|
December 2005
The
Times They Are (About To Be) A Changin'
Oh
Say Can You OCC?...As you might know, the OCC (Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
and one of the chief banking system regulators) is set to hand
down guidelines regarding bank commercial and residential real
estate landing practices prior to year end. Given the fact
that interagency discussions about the initial draft of the
guidelines has really only just begun, don't be surprised if it's
somewhere in 1Q 2006 that final guideline commentary is made
public. Nonetheless, it's clear to us from recent comments
by the Comptroller himself that in terms of residential real
estate credit availability, the times they are about to be a
changin'. At least as far as the banks are concerned.
For the full version of his recent comments made on October 27th,
just follow the link.
Of course we couldn't help but excerpt a few lines here and there
from the text that will give you the feel for the raised level of
OCC concern regarding recent bank real estate lending practices.
It's absolutely clear to us that these folks want to see "new
era" residential mortgage lending products reigned in rather
meaningfully. And unless the US banks are desirous of
unwanted audit scrutiny, they're going to get in line with the
guidelines. Here are just a few unedited excerpts directly
from the text we linked above that, if you will, sets the tone in
terms of the regulatory level of concern.
|
"But it's at the top of the credit cycle where
stresses and weaknesses typically appear, so what we are
seeing today should not surprise anyone. With
liquidity pouring into the market, we would expect to see
increased competition for loan customers - and we are.
With competition intensifying, we would expect to see
underwriting standards easing - and we are. And we
would expect to find emerging concentrations in some loan
categories, such as commercial and residential real
estate. We are most definitely seeing that.
One of the striking findings in our 2005 underwriting
survey was the breadth and extent to which banks had
relaxed their lending standards.
"But while the trend toward increased credit risk is
visible across the portfolio and across the country, it
really stands out in two product areas. The first is
commercial real estate; the second, residential first
mortgages.
"Such concentrations by themselves would warrant
supervisory concern under any circumstances. But in
order to attract new business and sustain loan volume,
banks have made many compromises and concessions to
borrowers along the way, resulting in commercial real
estate credits with structural weaknesses that go beyond
discounted pricing.
"It seems like only yesterday when a 5/1 ARM was
considered a risky mortgage product. And it was -
but primarily for borrowers, who, in turn for lower
initial payments, assumed the interest rate risk that had
previously been borne by lenders. Today's
non-traditional mortgage products - interest-only, payment
option ARMs, no doc and low-doc, and piggyback mortgages,
to name the most prominent examples - are a different
species of product, with novel and potentially risky
features. I don't have to explain those features to
you, because these products have come to dominate the
mortgage originations that many of you look at every day.
"The dominance is increasingly reflected in the
numbers. By some estimates, interest-only products
constituted approximately 50 percent of all mortgage
originations last year. In the first half of 2005,
IOs started to decline in favor of payment-option ARMs,
which, according to one source, comprised half of new
mortgage originations. And roughly every other
mortgage these days is also a "piggyback" or
reduced documentation mortgage, which points to another
development that concerns us: the trend toward
"layering" of multiple risks."
|
The
charge of the OCC is to maintain a safe and sound banking system.
There's simply no question that in 2006, they will be carrying the
banner of real estate lending practice concern as they charge into
US banks from sea to shining sea. What will this do to the
character of mortgage lending in the US broadly? Of course
that remains to be seen. The OCC is concerned with the
banks. It's not the regulator of subprime lenders such as
New Century. After all, despite the fact that NEW's stock price is
down over 40% this year alone, New Century can go right on making
any kind of loans it chooses. Remember, as we've told you
many a time now, the largest source of mortgage credit creation in
the US over the last few years has been the asset backed markets.
The ABS markets themselves will ultimately dictate the terms of
mortgage lending to the non-bank players such as NEW. ABS
investors will react when delinquencies spike and perhaps defaults
begin to occur. But for now, what's important in watching
for change in the residential real estate markets is to watch all
sources of credit creation and how the character of that lending
changes ahead. For now, at least according to the OCC, the
US banking system is going to be taking one step back from
imbibing in "new age" mortgage lending practices of the
last three to five years. That's one small dent in the armor
of overall credit availability. One last comment.
We're absolutely convinced that private capital, which supports
the asset backed securities markets, will turn the credit spigot
off entirely if default trouble begins to brew in residential
mortgage lending land. Remember, as we've told you ad
nauseum over the last half decade at least, liquidity is inherently
a coward. There's always too much when it's least needed and
it's never around when it's needed most. (Admittedly, in the
greater picture of the moment, the FED may be changing this little
rule, at least for now.)
At
the moment, US banking system exposure to both commercial and
residential real estate is approximately 53% of total loans and
leases outstanding. If we include current HELOC (home equity
line of credit) exposure, which is not included in the chart
below, the number below moves to just over 60%. And if we
include bank investments in mortgage backed paper, the numbers
move even higher. No wonder the
folks at the OCC believe it's a topic of current interest.

It'll
Soon Shake Your Windows And Rattle Your Walls, For The Times They
Are A-Changin'...There
is absolutely no question at all that capital extraction from home
equity values has been meaningful to US consumers over at least
the last half decade. The super folks at Freddie Mac
recently revealed their cash out refi numbers for 3Q a while back. Again, we'll let the pictures to the talking.
As of the end of 3Q, the gang at Freddie was estimating that happy
US homeowners were currently on track to extract over $200 billion
in cash via only the cash-out refi mechanism in 2005 alone.
If indeed this comes to pass, it will be a record amount.
And this is despite the fact that refi activity in terms of
specific volume count is not particularly vibrant at the moment at
all. As you'll see in just a minute, this magnitude of cash
extraction is really a function of folks yanking ever larger
percentages of "equity" out of the current values of
their homes. After all, as the TV commercials and assorted
realtor community spokesfolks continue to remind us in the media,
anyone sitting on unused equity in their homes is simply not
maximizing investment opportunities, right? Apparently those
individuals doing refi's seem to be listening to that very
message.

As
we mentioned above, those undertaking refis at the moment are
taking ever larger percentage based "cash draws"
relative to new loan amounts. 2005 up to this point is
another record.

Perhaps
the most important chart of this little series lies directly
below. We've taken the numbers used to create the chart of
cash outs over the years in dollars (including the $200+ billion we mentioned for
2005) and looked at them as a percentage of the year over year
nominal dollar change in personal disposable income. If you
ask us, this is some meaningful stuff. Despite the fact that
we're well off the highs of a few years back, cash being extracted
from equity in residential real estate via the refi process alone continues to exceed 20% of the year over year change in disposable
personal income. Add in HELOC loans and it becomes a much
larger percentage number benchmarked against changes in DPI.
Just to keep ourselves honest, the 2005
disposable income number we used for the denominator of the value
in the chart below was indeed annualized. We've kept this an
apples to apples comparison across the board.

Again,
it's important to remember that in the numbers above, we're only
looking at official refi activity and the cash extracted there
from. What's important to keep in mind is that current HELOC
balances approximate $400 billion at the moment. You'll
remember that in the recent Greenspan co-authored Fed study on MEW
(mortgage equity withdrawal), he cited an annualized current
number of close to $600 billion. Greenspan was including
both refi and home equity line of credit activity in the study,
just as he should have. Let's put it this way, if the
coming OCC actions are the beginnings of greater mortgage credit
restrictions across the entire US financial system, the now newly
popular term (as a result of the Greenspan study) "mortgage
equity withdrawal" is about to take on a whole new meaning.
At Your Financial Service...Well,
as you know by know, when the recent FOMC minutes were released
last week prior to the Thanksgiving holiday, the mere intimation
that future FOMC statement wording might be changed gave the
equity and bond markets reason to gobble even louder than they
have been in the post October equity market low period to
date. Could it really be that the Fed is about to draw their
current rate tightening episode to a dramatic conclusion?
Well, after twelve measured blips up in the Fed Funds rate since
June of 2004, it's a darn good bet that we're closer to the end of
the ride than not on the pure basis of statistical chance, let
alone predicated on some change in statement wording. And as
"everyone" knows, once a Fed rate tightening cycle
reaches its cyclical conclusion, there's only one thing to do -
anticipate the next rate easing cycle, right? If you've been
watching the markets as of late, you already know that the
financial stocks have been one of the best sector performers since
mid-October. In other words, with the financials in the
lead, hasn't the market already been discounting the end of the
Fed rate tightening cycle at least a good month prior to the
announcement of a potential shift in forward Fed verbiage?
For now, we believe it's very important to keep a sharp eye on the
financial sector. Why? Any disappointment in the
expectations being built into financial sector stocks driven by
forward perceptions regarding either inflation or the end of the
monetary tightening cycle may be a
tell tale sign as to the mood of the broader market as we move
forward. The following are a few comments we hope are
helpful.
A
number of weeks back, the folks at the Fed released the Senior
Bank Loan Officer Survey for 4Q. We'd like to roll over just
a few tidbits of the report as the messages are broader than
perhaps for just what's happening with the banks. But before
getting started, we hope this portion of the discussion is
meaningful in that a number of the financial related equity
indices or benchmarks have recently broken out to new price highs
as of late. The NYK (the New York Financial Index), the XLF
(the financial sector ETF) and the BKX (the Philly Bank Index)
have all broken to new all time highs as the current rally has
progressed. Stepping back for just a second, financial
sector upward price breakouts have usually occurred most
prominently under two scenarios. First would be the
beginning of a new bull market not only for equities, but really
reflective of an improving and accelerating broader economy.
The second scenario of noticeably higher financial stock prices
would be in anticipation of a conclusion to a Fed tightening
cycle. Quite simplistically, what both discounting scenarios
have in common is a supposition that the financial sector as a
whole would be moving into an improved environment for lending
and/or better interest rates spreads (a steepening yield
curve). That's the big ticket. Let's say the Fed does
stop dead in its monetary tightening tracks perhaps in January of
next year or at the very least verbally tells us that the end is
near, so to speak. Does a better lending environment automatically
lie ahead based on a change in FOMC statement wording? Let's say the economy is about to reaccelerate
upward in '06. Does that mean consumers and corporations are
now ready to increase their borrowing on a simple rate of change
basis? Of course the reason we are asking these questions is
that during the recent recession of 2001 and into the years that
followed, credit expansion in the US never really turned down, as
it had exactly done in so many recessionary cycles past. So although the
historic knee jerk reaction of the equity markets to an end of a
Fed tightening cycle would be to buy the financials, is a much
better fundamental environment for lending volume or interest rate spreads
really what's to play out ahead in the current cycle? Or
will this time be different (as have been so many macro post
recessionary experiences of the last four years)? As you'll
see directly below, the financials look like they are bolting from
the starting blocks. The key question being, is this a
false-start? If so, we believe this has much broader
ramifications for the entirety of domestic financial markets. One item to notice is the chart of the XLF
(financial sector ETF). It's the only one where we can
capture volume data. And, as you'll see in the weekly chart,
over the past few years, volume has accelerated on sell offs and
retreated on advances. Not exactly a bull market pattern,
now is it?



Let's take a quick look at
recent rate of change patterns in broad credit expansion and where the banks are, or where they say they are, in the
lending officer survey in
terms of both consumer and corporate lending.
CONSUMER
LENDING
You know from our prior
discussions that the banks are top heavy in real estate loans at
the moment - both residential and commercial. These loans
have really been their bread and butter throughout this entire
current lending cycle (since the end of the last recession in
2001). In addition, home equity lines of credit have become big
business for the banks over the last two to three years. So
how do things look ahead? First, the chart below is the year
over year rate of change in household mortgage debt outstanding,
not inclusive of home equity lines. Although mortgage debt
through the second quarter of this year is still up 10% on a year
over year basis, it's now trending lower from cyclical growth rate
highs seen late last year. We won't have the numbers for 3Q
for a number of weeks, but we'll update you when we do.
As you know, this is where household borrowing excesses reside in
the current cycle. Can we really expect an all new upcycle
in lending to start so soon? Especially given the fact that
it sure looks like real estate prices and sales volume activity are cooling now as never
before in the current cycle, to mention nothing of the fact that
affordability indexes are pushing decade-plus lows and the OCC is
about to lower the boom on aggressive bank driven mortgage lending
practices?

As you know,
home equity lines are most often tied to the prime rate.
With a 300 basis point increase in the Fed Funds rate, and a
commensurate move up in prime (with more to come on December 13
and probably beyond), is it really any wonder the following chart
looks like it does? Again, without a large and immediate
drop in the Fed Funds rate and a coincident prime rate decline, can we really
expect another meaningful upcycle to get under way for HELOC lending as the
financial sector stocks seem to be broadly suggesting?

What about
straight out non-mortgage related consumer credit? It just so happens that in the
month of September, we saw the month over month outstanding card
debt in the US actually contract. A rare occurrence these
days. Certainly a part of the
reason as to why were lower car sales (non-revolving credit).
But as you'll see in the chart below, as of September, the year
over year rate of change in consumer credit (cards) was up only
3.6%. This is the lowest number experienced since 1993 (and
that was during an improving economy with credit use on the
upswing, not the downswing). Could it be that consumers are
coming to grips with the changes in the bankruptcy laws that are
now in place?

Moreover, in
the recent bank lending officer survey, the banks themselves are
telling us that they are less willing to make consumer loans at
the moment. And this is despite the fact that it
theoretically should be easier for them to ultimately collect
ahead with the recent change in the bankruptcy law.

The banks are
telling us that they are less willing to make consumer loans and
the real world is showing us that the rate of change in demand for
consumer lending is slowing. These are the facts. We
have to ask ourselves with these facts in front of us, just what
the heck are the financial stocks discounting as of late?
Again, is some change in FOMC statement wording about to reverse
growth rates of consumer credit trends in general? In our
minds, we've already done that over the last five years. An
encore performance at this point of significant credit expansion
in the face of continuing negative real wage growth and a stalling
in the housing market in the US is going to be a very tough act to
pull off. The Fed under the new Bernanke regime may indeed
stand ready to flood the markets with liquidity at any time, but
will consumers be ready to automatically accelerate their
borrowing of that "liquidity" so soon after gorging
themselves on cheap credit of the last half decade? That's
the issue plain and simple for the real economy. And at
least as of now, consumer credit trends are headed in the opposite
direction on a rate of change basis.
COMMERCIAL
LENDING
In the 4Q Fed bank lending survey,
the lending officers told us that they are seeing less demand for
both large company and small company demand for commercial loans.
The history of this portion of the survey lies below. (We're
only showing you the large company C&I lending survey
results. Trust us, the small company survey results and
history are virtually identical.)

Is
this really a drop off in commercial loan activity? Or is
this response more reflective of the fact that corporations in
general are flush with cash these days and don't really need to
borrow? Well, it just so happens that the directional year
over year rate of change in nonresidential fixed investment (a
broad proxy for corporate capital spending) very closely mirrors
what has been seen over time in terms of bank lending officer
responses to commercial lending demand in the Fed survey. In
other words, the banks are corroborating the rate of change
slowdown in corporate cap spending as of late.

So although the financial
stocks have been heading higher, perhaps on hopes that the Fed is
near done for this cycle or that the US economy is about to
improve in a big way, the facts of the real world also reflected
in the responses of bank lending officers tell a different story.
They tell a story of a rate of change decline in the demand for
credit both at the household and corporate level. Here's a
case where near term price volatility (in this case to the upside)
does not seem to be corresponding with current facts and
circumstances. Is this just a case of hedge and proprietary desk
trading activity on a short term basis reallocating speculative
investment capital to a sector
that has been underperforming for some time (the financial
sector)? Or is there
simply an incredible amount of pent up demand for additional credit
expansion in the US that is about to explode higher on the first
hint that the Fed may halt its assault on short term interest
rates? Which do you
think it is? Watch the financials. They have led the
current rally up. If this is a new bull market and the
beginning of a new and ever greater magnitude of credit expansion
stateside, the financials will continue to lead. They have
led in almost ever cyclical bull episode for equities over the
last two-plus decades. Alternatively, if the
financials turn tail and head south post the knee-jerk "Fed
is done" reaction rally, it's a good bet they're going to
have some broader sector company on the way back down. As
we've mentioned many a time, the financials continue as the
largest sector weight in the S&P by a good measure.
Don't take your eyes off of them as we round the turn into 2006.
|