in Massachusetts and New England have slowed dramatically, and by some estimates, property values have declined.”

The following is one interesting chart (click for larger version) from the paper that shows how in 2003, when affordability really hit the wall, the percentage of market share of traditional fixed rate loans dropped nearly 15% from their 5 year average while prime ARMs and subprime products simultaneously picked up that 15% slack. This resulted in roughly 30% of all loans being either a prime ARM or subprime product.



As in months past, be on the lookout for the inflation adjusted charts produced by BostonBubble.com for an even more accurate "real" view of the current market trend.

February’s Key Statistics:

  • Single family sales declined 12.2% from January and increased 1.2% as compared to February 2006
  • Single family median price declined 4.4% from January and declined 4.1% as compared to February 2006
  • Condo sales declined 0.6% from January and increased 4.5% as compared to February 2006
  • Condo Median Price increased 0.7% from January and declined 1.8% as compared to February 2006
  • The number of months supply of residential properties stands at 12.3 months.
  • The “days on market” for residential properties stands at 148 days.

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

New Residential Construction Report: February 2007

Popularly reported as showing a “bounce back” to housing starts, today’s New Residential Construction Report continues to indicate significant weakness in the nations housing markets and for residential construction.

Although it’s a widely held belief that the best selling season is the spring, leading some to look for signs of strength later the year, it may be that this report is showing us the best numbers we are going to see for residential construction in 2007.

As Bob Toll recently recounted, the period between January and Presidents day weekend is considered the “hot” selling season in the new home market and by his account this year was a “bust”.

“Well the Spring selling season is over, it’s a misunderstanding that we have been unable to correct over the past 40 years. In the new home business, you start selling immediately after the holidays.. it increases in number and then there’s a pretty substantial jump right after the Super Bowl because ‘she’ hasn’t been able to get ‘him’ out of the seat to go and see the product on Sunday, which is our big day, then you continue to run-up from after the Super Bowl to Presidents Day weekend… That’s the peak of the market… We have had this substantial jump from the December sales into January, we had this substantial jump from January into February but that jump cam no where near on a per-community basis to what it’s been on an average over the past 10 years.”

Today’s report shows permits and starts down high double-digits both nationally and in every region with completions now accelerating to the downside as had been widely speculated.

In fact, the report shows that completions from January as well as on a year-over-year basis are now declining in every region with particularly steep declines as compared to February 2006.

Further significant declines from here on out would unequivocally indicate that the housing market has not yet stabilized.

Here are the statistics outlined in today’s report:

Housing Permits

Nationally

  • Single family housing permits down 3.1% from January, down 32.9% as compared to February 2006
Regionally

  • For the Northeast, single family housing down 23.8% from January, down 38.9% as compared to February 2006.
  • For the West, single family housing permits up 4% from January, down 30.0% as compared to February 2006.
  • For the Midwest, single family housing permits down 16.9% from January, down 43.2% as compared to February 2006.
  • For the South, single family housing permits up 1.4% from January, down 30.3% compared to February 2006.
Housing Starts

Nationally

  • Single family housing starts up 10.3% from January, down 32.7% as compared to February 2006.
Regionally

  • For the Northeast, single family housing starts down 26.0% from January, down 37.2% as compared to February 2006.
  • For the West, single family housing starts up 37.4% from January, down 35.9% as compared to February 2006.
  • For the Midwest, single family housing starts down 19.3% from January, down 52.3% as compared to February 2006.
  • For the South, single family housing starts up 16.4% from January, down 23.5% as compared to February 2006.
Housing Completions

Nationally

  • Single family housing completions down 11.3% from January, down 23.1% as compared to February 2006.
Regionally

  • For the Northeast, single family housing completions down 24.1% from January, down 16.4% as compared to February 2006.
  • For the West, single family housing completions down 10.9% from January, down 38.0% as compared to February 2006.
  • For the Midwest, single family housing completions down 20.4% from January, down 36.4% as compared to February 2006.
  • For the South, single family housing completions down 6.6% from January, down 11.5% as compared to February 2006.
Keep in mind that this particular report does NOT factor in the cancellations that have been widely reported to be occurring in new construction.

Sunday, March 18, 2007

Zero Down at Countrywide

A couple of weeks ago, when in the initial malaise of the sub-prime meltdown was just settling over the nation, Countrywide Financial appeared to scramble to take some action that might allay the fears of an increasingly volatile market.

Then came a widely publicized account of an “urgent” email which specified that Countrywide brokers were to no longer provide any 100% financing deals as of March 12.

"Please get in any deals over 95 LTV (loan-to-value) today!... Countrywide BC will no longer be offering any 100 LTV products as of Monday, March 12."

At first glance, this was a fairly positive development for the company as most would easily agree that lending first time home buyers 100% of their purchase price was probably a bit too risky let alone lending it to buyers with sketchy credit histories.

But still, it seemed a bit light on substance given that home buyers, even ones with sub-prime credit quality or low to no verified income, could still borrow 95% of the purchase price of their home, not to mention that there was never an official follow up release from the company substantiating the changes.

Either way, the traditional media ran with the news of the changes and fact or fiction, company stunt or legitimate development, it eventually made it's way onto CNBC and into the Wall Street Journal.

Then a few days ago, I managed to get my hands on a few Countrywide BC rate sheets dated March 12th as well as several underwriting matrices and was quickly able to arrive at the truth behind the reported changes.

First, although Countrywide may have limited the availability of their 100% LTV products, they did NOT eliminated them entirely.

In fact, 100% financing is still an option, allowing “full documentation” borrowers with credit scores of 620 or better to borrow up to $1 million using either a 100% or 80%-20% product.

Borrowers with credit scores as low as 580 can receive 95% financing allowing them to borrow up to $550,000 and even “no-doc” borrowers with credit scores of 640 or better are eligible for 95% LTV loans of up to $600,000.

Finally, Countrywide is still offering these loan products in the form of risky “interest only” option ARMs as well as continuing to serve borrowers who are “out of bankruptcy less than a year” as one of their ads had promoted.

All in all, I’d say not much has changed over at Countrywide and although their CEO Angelo Mozilo has gone to great lengths recently to assure the markets that they were operating in a sound manner, you would be hard pressed to tell that from their underwriting guidelines.

So, was this a surprise?

Truthfully, given the state of affairs that has been unfolding in the last month, I was a bit surprised… that is, until I read the following press release titled “Countrywide Home Loans Assures Homeowners and Home Buyers That They Still Have Many Mortgage Loan Choices” published late Friday evening.

Here is the most pertinent excerpt:

"We want to assure homeowners that there is still an extensive selection of mortgage loans to suit a multitude of personal and financial circumstances," said Tom Hunt, managing director of Countrywide Home Loans. "We recognize it's been widely reported that some major lenders, like Countrywide, no longer offer 100% financing. In fact, we have made changes to certain subprime and other special mortgage programs, but we have not eliminated 100% financing. We still offer one of the widest selections of low- and no-downpayment options to qualified customers, including those with less-than-perfect credit."

So, it appears that Mozilo may have summed it up best when he told Maria Bartiromo of CNBC the following:

“There’s been a rush to judgment, an overreaction, a baby out with the bathwater… “

Friday, March 16, 2007

Dancing with Toll

Yesterday, Toll Brothers executives were out in force, stumping simultaneously at two separate investor conferences.

First, there was the UBS US Home Building and Building Products Conference which featured several panels of home builder and product COOs and CFOs speaking about their respective companies as well as the outlook for the housing market.

In somewhat of a reversal of prior statements made by Bob Toll, Fred Cooper, Senior Vice President of Toll Brothers suggested the following regarding the effect of the sub-prime mortgage market had on housing demand:

“In 2004 2005 suddenly you had a ratcheting up of demand … so you had home price increases that were very rapid. As it turns out, in retrospect, a bunch of that home price increases were being fueled by speculators and I expect when the dust settles its going to turn out that a lot of the speculators were being fueled by the sub-prime mortgage market because they would be able to control five or six homes at a time without having to put up much capital.”

When asked about the credit quality of Toll Brothers buyers, Copper responded:

“Our buyers typically borrow just a little bit North of 70% of the purchase price of their homes so they’re not really overstretching. I would say 1% to 2% of our buyers use sub-prime and they generally use it for a bridge.. so it really wasn’t a big factor in our buyers buying ability. ”

Formally, Bob Toll made statements downplaying the effects that sub-prime mortgage lending had on their sales, suggesting that Toll Brothers buyers generally aren’t sub-prime buyers although he did note that there were quite a few investors buying Toll Brothers homes during the housing run-up.

Possibly the reality is somewhere in the middle whereby those who bought Toll Brothers homes for their primary residence generally used prime or Alt-A funding but speculating investors used sub-prime loans as Cooper suggested.

Cooper later makes the following statements:

“To say that we were wrong in 2004 2005… I don’t think we were wrong, we went from $400 million in profits to $800 million in profits and I don’t think that we would have wanted to forego those… Well I think what we missed was, I think we misjudged how impactful the speculators were.”

Listen to the entire presentation and Q&A here with Fred Cooper here.

Simultaneously, Robert Toll, CEO of Toll Brothers addressed Citigroup's Small & Mid-Cap Conference where stated that “housing is in a considerable slump”.

“Housing is a market of sub-markets and really shouldn’t be spoken about in general. Some markets are knocking them dead right now but their few and far between. Most of the markets are having a difficult time. The primary reason is the oversupply left by speculators and investors who got caught up in the mania of the price increases that were brought to the market by the extra demand created by the speculators and investors.”

Toll then goes on to play out a strange fictional scenario to demonstrate that in some markets, Toll is actually attempting to prove to buyers, with a little tough love, that there really is more demand than they think.

“somebody will come to the office and say ‘Ill take it but I need $10,000 more in incentives’… we’ll say ‘no’ and they’ll say ‘well I’m very sorry’ and they leave. Then they come back next week.. ‘how we doing…’ and we say ‘well I’m very sorry we’re doing well but we’ve had a two thousand dollar price increase and we are still maintaining the same incentives’ but we have posted a price increase because we want to show the market that we have more demand than the market believes we have and then that person will buy.”

Later, when asked to elaborate on these selective price increases during this spring selling season Toll offered this telling analysis:

“Well the Spring selling season is over, it’s a misunderstanding that we have been unable to correct over the past 40 years. In the new home business, you start selling immediately after the holidays.. it increases in number and then there’s a pretty substantial jump right after the Super Bowl because ‘she’ hasn’t been able to get ‘him’ out of the seat to go and see the product on Sunday, which is our big day, then you continue to run-up from after the Super Bowl to Presidents Day weekend… That’s the peak of the market… We have had this substantial jump from the December sales into January, we had this substantial jump from January into February but that jump cam no where near on a per-community basis to what it’s been on an average over the past 10 years.”

“As a matter of fact, it was probably as bad in traffic as a half, which is terribly down, now this is on average… the Spring selling season, or the prime selling season is pretty much a bust on a per-community basis.”

“When you stepped back and looked at it [it was] no where near where it should have been if you were looking at an average of the last 10 years.”

Then Toll goes on at length about speculators and the sub-prime market:

“By the way, speculative investors have not left the market entirely. There are still speculator investors that are now circling the market as the buzzards would on the carcass because prices have gone so far down on standing inventory that investor speculators are doing anything they can to try and get an additional incentive on that property and to buy it with as little as possible which was made possible by the idiocy of the sub-prime market until very recently. But it’s not done yet.”

“Sub-prime originators will struggle to continue to deliver sub-prime product because if they can’t they’re out of business, and before they go out of business they are just going to continue as hard as they can to be able to produce no-doc loans 100% financing… speculators eat this up.”

In a funny conclusion, Toll delivers another dancing anecdote:

“I remember in 1974 literally having to dance on top of the desk of the Third Federal CEO Mr. Greenberg who said if I got up and danced on his desk he would give me three mortgages so that I could take them and sell homes. Those were tough times… We may get there… I hope we don’t but we’re certainly not there right now.”

Listen to the entire presentation and Q&A here with Bob Toll here.