RSS Twitter

Archive for January, 2011

Thursday, January 20th, 2011

Kroll Bond Rating is capping its second day of work since launching an official marketing campaign yesterday. Eric Williamson, a residential mortgage-backed securities analyst at the firm, is already anticipating some activity on the private-label side.

"We expect some RMBS transactions over the course of the year, both on newer collateral and vintage collateral," he said.

Surveillance and intelligence entrepreneur Jules Kroll founded Kroll Bond Rating, with an aim of taking market share from other credit rating agencies Moody’s Investors Service, Standard & Poor’s and Fitch Ratings.

When asked in May 2010 for more clarity, he responded to Fox Business "We need to pick the spots where the incumbents have had the greatest harm to their credibility and that's mortgage-backed securities of a commercial and residential nature,” he said.

So far, the agency is proving a draw, Williamson said. "We've received a number of inquiries and we are getting more as we are getting out there in front of investors, bankers and issuers," he added.

The company has so far received two mandates, but neither is for MBS. The private-label RMBS market is largely inactive at the moment. But Williamson said progress is being made at reopening the market for this structured finance product.

A Kroll rated RMBS, for example, will include greater levels of due diligence, more post-issue surveillance and a two-way dialogue with investors.

Another development is that Kroll’s rating agency requires issuers to pay for the rating up front, to avoid any potential conflict on the rating outcome. Kroll will also rely less on predictive modeling, in favor of real-time performance.

These selling points are necessary, Williamson said, in order to please the buy-side.

"Ultimately a rating agency serves market investors," he said. "It is imperative."

Write to Jacob Gaffney.

Follow him on Twitter @JacobGaffney.

Thursday, January 20th, 2011

There are now two new files on my desk.

Wednesday, HousingWire posted four stories covering the Mortgage Bankers Association meeting in Washington, D.C.

The final article focused on the potential for much higher interest rates should the mortgage industry decide to do away with its self-created electronic tracking service, Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, or MERS.

Another revolved around a group of protesters organized by the AFL-CIO who interrupted the proceedings.

Both are earning the reporter who covered the conference, Jon Prior, equal parts praise and equal parts scathing criticism.

HousingWire's readers, it appears, are polarized into two, distinct sides of which neither is likely to concede much ground.

As Jon's editor, it is my responsibility to review his work and determine if proponents and detractors alike use arguments that hold water.

The most heated e-mails generally tend to be illogical. In one case, an e-mail associates Jon with terrorism and suggests that his time would be better occupied in prison. The author then points Jon to another website to support his assertion.

To imprison a journalist based on his or her published writing is a clear violation of their First Amendment rights. Not that we charge that this commentary is un-American, but it is a common theme in today's letters.

Another such letter also suggests the reporter be "charged with making terroristic threats against the United States and the states individually and imprisoned, not coddled and pandered to."

In this case, I can offer a clear assurance that Jon Prior is neither coddled, nor pandered to, in his day-to-day work responsibilities.

My personal favorite is an e-mail that offers a question seemingly unrelated to any of Jon's coverage of the MBA conference: "How dare you fight against affordable housing in an effort to keep prices high?"

Yet the simple math reasonably demonstrates that if foreclosures were allowed to reach the market and drive up supply, then demand would lower as well, and, as a consequence, so will prices.

The American Enterprise Institute, which seeks to reform the housing market, submitted Thursday a white paper to Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-Texas), vice chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, arguing for an end to the government-sponsored enterprises. Such a white paper would likely be well-received by the readers above.

After spending the eight years prior to this living and working in London, I was struck by the following passage:

"No other developed country provides anything that approaches the support for housing provided by the U.S. government, and many of these other systems produce higher homeownership rates, lower mortgage interest rates and fewer losses when defaults occur."

The statement from the white paper is true. But it also begs the argument that the system is primarily responsible for the impossible, dire housing situation in America.

The AEI wants an end to the GSEs, but without a viable alternative, via private-label securitization or workable covered bond legislation, mortgages would be pricier for borrowers without Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

That is the system, warts and all. And some readers view our stories as either supporting or opposing their views on housing finance.

Here's a thought: HousingWire editorial is actually a centered organization made up of both young (Jon) and older (me) staff members who have only ever worked in media, not the mortgage industry. Our goal, in our news stories, is to present you with up-to-date, exclusive and insightful analysis of the nation's housing market. We also give you a wide-range of opinions about the news in our "Voices" section.

That said, I am placing the above correspondence in a new file marked "Death to HousingWire!"

Letters that will instead be relegated to the other file, now marked "Long Live HousingWire!" will be from our readers who no doubt enjoy the self-aggrandizing title of this column.

These are the letters that are sometimes critical of what it is we do, but offer guidance, reassurance and an understanding of the way things work in mortgage finance and why.

And in the spirit of benevolence (and centrism), I would offer a sample of their words of encouragement, but I suspect both sets of readers are happiest just reading the vitriol.

Write to Jacob Gaffney.

Follow him on Twitter @JacobGaffney.

Thursday, January 20th, 2011

Most major metropolitan statistical areas experienced significant declines in home prices in November from a year earlier, according to the Radar Logic RPX composite price index released Thursday.

The report said November home prices fell in 22 of the 25 MSAs tracked by Radar Logic, with the largest declines in Atlanta (down 12.7%), Chicago (down 10.5%), Miami (down 9.3%) and Minneapolis (down 8.9%).

Homes prices for November remained essentially flat with October, increasing just 0.3%. Radar Logic said that upward swing will be short-lived.

"Based on the historical pattern of housing price changes in autumn and winter, we expect to see declines in the RPX composite resume when the December 2010 RPX values are published next month," the firm said.

On a month-over-month basis, home prices in Milwaukee, Jacksonville, New York and Seattle increased the most — up 5.6%, 3.6%, 2.2% and 1.9%, respectively.

The number of sales transactions between Oct. 18 and Nov. 18 fell 2.5%, marking the sixth consecutive month of declines. Transactions fell in 15 MSAs. Compared to 2009, transactions for the period plummeted 25.6% no longer aided by the government's homebuyer tax-incentive plan that expired in April, Radar Logic said.

"In fall 2009, the federal government bolstered housing demand and therefore sales by offering tax credits to homebuyers and reducing mortgage rates through the Fed's purchases of over $1.4 trillion in mortgage-backed securities and agency debt," the report said. "These initiatives were phased out by mid-2010, and transaction counts decline year-over-year in all 25 MSAs tracked by Radar Logic as a result."

Of the transactions that occurred during the month, 28% are attributable to "motivated sales," or foreclosure sales/auctions by financial institutions. This number is up 23% from one year prior, and is expected to increase in the coming months as Radar Logic predicts more homebuyers will strategically default and their homes will be repossessed by the banks.

Lender Processing Services reported in November nearly 2.2. million mortgage loans were 90 days or more delinquent.

Write to Christine Ricciardi.

Follow her on Twitter @HWnewbieCR.

Thursday, January 20th, 2011

After three months of marketplace testing, VantageScore 2.0 is now available to all financial institutions through the three major credit reporting agencies, Equifax, Experian and TransUnion.

VantageScore Solutions, which created the system, launched its original product VantageScore in March 2006. VantageScore 2.0 is an upgrade.

Barrett Burns, chief executive officer of VantageScore Solutions, sat down with HousingWire in November to discuss the enhancements to his firm's credit scoring valuation system. Burns said VantageScore 2.0 incorporates a better model for evaluating risk based on recent economic factors.

"We’ve seen tremendous turmoil in our economy coupled with significant changes in consumer debt management behavior since we launched more than four years ago, and lenders need to equip themselves with a credit score that incorporates those realities," Burns said then.

VantageScore 2.0 was created using data from 45 million credit files and built on a blend of consumer behaviors between two time periods, 2006-2008 and 2007-2009.

"This reduces the algorithm's sensitivity to highly volatile behavior that would be found in a single time frame," Burns said.

Each time frame contributes to 50% of each sample to assess a borrower's dependability to pay their debts.

"It’s always important to note what a credit score can and cannot do, and our model does not predict absolute risk or credit loss nor does it evaluate loan quality," Burns said. "The purpose of a credit score is to rank-order consumers on the likelihood of becoming 90 days or more past due on a credit obligation within two years from the time that the credit is granted."

Write to Christine Ricciardi.

Follow her on Twitter @HWnewbieCR.

Thursday, January 20th, 2011

The American Securitization Forum lauded the Securities and Exchange Commission on its new rules that are supposed to make asset-backed securities more transparent for investors.

The SEC approved a set of rules Thursday that requires issuers of ABS, which can sometimes be backed by mortgages, to disclose the history of the requests they received and repurchases they made on outstanding ABS. A second set of rules requires issuers to conduct a review of the assets underlying the securities.

"We commend the commission for seeking industry input regarding reforms in the asset-backed securities market and appreciate that the final rules approved today for repurchase disclosure address our suggestions to implement a quarterly filing requirement and allow issuers with no repurchase requests to suspend quarterly filing, but instead provide an annual filing," ASF Executive Director Tom Deutsch said in a statement.

The SEC permits issuers to abide by the new rule inhouse or hire third parties for the work, but that hired firm must consent to being named as an "expert" under federal securities laws.

Deutsche pointed out that if the final rules require third-party due-diligence providers to take expert liability of their work, that could hurt their ability to perform the due diligence for issuers.

"While the commission did announce steps attempting to alleviate this concern, it is unclear without seeing the final rules whether issuers will continue to be able to offer investors cost-effective due diligence by independent third parties," Deutsch said.

The Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) Managing Director Richard Dorfman also applauded the SEC but raised the same question Deutsche did about expert liability.

"We remain concerned, however, with the expert liability issues which we raised in our comments to the SEC in November," Dorfman said. "Naming a third party conducting a due diligence review an ‘expert’ creates a liability associated with that designation which could limit the availability of these types of services, effectively preventing and/or limiting access to the valuable due diligence provided by these types of firms."

Write to Jon Prior.

Follow him on Twitter: @JonAPrior

Thursday, January 20th, 2011

[Update 1: to clarify for all investment grade ratings not just triple-A.]

Resecuritizations within residential mortgage-backed securities can help investors, but until some credit concerns are addressed by issuers the bonds won't be garnering ratings from Moody's Investors Service.

Analysts said less than 1% of about 5,500 rated RMBS resecuritizations in the past two years warranted receiving investment-grade ratings. In 2009, Moody's rated 38 of these deals. Last year, just three of these deals came to market with an investment-grade rating from the agency.

Moody's said the volatility of potential losses weighs heavily on the credits and has prompted analysts to abstain from assigning many transactions a rating.

"Resecuritizations are more sensitive to certain payment scenarios than the underlying bonds," according to Linda Stesney, managing director at Moody's. "This sensitivity, together with the complexity of resecuritizations, results in a higher level of loss volatility."

This volatility has disqualified many deals from being rated, "rendering them uneconomical" for issuers, who subsequently decline ratings from the agency, according to Moody's.

Ambiguities in legal documents for the underlying bonds within the RMBS, foreclosure irregularities and bankruptcy risk also lead Moody's to withhold assigning a rating to many of these deals.

Still, analysts said resecuritizations can result in a strong rating for the bonds, when the deal is structured properly because they "bifurcate the risk embedded in low-rated bonds."

"When properly structured, the resecuritization senior bond could achieve a rating higher than the original underlying RMBS bond, however the majority of resecuritizations we've seen to date have had significant credit concerns," Stesney said. "We believe ratings on properly structured transactions can provide investors with a useful indication of the credit risk of their investments."

Write to Jason Philyaw.

Thursday, January 20th, 2011

Fannie Mae directed its mortgage servicers to delay scheduled foreclosure sales 45 days for borrowers that have been approved for assistance through the Hardest Hit Fund.

In June, the Obama administration approved $1.5 billion in foreclosure-prevention funding through programs set up by 19 state housing finance agencies (including the District of Columbia). In August, he signed off on another $600 million. The initiatives range from providing options for struggling, unemployed borrowers, as well as programs to address first and second liens, facilitate short sales and deeds-in-lieu of foreclosure, and assist in past-due payments.

The states hardest hit by the foreclosure crisis are Alabama, Arizona, California, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, North Carolina, Ohio, Oregon, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee and Washington, D.C.

Fannie released guidance Wednesday detailing how its servicers should handle those loans that qualify for the state assistance, and notified them that they should be ready to receive funds from the HFAs within 60 days after a program is launched.

Borrowers can receive unemployment assistance through one of the HFAs to help make their mortgage payments. Servicers are required to accept funds through a reinstatement program, if an HFA has one, which provides aid to borrowers for bringing the mortgage current or reduce the period of delinquency.

Fannie also addressed how the Hardest Hit Fund would affect loans permanently modified under the Home Affordable Modification Program.

"If a mortgage loan has been permanently modified under HAMP, a borrower who subsequently becomes unemployed may use an HHF Unemployment Program to make monthly mortgage payments," Fannie said in its guidance.

If the borrower remains unemployed after leaving the program, servicers must determine if the borrower can qualify for another one of Fannie's foreclosure prevention alternatives such as forbearance.

If the borrower was not in a permanent HAMP modification and found a job, the servicers were directed to consider the borrower for HAMP. But if a borrower redefaults out of a HAMP mod while unemployed, Fannie told its servicers to only evaluate them for Fannie's own program if the borrower finds a job.

Write to Jon Prior.

Follow him on Twitter: @JonAPrior

Thursday, January 20th, 2011

Federal securities fraud class-action cases rose in the second half of 2010, according to a report prepared by the Stanford Law School in cooperation with Cornerstone Research. The report shows 104 class-action cases alleging federal securities fraud were filed in the second half of the year, up from 72 filings in the first six months of the year.

For the full year, there were 176 filings, a 4.8% increase from 168 filings in 2009, but 9.7% below the annual average of 195 filings between 1997 and 2009.

The number of lawsuits alleging disclosure violations in merger-and-acquisition transactions increased to 40 filings in 2010 from seven in 2009, a six-fold increase.

“The sharp increase in federal litigation alleging disclosure violations in M&A transactions suggests that plaintiff lawyers are scrambling for new business as traditional fraud cases seem to be on the decline,” said Professor Joseph Grundfest, director of the Stanford Law School Securities Class Action Clearinghouse.

Filing activity also spiked against Chinese companies. In 2010, Chinese issuers were named in 12 filings, or 42.9% of all filings against foreign issuers. Filings against foreign issuers accounted for 15.9% of all filings, among the highest rate ever observed.

“The spike in litigation against Chinese issuers presents an interesting challenge for investors and regulators alike. It’s impossible to deny China’s ascending importance as a global market force, but tensions may well arise as some Chinese issuers struggle to conform to Western market norms and others might engage in outright fraud,” the report said.

President Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao met this week to discuss friction points, including economic and business issues.

Filings related to the credit crisis were sharply lower with just 13 such filings in 2010, a 76.4% decrease from 55 in 2009. Credit-crisis filings in 2010 represented just 7.4% of all filings compared with 32.7% in 2009.

Settlement rates have been lower for credit-crisis filings compared with noncredit-crisis filings, while the dismissal rates are similar between the two are similar.

Filings against financial companies also declined. Standard & Poor’s data show that 10.3% of S&P 500 companies in the financials sector were named defendants in a class action in 2010 compared with the 10-year historical average of 11.8%.

Write to Kerry Curry.

Follow her on Twitter @communicatorKLC.

Thursday, January 20th, 2011

U.S. regulators adopted new rules Thursday that seek to give investors better information before they decide to invest in asset-backed securities, a market that's still struggling to recover from the financial crisis.

One rule, approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission in a 5-0 vote, would give investors a way to scope out the track record of asset-backed security issuers, like Bank of America Corp. Specifically, the rules would let investors see how often the issuers were asked to buy back assets such as those linked to toxic mortgages because they didn't meet the underwriting criteria laid out in the prospectus.

The other rule, approved in a 3-2 vote, would require issuers to conduct a review of the assets underlying the securities and disclose it to investors. The rule would establish a minimum standard of review.

Thursday, January 20th, 2011

Mortgage rates for 30-year fixed-rate mortgages are back on the rise after two consecutive weeks of decline, according to Freddie Mac's Primary Mortgage Market Survey. The rate for that type of mortgage came in at 4.74% for the week ending Jan. 20.

The rate was 4.71% one week ago and 4.99% one year ago.

Despite the increase, rates on 15-year FRMs decreased from one week prior, down to 4.05% from 4.08%. The average origination point for this type of loan is currently 0.8. The rate for a 15-year FRM was 4.40% one year ago.

Short-term mortgage rates also showed mixed results last week. Five-year, Treasury-indexed hybrid adjustable rate mortgages dropped to 3.69% from 3.72% the week prior, while 1-year, Treasury-indexed ARMs increased two basis points to 3.25%. A year ago, the rates for these ARMs were 4.27% and 4.32%, respectively.

Freddie Mac Chief Economist Frank Nothaft commented that rates generally remained stable alongside reports that other economic factors were stable also.

Mortgage rates were little changed during the holiday week amid reports that inflation remains tame," Nothaft said. "Compared to December 2009, core consumer prices rose at a 0.8% rate, the smallest yearly increase since records began in 1958."

The Bankrate survey of large thrifts found similar results. The rate for a 30-year FRM increased one bps to 4.95%, the rate for a 15-year FRMs stayed flat at 4.29% and the rate for a 5-year ARM increased 2 bps to 3.86%.

Write to Christine Ricciardi.

Follow her on Twitter @HWnewbieCR.



Origination/Lending
Consumer sentiment climbed to an index level of 75 in January, the best reading of the Thomson Reuters/University of Michigan...

Read More »

Secondary Markets/Investors
The new federal task force led by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman sent subpoenas to the 11 largest financial...

Read More »