Mortgages Part VI – On Wall Street

How do mortgages make it to Wall Street anyway?

None of the following is essential to understanding mortgages from a personal finance standpoint, I just thought the details of mortgage securitization and mortgage bond trading and structuring would be interesting for some people.

sausage-casing

 

 

I sold mortgage bonds at Goldman for a few years in the early 2000s, so this sausage-making was my daily life.  Below, and in a subsequent post, I introduce some Wall Street concepts of the mortgage bond market.

  1. “When Issued” forward-trading of mortgage origination supply
  2. The packaging of homeowner loans into plain vanilla mortgage bonds
  3. The role of mortgage servicers and mortgage insurers in the bond market
  4. The demise of the big mortgage insurers in 2008
  5. The basics of mortgage trading – Prepayment risk!
  6. The basics of CMOs – mortgage derivative structuring
  7. Recent market moves must have caused a bloodbath on most Wall Street mortgage desks

In this post, I’m going to describe points 1 through 3.

Subsequent posts will describe points 4 through 7.

Conforming mortgages, the forward trade

In July 2013, Wall Street is now “forward trading” the October 2013 30-year 4.0% mortgage bonds.  October 2013 mortgages are part of the ‘When Issued” market, which is kind of like a grain farmer selling wheat on the commodities exchange 3 months before his harvest.  The farmer has an approximate idea of what yield he’ll get soon, but he may trade on a commodities exchange as his estimate changes, and as his sense for the attractiveness of prices changes.[1]

As the largest originator in the US, Well Fargo, in recent times, originates over $100 Billion in mortgages per quarter.

That means that on any day in July, and in fact for the next two months, mortgage traders at a big mortgage originator like Wells Fargo will call up their salesman at Goldman Sachs and ask Goldman to purchase some amount of their mortgages that will be originated by October 2013.

This “When Issued” mortgage market is just about the most liquid market in the world, and a $1 billion trade happens in seconds.

“Hello, this is Goldman,” said in a shouty but efficient voice

“Bid 750 Fannie 4s in October!” *

“22+” **

“Done” ***

“Done. GS buys $750 million Fannie 4s in October at 100-22+. Thanks for the trade.” Click.

****

[And…let’s translate:

* Wells Fargo today, in July 2013, is selling $750 million worth of future mortgage supply, which it will ultimately originate in October 2013.  Wells has an idea of its future October volume, however, because of the recent amount of customers who have locked in their current interest rates.  Many of these will end up as loans eligible for inclusion in a Fannie Mae securitization of similar mortgages.

**The mortgage salesman’s price is a fractional short-hand for how many 64ths Goldman will pay, in this case the 22+ means 22 and a half/32nds, or 45/64ths, or .703125.  This quote assume everyone knows on the buying and selling side knows the ‘handle,’ which is the main price, near par, that the bond will trade at during origination.  Newly issued mortgage bonds, like most newly issued bond generally, will trade somewhat near 100, but during periods of rapid interest rate changes this handle could be in the 95 to 105 range.  The Well Fargo trader and Goldman salesman will now ahead of time and won’t waste time reviewing this info, until after the trade is done.

***I agree to your price.  Not only that, but I agreed to your price so quickly (within a second or so) that you as broker are held to the price even if the market moves against you in the subsequent 10 seconds, or minutes, or days.  Goldman is now at risk as a future owner of $750 million in bonds

****Ok, I bought your bonds.

Now back to your regularly-scheduled description of mortgage origination and hedging.]

 

As Wells Fargo’s mortgage origination supply fluctuates between July and October, Wells may find itself needing to sell more ‘When Issued’ mortgages, or it may buy some back if its mortgage origination supply drops.  If mortgages expected to close in October instead actually close in November, then Wells may end up selling fewer mortgages in October and will instead do a trade so that it can deliver them in November.

Delivery, again, is like the futures market for wheat.[2]  The farmer, in this case Wells Fargo, anticipates his yield, and manages and hedges his future production by selling his ‘When Issued’ mortgages to Wall Street.

Delivery and Securitization

When October arrives, Wells Fargo delivers its $750 million in conforming[3] mortgages to Goldman.  Goldman may then choose to turn over this inventory of raw mortgages to Fannie Mae for securitization as a 4% Fannie Mae bond.

Securitization, the process by which a few thousand similar-vintage mortgages become a tradable bond, is the process that occurs to most home mortgages, further separating the home owner from the bank.  Not incidentally, it’s part of what makes our home mortgage rates so affordable.

Let’s say for simplicity’s sake that 2,000 different mortgage loans underlie the $750 million securitization, for an average loan balance of $375,000.  They will cluster in interest rate, to the 2,000 homeowners, around 4.375% to 4.5%, and all will generally have ‘closed’ in October 2013.  Astute readers will notice the extra 0.375% to 0.5% difference between the homeowner rate and the bond rate.  This difference largely gets paid in monthly fees to two different entities, the mortgage bond servicer, and the mortgage insurer.  I’ll next explain these two roles in the mortgage securitization market.

The plain-vanilla Mortgage bond

Once the 2,000 underlying mortgages get grouped together and assigned to a structure, and assigned to a mortgage servicer, and guaranteed by the mortgage insurer – Fannie Mae – it becomes a tradable bond.  The bond will get registered, with a Cusip and ISIN[4], loaded into Bloomberg for ease of tracking, and assigned a Fannie Mae number.  I’ll call this one “FN 8720331.”

Let’s say Goldman next sells this particular FN 8720331 to a Vanguard Fund dedicated to purchasing new mortgage bonds.  For the next few years, the Vanguard Fund will receive a combination of principal and interest from FN 8720331.

FN 8720331 is a AAA-rated, safe security.  Vanguard will earn 4% on its investment – I’m assuming that’s the coupon of the bond and that it was purchased at par – although the timing of payments is uncertain.  If interest rates decline from here, many of the 2,000 homeowners will refinance before 30 years, shortening the ‘average life’ of FN 8720331 to something in the 3 to 7 year range.  If instead interest rates rise – as seems more likely – homeowners may realize their 4.5% mortgages is a great rate, and they may not refinance for many years.  FN 8720331 may end up as a 10+ year average life bond.  Vanguard takes that risk, known as pre-payment risk.

 

Mortgage Servicer

The mortgage bond servicer earns its fee – a portion of the 0.375% to 0.5% difference between homeowner interest and bond-holder interest – making sure that the monthly mortgage payments of 2,000 homeowners get routed correctly through the structure that pays out monthly to Vanguard.  Our theoretical $750 million bond pays a monthly portion of the 4% annual interest plus principal on a mortgage bond.

Just as an individual mortgage paid by a homeowner slowly amortizes – decreases in principal amount owed each month – so too does the servicer of the mortgage bond disburse a portion of underlying principal to Vanguard every month.

This means that 3 years from now our $750 million bond will have partly amortized, let’s say to 70% of its original face amount.  Wall Street, if it trades this bond in the future, will still quote the original face amount, but mechanically only 0.7 of money will change hands at the time of a trade between Vanguard and its Wall Street broker.  In other words If you want to buy $100 million of this bond – and it still trades at par – you’ll only need to pay $70 million to Vanguard for it, since it trades at a ‘factor’ of 0.7.

Each month the factor gets a little smaller, as each month more of the mortgage bond principal gets paid down.  Toward the end of the life of a mortgage bond, you get to a sort of absurd factoring situation, in which only 10% of the bond face value is left, meaning a $1 million bond only has $100,000 principal left.

The mortgage servicer’s process is mostly automated, directing a precise amount toward the interest and principal, but the separation of the principal from the interest is essential.

If a homeowner pays off his mortgage early, or a foreclosure forces a sale of the home and repayment of a mortgage, that larger-than-expected payment shows up for Vanguard as a larger principal payment the next month.  The mortgage servicer pre-pays a portion of the principal, reducing the bond factor faster than the original amortization schedule.

For the purposes of creating mortgage derivatives – the technology that makes mortgage lending  even more efficient – the mortgage bond servicer separates the interest and principal amounts precisely before passing that on to bond holders.  I’ll explain a bit more of that further down, after introducing the role of the mortgage insurer.

 

Mortgage Insurer

The mortgage insurer, in my example Fannie Mae, also earns a fee every month (a portion of that 0.375% to 0.5%) for guaranteeing loan defaults and loan losses within the portfolio.  If a few of the 2,000 loans underlying the bond ‘go bad’ in any given month, Fannie Mae makes up the difference to bond holders owed a fixed amount, their 4% plus principal, every month.

Losses may occur because of delinquency – for example, some of the 2,000 homeowners stop paying on their mortgage for a few months.  Fannie Mae makes up the temporary shortfall in funds, guaranteeing no diminishment of payment.

Losses may also occur because of foreclosure – some of the 2,000 homeowners lose their home.  A special servicer will work to recover the proceeds of the foreclosure sale and apply that recovered money as an early payment of principal to Vanguard.

Under ordinary times, temporary losses from the 2,000 mortgages in non-payment remain relatively light.  At any given time only a few homeowners are delinquent on their payments, and many of these resume payment as the homeowners stabilize their finances, or the house gets sold.  In addition, bond holder losses due to foreclosure are typically not catastrophic, given that a 20% down-payment cushions bond holders from taking a loss, even when the house gets foreclosed upon.

Fannie Mae, and its close cousin Freddie Mac found this mortgage insurance business extremely profitable, for many years, leading up to the Crisis of 2008.

Under ordinary times, Fannie and Freddie were like insurance companies offering health insurance for 20-30 year-olds.  Hardly anyone got sick.  The occasional kid decided to ride a motorcycle and amassed huge fees after cracking his head open, but the majority of people never even saw a doctor.  Fannie and Freddie collected fees for doing next to nothing.

Obviously, this comfortable arrangement all changed in 2008.

 

 

 

See upcoming posts on:

The Mortgage Insurance Crisis of 2008

and

An introduction to Mortgage Derivatives

 

Also, see previous posts on Mortgages:

Part I – I refinanced my mortgage and today I’m a Golden God

Part II – Should I pay my mortgage early?

Part III – Why are 15-year mortgages cheaper than 30-year mortgages?

Part IV – What are Mortgage Points?  Are they good, bad or indifferent?

Part V – Is mortgage debt ‘good debt’ A dangerous drug?  Or Both?



[1] My managing editor (aka wife) points out that nobody outside of Wall Street or farmers knows what commodity futures are either, so my analogy is about as useful as a bicycle is to a fish.  But since that is an analogy everyone remembers from that U2 song, at least we have some pop culture reference in here somewhere.  Right then, so, we cool?

[2] Which, again, I can’t really explain if you still have no idea what I’m talking about.  But remember the orange juice plot line in Trading Places? That was the futures market for another commodity, recently explained here.  The price of the future bond fluctuates in anticipation of future supply and demand.  Like the most active part of the mortgage bond market.

[3] “Conforming” is distinguished from “Jumbo” mortgages by size.  In most cases the current conforming loan needs to be smaller than a set limit, currently somewhere between $417K and $625,500 depending on local real estate prices.

[4] All securities get assigned these registration numbers for tracking purposes.

Post read (9418) times.

Mortgages Part V – Good Debt? Dangerous Drug? Or Both?

Is mortgage debt good debt? A dangerous drug? Or both?

All debt acts like a drug.

Debt artificially changes your personal financial metabolism, accelerating personal consumption, and exaggerating investment losses and gains. 

Like any pharmaceutical, debt can be life-saving.  Without debt, you might have to wait an additional 10 years before you’ve saved up enough to own your home.  Without debt, you might not be able to eat, between now and better employment, 3 months from now.  Without debt, your further education plans never happen.  Without debt, you’d be stuck.  Debt can be awesome.

Like any pharmaceutical, debt can also be life-destroying.

A mortgage, because it’s the largest debt most of us can qualify for, is the ultimate drug.  Just because a mortgage can make the dream of home-ownership a reality, provide investment leverage, offer tax advantages and a hedge against inflation doesn’t make it any less dangerous for certain parts of the population.

Mortgages are powerful drugs and in any given group of people some of us will abuse the pharmaceutical.

i want a new drug

Please see related Mortgage posts:

Part I – I refinanced my mortgage and today I’m a Golden God

Part II – Should I pay my mortgage early?

Part III – Why are 15-year mortgages cheaper than 30-year mortgages?

Part IV – What are Mortgage Points?  Are they good, bad or indifferent?

Part VI – What happens at the Wall Street level to my mortgage?

Part VII – Introduction to Mortgage Derivatives

Part VIII – The Cause of the 2008 Crisis

Post read (9572) times.

On Mortgages Part IV – What are points? Are they Good, Bad, or Indifferent?

mortgage pointsMortgage banks will quote you a mortgage interest rate, with the option to pay more money upfront, in the form of ‘points,’ for a lower interest rate over the life of the loan.

The quick answer to “good, bad or indifferent?“

Mostly bad, for most people.

It’s possibly good or indifferent under very specific scenarios.

One ‘point’ on a mortgage means precisely 1% of the loan principal amount.  If you plan to take out a $200,000 mortgage, for example, and you pay 1 point upfront, you will pay exactly $2,000 additional at the mortgage closing, ie the time you take out the loan.

The effect on your interest rate of paying 1 point varies, but might be in the order of 1/4 of 1%.[1]  At today’s rates, you might lower your 15 year mortgage interest rate from 3.75% down to 3.5%, which could lower your monthly payment on a $200,000 15 year loan by about $25.

Let’s do 30-year mortgages now.[2]

The effect of paying 1 point on a 30-year mortgage, or $2,000, could also be in the order of 1/4 of 1%, and you could lower your 30-year mortgage interest rate from 4.75% to 4.5%, providing approximately $25 in monthly savings.  This is similar to the effect of points on a 15 year, except that a 30-year mortgage provides more time for monthly savings through the lowered interest rate.

The effect of paying 3 points on a 30-year mortgage, or $6,000, could be in the order of 5/8 of 1%, lowering your interest rate from 4.75% to 4.125%, providing approximately $75 in savings per month.

Does it make sense to pay points?

Not for most people.

The important thing to note, if you want to understand ‘points’ is that the monthly savings by paying points is a fraction of the upfront cost.

In the quotes above, after paying 1 point on a 15-year or 30-year mortgage, or 3 points on the 30-year mortgage, it will take 80 months to ‘break even.’  That’s $2000 upfront, divided by $25/month savings, or $6000 divided by $75/month savings.

Nearly 7 years to ‘break even’ on the optional points seeks like a long time to me.  I don’t think of myself as particularly prone to refinancing or moving, but as I review my own 15 year history of real estate home ownership & mortgages, I realize I’ve taken out 5 different mortgages.  No mortgage has lasted more than 4 years.  Granted, this is during a period of falling interest rates[3] and I’m young enough to have moved a few times in that period, but still, I think most people can’t know for sure that they’ll be in the same place, in the same mortgage, for the life of a mortgage.

Points make even less sense on a 15-year mortgage than they do for a 30-year, since there’s less opportunity to ride out the life of loan, past the 7.7 year break-even point.

Receiving, rather than paying, points

My mortgage lender[4] also offers the option to receive points, essentially payment toward closing costs, in exchange for a higher mortgage interest rate.  This process works the same way, except that you get $2,000 applied to lower your upfront costs but might agree for example to pay an additional 1/4 of 1%, raising the rate from 4.5% to 4.75%.

The breakeven calculation for ‘receiving points’ now would work the other way, in that you’re worse off the longer you stay in the same mortgage.  In the specific situation that you knew you only wanted to stay in a house for 3 years, it might make sense to lower your closing costs through receiving points.

The larger issue, however, is that if you knew you would stay in a house for only 3 years you probably should think twice about buying, since home ownership is risky and you could end up losing money in the short run.

In sum, on mortgage points: Don’t do it.  That’s all.

Tax deductibility of mortgage points

Ok, not quite all.  One additional factor about paying mortgage points is that they are tax deductible in the year you signed the loan.  Mortgage points are considered ‘pre-paid interest,’ which allows you to itemize them on your income taxes, just like other mortgage interest.  Now, that is all.

Please see related Mortgage posts:

 

Part I – I refinanced my mortgage and today I’m a Golden God

Part II – Should I pay my mortgage early?

Part III – Why are 15-year mortgages cheaper than 30-year mortgages?

Part V – Is mortgage debt ‘good debt’ A dangerous drug?  Or Both?

Part VI – What happens at the Wall Street level to my mortgage?



[1] There is not a precise formula for knowing in advance what effect paying points will have on the mortgage interest rate you’re quoted by a bank.  These examples are real, taken from mortgage quotes I’ve asked for at today’s rates, but you can expect they’ll vary somewhat within a range.  My goal here is to give a sense for likely ranges.

[2] I started with 15-year mortgage rates because, did I mention I refinanced into a 15-year mortgage?

[3] And that trend might have permanently reversed itself last month!

[4] USAA.com.  Guys, what’s it going to take for you to start advertising on bankers-anonymous.com?  Jeez.

Post read (13398) times.

Mortgages Part III – 15-year vs. 30-year Mortgages

Why are 15 year mortgages cheaper than 30 year mortgages?

The answer has to do with the interest-rate curve.  Contrary to what some may believe, the economy does not have one interest rate, but rather an infinite number of market-based rates, and dozens of important benchmark rates that determine the cost of money to different groups of borrowers.

interest rate curve

Mortgage interest rates respond to market-based interest rates, which may be seen as an upward-sloping curve on a graph, showing a Y-axis of % interest rates and an X-axis of different loan “terms” that represent the cost of money for time periods from 1 day, to 3 months to 30 years.

Generally, 15-year mortgage interest rates trade somewhat below 30-year rates, as lenders charge less to lend money for 15 years than 30 years.

For that matter, generally 3, 5, and 7 year mortgage rates are lower than 15-year or 30-year rates, which is where the ‘teaser’ rates for adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs) come from, before those interest rates float upwards at the end of a their 3, 5, and 7-year fixed period. 

Mortgage borrowers historically refinanced after the fixed period, making it statistically reasonable – in pre-2008 crisis times – to charge lower rates for 3, 5, and 7-year interest rates.  The fact that ARMs got combined in a toxic manner with sub-prime lending temporarily gave ARMs a bad name, although I think they’re great products, and I got a 5-year ARM in 2001 and a later a 3-year ARM in 2006.

Please see related Mortgage posts:

Part I – I refinanced my mortgage and today I’m a Golden God

Part II – Should I pay my mortgage early?

Part IV – What are Mortgage Points?  Are they good, bad or indifferent?

Part V – Is mortgage debt ‘good debt’ A dangerous drug?  Or Both?

Part VI – What happens at the Wall Street level to my mortgage?

Part VII – Introduction to Mortgage Derivatives

Part VIII – The Cause of the 2008 Crisis

 

Post read (11949) times.

Ask an Ex-Banker: Mortgages Part II – Should I Pay My Mortgage Early?

mortgage or invest

Dear Banker,

Most months we manage to cover our costs and have a little extra left over.  Sometimes I send the bank an extra $500 or $1,000 toward paying down our mortgage balance, which has another 21 years to go.  Once I sent close to $5,000.  Does this make sense?  — Manny T., Chicago, IL

Dear Manny,

Congratulations on doing the first-order hardest thing in personal finance – produce a monthly surplus in your household.  Wealth for you – while not inevitable – is made possible by this monthly surplus.

I appreciate your question whether you should – or anyone should — pay off a mortgage early with small interim payments of principal.

This perennial question generates as many strongly held opinions as there are mortgage holders.  There’s a thoughtful discussion to a similar question prompted on this personal finance site.

Like most interesting personal finance questions, the answer depends on a combination of personal psychology and finance math.[1]  Your own personal relative weighting of this combination may lead you to a different ‘correct’ answer than that of someone else.[2]

My own short answer is that while paying off your mortgage principal in small early increments does not make much sense from a pure financial math perspective, it can be the totally correct thing for certain psychological reasons.

Therefore, while I don’t advocate paying off a mortgage this way, I fully acknowledge that for people with a different psychological approach than me, the incremental payments make plenty of sense.

The math side of things – forward rates

First, it’s helpful to understand mechanically what happens when you make an extra, partial, principal payment on your mortgage.

After making your regular monthly payment, let’s say you send an additional $1,000 to the bank for principal.  The bank – actually the mortgage servicing company, but let’s not nitpick – applies that principal to the furthest-away-in-time mortgage payment.  In Manny’s case, his $1,000 payment gets applied toward a payment due 21 years from now.

In other words, Manny’s total mortgage principal gets reduced by $1,000, but not in any way that affects his current monthly mortgage costs.  He’s still obligated to make regular mortgage payments next month.[3]

You may have read, not entirely incorrectly, that when you pay debt principal early you get a guaranteed return on your money equal to your interest rate.  If you have a 6% mortgage, the conventional wisdom goes, you get a 6% “return on investment” when you pay off your mortgage.

But this is not entirely correct either, in purely financial math terms.

I’m going to assume Manny’s mortgage (obtained 9 years ago) has a 6% interest rate.  Since he’s eliminated by early payment the obligation to pay 6% interest on his borrowed money 21 years from now, we could more precisely say he’s invested the equivalent of $1,000 at “6% interest rate, 21 years forward.”

That may seem like an odd turn of phrase, except that the bond markets operate precisely this way – on today’s interest rate (you might call this the ‘spot’ rate) as well as tomorrow’s forward rates (incorporating the idea for example, of 1 year interest rates, one year from now, stated as “1 year rates, 1 year forward.”)

We don’t all have to be bond geeks to make good decisions about early mortgage payments, nor do we need to know exactly what I mean with this clarification, except you should understand the following:  We don’t know with very much precision what prevailing interest rates will be 21 years from now.  As a result, it’s not as obviously a ‘good trade’ to pay off your mortgage at 6%, precisely because it’s not actually true that you’re locking in a “6% return” on your money today.

21 years from now a 6% mortgage interest rate may be extraordinarily high or it may be extraordinarily low (I’m agnostic on the issue) but the imprecision around the question of forward rates makes it less obvious what your effective ‘return on investment’ really is, or what you should reasonably expect to earn on your money 21 years from now.

One major and obvious exception to my clarification on “forward rates” is that if you pay off your full mortgage balance early – entirely eliminating the need to make future monthly payments – then indeed you did lock in a 6% ‘return’ on your money.[4]

Inflation scenario as an illustration of forward rates

To return to the problem of unknown forward rates for a moment, it may be helpful to think of specific, possibly extreme, scenarios.  I’ve written before that the combination of home ownership with a mortgage can be a very powerful inflation hedge.  One way of seeing that is through the concept of forward rates.

A future high inflation rate can illustrate the ‘forward rates’ problem.  If future inflation, say 10 years from now, runs at an annual 15% rate, with prevailing mortgage interest rates around 18%, then it becomes obvious that locking in a 6% return on your money in the final years of your mortgage was not a good idea, from a personal financial math perspective.  In my example you might have earned 18% just leaving your money parked in a money market account.  That kind of future interest rate can show us why we should be less sure of ourselves that earning a 6% return by paying of a mortgage early is the right decision, from a purely mathematical perspective.

More on the math side of things – comparative rates of return

I have not yet addressed the most common financial math reason why people claim you should not pay off your mortgage in small early chunks of principal payment.

Specifically, many argue that you may be able to earn a higher return on your money “in the market” than you can by eliminating personal debt and locking in the rate of return of your mortgage’s interest rate.

This is possibly true, although it depends on specific scenarios, like the following:

·         If you are talking about credit card debt – with interest rates between 9% and 29.99% – it’s clear to me that paying off your debt offers a better return than you could reasonably expect from another investment “in the market.”

·         If instead you are talking about current prevailing mortgage rates – like my newly refinanced 15-year mortgage at 2.75%! – then I heartily agree that a better return is quite likely available “in the market” rather than through paying down personal debt.

·         If you are able to invest in a tax-advantaged 401K or IRA vehicle, and you have a sufficiently long time horizon to invest in risky assets, then you can stack the odds mightily in your favor to earn a better return “in the market” rather than paying down debt.[5] 

The Psychological approach – Arguing against myself

So I’ve made the case that locking in a specific return on your money – by paying down mortgage debt – is not as clear-cut as it first appears, from a purely finance-math perspective.

However, I do think the psychological aspect of making early mortgage payments should not be forgotten.  We are all humans,[6] responding irrationally to myriad inputs.  For many of us, money left on a monthly basis in the checking account gets spent, so the key to not spending is to not leave extra money lying around.

If Manny’s realistic choice every month is between sending $1,000 to the bank to pay his mortgage early or instead – like many of us – to spend $150 more on Amazon Prime downloads, $300 on jewels in Farmville and $273 on One Direction concert tickets, leaving just a $277 surplus at the end of the month, then the choice is clearer. 

All the possible market returns in the world cannot undo the simple fact that paying off debt guarantees an incremental increase in net worth.  If you can’t stop yourself from spending your surplus – and this really comes down to the psychological imperative: “know thyself” – then paying off the mortgage in small extra increments makes total, perfect, unassailable sense.

And then there’s risk tolerance

In addition, there’s the “know thyself” imperative applied to risk tolerance. 

Investing money in the market – instead of paying down debt – makes an increase in net worth possible, even likely, but has no guarantee.  If you hate losing any amount of money ever, then by all means pay down all of your debts before investing in anything risky.

Earning a 6% return by paying off your mortgage[7] early may sound much better than shooting for a possible 10% compound annual return but with a possibility of a 25% sudden loss in any given year.

Few investments in the long run are worth 3AM insomnia.  A fully paid-off mortgage may do more for encouraging restful sleep than all the Posturepedic  mattresses in the world.

Please see related posts:

On Mortgages Part I – I Am a Golden God

Part III – 15 yr vs. 30 yr mortgages

Part IV – What are Mortgage Points?  Are they good, bad or indifferent?

Part V – Is mortgage debt ‘good debt’ A dangerous drug?  Or Both?

Part VI – What happens at the Wall Street level to my mortgage?


[1] My bond sales mentor memorably told me once that bond sales consists of 5% bond math and 95% child psychology.  Personal finance strikes me as a similar deal, although probably even more weighted toward the psychology part of the spectrum.

[2] And since I’m always looking for an excuse to quote Jack Handey, let’s review this gem: “Instead of having ‘answers’ on a math test, they should just call them ‘impressions,’ and it you got a different ‘impression,’ so what, can’t we all be brothers?”

[3] I’m assuming for the purposes of this example that Manny has sent the money to the bank to be applied to principal since that’s how his question is phrased, rather than specifying something like ”I’m paying the next 3 months early.”  Presumably that’s also possible, but non germane to the question.

[4] At this point further math geeks will point out that the tax-deductibility of mortgage interest means that your effective interest rate is probably closer to the 4% than 6% rate, making your effective ‘return on investment’ lower than it seems.

[5] As always, if you can get an employer match for 401K contributions then that use of money trumps everything except paying off high interest-rate credit card debt.

[6] All of us, that is, except for my Rihanna-bot, who takes care of me in my old age, on my hovercraft.  She’s not human, just human-like.

[7] Yes, closer to 4% after taxes, and yes, actually “6% 21 years forward.”

Post read (70704) times.

Busting the Rating Agency

Frat Party

Yo everybody 5-0! 5-0!  The cops are here!

The US Justice Department filed a lawsuit yesterday against Standard & Poors, for its role in over-rating mortgage bonds, CDOs, and other securities in the years 2004 to 2007, securities which later proved to be weapons of mass financial destruction – the initial catalysts of the Great Credit Crunch.

When I read the story this morning, I suffered an involuntary eye-roll, the type I discourage in my daughters.

If a fraud was committed in those years, the rating agencies, frankly, are not the prime suspects here.

If the Wall Street mortgage bond market was the greatest financial frat party of all time, in the years 2002 to 2008, the rating agencies were the freshman pledges.  We needed them for continuity, and because they provided a reason to host a party.  But look, nobody really respected them.  They did what Wall Street told them.[1]

But then the party went horribly awry.  Somehow the upperclassmen frat brothers are way too smart to still be at the scene.

Now, with the frat house furniture stolen, the neighbor’s cat shaved and duct-taped, the Dean’s house toilet-papered, and the entire kitchen and basement burned black, the police have shown up and seized all the stupid pledges they found passed out in the back garden.

Yes, the pledges were at the party.  And yes, they kind of knew it could all go wrong somehow,[2] but not really.  They weren’t really in on it.  They didn’t have the upside that the Wall Street firms had.  They were just trying to appeal to the big frat brothers, who might someday invite them to be part of the inner circle.[3]

So, I rolled my eyes this morning because the cops can definitely bust Standard & Poors, but it begs the question of “Why?”



[1] Who paid their fees?  Oh, Wall Street firms did?  ‘nuff said.

[2] The US Justice Department has damning emails from S&P employees saying things like 1. ““Let’s hope we are all wealthy and retired by the time this house of card falters.” And 2. ““We rate every deal. It could be structured by cows and we would rate it.”  Hey guys?  I know you have that personal opinion, but seriously, never write that shit down.

[3] Michael Lewis makes the great point in The Big Short that the rating agency folks generally didn’t have the educational pedigree of the Wall Street in-crowd, but many hoped one day to join the firms themselves.  This “next-job” focus often leads to conflicted professional behavior and may help explain why the rating agencies acted like pledges at the frat party.

 

Post read (6632) times.