On the Securitization of Student Loans and the Financial Crisis of 2007–2009

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

On the Securitization of Student Loans and the Financial Crisis of 2007–2009 On the Securitization of Student Loans and the Financial Crisis of 2007–2009 by Maxime Roy Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy at Tepper School of Business Carnegie Mellon University May 16, 2017 Committee: Burton Hollifield (chair), Adam Ashcraft, Laurence Ales and Brent Glover External Reader: Pierre Liang À Françoise et Yvette, mes deux anges gardiens. abstract This dissertation contains three chapters, and each examines the securitization of student loans. The first two chapters focus on the underpricing of Asset-Backed Securities (ABS) collateralized by government guaranteed student loans during the financial crisis of 2007–2009. The findings add to the literature that documents persistent arbitrages during the crisis and doing so in the ABS market is a novelty. The last chapter focuses on the securitization of private student loans, which do not benefit from government guarantees. This chapter concentrates on whether the disclosure to investors is sufficient to prevent the selection of underperforming pools of loans. My findings have normative implications for topics ranging from the regulation of securitization to central banks’ exceptional provision of liquidity during crises. Specifically, in the first chapter, “Near-Arbitrage among Securities Backed by Government Guaranteed Student Loans,” I document the presence of near-arbitrage opportunities in the student loan ABS (SLABS) market during the financial crisis of 2007–2009. I construct near-arbitrage lower bounds on the price of SLABS collateralized by government guaranteed loans. When the price of a SLABS is below its near-arbitrage lower bound, an arbitrageur that buys the SLABS, holds it to maturity and finances the purchase by frictionlessly shorting short-term Treasuries is nearly certain to make a profit. The underpricing on some SLABS relative to Treasuries exceeded 22% during the crisis. In the second chapter, “SLABS Near-Arbitrage: Accounting for Historically Unprecedented Macroeconomic Events,” I analyze whether the risks associated with unprecedented macroe- conomic events, such as exceptionally high inflation or default by the government on its loan guarantee, could explain the large underpricing of SLABS relative to Treasuries observed during the financial crisis of 2007–2009. Using data on inflation caps, interest rate swaps and interest rate basis caps, and comparing the price dynamics of SLABS to other securities benefiting from a similar government guarantee, I find that for 90% of SLABS, the aforementioned risks explain at most 25% of the near-arbitrage gaps. In the third chapter, “Securitization with Asymmetric Information: The Case of PSL-ABS” (joint with Adam Ashcraft), we empirically analyze the adverse selection of loans in the private student loan (PLS) ABS market. Using loan-level data, we demonstrate the potential for an issuer of PSL-ABS to select loans in such a way that could result in materially adverse outcomes for investors (credit rating downgrades or market value losses). We find that an issuer could increase pool losses on the non-cosigned portion of securitized pools by 6%–20% among pre-crisis deals and by 16%–36% among post-crisis deals while still matching the pool characteristics disclosed to investors. The shifts in pool losses are achieved by exploiting the coarseness of the disclosure and by jointly overrepresenting unseasoned loans in the low credit score region and overrepresenting seasoned loans in the high credit score region. We present multiple additional channels for adverse selection of private student loans that could substantially increases losses without altering the i disclosed characteristics of PSL-ABS deals (e.g. overrepresenting college drop-outs, the share of which is known to the securitizer but not disclosed). The existence of such channels indicates that our estimates of ABS issuers’ ability to affect pool performance via loan selection at the time of securitization should be interpreted as lower bounds. ii Acknowledgements I am grateful for the guidance and advice provided by Burton Hollifield throughout my efforts to produce this dissertation. I am indebted to Adam Ashcraft for giving me the opportunity to work at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York as a PhD intern and later as a contractor. Adam went far beyond his duties and the completion of the third Chapter would not have been possible without his generosity. I am thankful to Laurence Ales who did a great job helping me prepare for the job market and helped improve this dissertation. I would also like to thank Brent Glover and Pierre Liang for raising questions and providing valuable advice that helped improve this dissertation. Other faculties that stood out because of their advice or suggestions on parts of this dissertation include: Antje Berndt, Stephen Karolyi and Jack Stecher. I would also like to thank Chris Sleet, Yaroslav Kryukov, Rick Greene, Duane Seppi and Fallaw Sowell. Thank you for helping me progress through the PhD program or for going out of your way to pose a supportive action. Finally, a big thank you to my friends and classmates who helped me improve this dissertation or helped me progress through the PhD program. From proof-reading and editing to modeling advice, I greatly appreciate the help provided by Artem Neklyu- dov, Batchimeg Sambalaibat, David Schreindorfer, Andrés Bellofatto, Carlos Ramírez, Alexander Schiller, Emilio Bisetti, Ben Tengelsen and Christopher Reynolds. I received a Doctoral Fellowship from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada (SSHRC). I thank the SSHRC for its support. I also acknowledge financial support from the William Larimer Mellon Fellowship at Carnegie Mellon University. iii Contents 1 Near-Arbitrage among Securities Backed by Government Guaranteed Student Loans 1 1.1 Introduction.....................................1 1.2 Sources of cash flow on SLABS..........................4 1.3 Benchmark no-arbitrage lower bounds on the price of simplified SLABS.. 11 1.4 Near-arbitrage lower bound on the price of SLABS.............. 14 1.4.1 Simulations, overcollateralization and relation with analytical lower bounds.................................... 14 1.4.2 Abandoning the simplifying assumptions............... 19 1.4.3 Upper bound on servicing fees...................... 21 1.4.4 Examples of SLABS-Treasury near-arbitrage.............. 28 1.5 Normative implications.............................. 35 1.5.1 Central banks’ exceptional measures of liquidity provision..... 35 1.5.2 Asset purchase program.......................... 36 1.5.3 Fire-sale insurance............................. 38 1.6 Conclusion...................................... 39 1.7 Appendix...................................... 41 1.7.1 SLABS that satisfy all selection criteria................. 41 1.7.2 Proof of Proposition 1........................... 43 1.7.3 Estimation of parameters of the interest rate model.......... 49 1.7.4 Data and computation of the servicing cost difference between delinquent and current borrower..................... 51 1.7.5 Near-arbitrage lower bounds on SLABS deals with a stepdown date 52 2 SLABS Near-Arbitrage: Accounting for Historically Unprecedented Macroeco- nomic Events 55 2.1 Introduction..................................... 55 2.2 Insuring against inflation risk........................... 56 v 2.3 Basis risk....................................... 60 2.4 Default on government guarantees........................ 69 2.5 Conclusion...................................... 71 2.6 Appendix...................................... 74 2.6.1 SBA PC price indexes........................... 74 3 Securitization with Asymmetric Information: The Case of PSL-ABS 76 3.1 Introduction..................................... 76 3.2 Related Literature and Lower Bound Interpretation.............. 79 3.3 Data Description.................................. 84 3.3.1 Pool characteristics data.......................... 84 3.3.2 Loan-level performance data....................... 86 3.4 Shifts in Pool Losses via Selection........................ 89 3.4.1 Matched pool characteristics and empirical constraints........ 90 3.4.2 Estimation.................................. 94 3.4.3 Forming loss-maximizing and random pools.............. 98 3.4.4 Shifts in pool losses............................ 104 3.4.5 Matched credit score, performance and interest rate......... 105 3.5 Concluding Remarks................................ 106 3.6 Appendix...................................... 108 3.6.1 Disclosure on Credit Score at Origination................ 108 3.6.2 Type of Data Used to Construct Pool Level Parameters........ 108 3.6.3 Loan Level Variables from CCP: Raw and Derived.......... 109 3.6.4 Distribution across Seasoning Groups.................. 111 3.6.5 Matched Pool Characteristics....................... 112 3.6.6 Geometric Solution to a Simplified Issuer’s Problem......... 114 3.6.7 Forming Loss-Maximizing Pool (Post-Crisis Deals).......... 127 Bibliography 128 vi Chapter 1 Near-Arbitrage among Securities Backed by Government Guaranteed Student Loans 1.1 introduction The financial crisis of 2007-2009 presented several challenges for central banks in perform- ing their role of liquidity provider of last resort. In the preceding decade, the origination of consumer loans became increasingly reliant on their indirect sale to investors purchas- ing asset-backed securities (ABS). Most ABS markets experienced sharp declines in prices during the crisis. Simultaneously, the cost of raising funds to originate
Recommended publications
  • Asset Securitization
    L-Sec Comptroller of the Currency Administrator of National Banks Asset Securitization Comptroller’s Handbook November 1997 L Liquidity and Funds Management Asset Securitization Table of Contents Introduction 1 Background 1 Definition 2 A Brief History 2 Market Evolution 3 Benefits of Securitization 4 Securitization Process 6 Basic Structures of Asset-Backed Securities 6 Parties to the Transaction 7 Structuring the Transaction 12 Segregating the Assets 13 Creating Securitization Vehicles 15 Providing Credit Enhancement 19 Issuing Interests in the Asset Pool 23 The Mechanics of Cash Flow 25 Cash Flow Allocations 25 Risk Management 30 Impact of Securitization on Bank Issuers 30 Process Management 30 Risks and Controls 33 Reputation Risk 34 Strategic Risk 35 Credit Risk 37 Transaction Risk 43 Liquidity Risk 47 Compliance Risk 49 Other Issues 49 Risk-Based Capital 56 Comptroller’s Handbook i Asset Securitization Examination Objectives 61 Examination Procedures 62 Overview 62 Management Oversight 64 Risk Management 68 Management Information Systems 71 Accounting and Risk-Based Capital 73 Functions 77 Originations 77 Servicing 80 Other Roles 83 Overall Conclusions 86 References 89 ii Asset Securitization Introduction Background Asset securitization is helping to shape the future of traditional commercial banking. By using the securities markets to fund portions of the loan portfolio, banks can allocate capital more efficiently, access diverse and cost- effective funding sources, and better manage business risks. But securitization markets offer challenges as well as opportunity. Indeed, the successes of nonbank securitizers are forcing banks to adopt some of their practices. Competition from commercial paper underwriters and captive finance companies has taken a toll on banks’ market share and profitability in the prime credit and consumer loan businesses.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Securitization
    Understanding Securitization It is important to have a general familiarity with mortgage securitization in order to understand the foreclosure process. Securitization involves a series of conveyances of the note evidencing the residential loan and assignment of the mortgage or trust deed securing it. Therefore, chain of title and beneficial interest issues frequently turn on the securitization trajectories. Securitization is the process pooling loans into “mortgage‐ backed securities” or “MBS” for sale to investors. MBS is an investment instrument backed by an undivided interest in a pool of mortgages or trust deeds. Income from the underlying mortgages is used to pay interest and principal on the securities. Figure A below is a simplified schematic depicting the general securitization process and some of the parties involved. The process begins with Originators, which are the lenders (such as banks or finance companies) that initially make the loans to homeowners. Sponsor/Sellers (or “sponsors”) purchase these loans from one or more Originators to form the pool of assets to be securitized. (Most large financial institutions are both Originators and Sponsor/Sellers.) A Depositor creates a Securitization Trust, a special‐purpose entity, for the securitized transaction. The depositor acquires the pooled assets from the Sponsor/Seller and in turn deposits them into the Securitization Trust. An Issuer acquires the Securitization Trust and issues certificates to eventually be sold to investors. However, the Issuer does not directly offer the certificates for sale to the investors. Instead, the Issuer conveys the certificate to the Depositor in exchange for the pooled assets. An Underwriter, usually an investment bank, purchases all of the certificates from the Depositor with the responsibility of offering to them for sale to the ultimate investors.
    [Show full text]
  • Securitization & Hedge Funds
    SECURITIZATION & HEDGE FUNDS: COLLATERALIZED FUND OBLIGATIONS SECURITIZATION & HEDGE FUNDS: CREATING A MORE EFFICIENT MARKET BY CLARK CHENG, CFA Intangis Funds AUGUST 6, 2002 INTANGIS PAGE 1 SECURITIZATION & HEDGE FUNDS: COLLATERALIZED FUND OBLIGATIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................ 3 PROBLEM.................................................................................................................................................... 4 SOLUTION................................................................................................................................................... 5 SECURITIZATION..................................................................................................................................... 5 CASH-FLOW TRANSACTIONS............................................................................................................... 6 MARKET VALUE TRANSACTIONS.......................................................................................................8 ARBITRAGE................................................................................................................................................ 8 FINANCIAL ENGINEERING.................................................................................................................... 8 TRANSPARENCY......................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Private Mortgage Securitization and Loan Origination Quality - New Evidence from Loan Losses
    Private Mortgage Securitization and Loan Origination Quality - New Evidence from Loan Losses Abdullah Yavas Robert E. Wangard Chair School of Business University of Wisconsin - Madison Madison, WI 53706 [email protected] and Shuang Zhu Associate Professor Department of Finance Kansas State University Manhattan, KS 66506 [email protected] December 11, 2018 1 Private Mortgage Securitization and Loan Origination Quality - New Evidence from Loan Losses Abstract Due to data constraints, earlier studies of the impact of securitization on loan quality have used default probability as a proxy for loan quality. In this paper, we utilize a unique data set that allows us to use loan losses, which incorporate both probability of default and loss given default, to proxy for mortgage quality. Our analysis of prime loans shows that higher expected loan losses are associated with higher probability of securitization. Lenders sell prime loans with lower observable quality and keep higher observable quality loans on their books. For subprime loans, we observe opposite results that lenders sell better quality loans and keep lower quality loans on their book. We then use the cutoff FICO score of 620 to infer the lender’s screening effort with respect to unobservable loan quality. We find that securitized prime loans exhibit no significant difference in default losses for 620- versus 620+ loans. However, securitized subprime loans with a 620- score incur significantly lower loan losses than securitized subprime loans with a 620+ score. By using loan losses as the proxy of loan quality, separating the analysis into prime and subprime samples, and distinguishing between observable and unobservable risk characteristics, this study sheds additional light on the potential channels that the securitization affects loan quality.
    [Show full text]
  • WORLD FINTECH REPORT 2018 Contents 4 Preface
    in collaboration with WORLD FINTECH REPORT 2018 Contents 4 Preface 8 Executive Summary FinTechs Are Redefining the Financial Services Customer Journey 13 Competition and Rising Expectations Spur 14 Customer-Centricity Push – Identify gaps left by traditional Financial Services providers and explore changing customer expectations. Emerging Technologies Enable Customer 19 Journey Transformation – Data and insights are reshaping personalized experiences through automation and distributed ledger technology. Alignment with Customer Goals, Creation of 27 Trust, and Delivery of Digital, Agile, and Efficient Processes Are Catalysts for Success – Firms are driving innovation and operational excellence through agile and digital teams. World FinTech Report 2018 The Symbiotic Relationship between FinTechs and Traditional Financial Institutions 35 FinTech and Incumbent Firms’ Respective 36 Competitive Advantages and Shortcomings Make Collaboration a Logical Fit – A partnership ecosystem of FinTechs, incumbents, and other vendors fosters a win-win for stakeholders. Finding the Right Partners for Collaboration 44 Is Essential – Maintaining and accelerating scale is a common FinTech firm struggle, so the right collaboration partner is critical. Successful Collaboration Requires Commitment 49 and Agility from FinTechs and Incumbents – Selection of the appropriate engagement model boosts FinTech scale-up efforts. The Path Forward: An Impending Role for BigTechs? 60 – BigTechs could have massive impact on the Financial Services industry. Preface Once rather homogenous and somewhat staid, the financial services marketplace has transformed into a dynamic milieu of bar-raising specialists. These new-age professionals are devoted to meeting and exceeding the expectations of consumers who have become accustomed to personalized services from industries such as retail, travel, and electronics. Financial services customers no longer rely on one or two firms.
    [Show full text]
  • FINTECH – BANK MODEL a Baseline Review of Best PARTNERSHIPS Practices and Pitfalls…
    FINTECH – BANK MODEL A baseline review of best PARTNERSHIPS practices and pitfalls…. Comments by Comptroller Otting before the House Financial Services Committee in June 2018: BANK— “The world has changed dramatically over the last two years.” FINTECH “Fintechs used to think that they wanted to be banks; and, now, most are realizing because of the capital, liquidity, and commitment to the community they have to PARTNERSHIPS provide, they really don’t want to be.” “More and more Fintechs are talking to us about how they partner with banks to be able to provide portals and things where they can reach customers.” SHIFTING TO DIGITAL SOLUTIONS • Digital/Mobile Banking • Marketplace Lending • Payments • Deposit Gathering • Banking as a Platform • Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning • “RegTech” THE SHIFT IN BANKING TECHNOLOGY “Mobile first, digital everything.” Jamie Dimon, J.P. Morgan Chase & Co. on the bank’s new mantra guiding its future growth. Mobile Banking App Usage Post- THE MIGRATION TO Covid ONLINE/DIGITAL BANKING The Big 6 banks (Bank of America, Chase, Citibank, PNC, U.S. Bank and 20% Wells Fargo) currently have a jump No Change on regional and midsize banks to 42% Use It Less build digital engagement. I Don't Use It Used for First Time Use It A Lot More 24% Use It A Little More Prior to the pandemic, 49% of big bank customers had high levels of 6% 5% 3% digital engagement, compared with 41% of regional bank customers and 36% of midsize bank customers. *Source: J.D. Power (Sept. 2020) DIGITAL TRANSFORMATION SPANS GENERATIONS AND CHANNELS CURRENTLY USE DIGITAL BANKING 85% PERSONALLY COMMERCIAL CUSTOMERS THAT 95% WANT DIGITAL BANKING 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% *Source: ABA (Feb.
    [Show full text]
  • The Role of the Secondary Market in Mortgage Financing | 2 Limiting the Secondary Market Would Share of Mortgages on Balance Sheets at 30 Percent
    Economic Policy Program Housing Commission The Role of the Secondary Market in Mortgage FinancingTotal Mortgages Outstanding (total $13.1 trillion) Home ($9.8 trillion) 75% Multifamily Residential ($0.9 trillion) 7% Commercial, e.g. offices, retail, factories ($2.2 trillion) 17% Farm ($0.2 trillion) 1% The secondary market for mortgages Mortgages: A $13.1 Trillion Market Notes: plays a critical role in sustainingThese lines The taken current verbatim size of the from mortgage one-­‐line market is totals of L.217 $13.1 trillion, the a healthy housing market. Few largest share of which (75 percent) funds home mortgages. As displayed in Chart 1, another 7 percent of the mortgage homebuyers have sufficient savings market fundsTotal mortgagesMortgages Oonu tapartmentstanding (t obuildingstal $13.1 and other to purchase a home outright, and multifamily properties. trillion) many need to borrow money to buy their first home or to move to another Chart 1: Total Mortgages Outstanding ($13.1 trillion) 1% one. Without the ability to borrow against the value of the home they are 17% purchasing, many prospective buyers 7% would be shut out of the market. The secondary market allows participants 75% in our mortgage system to access capital from investors in the United States and around the world. Any decline in the size of the secondary market would reduce the amount of Home ($9.8 trillion) Multifamily Residential ($0.9 trillion) capital available for mortgage lending Commercial, e.g. offices, retail, factories ($2.2 trillion) and, in turn, borrowers’ options for Farm ($0.2 trillion) financing the purchase of a home.
    [Show full text]
  • Hyundai Auto Lease Securitization Trust 2020-B
    Presale: Hyundai Auto Lease Securitization Trust 2020-B September 15, 2020 PRIMARY CREDIT ANALYST Preliminary Ratings Ethan Choi New York Preliminary amount Legal final (1) 212-438-1043 Class(i) Preliminary rating Type Interest rate(ii) (mil. $) maturity ethan.choi A-1 A-1+ (sf) Senior Fixed 142.00 Oct. 15, 2021 @spglobal.com A-2 AAA (sf) Senior Fixed 380.00 Jan. 17, 2023 SECONDARY CONTACT A-3 AAA (sf) Senior Fixed 380.00 Sept. 15, 2023 Sanjay Narine, CFA Toronto A-4 AAA (sf) Senior Fixed 74.39 June 17, 2024 + 1 (416) 507 2548 B AA+ (sf) Subordinate Fixed 52.94 Oct. 15, 2024 sanjay.narine @spglobal.com Note: This presale report is based on information as of Sept. 15, 2020. The ratings shown are preliminary. Subsequent information may result in the assignment of final ratings that differ from the preliminary ratings. Accordingly, the preliminary ratings should not be construed as evidence of final ratings. This report does not constitute a recommendation to buy, hold, or sell securities. (i)All or a portion of one or more classes of notes may be initially retained by the sponsor Hyundai Capital America Inc. or its affiliate. (ii)The actual coupons of these tranches will be determined on the pricing date. Profile Expected closing date Sept. 23, 2020. Collateral Prime auto lease receivables. Origination trust Hyundai Lease Titling Trust. Issuer Hyundai Auto Lease Securitization Trust 2020-B. Sponsor, servicer, and administrator Hyundai Capital America Inc. (BBB+/Negative/A-2). Depositor Hyundai HK Lease LLC. Indenture trustee U.S. Bank N.A.
    [Show full text]
  • Securitization of Catastrophe Mortality Risks
    Securitization of Catastrophe Mortality Risks Yijia Lin Samuel H. Cox Youngstown State University Georgia State University Phone: (330) 629-6895 Phone: (404) 651-4854 [email protected] [email protected] SECURITIZATION OF CATASTROPHE MORTALITY RISKS ABSTRACT. Securitization with payments linked to explicit mortality events provides a new investment opportunity to investors and financial institutions. Moreover, mortality- linked securities provide an alternative risk management tool for insurers. As a step toward understanding these securities, we develop an asset pricing model for mortality-based secu- rities in an incomplete market framework with jump processes. Our model nicely explains opposite market outcomes of two existing pure mortality securities. 1. INTRODUCTION Securities with mortality risk as a component have been around a long time. These securities arise as securitization of portfolios of life insurance or annuity policies. The risks underlying a life insurance or annuity portfolio include interest rate risk, policyholder lapse risk, as well as mortality or longevity risk. In these transactions, the positive future net cash flow from the policies is dedicated to pay the bondholders. Therefore, they are similar to asset securitization. Cummins (2004) surveys recent life insurance securitization transactions, including these asset- type securities. However, securitization of pure mortality or longevity risk is a recent and potentially important innovation in financial markets. Pure mortality or longevity securitization is more like property- linked catastrophe bonds than the common asset-type life insurance securitizations. This is be- cause, like that of a property-linked catastrophe bond based on earthquake or hurricane losses, the payment of a mortality security is only subject to a well-defined risk.
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Aspects of Securitization of Risk
    ECONOMIC ASPECTS OF SECURITIZATION OF RISK BY SAMUEL H. COX, JOSEPH R. FAIRCHILD AND HAL W. PEDERSEN ABSTRACT This paper explains securitization of insurance risk by describing its essential components and its economic rationale. We use examples and describe recent securitization transactions. We explore the key ideas without abstract mathematics. Insurance-based securitizations improve opportunities for all investors. Relative to traditional reinsurance, securitizations provide larger amounts of coverage and more innovative contract terms. KEYWORDS Securitization, catastrophe risk bonds, reinsurance, retention, incomplete markets. 1. INTRODUCTION This paper explains securitization of risk with an emphasis on risks that are usually considered insurable risks. We discuss the economic rationale for securitization of assets and liabilities and we provide examples of each type of securitization. We also provide economic axguments for continued future insurance-risk securitization activity. An appendix indicates some of the issues involved in pricing insurance risk securitizations. We do not develop specific pricing results. Pricing techniques are complicated by the fact that, in general, insurance-risk based securities do not have unique prices based on axbitrage-free pricing considerations alone. The technical reason for this is that the most interesting insurance risk securitizations reside in incomplete markets. A market is said to be complete if every pattern of cash flows can be replicated by some portfolio of securities that are traded in the market. The payoffs from insurance-based securities, whose cash flows may depend on Please address all correspondence to Hal Pedersen. ASTIN BULLETIN. Vol. 30. No L 2000, pp 157-193 158 SAMUEL H. COX, JOSEPH R. FAIRCHILD AND HAL W.
    [Show full text]
  • Securitization and the Fixed-Rate Mortgage
    Federal Reserve Bank of New York Staff Reports Securitization and the Fixed-Rate Mortgage Andreas Fuster James Vickery Staff Report No. 594 January 2013 Revised June 2014 This paper presents preliminary findings and is being distributed to economists and other interested readers solely to stimulate discussion and elicit comments. The views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or the Federal Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the authors. Securitization and the Fixed-Rate Mortgage Andreas Fuster and James Vickery Federal Reserve Bank of New York Staff Reports, no. 594 January 2013; revised June 2014 JEL classification: E44, G18, G21 Abstract Fixed-rate mortgages (FRMs) dominate the U.S. mortgage market, with important consequences for monetary policy, household risk management, and financial stability. In this paper, we show that the share of FRMs is sharply lower when mortgages are difficult to securitize. Our analysis exploits plausibly exogenous variation in access to liquid securitization markets generated by a regulatory cutoff and time variation in private securitization activity. We interpret our findings as evidence that lenders are reluctant to retain the prepayment and interest rate risk embedded in FRMs. The form of securitization (private versus government-backed) has little effect on FRM supply during periods when private securitization markets are well-functioning. Key words: mortgage finance, securitization, regression discontinuity design, difference-in- differences _________________ Fuster, Vickery: Federal Reserve Bank of New York (e-mail: [email protected], [email protected]).
    [Show full text]
  • The Securitization Process Asset-Backed
    Giddy/ABS The Securitization Process/1 Asset-Backed Securities The Securitization Process Prof. Ian Giddy Stern School of Business New York University Asset-Backed Securities l The basic idea l What’s needed? l The technique l ABS around the world Copyright ©2000 Ian H. Giddy The Securitization Process3 Giddy/ABS The Securitization Process/2 Securitization of Assets l Securitization is the transformation of an illiquid asset into a security. l For example, a group of consumer loans can be transformed into a publically-issued debt security. l A security is tradable, and therefore more liquid than the underlying loan or receivables. Securitization of assets can lower risk, add liquidity, and improve economic efficiency. Copyright ©2000 Ian H. Giddy The Securitization Process4 Range of Debt Markets Illiquid Highly liquid Nontradable Tradable Actively Commercial Public private private traded paper issue placement placement bonds Copyright ©2000 Ian H. Giddy The Securitization Process5 Giddy/ABS The Securitization Process/3 What is the Technique for Creating Asset-Backed Securities? l A lender originates loans, such as to a homeowner or corporation. l The securitization structure is added. The bank or firm sells or assigns certain assets, such as consumer receivables, to a special purpose vehicle. l The structure is legally insulated from management l The SPV issues (usually) high-rated debt. Copyright ©2000 Ian H. Giddy The Securitization Process6 Securitization: The Basic Structure SPONSORING COMPANY ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE SALE OR ASSIGNMENT
    [Show full text]