Homeowners Continue Shift Away from Cash-Out Refinancing

Homeowners who refinanced their homes during the fourth
quarter of 2011
either refinanced for about the same amount or actually brought
cash to the table according Freddie Mac. 
Fewer than 15 percent of those who refinanced during the quarter
increased their loan amount by 5 percent or more.  This is the lowest percentage of “cash-out”
borrowers in the 26 years that Freddie has been tracking the statistics.  During those 26 years covering 1985 to 2010
the average percentage of cash-out borrowers was 46 percent.

Thirty-seven percent of refinancing homeowners took out new
loans of approximately the same size as the old loan but nearly half (49
percent) actually brought cash to the table, reducing the amount of the new
loan to a median ratio of .74 of the old loan. 
The percentage of “cash-in” borrowers is also a 26-year record.

The fourth quarter figures are a stark contrast to the
pattern of refinancing during the last years of the housing boom.   During
eight consecutive quarters (Q4 of 2005 to Q3 of 2007) cash-out loans exceeded
80 percent of all refinancing and in none of those quarters did more than 8
percent of homeowners reduce the size of their mortgages when refinancing.

Borrowers who refinanced achieved a new interest rate about
1.4 percentage points lower than their old mortgage, a 26 percent improvement.  These borrowers will save a median of $2,700
during the first year if they have a $200,000 loan.

The 15 percent who did cash out took an estimated $5.5
billion in net equity out of their homes, representing 3.0 percent of the total
refinanced.  This was down from $5.6
billion and 3.7 percent in the third quarter. 
Adjusted for inflation this was the lowest level since the third quarter
of 1995.  During the peak period for
cash-out refinancing, the second quarter of 2006, homeowners cashed out $83.7
billion through refinancing, 31.1 percent of the total value of all transactions.   

Freddie Mac said that the mortgages refinanced had been in
place for a median of four years and the underlying collateral had decreased in
value by a median of 4 percent during that time.  The Freddie Mac House Price Index shows about
a 23 percent decline in its U.S. series during that four year period.  Thus, Freddie Mac says, “Borrowers who refinanced in
the fourth quarter owned homes that had held their value better than the
average home, or may reflect value-enhancing improvements that owners had made
to their homes during the intervening years.” 
This statement does not seem to recognize the possibility these
borrowers had been able to refinance solely because their homes had held value
and thus self-selected their loans for analysis.   

…(read more)

Forward this article via email:  Send a copy of this story to someone you know that may want to read it.

Refinancing Continues to Drive Application Volume

The
Mortgage Bankers Association’s (MBA) Weekly Mortgage Applications Survey
reported that mortgage applications as measured by its Market Composite Index
were down 2.9 percent on a seasonally adjusted basis during the week ended
January 27 but increased 9.0 percent from the previous week on an unadjusted
basis.

The
seasonally adjusted Purchase Index was down 1.7 percent while it increased 17.1
percent on an unadjusted basis from the week ended January 20 and was 4.3
percent lower than during the same week in 2011.  The Refinance Index decreased 3.6 percent
from the previous week.

All
of the four week moving averages were higher for the week.  The seasonally adjusted Market Index rose
4.11 percent, the seasonally adjusted Purchase Index was up 2.48 percent and
the Refinance Index increased 4.22 percent.

Applications for
refinancing represented 80.0 percent of all applications, down from 81.3
percent the previous week.  Applications
for adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) had a 5.6 percent market share compared to
5.3 percent a week earlier.

Refinancing
applications in December increased in every U.S. state according to MBA and,
despite multiple holidays only 12 states had fewer purchase applications than
in November.  In Connecticut refinancing
applications increased 80.1 percent from November and Maine saw a 30.8 percent
increase in applications for home purchase mortgages.

Purchase Index vs 30 Yr Fixed

Click Here to View the Purchase Applications Chart

Refinance Index vs 30 Yr Fixed

Click Here to View the Refinance Applications Chart

Rates fell for all
fixed rate mortgages (FRM) compared to the previous week.  The average contract interest rate for
30-year conforming FRM (balances under $417,500) decreased to 4.09 percent with
0.41 point from 4.11 with 0.47 point. Rates for jumbo mortgages (those with
balances over $417,500) decreased from 4.39 percent to 4.33 percent while
points increased from 0.40 to 0.41.  This
is the lowest rate for the 30-year jumbo mortgages since MBA started tracking
them one year ago. 

FHA backed 30-year
FRM rates decreased one basis point to 3.96 percent with points increasing to
0.61 from 0.57.  Rates for the 15-year
FRM were down from 3.40 percent with 0.40 point to 3.36 percent with 0.41
point.  The effective rate of all of the
mortgage products listed above also decreased.

The sole rate increase was for the 5/1 ARM which increased on average to 2.94 percent with 0.39 point
from 2.91 percent with 0.41 point.  The
effective rate also increased. 

Follow what drives changes in mortgage rate each day with Mortgage Rate Watch from MND.

All rates quoted
are for 80 percent loan to value loans and points include the origination fee.

Michael
Fratantoni, MBA’s Vice President of Research and Economics said of the week’s
results, “The Federal Reserve surprised the market last week by indicating
that short-term rates were likely to stay at their current low-levels until the
end of 2014.  Longer-term treasury rates dropped in response, and mortgage
rates for the week were down slightly as a result.  Although total application volume dropped on
an adjusted basis relative to last week, refinance volume remains high, with
survey participants reporting that the expanded Home Affordable Refinance
Program (HARP) contributed to roughly 10 percent of their refinance
activity.”

MBA’s weekly
survey covers over 75 percent of all U.S. retail residential mortgage
applications, and has been conducted since 1990.  Respondents include
mortgage bankers, commercial banks and thrifts.  Base period and value for
all indexes is March 16, 1990=100.

…(read more)

Forward this article via email:  Send a copy of this story to someone you know that may want to read it.

FHFA Answers Conflict of Interest Charges against Freddie Mac

The
Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) issued a statement late Monday refuting a
story
from ProPublic and NPR
that a complicated investment strategy utilized by Freddie Mac had influenced
it to discourage refinancing of some of its mortgages.  FHFA confirmed that the investments using
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations (CMOs) exist but said they did not impact
refinancing decisions and that their use has ended. (the NPR Story)

Freddie Mac’s charter calls for
it to make home loans more accessible, both to purchase and refinance their
homes but the ProPublica story, written by Jesse
Eisinger (ProPublica) and Chris Arnold (NPR) charged that the CMO trades “give Freddie a powerful incentive to do
the opposite
, highlighting a conflict of interest at the heart of the company.
In addition to being an instrument of government policy dedicated to making
home loans more accessible, Freddie also has giant investment portfolios and
could lose substantial amounts of money if too many borrowers refinance.”

Here,
in a nutshell, is what the story (we are quoting from an “updated” version)
says Freddie has been doing.  

Freddie
creates a security (MBS) backed by mortgages it guarantees which was divided
into two parts.  The larger portion, backed
by principal, was fairly low risk, paid a low return and was sold to investors.  The smaller portion, backed by interest
payments on the mortgages, was riskier, and paid a higher return determined by
the interest rates on the underlying loans. 
This portion, called an inverse floater, was retained by Freddie Mac.

In
2010 and 2011 Freddie Mac’s purchase (retention) of these inverse floaters rose
dramatically, from a total of 12 purchased in 2008 and 2009 to 29.  Most of the mortgages backing these floaters had
interest rates of 6.5 to 7 percent.

In
structuring these transactions, Freddie Mac sells off most of the value of the
MBS but does not reduce its risk because it still guarantees the underlying
mortgages and must pay the entire value in the case of default.  The floaters, stripped of the real value of
the underlying principal, are also now harder and possibly more expensive to
sell, and as Freddie gets paid the difference between the interest rates on the
loans and the current interest rate, if rates rise, the value of the floaters
falls. 

While
Freddie, under its agreement with the Treasury Department, has reduced the size
of its portfolio by 6 percent between 2010 and 2011, “that $43 billion drop in
the portfolio overstates the risk reduction because the company retained risk
through the inverse floaters
.”

Since
the real value of the floater is the high rate of interest being paid by the
mortgagee, if large numbers pay off their loans the floater loses value.  Thus, the article charges, Freddie has tried
to deter prospective refinancers by tightening its underwriting guidelines and
raising prices.  It cites, as its sole
example of tightened standards that in October 2010 the company changed a rule
that had prohibited financing for persons who had engaged in some short sales
to prohibiting financing for persons who had engaged in any short sale, but it
also quotes critics who charge that the Home Affordable Refinance Program
(HARP) could be reaching “millions more people if Fannie (Mae) and Freddie
implemented the program more effectively.”

It
has discouraged refinancing by raising fees. 
During Thanksgiving week in 2010, the article contends, Freddie quietly
announced it was raising post-settlement delivery fees.  In November 2011, FHFA announced that the
GSEs were eliminating or reducing some fees but the Federal Reserve said that “more
might be done.”

If
Freddie Mac has limited refinancing, the article says, it also affected the whole
economy which might benefit from billions of dollars of discretionary income generated
through lower mortgage payments.  Refinancing
might also reduce foreclosures and limit the losses the GSEs suffer through defaults
of their guaranteed loans.

The
authors say there is no evidence that decisions about trades and decisions
about refinancing were coordinated.  “The
company is a key gatekeeper for home loans but says its traders are “walled
off” from the officials who have restricted homeowners from taking advantage of
historically low interest rates by imposing higher fees and new rules.”

ProPublica/NPR says that the
floater trades “raise questions about the FHFA’s oversight of Fannie and
Freddie” as a regulator but, as conservator it also acts as the board of
directors and shareholders and has emphasized that its main goal is to limit
taxpayer losses.  This has frustrated the
administration because FHFA has made preserving the companies’ assets a
priority over helping homeowners.  The
President tried to replace acting director Edward J. DeMarco, but Congress
refused to confirm his nominee. 

The
authors conclude by saying that FHFA knew about the inverse floater trades
before they were approached about the story but officials declined to comment on whether the
FHFA knew about them as Freddie was conducting them or whether the FHFA had
explicitly approved them.”

The
FHFA statement
said that Freddie Mac has historically used CMOs as a tool to
manage its retained portfolio and to address issues associated with security
performance.  The inverse floaters were
used to finance mortgages sold to Freddie through its cash window and to sell
mortgages out of its portfolio “in response to market demand and to shrink its
own portfolio.”  The inverse floater
essentially leaves Freddie with a portion of the risk exposure it would have
had if it had kept the entire mortgage on its balance sheet and also results in
a more complex financing structure that requires specialized risk management
processes.  (Full FHFA Statement)

The
agency said that for several reasons Freddie’s retention of inverse floaters ended in
2011 and only $5 billion is held in the company’s $650 billion retained
portfolio.  Later that year FHFA staff
identified concerns about the floaters and the company agreed that these
transactions would not resume pending completing of the agency examination.

These
investments FHFA said did not have any impact on the recent changes to
HARP.  In evaluating changes, FHFA
specifically directed both Freddie and Fannie not to consider changes in their
own investment income in the HARP evaluation process and now that the HARP
changes are in place the refinance process is between borrowers and loan
originators and servicers, not Freddie Mac.

…(read more)

Forward this article via email:  Send a copy of this story to someone you know that may want to read it.

Investor Cash Adding Downward Pressure on Home Prices

Cash buyers, principally investors, may
be putting downward pressure on home prices according to the Campbell/Inside
Mortgage Finance Housing Pulse Tracking Survey released Monday.  The survey found that investors with cash in
hand are able to offer something that homeowners dependent on mortgage
financing cannot, a guaranteed sale with a quick closing timeline.  This seems to offset the desirability of a
higher bid with a mortgage contingency.   

The
Housing Pulse survey found that the trade-off between price and speed is
particularly true with offers on distressed properties because the lenders and
servicers liquidating the properties generally prefer transactions that can
settle within 30 days.  The Campbell
report states, “While investor bids may not be the
first offers accepted, they often end up winning properties after other
homebuyers are eliminated because of mortgage approval or timeline problems.
Appraisals below the contracted price are a common reason for mortgage denials.
Most mortgage financing timelines are now in excess of 30 days.”

The
survey reports that 33.2 percent of home buyers in December were cash buyers,
up from 29.6 percent in December 2010. 
However, 74 percent of investors came to the table with cash.  This is especially striking as the survey
found that investors accounted for 22.8 percent of home purchases in December,
changed only slightly from 22.2 percent in November.  But, Campbell says, “Despite their relatively
small share among homebuyers, investors have an outsize effect on home prices because
their bids bring down market prices.”

Real estate agents responding to the
survey commented on the low bids they are seeing from investors.  Campbell quoted anecdotal information from a
few agents indicating they are seeing investor bids 10-20 percent below list
prices, but with quick closings.

The total share of distressed properties
in the housing market in December continued at a three-month moving average of
47.2 percent, the 24th consecutive month that the HousePulse
Distressed Property Index (DPI) was over 40 percent.

The Campbell/Inside Mortgage Finance
HousingPulse Tracking Survey involves approximately 2,500 real estate agents
nationwide each month and provides up-to-date intelligence on home sales and
mortgage usage patterns.

…(read more)

Forward this article via email:  Send a copy of this story to someone you know that may want to read it.

Momentum Seen for Home Improvement Spending

Spending
on home improvements and remodeling have shown signs of a rebound and the
Remodeling Futures Program at the Harvard Joint Center for Housing Studies is
projecting that sector of the economy will end 2012 on a positive note.

The
Joint Center produces the Leading Indicator of Remodeling Activity (LIRA) each
quarter.  It is designed to estimate
national homeowner spending on improvements for the current quarter and the
following three quarters.  The indicator, measured as an annual rate-of-change
of its components, provides a short-term outlook of homeowner remodeling
activity and is intended to help identify future turning points in the business
cycle of the home improvement industry.

The
figures from the most recent quarter, the fourth quarter of 2011, showed an
estimated four-quarter moving total of $112.4 billion in home improvement
spending compared to $113.8 billion in the third quarter.  This number is expected to dip further in the
first quarter of 2012, to $108.1 billion before starting to build at mid-year.

 “Sales of existing homes have been increasing
in recent months, offering more opportunities for home improvement projects,”
says Kermit Baker, director of the Remodeling Futures Program at the Joint
Center.  “As lending institutions become less fearful of the real estate
sector, financing will become more readily available to owners looking to
undertake remodeling.”

…(read more)

Forward this article via email:  Send a copy of this story to someone you know that may want to read it.