600 likes | 610 Views
This article explores the main causes and factors that led to the global financial crisis in 2008, including falling interest rates, excessive liquidity, underpriced risk, excessive leverage, declining prudential standards, and more. It examines the scale of the problem and the impact it had on the economy, as well as the role of government policy, inadequate regulators, and accounting issues. The article also discusses the housing market boom and its effects on borrowers.
E N D
Bubbles and big numbers – how could it happen? Wayne Lonergan April 2009 1
The main causes Falling interest rates Excess liquidity Under-priced risk Excessive F. Institutions leverage / growth Declining prudential standards Residential property boom Implicit assumptions
Second order causal factors Government policy Inadequate regulators Off B/S finance Securitisation Excessive remuneration / moral hazard Short termism Accounting issues* Unexpected double whammy* Valuation issues* Academics * * (Mostly) not yet outed.
The scale of the problem $bn – 9 zeros $tn – 12 zeros US$14.3tn – USA GDP 2008 US$5tn – fall in market cap of banks (2007-09) US$1.5 - $3.0tn – estimate of US F.I . losses US$1.4tn – total stimulus etc. package (10% USA GDP) US$5,000 – per person in USA Source: Economist
$1 trillion – in $100 notes(10,000 pallets – those below are double stacked)
Just another boom? Lower interest rates Increases ability to borrow Increases asset values Encourages more leverage Increases asset values Declining prudential standards Increases asset values +
Corporate spreads fell – Global Corporates AAA – Global Corporates AA –Global Corporates A – Global Corporates BBB Source: Bloomberg
Volatility declined – implied volatility of the S&P 500 and DAX Source: CBOE and Deutsche Borse Note: VIX and VDAX are indices of implied volatility for stock option prices on the S&P 500 and DAX respectively
Excess liquidity – international issues Undervalued currencies created surpluses recycled to USA (eg China) Imprudent lending (e.g. large loans to eastern European countries) Widespread foreign currency denominated borrowing (eg Czech) Reckless lending / expansion (e.g. Iceland)
Risk was underpriced Corporate bonds spread over govt bonds (B.PTS)
Risk was underpriced cont. Five year credit default swaps
National debt levels exploded Source: FSA
National debt levels exploded cont. Source: FSA
Role of financial institutions* Excessive leverage Inadequate (no?) review of credit quality Off B/S structures Excessive proprietary trading Short-term focused remuneration incentives Culture of greed Reliance on flawed formula With a few notable exceptions e.g. Allco, B&B * Not in Oz
Plus risks not recognised – taking risk off B/S Traditional Deposits funds loans Loan originator = ultimate funder Securitised Deposits funds loans Loan originator and packager ≠ ultimate funder Securitised * Shaded = no capital unregulated
Lending complexity increased, participants and roles changed Traditional model Loan originator (bank) makes loans, funds, holds to maturity Securitisation model Loan originator (broker) makes loans, investors fund / trade / hold to maturity
Lending complexity increased, participants and roles changed cont. Advanced securitisation model Loan originator / broker makes loan Intermediaries slice, trade, hive off risk and improve / enhance apparent credit status with CDS and credit insurance
Advanced securitisation Slice, hive, improve, trade* *No acronyms please Credit insce / CDS CDS2 CDS 3 (etc)
Declining prudential standards Excessive leverage (US FI 30:1, Fannie Mae 70:1, Credit Insurers 100:1) Low doc. Loans (sub-prime 35%, ALT – A 71%) Low / no deposit loans Blind faith in credit ratings Misplaced faith in credit insurance / CDS Credit ratings agencies Conflicts: Defence counsel and judge Paid by issuers
What’s different about USA property loans Non-recourse Mostly fixed rate (90% +)(1) Rate based on LTBR No / low penalty for early payout(2) Tax deductible interest for borrowers Loan initiators distanced from ultimate financiers Note: 1 Hard to ameliorate debt burden 2 Interest rate risk, either way, for lenders. Also encourages “trading up”.
USA Residential property boom Interest rates fell Incomes rose LVR increased Values increased
Financial impact on USA residential borrowers Cyclical 36%
Declining loan quality Qualitative decline – more loans to lower income earners (HSG AWE 64%, UG AWE) Traditional counter cyclical deposit constraint removed (+ LVR) Traditional interest constraint payment removed Deferred interest step ups (2004) initial rate 7.3%, full rate 11.5% Low doc / no deposit loans Loans initiators distanced from borrowers LVR 78% to 88% (ave) Some LVR 105% - 110%
Implicit assumptions were ill founded (as always) A new paradigm AAA means AAA Houses are a safe investment Credit insurers could cover losses Financial instruments reduce systemic risk Lenders will roll over on maturity No double whammy (assets fall, liabilities rise) Different states = diversification Recent low bad debt experience would continue
Government regulators exacerbated / caused / ignored problems
Government regulators exacerbated / caused / ignored problems cont.
Excessive remuneration / short termism Excessive focus on STI
Failure to identify there were two types of risk Quantifiable expected deviation Unquantifiable unexpected (Fat Tail) deviation
Australian property valuation issues Property valuers look backward No conceptual framework in property DCF rare Excessive leverage “Hedged” borrowings Cheap trust capital used for development risks