Connect with us

Opinion: Former Freddie Mac CEO lashes out at mortgage lenders

The former CEO of Freddie Mac penned an article that might be construed as an attack piece on mortgage originators.
The post Opinion: Former Freddie Mac…

Published

on

Don Layton, the former CEO of Freddie Mac recently penned what can only be described as an attack piece on mortgage originators from his seat as a fellow at the JCHS, Harvard’s Joint Center For Housing Studies. But what Mr. Layton has done is simple: perpetuate his ongoing disdain for the participants in the manufacturing of mortgage loans in the U.S. and, in the process, made some inaccurate assumptions as to causality.

The piece is titled, “The Policymaking Implications Of Record-High Mortgage Origination Profits During The Pandemic.” In it he describes mortgage originators as “middlemen” in the transaction between a consumer and the secondary market. His thesis seems to lean on his long-standing belief that the GSEs and the Ginnie Mae programs are all that matter in creating access to mortgage finance and that lenders are, essentially, greedy institutions that leveraged the actions of the Federal Reserve during the pandemic to maximize profits as opposed to passing through the full value of rate reductions to consumers. His disdain for mortgage originators clearly oozes through his words but skew his sensibilities in his published paper.

A bit of history

First, let’s be clear. It is true that margins widened enormously as a result of the actions of the Federal Reserve. In the peak of the pandemic, 30-year mortgage rates tumbled, bottoming out at around 2.25% for a well-qualified borrower. Volumes skyrocketed and overwhelmed an unprepared mortgage finance system that, just months earlier in 2019, thought it might be heading into higher rates and slower volumes.

In fact, if you look at the period just prior to the Fed’s COVID-19 reaction, refinance volume was far lower and then suddenly spiked upwards by more than 250% on a year-over-year basis. Lenders and the GSEs both bore the brunt of this impact.

In the beginning phase in early April 2020, the interest rate moves were so swift that many were worried that mortgage originators hedged pipelines might cause institutional failures as a result of margin calls. I would note that this liquidity concern could have been alleviated by actions from the GSEs themselves, including the very company with which Mr. Layton was once CEO. But they didn’t, and lenders quickly were forced to drain their liquidity to support these margin calls, something policymakers remain very concerned about on a go-forward basis.

This surge in volume left mortgage originators with limited options to manage consumer demand. Since denying applications in order to slow volume to a manageable level would have drawn outcries from housing activists and more and would be deemed illegal as well, they had to go to the only two options available.

Picture2

First, mortgage lenders tried to hire as rapidly as possible. The total capacity for the U.S. mortgage market pre-COVID-19 would allow for $1.5 to $2 trillion in volume. With the Fed’s extraordinary round of intervention, called Quantitative Easing (QE), the market volume doubled. 2020 and 2021 were back to back the two largest mortgage origination years in U.S. history. With 2003 being the only year previously to come close to that level.

A zero sum game

Hiring enough skilled capacity to manage the volume was a challenge. Since all lenders were trying to hire, it became a zero sum game that ultimately required lenders to both hire and train unskilled workers to become processors, closers, underwriters, quality control staff, and more. This was an impossibility to accomplish quickly amidst the rapid onslaught of volume.

The only other option to slow volume — pricing

The only other option lenders had, therefore, was to try to slow volume another way. And the one remaining valve to which they could turn was pricing. So, amidst the pandemic recession, with the historic levels of mortgage production and capacity limitations, lenders began raising rates or slowing the full recognition of the declines in order to keep service levels and customer expectations at bay.

Mr. Layton argues that these “middlemen” — the mortgage originators — somehow took advantage of Fed actions intentionally to manufacture excess profits. While it’s true that margins widened as pricing was used to tether volume levels, anyone in the mortgage business knows that this industry has no ability to collude in a joint effort to produce better returns.

If one wants evidence of that, just look at the inability to control mortgage origination pay scales. The mortgage industry is notoriously uncoordinated when it comes to market management. That usually serves as a benefit in a normal market as the competition among the multitude of mortgage bankers and mortgage brokers will typically drive rates to the lowest common denominator, often bringing margins to near break-even levels.

Clear distain for mortgage originators

What’s perhaps most concerning in this Layton treatise is his “middleman” language and clear disdain for mortgage originators, seeming to almost describe them as an impediment versus a critical access channel. Mr. Layton seems to fail to realize that as CEO of Freddie Mac, he and his successors had every opportunity to ease the process burdens on lenders that might have reduced some of the operational inefficiencies that established these timelines for the processing of a mortgage.

But most importantly, I think that Mr. Layton has missed the critical element. Far from being “middlemen,” without mortgage originators, the products of Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, and the Ginnie Mae programs would be nothing more than a set of dusty books on shelves.

Freddie Mac greatly benefits by three things

The reality is that the company he once ran — while critical — benefits greatly by three things. First, the GSEs do not bear the general and administration burden of having to manage the mortgage origination infrastructure of America’s mortgage market, which thus allows them to operate with just a few thousand employees.

Second, the GSEs are members of an exclusive club with only two members that consist of Fannie and Freddie. Legislation currently bars any new entrants to the model, thus essentially eliminating any real competition.

Third, all of the GSEs’ debt is guaranteed by the U.S. Government. The triple A status on agency MBS that results from this guaranty assures that agency (and GNMA) securities will trade ahead of almost all others in a global market, thus providing the GSEs a level of market advantage that does not exist in any form similar on the earth.

The crushing aftermath

One final point, just as mortgage lenders saw wider margins in these back-to-back historic $4 trillion years, the industry today is facing the crushing aftermath of that with a market facing an approximate $1.5 trillion decline in 2022.

Layoffs, margin compression, mergers and acquisitions, and more are beginning. When this cycle is over, the breadth of the industry will look vastly different than it does today. Freddie and Fannie; however, will look relatively the same, because they do not compete and are not saddled with all the expenses of manufacturing the mortgage. Mr. Layton’s former company can benefit from watching on the sidelines, concerned only with some counter-party risk that might come from some weakened companies.

Oh yes, by the way, Mr. Layton defends the 50 basis-point refi fee as warranted because of the pandemic, and one that was removed following a realization that impact would be less. That is a complete distortion of fact. Director Calabria imposed a fee on refinances simply because he also knew that he could widen GSE margins in this high-demand cycle. It had nothing to do with risk.

In fact, refinances lower risk to a mortgage portfolio. The fee only was removed following the termination of Calabria’s tenure. The incoming Director Sandra Thompson eliminated the fee.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing

My father always taught me, “a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.” His love for Shakespeare showing through, but a lesson for Mr. Layton, who over his tenure at Freddie Mac, openly showed disdain for mortgage insurance companies and now mortgage originators while failing to realize the privilege his company held and holds in the marketplace.

His assumptions about margin shifts amid market cycles; however, is the most concerning as this seat he holds at JCHS may have influence on others looking to take a bite out of a critical part of the mortgage finance system. And for that reason, it’s important to speak openly against his perspective.

David Stevens has held various positions in real estate finance, including serving as senior vice president of single family at Freddie Mac, executive vice president at Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, assistant secretary of Housing and FHA Commissioner, and CEO of the Mortgage Bankers Association.

This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of HousingWire’s editorial department and its owners.

To contact the author of this story:
Dave Stevens at dave@davidhstevens.com

To contact the editor responsible for this story:
Sarah Wheeler at sarah@hwmedia.com

The post Opinion: Former Freddie Mac CEO lashes out at mortgage lenders appeared first on HousingWire.

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Analyst reviews Apple stock price target amid challenges

Here’s what could happen to Apple shares next.

Published

on

They said it was bound to happen.

It was Jan. 11, 2024 when software giant Microsoft  (MSFT)  briefly passed Apple  (AAPL)  as the most valuable company in the world.

Microsoft's stock closed 0.5% higher, giving it a market valuation of $2.859 trillion. 

It rose as much as 2% during the session and the company was briefly worth $2.903 trillion. Apple closed 0.3% lower, giving the company a market capitalization of $2.886 trillion. 

"It was inevitable that Microsoft would overtake Apple since Microsoft is growing faster and has more to benefit from the generative AI revolution," D.A. Davidson analyst Gil Luria said at the time, according to Reuters.

The two tech titans have jostled for top spot over the years and Microsoft was ahead at last check, with a market cap of $3.085 trillion, compared with Apple's value of $2.684 trillion.

Analysts noted that Apple had been dealing with weakening demand, including for the iPhone, the company’s main source of revenue. 

Demand in China, a major market, has slumped as the country's economy makes a slow recovery from the pandemic and competition from Huawei.

Sales in China of Apple's iPhone fell by 24% in the first six weeks of 2024 compared with a year earlier, according to research firm Counterpoint, as the company contended with stiff competition from a resurgent Huawei "while getting squeezed in the middle on aggressive pricing from the likes of OPPO, vivo and Xiaomi," said senior Analyst Mengmeng Zhang.

“Although the iPhone 15 is a great device, it has no significant upgrades from the previous version, so consumers feel fine holding on to the older-generation iPhones for now," he said.

A man scrolling through Netflix on an Apple iPad Pro. Photo by Phil Barker/Future Publishing via Getty Images.

Future Publishing/Getty Images

Big plans for China

Counterpoint said that the first six weeks of 2023 saw abnormally high numbers with significant unit sales being deferred from December 2022 due to production issues.

Apple is planning to open its eighth store in Shanghai – and its 47th across China – on March 21.

Related: Tech News Now: OpenAI says Musk contract 'never existed', Xiaomi's EV, and more

The company also plans to expand its research centre in Shanghai to support all of its product lines and open a new lab in southern tech hub Shenzhen later this year, according to the South China Morning Post.

Meanwhile, over in Europe, Apple announced changes to comply with the European Union's Digital Markets Act (DMA), which went into effect last week, Reuters reported on March 12.

Beginning this spring, software developers operating in Europe will be able to distribute apps to EU customers directly from their own websites instead of through the App Store.

"To reflect the DMA’s changes, users in the EU can install apps from alternative app marketplaces in iOS 17.4 and later," Apple said on its website, referring to the software platform that runs iPhones and iPads. 

"Users will be able to download an alternative marketplace app from the marketplace developer’s website," the company said.

Apple has also said it will appeal a $2 billion EU antitrust fine for thwarting competition from Spotify  (SPOT)  and other music streaming rivals via restrictions on the App Store.

The company's shares have suffered amid all this upheaval, but some analysts still see good things in Apple's future.

Bank of America Securities confirmed its positive stance on Apple, maintaining a buy rating with a steady price target of $225, according to Investing.com

The firm's analysis highlighted Apple's pricing strategy evolution since the introduction of the first iPhone in 2007, with initial prices set at $499 for the 4GB model and $599 for the 8GB model.

BofA said that Apple has consistently launched new iPhone models, including the Pro/Pro Max versions, to target the premium market. 

Analyst says Apple selloff 'overdone'

Concurrently, prices for previous models are typically reduced by about $100 with each new release. 

This strategy, coupled with installment plans from Apple and carriers, has contributed to the iPhone's installed base reaching a record 1.2 billion in 2023, the firm said.

More Tech Stocks:

Apple has effectively shifted its sales mix toward higher-value units despite experiencing slower unit sales, BofA said.

This trend is expected to persist and could help mitigate potential unit sales weaknesses, particularly in China. 

BofA also noted Apple's dominance in the high-end market, maintaining a market share of over 90% in the $1,000 and above price band for the past three years.

The firm also cited the anticipation of a multi-year iPhone cycle propelled by next-generation AI technology, robust services growth, and the potential for margin expansion.

On Monday, Evercore ISI analysts said they believed that the sell-off in the iPhone maker’s shares may be “overdone.”

The firm said that investors' growing preference for AI-focused stocks like Nvidia  (NVDA)  has led to a reallocation of funds away from Apple. 

In addition, Evercore said concerns over weakening demand in China, where Apple may be losing market share in the smartphone segment, have affected investor sentiment.

And then ongoing regulatory issues continue to have an impact on investor confidence in the world's second-biggest company.

“We think the sell-off is rather overdone, while we suspect there is strong valuation support at current levels to down 10%, there are three distinct drivers that could unlock upside on the stock from here – a) Cap allocation, b) AI inferencing, and c) Risk-off/defensive shift," the firm said in a research note.

Related: Veteran fund manager picks favorite stocks for 2024

Read More

Continue Reading

International

Major typhoid fever surveillance study in sub-Saharan Africa indicates need for the introduction of typhoid conjugate vaccines in endemic countries

There is a high burden of typhoid fever in sub-Saharan African countries, according to a new study published today in The Lancet Global Health. This high…

Published

on

There is a high burden of typhoid fever in sub-Saharan African countries, according to a new study published today in The Lancet Global Health. This high burden combined with the threat of typhoid strains resistant to antibiotic treatment calls for stronger prevention strategies, including the use and implementation of typhoid conjugate vaccines (TCVs) in endemic settings along with improvements in access to safe water, sanitation, and hygiene.

Credit: IVI

There is a high burden of typhoid fever in sub-Saharan African countries, according to a new study published today in The Lancet Global Health. This high burden combined with the threat of typhoid strains resistant to antibiotic treatment calls for stronger prevention strategies, including the use and implementation of typhoid conjugate vaccines (TCVs) in endemic settings along with improvements in access to safe water, sanitation, and hygiene.

 

The findings from this 4-year study, the Severe Typhoid in Africa (SETA) program, offers new typhoid fever burden estimates from six countries: Burkina Faso, Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), Ethiopia, Ghana, Madagascar, and Nigeria, with four countries recording more than 100 cases for every 100,000 person-years of observation, which is considered a high burden. The highest incidence of typhoid was found in DRC with 315 cases per 100,000 people while children between 2-14 years of age were shown to be at highest risk across all 25 study sites.

 

There are an estimated 12.5 to 16.3 million cases of typhoid every year with 140,000 deaths. However, with generic symptoms such as fever, fatigue, and abdominal pain, and the need for blood culture sampling to make a definitive diagnosis, it is difficult for governments to capture the true burden of typhoid in their countries.

 

“Our goal through SETA was to address these gaps in typhoid disease burden data,” said lead author Dr. Florian Marks, Deputy Director General of the International Vaccine Institute (IVI). “Our estimates indicate that introduction of TCV in endemic settings would go to lengths in protecting communities, especially school-aged children, against this potentially deadly—but preventable—disease.”

 

In addition to disease incidence, this study also showed that the emergence of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) in Salmonella Typhi, the bacteria that causes typhoid fever, has led to more reliance beyond the traditional first line of antibiotic treatment. If left untreated, severe cases of the disease can lead to intestinal perforation and even death. This suggests that prevention through vaccination may play a critical role in not only protecting against typhoid fever but reducing the spread of drug-resistant strains of the bacteria.

 

There are two TCVs prequalified by the World Health Organization (WHO) and available through Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance. In February 2024, IVI and SK bioscience announced that a third TCV, SKYTyphoid™, also achieved WHO PQ, paving the way for public procurement and increasing the global supply.

 

Alongside the SETA disease burden study, IVI has been working with colleagues in three African countries to show the real-world impact of TCV vaccination. These studies include a cluster-randomized trial in Agogo, Ghana and two effectiveness studies following mass vaccination in Kisantu, DRC and Imerintsiatosika, Madagascar.

 

Dr. Birkneh Tilahun Tadesse, Associate Director General at IVI and Head of the Real-World Evidence Department, explains, “Through these vaccine effectiveness studies, we aim to show the full public health value of TCV in settings that are directly impacted by a high burden of typhoid fever.” He adds, “Our final objective of course is to eliminate typhoid or to at least reduce the burden to low incidence levels, and that’s what we are attempting in Fiji with an island-wide vaccination campaign.”

 

As more countries in typhoid endemic countries, namely in sub-Saharan Africa and South Asia, consider TCV in national immunization programs, these data will help inform evidence-based policy decisions around typhoid prevention and control.

 

###

 

About the International Vaccine Institute (IVI)
The International Vaccine Institute (IVI) is a non-profit international organization established in 1997 at the initiative of the United Nations Development Programme with a mission to discover, develop, and deliver safe, effective, and affordable vaccines for global health.

IVI’s current portfolio includes vaccines at all stages of pre-clinical and clinical development for infectious diseases that disproportionately affect low- and middle-income countries, such as cholera, typhoid, chikungunya, shigella, salmonella, schistosomiasis, hepatitis E, HPV, COVID-19, and more. IVI developed the world’s first low-cost oral cholera vaccine, pre-qualified by the World Health Organization (WHO) and developed a new-generation typhoid conjugate vaccine that is recently pre-qualified by WHO.

IVI is headquartered in Seoul, Republic of Korea with a Europe Regional Office in Sweden, a Country Office in Austria, and Collaborating Centers in Ghana, Ethiopia, and Madagascar. 39 countries and the WHO are members of IVI, and the governments of the Republic of Korea, Sweden, India, Finland, and Thailand provide state funding. For more information, please visit https://www.ivi.int.

 

CONTACT

Aerie Em, Global Communications & Advocacy Manager
+82 2 881 1386 | aerie.em@ivi.int


Read More

Continue Reading

International

US Spent More Than Double What It Collected In February, As 2024 Deficit Is Second Highest Ever… And Debt Explodes

US Spent More Than Double What It Collected In February, As 2024 Deficit Is Second Highest Ever… And Debt Explodes

Earlier today, CNBC’s…

Published

on

US Spent More Than Double What It Collected In February, As 2024 Deficit Is Second Highest Ever... And Debt Explodes

Earlier today, CNBC's Brian Sullivan took a horse dose of Red Pills when, about six months after our readers, he learned that the US is issuing $1 trillion in debt every 100 days, which prompted him to rage tweet, (or rageX, not sure what the proper term is here) the following:

We’ve added 60% to national debt since 2018. Germany - a country with major economic woes - added ‘just’ 32%.   

Maybe it will never matter.   Maybe MMT is real.   Maybe we just cancel or inflate it out. Maybe career real estate borrowers or career politicians aren’t the answer.

I have no idea.  Only time will tell.   But it’s going to be fascinating to watch it play out.

He is right: it will be fascinating, and the latest budget deficit data simply confirmed that the day of reckoning will come very soon, certainly sooner than the two years that One River's Eric Peters predicted this weekend for the coming "US debt sustainability crisis."

According to the US Treasury, in February, the US collected $271 billion in various tax receipts, and spent $567 billion, more than double what it collected.

The two charts below show the divergence in US tax receipts which have flatlined (on a trailing 6M basis) since the covid pandemic in 2020 (with occasional stimmy-driven surges)...

... and spending which is about 50% higher compared to where it was in 2020.

The end result is that in February, the budget deficit rose to $296.3 billion, up 12.9% from a year prior, and the second highest February deficit on record.

And the punchline: on a cumulative basis, the budget deficit in fiscal 2024 which began on October 1, 2023 is now $828 billion, the second largest cumulative deficit through February on record, surpassed only by the peak covid year of 2021.

But wait there's more: because in a world where the US is spending more than twice what it is collecting, the endgame is clear: debt collapse, and while it won't be tomorrow, or the week after, it is coming... and it's also why the US is now selling $1 trillion in debt every 100 days just to keep operating (and absorbing all those millions of illegal immigrants who will keep voting democrat to preserve the socialist system of the US, so beloved by the Soros clan).

And it gets even worse, because we are now in the ponzi finance stage of the Minsky cycle, with total interest on the debt annualizing well above $1 trillion, and rising every day

... having already surpassed total US defense spending and soon to surpass total health spending and, finally all social security spending, the largest spending category of all, which means that US debt will now rise exponentially higher until the inevitable moment when the US dollar loses its reserve status and it all comes crashing down.

We conclude with another observation by CNBC's Brian Sullivan, who quotes an email by a DC strategist...

.. which lays out the proposed Biden budget as follows:

The budget deficit will growth another $16 TRILLION over next 10 years. Thats *with* the proposed massive tax hikes.

Without them the deficit will grow $19 trillion.

That's why you will hear the "deficit is being reduced by $3 trillion" over the decade.

No family budget or business could exist with this kind of math.

Of course, in the long run, neither can the US... and since neither party will ever cut the spending which everyone by now is so addicted to, the best anyone can do is start planning for the endgame.

Tyler Durden Tue, 03/12/2024 - 18:40

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending