|
Feb. 9, 2011: Fannie & Freddie & Friday; mortgage jobs; heading for an ARM world?; investor's views of reps & warrants; Blackrock firing up non-agency biz
Rob Chrisman
If you
think that you're confused with the mortgage application
process, you're not alone. http://blogs.wsj.com/developments/2011/02/08/survey-mortgage-process-has-become-too-confusing/.
Some confusion and conjecturing may end on Friday, when the plan for Freddie and Fannie are presented.
"U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner will present
Congress with three options for reducing the government’s role
in the nation’s decades-old housing finance system." One can
only imagine how much chatter, lobbying, rumoring, posturing,
etc., there will be after the three plans are given to Congress,
and it will certainly take years to do anything. http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-02-09/fannie-mae-freddie-mac-could-be-phased-out-under-treasury-s-housing-plan.html.
Pundits suggest that the US will have an 8-10 year period to
reduce GSE portfolio. Look for a reduction in the maximum loan
amount in many areas to about $625,000, a gradual increase in
the guarantee/guarantor fees to reduce the total mortgage volume
insured by the agencies from 95% currently to something closer
to 50%, plans to bring in private money, and for the FHA program
to be used for low income borrowers only.
Some companies are
contracting, but there continue to be jobs out there. Envoy Mortgage is hiring Branch Managers and
MLO’s throughout Colorado, Minnesota, Missouri, Kansas, Iowa and
Illinois. Envoy offers both retail A and B models and has a
reputation for state of the art technology and execution, backed
by a highly service oriented operations staff. They are a 2
billion/year, completely digital mortgage banking platform with
plans and staff in place to double in the next two years.
Interested applicants should contact Kent Montavon at kmontavon@envoymortgage.com
or visit the website at www.envoymortgage.com.
One job that was not open for very long was Wells Fargo CFO's.
Wells Fargo unexpectedly replaced Howard Atkins, its chief
financial officer and who retired for "personal reasons” after
10 years with Wells, with Timothy Sloan, the chief
administrative officer.
Don't resist the
urge. From San Diego to Bangor, lenders are dusting
off the ARM manuals. The latest application figures from
the MBA show that ARM share increased to 5.9% from 5.5% of total
applications from the previous week. It doesn't seem like much,
but the number will only increase. Overall, apps last week
dropped 5.5%, with refi's down almost 8% and purchases down
about 1%. As a sign of the times, Optimal Blue
released Flagstar's Correspondent Jumbo 5/1
LIBOR ARM, and Jumbo 10/1 LIBOR ARM product lines.
Gee, is it "late breaking news" that the value of any company
that has large portion of its revenue from mortgage production
would suffer? http://blogs.forbes.com/greatspeculations/2011/02/08/wells-fargo-mortgage-origination-faces-headwinds/.
At some price someone will buy something, and at some yield it
makes sense to invest in mortgages. Perhaps giving Redwood Trust
a run for its money, a "Blackrock fund is set to
approve 10 lenders in its effort to expand into the home loan
market." The fund, set at $1 billion, will provide money for
non-agency mortgage originations, with the goal being to package
those loans into residential mortgage-backed securities. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/08/us-mortgages-blackrock-idUSTRE71749920110208
The California Public Employee's Retirement System (CALPERS),
which is the nation's largest, has sued a group of former Lehman Brothers executives and underwriters,
accusing them of misleading investors about the investment
bank’s condition as the financial system descended into crisis.
In a story from The Financial Times, it is "seeking to recover
losses it racked up on Lehman shares and bonds that it had
bought between June 2007 and September 2008, when the securities
firm filed for bankruptcy protection." CALPERS has also claimed
that Bank of America failed to disclose Merrill Lynch’s
financial condition before shareholders had voted on the
companies’ merger, and has also sued Moody’s Investors Service
for inaccurately assessing the risks of three structured
products in which the fund had invested.
Why is it so hard for
companies like Bank of America, or analysts and forecasters, to
put a firm number on repurchase liabilities due to rep &
warrant issues? Reps & warrants are of critical
importance in any relationship, and should be adhered to,
but on a global level there is indeed a huge uncertainty about
the final base case loss number due to repurchases, mostly due
to the lack of conviction on the many assumptions that go into
calculating the putback-related loss numbers. Because you find a
mouse in your house, does that mean it is the only one, or that
there are dozens of nests of them in the basement? Overall, from
a fundamental standpoint, rep and warranty repurchase losses are
sizable and cannot be ignored. However, many
analysts believe there are several reasons why rep &
warrant issues should not pose significant risks from a
systemic standpoint. One, the process to make many of
these repurchases happen is very complex, and in most cases, it
has either not begun or is in the early stages. This is
especially true for non-agencies. Two, the time lag in getting
access to loan files (even assuming that happens) and getting a
successful repurchase claim is very long and can involve a lot
of individual loan-specific back and forth between the parties
involved. The lag is currently big and could worsen dramatically
if claim volumes go up substantially. Three, even if losses are
high, they are likely to happen over the next several years, as
opposed to only 1-2 years, and that alone should lessen the
systemic effect. One cannot ignore the possibility of faster
negotiated settlements but would not expect originators to
embrace them unless they offer a much better deal than the other
option of “dragging it out.” The real near term risk seems to be
if significant negative headlines make their way into the
markets.
Speaking of the
markets, fixed-income securities got kicked in the
teeth (for lack of a better term) Tuesday, and it seemed
half my e-mails were rates changes for the worse. The
trend in interest rates is higher and that despite the
Fed’s efforts at keeping rates low, the bond market seems to be
adjusting to that concept. The two biggest reasons for the rise
in rates are stronger economic data and the US’s borrowing needs
to fund our enormous deficit. As I mentioned, with no data to
trade off of, we are following Friday’s markets.
It didn’t help rates
when the Fed’s Lacker was quoted saying that there has been a
marked improvement in the economic outlook since the U.S.
central bank launched its $600 billion bond buying program in
November, and saying the Fed should “quite seriously” evaluate
the pace and size of the program. He is stating the obvious, and
is not a voting member of the FOMC, but his words do carry some
weight. Analysts believe that an increase in
10-year yields to 3.75% could spark a wave of mortgage-related
selling, contributing to even higher rates. (As interest
rates rise, the duration - average maturity - of a mortgage
portfolio lengthens, and to offset this increase mortgage
investors typically sell Treasury securities from their
portfolios to return to their desired duration, creating a cycle
of higher rates.)
Supply is certainly
an issue. Yesterday’s 3-yr auction was viewed as “sloppy” with
low direct and indirect bidder participation. We have a $24
billion 10-yr auction to get through today, and some feel that
it might take a 3.75% yield to attract good demand. (Let’s not
forget the $16 billion in 30-yr bonds to be sold tomorrow.) With
no economic news, “Fed Speak” takes on more of an emphasis, and
we have two items today: Fed President Bernanke testifying
before the House Budget Committee at 10AM EST, and Atlanta Fed
President Lockhart (non-voter) speaks on the U.S. Economy this
evening. 10's hit a high yield of 3.77% overnight
before returning to Tuesday's closing levels.
Little Carol came
into the kitchen where her mother was making dinner. Her
birthday was coming up and she thought this was a good time to
tell her mother what she wanted.
"Mom, I want a bike
for my birthday."
Now, Little Carol was a bit of a troublemaker. She had gotten
into trouble at school and at home. Carol's mother asked her if
she thought she deserved to get a bike for her birthday. Little
Carol, of course, thought she did.
Carol's mother, being a Christian woman, wanted her to reflect
on her behavior over the last year, and write a letter to God
and tell him why she deserved a bike for her birthday. Little
Carol stomped up the steps to her room and sat down to write God
a letter.
LETTER 1:
Dear God:
I have been a very good girl this year and I would like a bike
for my birthday. I want a red one.
Your friend, Carol
Carol knew this wasn't true. She had not been a very good girl
this year, so she tore up the letter and started over.
LETTER 2:
Dear God:
This is your friend Carol. I have been a pretty good girl this
year, and I would like a red bike for my birthday.
Thank you, Carol
Carol knew this wasn't true either. She tore up the letter and
started again.
LETTER 3:
Dear God:
I know I haven't been a good girl this year. I am very sorry. I
will be a good girl if you just send me a red bike for my
birthday.
Thank you, Carol
Carol knew, even if it was true, this letter was not going to
get her a bike. By now, she was very upset. She went downstairs
and told her mother she wanted to go to church. Carol's mother
thought her plan had worked because Carol looked very sad.
Carol walked down the street to the church and up to the altar.
She looked around to see if anyone was there. She picked up a
statue of the Virgin Mary, slipped it under her jacket and ran
out of the church, down the street, into her house and up to her
room. She shut the door and sat down and wrote her letter to
God.
LETTER 4:
I GOT YOUR MAMA. IF YOU WANT TO SEE HER AGAIN, SEND THE BIKE.
Signed, YOU KNOW WHO
|