• 09 Sep 2011 at 3:17 PM

Let’s Talk About My Mortgage For A Minute

Like many people, I like to believe that I prefer the government policies that I prefer because they’re a Good Thing for the world, not because they advance my self-interest. But as a relatively new homeowner, I break down a little on mortgages. Sure the mortgage interest deduction is a crazy and inefficient boondoggle, but it’s my crazy and inefficient boondoggle, and I don’t really want my apartment to lose (more) value if the deduction goes away.

Similarly, I’m pretty psyched about the plan that’s been kicking around, and that made it in vague form into the president’s jobs proposal, to allow people to refinance mortgages even if their houses are underwater or their income wouldn’t support the new payments. When I took out my mortgage I had a bit over one turn of leverage, as it were, which had my mortgage bankers congratulating me and asking if maybe I wanted to take a little more money just in case. Whereas now I make TXU look like a strong credit. Because um blogging pays less than banking you see. So I like the idea of being able to reduce my mortgage payment without actually having to try to convince a banker that it’s a good idea for me to keep this much debt. Even though I’m not entirely convinced that it’s good for the world.

Others are also skeptical. The Congressional Budget Office did a rough-cut analysis of a version of the plan, which is mildly critical. The CBO sums up the tradeoffs as follows:

A well-designed and well-executed large-scale refinancing program with relatively broad eligibility criteria would have benefits both for borrowers with above-market interest rate mortgages and for the enterprises providing the credit guarantee on those same loans. Those benefits would come at a cost to those who invested in the MBSs backed by the loans. Some of that cost would be borne by the federal entities (the GSEs, the Federal Reserve, and the Treasury) that have amassed portfolios of those securities.

How would those investors lose money? Well, they’d get paid down at par – and their MBSs aren’t trading at par. Specifically they’re trading like this:

This shows the trading price, as a percent of par, of Fannie Mae 30-year mortgage backed securities with a coupon that’s about 150 basis points above the coupon of the 30-year Fannie Mae MBS that trades at par. So on a day where a 4.5% MBS trades at par, this shows the trading price of a 6.0% MBS. The number got close to 102 in January of 2009, but has gotten close to 108 this year. If you have a bond marked at 108 that gets paid down at par, you lose 8 points.

You can make moral arguments about this. Some dude told the FT:

“The study recognises the enormous losses private investors would suffer in a transfer of wealth to borrowers,” said Joshua Rosner, a housing finance expert and managing director at independent research firm Graham Fisher & Co. “While such a transfer would be acceptable to some in Washington … it would result in the unwillingness of investors to buy mortgage-backed securities without charging an exorbitant risk premium to compensate for the event the government does this regularly.”

On the other hand, Felix Salmon at Reuters says:

But what’s happening right now is that mortgage bonds are trading well above par just because investors are well aware that refis are hard to come by for many homeowners. They’re basically taking unfair advantage of the fact that homeowners are locked into above-market mortgage rates. If the value of their bonds came down towards the face value of the bonds, that would be a good thing. It’s not good when mortgage bonds trade well below par, but it’s not good when they trade well above par, either — it’s a sign of market failure. Remember, there would be no default involved here. So bondholders really couldn’t complain much.

Now this Joshua Rosner person has a theoretical point: if you eliminated all barriers to refinancing, refinancing would be more common, you could never see any principal appreciation on your MBS, and you’d have to charge more in interest to make up for the fact that your bonds can only lose value and never gain. So implementing this policy would drive up mortgage rates for everyone in the future.

On the other hand – there will still be barriers to refinancing. Barriers like personal laziness, fees (which the plan would sort of risk-normalize but not eliminate), etc. In other words, the barriers that you’d see in a normal economy. The barriers that the plan would try to eliminate are pretty specific to this economy, to wit (1) massive unemployment and (2) massive home value deterioration.

But the CBO’s chart actually lets you have sort of real, data-driven thoughts about these questions. And by “you” I don’t necessarily mean “me” – I know nothing about mortgage-bond math except that it involves copulas, and that those aren’t as sexy as they sound. I haven’t gotten to that section in the CFA materials yet. (Wait, is that actually a section?) But still, you can be a human and think about these things with rough numbers. Two things suggest themselves.

First, the 10-year data provides some benchmark for what refinancing risk is “supposed” to look like. In a normal economy, the free-refinance option flattens a 150bps coupon premium to just under 4 points of bond price. If it trades at 106, or 108, or whatever, in the midst of a once-in-a-generation recession, then those extra 2 or 4 points are probably *due to* that recession and are, as Salmon says, “a sign of market failure.”

A policy goal of getting these bonds back to the 104 area would help borrowers into efficient refis – while not crushing bondholders in a way that would reduce further extensions of credit. Future mortgage buyers would not say to themselves “every time rates drop, the government is going to screw me out of all my profit.” Rather, they’ll say to themselves “if rates drop 150bps, I’ll make about 4 points of capital appreciation, just like I would have in the really quite robust housing market of 2000-2005.” That’s presumably a target that you could manage toward if you wanted to, e.g. by optimizing how the refinance plan deals with fees, by adjusting the “market rate” on the new loans, and/or by means-testing the plan so that it helps people who might otherwise default more than it does wealthy interest-rate speculators.

Second, and again disclaiming any insight into mortgage math, I’m going to guess that a trading level of 104 means that a 150bps-overcouponed security is expected to refinance, on average – for some loose value of “average” – in a bit under 3 years, so you get to clip a little under 450bps of excess coupons. (Right? If your entire portfolio was one loan and everything happened with 100% probability, and you picked some reasonable discount rate, you’d earn about 4 points more in the next three years than you would on a par bond. Construct bell curves around that, etc.) A level of 106 means that it’s going to refinance, on average, in a bit over 4 years, so you get to clip a little over 600bps of excess coupons. 108 means close to six years.

On that very stupid basis, this suggests that mortgage bonds say something about expectations for the length of the recesssion. A 106 trading level suggests an extra year or so before the “typical” homeowner refinances a way-above-market mortgage. A 108 trading level suggests an extra 3 years. Put differently, these levels suggest that the market sees 1 to 3 years before employment and housing prices stabilize to the point where people start refinancing normally.

Of course there’s noise in the data, plus my math is not to be trusted. Some of the difference between normal times and now is not due to refinancing risk but just duration – a 4.5% coupon is a bigger premium to a 3% par bond than a 7% coupon is to a 5.5% par bond. But also, I suspect that speculation about potential refinancing relief is keeping premiums down. In other words, markets aren’t just trying to predict when people will go back to refinancing normally on their own – they’re baking in the probability that the government will be refinancing for them.

And even so mortgage bonds trade well above par, and well above historical levels. Which to me suggests that a broad refinancing plan would be much reason – either on a moral basis or an ex-ante-incentives basis – to shed tears for the owners of these bonds. A lot of whom are Fannie and Freddie anyway.

71 comments (hidden to protect delicate sensibilities)
Show all comments ↓

Comments (71)

  1. Posted by Guest | September 9, 2011 at 3:23 PM

    I take back all those kind things I said about you when you first started here. Jerk face.

  2. Posted by Nailz6 | September 9, 2011 at 3:24 PM

    This is actually more interesting than my job.

    – Chicago Back office

  3. Posted by Guest | September 9, 2011 at 3:27 PM

    I thought you said we were going to talk about your mortgage for a minute, not an hour

  4. Posted by guess | September 9, 2011 at 3:29 PM

    when does bess ever use the word "I" in her posts? just asking…..

  5. Posted by Guest | September 9, 2011 at 3:31 PM

    No wonder why Matt had to leave GS…

  6. Posted by Touch Base Later | September 9, 2011 at 3:32 PM

    your graphs are like your girlfriend's face – busted.

  7. Posted by TLDR | September 9, 2011 at 3:36 PM

    Can someone point me to the dancing pig section of the article?

  8. Posted by Mark | September 9, 2011 at 3:41 PM

    As long as my landlord passed his savings on to me I'm all for it. Otherwise, I would prefer the bondholders make a profit and pay tax on the interest they receive and let the taxpayer (me) keep his/her money instead of giving it to Fannie/Freddie. I'm tired of bailing out the housing industry. Lets bail something else out.

  9. Posted by 2_Small_2_Bail | September 9, 2011 at 3:42 PM

    I actually liked the Levine posts for a while, I will admit. But this is the second article in 2 days that has me thinking "why the fuck did I just read that?"

  10. Posted by Alt_EST | September 9, 2011 at 3:42 PM

    "When I took out my mortgage I had a bit over one turn of leverage…Whereas now I make TXU look like a strong credit. Because um blogging pays less than banking you see."

    Decreases in income have nothing to do with leverage, but would impact debt service coverage.

  11. Posted by Guestapo | September 9, 2011 at 3:42 PM

    I have The Handbook of Mortgage-Backed Securities on my desk but I really don't feel like taking the time to prove you wrong.

  12. Posted by pazzo83 | September 9, 2011 at 3:48 PM

    What do you guys think of my new place?

    – BAC MD, Jan 2012

  13. Posted by Backdoor_Bess | September 9, 2011 at 3:49 PM

    Is this a blog or a fucking thesis page?

  14. Posted by Guest | September 9, 2011 at 3:49 PM

    I solved the Gaussian Copula! Fuck you all!

    – Asshole quant reject

  15. Posted by NotMatt | September 9, 2011 at 3:52 PM

    Right, because nobody ever talks about leverage in terms of debt to cash flow. Nobody.

    Who let the European banker onto the site?

  16. Posted by Dr_Rosenrose | September 9, 2011 at 3:55 PM

    I have the Handbook for the Recently Deceased on my desk, and after reading all of this, I wish I was.

  17. Posted by Tommy Vu | September 9, 2011 at 3:59 PM

    Get a bigger place, Matt. Buy more Real Estate. HAVE SOME GUTS!

  18. Posted by pissed off boi | September 9, 2011 at 3:59 PM

    fuck the refinancing – lenders should just write off the part ofthe debt that is underwater in exchange for a piece of any future appreciation in equity. Better than an outright haircut for lenders, no moral hazard, and shnooks like me who bought modest homes and pay our bills won't feel like we're getting boned yet again to help deadbeats.

  19. Posted by Alt_EST | September 9, 2011 at 4:00 PM

    Ok, true story. But I'm talking about homeowners now, and Matt was referring to the leverage in his house on an A/L basis (the way most do when thinking about leverage and home ownership) but then went on to imply that his leverage got worse because he signed on with Bess. Ceterus paribus, taking a lower-paying job only drives drives down payment-to-income, though there is the second-derivative effect of Matt probably not making excess principal payments any longer and driving up the E part of that equation

  20. Posted by early_hominid | September 9, 2011 at 4:00 PM

    You think blogging pay is bad, try commenting.

  21. Posted by trojan_ | September 9, 2011 at 4:06 PM

    Matt's going Faulkner stream-of-consciousness

  22. Posted by NotMatt | September 9, 2011 at 4:07 PM

    I hate you for making me defend Matt, but he did use the word "turn" when describing his leverage. I tend to associate the concept of "turns" when talking about leverage with operating income/cash flow metrics (e.g. "three turns on senior debt") rather than LTV.

    Anyway, it's all good. Sorry for my snide tone.

  23. Posted by guest | September 9, 2011 at 4:11 PM

    amazing call. that shack pictured is definitely in yoknapatawpha county.

  24. Posted by Guest | September 9, 2011 at 4:12 PM

    I've taken dumps on the floors of much nicer places.

    – Lenny

  25. Posted by Blog Reader | September 9, 2011 at 4:33 PM

    If you finance guys are so smart, why's the country in such a financial disaster?

  26. Posted by 25th Hour Trader | September 9, 2011 at 4:35 PM

    So much for op-sec. I don't know how Levine got a fix on my fall back location but I'm not waiting around to find out. Time to pull pitch*.

    -Gumby

  27. Posted by NotApologizing | September 9, 2011 at 4:36 PM

    Are you one of the customers without a yacht? Examine your motives.

  28. Posted by wahoo | September 9, 2011 at 4:38 PM

    It's pretty nice.

    -Foghorn Leghorn

  29. Posted by Michael Keaton | September 9, 2011 at 4:49 PM

    That's "Diseased."
    –Beetle-Geiss

  30. Posted by Shy | September 9, 2011 at 4:50 PM

    Try lurking.
    — Shy

  31. Posted by Lazy Fare | September 9, 2011 at 5:25 PM

    Imagine Matt's leverage in a month!

    GS Pay > Blogging Pay > Mountainside Waffle Shack Pay

  32. Posted by guest | September 9, 2011 at 5:29 PM

    Hey look he has a chart too !

  33. Posted by Anonymous Real Man | September 10, 2011 at 7:02 PM

    "The cocoa is for cobblers." __(Okay, not especially relevant, I just felt like a random SNL/Baldwin reference might be mildly amusing. Bess … I've sent my resume….)

  34. Posted by urbanity | September 11, 2011 at 4:49 PM

    TL;DR

  35. Posted by ACDC | September 11, 2011 at 5:02 PM

    Nice pic of your AAA rated second home.

    Moody's

  36. Posted by Moar Capital | September 12, 2011 at 6:51 AM

    I'd love to write something hilarious here but what's the point, nobody is going to make it through and article that long and 40 comments.

  37. Posted by Guest | September 12, 2011 at 10:01 AM

    Is there a link for a Cliffnote version anywhere?

    – Guy who doused himself in gasoline and had a lit match in hand after the first two paragraphs

  38. Posted by RMBS_Trader | September 12, 2011 at 1:08 PM

    "Now this Joshua Rosner person has a theoretical point: if you eliminated all barriers to refinancing, refinancing would be more common, you could never see any principal appreciation on your MBS, and you’d have to charge more in interest to make up for the fact that your bonds can only lose value and never gain."

    Bond w/ short prepayment option <> floating rate bond

    – Myron Scholes

  39. Posted by bookmarking service | September 9, 2012 at 9:25 PM

    cDGhae Thanks a lot for the article post.Really thank you!

  40. Posted by sarti | September 11, 2012 at 1:31 PM

    Fantastic article post.Really looking forward to read more.

  41. Posted by kc plumber | September 13, 2012 at 10:39 AM

    Thanks for the post.Thanks Again. Really Great.

  42. Posted by Italy villa rentals | September 13, 2012 at 3:31 PM

    Gripping! I would like to listen to the experts` views on the subject!!…

  43. Posted by video traffic academy | September 14, 2012 at 1:14 AM

    I almost accidentally visited to this site, but stayed here for a long time. Stayed because everything was very interesting. Surely will share with all my friends!…

  44. Posted by internet marketing | September 14, 2012 at 4:34 AM

    I truly appreciate this post.Much thanks again. Want more.

  45. Posted by diamant | September 14, 2012 at 5:48 PM

    A big thank you for your article.Much thanks again. Awesome.

  46. Posted by nopal juice | September 16, 2012 at 3:55 AM

    I value the article.Thanks Again. Really Cool.

  47. Posted by lida ile zayiflama | September 17, 2012 at 1:10 PM

    I cannot thank you enough for the post.Really thank you! Great.

  48. Posted by Panerai Replica | September 17, 2012 at 4:17 PM

    Internet is written with the capital letter in a sentence, by the way. And hundredths are written not with a point but with a comma. This is according to the standard. And actually everything is very good..!

  49. Posted by Abu Dhabi | September 18, 2012 at 4:51 AM

    Thanks so much for the post.Really looking forward to read more. Great.

  50. Posted by TDAP Vaccine Side Effects | September 18, 2012 at 10:08 AM

    Major thankies for the article post.Thanks Again.

  51. Posted by Site 1001bonnesaffaires.com | September 18, 2012 at 6:25 PM

    Fantastic blog post.Really thank you!

  52. Posted by need fast cash | September 18, 2012 at 8:12 PM

    Thank you for your post.Thanks Again. Want more.

  53. Posted by deck awning | September 18, 2012 at 10:00 PM

    Im grateful for the blog article. Really Cool.

  54. Posted by stilettos | September 19, 2012 at 1:46 PM

    Awesome blog article.Thanks Again. Really Great.

  55. Posted by 1001bonnesaffaires.com | September 19, 2012 at 7:18 PM

    I really enjoy the blog post.Really looking forward to read more. Really Cool.

  56. Posted by Surgical Compression Socks Surrey BC | September 19, 2012 at 7:56 PM

    I appreciate you sharing this blog post.Really looking forward to read more. Much obliged.

  57. Posted by How to talk to girls | September 19, 2012 at 8:33 PM

    Thanks a lot for the article.Much thanks again. Much obliged.

  58. Posted by How to get a girl to like you | September 20, 2012 at 1:22 AM

    Appreciate you sharing, great blog post.Really looking forward to read more. Much obliged.

  59. Posted by affordable auto insurance | September 20, 2012 at 3:52 AM

    Looking forward to reading more. Great post.Really looking forward to read more. Fantastic.

  60. Posted by Foreclosed Michigan Lakefront Homes for sale | September 21, 2012 at 2:56 PM

    Thanks-a-mundo for the blog post.Much thanks again. Great.

  61. Posted by web hosting sites | September 22, 2012 at 1:28 PM

    Great post.Much thanks again. Awesome.

  62. Posted by consultancy | September 22, 2012 at 4:03 PM

    I think this is a real great blog.Really thank you! Much obliged.

  63. Posted by UK poker room | September 22, 2012 at 5:56 PM

    Author, keep doing in the same way..!

  64. Posted by creating website | September 23, 2012 at 10:32 AM

    This is one awesome post.Really looking forward to read more. Great.

  65. Posted by top porn search engine | September 23, 2012 at 11:31 PM

    Appreciate you sharing, great article.Really thank you! Really Great.

  66. Posted by kitchenfloors | September 24, 2012 at 11:50 AM

    I decided to help and sent a post to the social bookmarks. I hope to raise it in popularity!!…

  67. Posted by buy instagram followers | September 26, 2012 at 4:00 AM

    I loved your blog.Really looking forward to read more. Awesome.

  68. Posted by canvas art prints | September 26, 2012 at 5:19 AM

    Thank you for your blog post.Really thank you! Great.

  69. Posted by Commission Cash Generator review | September 26, 2012 at 11:35 AM

    Awesome article post.Much thanks again. Want more.

  70. Posted by karité | September 26, 2012 at 1:30 PM

    Thanks a lot for the blog post.Really looking forward to read more. Really Cool.

  71. Posted by click cash commissions review | September 27, 2012 at 7:36 PM

    I serched through the internet and got here. What a wonderful invention of the mankind. With the help of the network you communicate, learn, read !… That helped us to get acquainted!…