mortgages

Error message

  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Deprecated function: The each() function is deprecated. This message will be suppressed on further calls in _menu_load_objects() (line 579 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/menu.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Notice: Trying to access array offset on value of type int in element_children() (line 6600 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).
  • Deprecated function: implode(): Passing glue string after array is deprecated. Swap the parameters in drupal_get_feeds() (line 394 of /var/www/drupal-7.x/includes/common.inc).

A Crash Course on Crises: Macroeconomic Concepts for Run-ups, Collapses, and Recoveries – review

In A Crash Course on CrisesMarkus K. Brunnermeier and Ricardo Reis survey the macroeconomics of financial crises, examining the before, during, and after stages of collapses through theoretical models and case studies. Though the book’s analysis is insightful, cogent and well-structured, Minh Dao suggests that the trade-off of depth for concision may leave some readers wanting.

A Crash Course on Crises: Macroeconomic Concepts for Run-ups, Collapses, and Recoveries. Brunnermeier, Markus K., and Ricardo Reis. Princeton University Press. 2023.

In A Crash Course on Crises: Macroeconomic Concepts for Run-ups, Collapses, and Recoveries, Markus K. Brunnermeier and Ricardo Reis examine the three stages of “macro-financial” crises: before, during, and after the crisis events. The book takes a straightforward approach. First, the authors qualitatively explain an economic model, then detail one or two case examples based on the given abstract framework, rendering each chapter a self-contained unit.

With the main content of the book contained within 100 pages, A Crash Course on Crises, summarises and synthesises theoretical explanations on famous macro-financial crises case studies

With the main content of the book contained within 100 pages, A Crash Course on Crises summarises and synthesises theoretical explanations on famous macro-financial crises case studies (eg, the Great Depression in the US in the 1920s and1930s, the Japanese Bubble of the 1980s and the European Debt Crisis in late 2009). The authors succinctly crystallise those theoretical analyses into a unifying theory of macro-financial crises through ten conceptual frameworks, one in each chapter. This macro-theory can be viewed from a chronological sequence as follows.

Before the run-up phase to a crisis, optimism leads to asset price bubbles because of the speculation from investors

First, before the run-up phase to a crisis, optimism leads to asset price bubbles because of the speculation from investors with different level of “sophistication” or rationality. In the authors’ words, we have two groups of sophisticated and momentum investors, ranging from fully to less rational, who are trying to get the most value from the growing bubbles by speculation, ie, guessing how others will behave. With the subsequent large and sudden capital inflows thanks to the bubble, a problem of capital misallocation can be seen within and across sectors. Simultaneously, modern banks can raise more funds as compared to traditional banks thanks to the wholesale funding component in the liabilities side of balance sheets. One common example of wholesale funding is interbank borrowing.

A discussion on how modern banks (especially European banks) run identifies three key features.  First, banks can grow quickly by wholesale funds because, banks can borrow more money from other big corporations or banks rather than waiting for people to lodge their savings. Second, wholesale funds are fickle; there is a risk that other banks may suddenly stop lending. Third, this borrowing behaviour amplifies the fluctuation of prices (“asset-price cycle”). An example of this is when banks can borrow a lot of money quickly and therefore lend it out to people easily, which makes housing prices go up due to high demands for houses (upturn). If some people lose their jobs and default on their payments, banks suffer and they become more cautious to lend, making the housing prices go down due to declining demands as people cannot borrow like before (downturn).

In this section, it seems that the authors’ advice to “lean against credit-financed bubbles” (20) may be too general, like saying all bubbles are bad and we therefore should discourage them. We know that “bubbles” exist for some reasons, eg, creating wealth and spurring innovation . There is an argument that “macroprudential policy should optimally respond to building asset price bubbles non-monotonically depending on the underlying level of indebtedness.” In other words, what we should do is to monitor the stages of bubbles rather than wholly discouraging them.

A curious reader may also wonder how governmental fiscal policy can prevent asset price bubble, especially when the authors stop short after briefly mentioning “Modern banking requires changes in regulation” (35), and a deeper analysis into macroprudential policy may supplement these chapters, eg, Systemic Risk, Crises, and Macroprudential Regulation by Freixas, Laeven, and Peydró.

At the arrival of a crisis, a domino reaction happens when investors start to sell assets quickly, driving down the prices and in turn making harder to sell the assets.

Secondly, at the arrival of a crisis, a domino reaction happens when investors start to sell assets quickly, driving down the prices and in turn making harder to sell the assets. This results in a systematic failure in the financial market. Amid crises, it is practically impossible to distinguish solvency and liquidity, and knowing which is the driver can inform the policymakers how to respond. A phenomenon known as a “diabolic loop”, when banks hold sovereign bonds interacting with governmental fiscal policy of bailout in a way that continuously brings both down, can explain further how and why bailout policy may not have the intended consequence. Another important phenomenon during the financial crises is the capital flight to safety (eg, investors buying sovereign bonds of Germany or France).

Finally, at the recovery period or policy response phase, national fiscal policy in the form of reserve satiation, forward guidance, and quantitative easing (dubbed “unconventional”) can shed light on the role of central banks and what advanced economies have been doing to mitigate economic slowdowns. The Japanese case study in Chapter 10 is illuminating with regards to fiscal policy addressing the long economic slowdowns. Moreover, revisiting to equilibrium real interest rate, r* (ie, the interest rate accounting for inflation that is the optimum for the market of saving and borrowing) and fiscal policy in ending the Great Recession is aimed at reconciling neo-classical and Keynesian arguments on the nexus of savings and investment. The authors’ fresh take on this reconciliation lies in how they consider why “the recession comes with a financial crisis” (102-103), whereas both neo-classical and Keynesian proponents did not account for financial crisis.

The trade-off of keeping “the book mercifully short” (9) and the ambition of covering 10 key concepts (each of which could easily merit a whole book) means that it sacrifices depth of enquiry, and many historical details are excluded. This is justifiable, as the book is intended as a supplementary reading to Intermediate Macroeconomics (hence the “Crash Course” of its title) and they did reference the background of real-life examples in the notes at the end of each chapter. However, the decision to economise on detail does leave readers wanting, both those familiar with the case studies and those being introduced to them who might find the chapters disjointed. If readers then need to consult additional sources, this belies the authors’ claim to have written a self-contained book.

The trade-off of keeping ‘the book mercifully short’ and the ambition of covering 10 key concepts (each of which could easily merit a whole book) means that it sacrifices depth of enquiry, and many historical details are excluded.

While Brunnermeier and Reis describe their theoretical models qualitatively before going into case studies, qualitative explanations alone may create difficulties in interpreting some models illustrated by graphs – eg, bivariate models of exchange rates and recovery (85) explaining the endogenous relationship and equilibrium between investments and savings (domestic and foreign). The book would have benefitted from some simple algebra accompanying the qualitative explanations of graphs to illustrate how the relationship and/or equilibrium changes. This could have been achieved without having to resort to mathematical generalisation (which the authors opt to avoid so as not to further complicate the subject matter). Sometimes, a prudently moderate combination of qualitative and quantitative explanation can make economic concepts more accessible than either extreme approach, especially for the target audience possessing only “introductory economics” (8).

This book is a great companion to macroeconomics or macro-finance courses for students and policy experts.

All things considered, Brunnermeier and Reis deliver a cogent treatise on macro-financial crises. This book is a great companion to macroeconomics or macro-finance courses for students and policy experts. The audience that may enjoy the greatest benefit are those with a grasp of intermediate macroeconomic understanding, rather than being familiar only “with introductory economics”, as the authors suggest.

Note: This review gives the views of the author, and not the position of the LSE Review of Books blog, or of the London School of Economics and Political Science.

Image credit: gopixa on Shutterstock.

Mortgage affordability for borrowers who re-fixed in 2023

Published by Anonymous (not verified) on Wed, 07/02/2024 - 8:00pm in

Daniel Norris, Elio Cucullo and Vasilis Jacovides

When borrowers enter a fixed-rate mortgage, lenders test whether they could continue to afford their mortgage if interest rates were to increase by the time it comes to re-fix. This ‘stressing’ is designed to create additional resilience for borrowers and the financial system. Over the last two years, mortgage rates have increased by over four percentage points, raising the cost of repayments for those re-fixing. We look at UK mortgage data and compare the stress rates applied at origination to rates available to borrowers when re-fixing. We find that the vast majority of borrowers who came to the end of their fixed terms in 2023 faced new mortgage rates which were lower than those they had been ‘stressed’ at.

This means that while these borrowers will still feel the squeeze of higher interest rates, their mortgage repayments are not as high as under the stressed scenario they were tested against. We find that this ‘headroom’ would remain for the majority of borrowers even at the peak level mortgage rates reached in 2023.  

It is important to flag upfront that there is no direct consequence of having no stress rate ‘headroom’ eg it does not imply that borrowers would default or face no prospect of re-fixing; but there is less certainty about affordability. Likewise, having some ‘headroom’ does not guarantee that a borrower can afford a higher mortgage rate. Furthermore, the stress rate only accounts for one element of overall mortgage affordability. Increases in income improve affordability, while cost of living pressures squeeze affordability.

Borrowers are ‘stressed’ when they enter a mortgage

When applying for a mortgage, prospective borrowers are subject to an assessment that tests whether they would be able to meet their current and future mortgage payments if they were faced with higher interest rates in the future.

Most mortgages in the UK have a fixed rate for a period of time, typically two to five years. Once this period comes to an end, borrowers typically re-fix; however the rate available at this point may be different to their previous one. And this can have a big impact on monthly payments – a 3 percentage point rate increase on a £300k mortgage would set borrowers back by an additional ~£500 per month. So lenders ‘stress’ in advance whether borrowers would be able to continue to afford their mortgages if rates were to rise by the time they need to re-fix. The size of the ‘stress rate’ used by lenders is typically determined by their prevailing Standard Variable Rate (SVR) and a ‘stress buffer’ that is added on top of this, which is subject to a minimum level set by regulators. SVRs tend to move in line with changes to the Bank Rate.

Comparing average stress rates to mortgage rates

Mortgage rates have increased substantially over the last two years. The theoretical ‘stressing’ of borrowers’ ability to afford their mortgages is now being tested in practice. Were borrowers coming to the end of their fixed terms over the last two years tested at the rates they faced to re-fix?

Chart 1 shows the average stress rate (orange line) across all mortgages coming to the end of their fixed term over 2022–23, for example five-year fixes originated in 2017–18 and two-year fixes in 2020–21. The most common products in our sample are two-year fixes. The average stress rate is constructed based on regulatory data submitted by lenders on the stress rate they applied on each mortgage. The average stress rate is relatively stable across the period because at the point of origination SVRs were low and stable. Average stress rate is plotted alongside the new mortgage rate available (white line) for an individual re-fixing with a two-year fixed-rate mortgage. The new mortgage rate is constructed based on the average mortgage rates on offer at a range of loan to value levels (from 60% to 95%) across lenders. The gap between the average stress rate and the new mortgage rate is the ‘headroom’.

Chart 1: Average stress rate versus new mortgage rate

Sources: FCA Product Sales Data and Bank of England calculations.

Increases in mortgage rates since January 2022 mean that, on average, there is less ‘headroom’ between the rates borrowers were stressed at and the rates they faced when exiting their fixed deals. However, this ‘headroom’ has not been completely depleted. This suggests that ‘stress rates’ applied have been effective on average in testing that borrowers could afford the new higher rates they faced at the point of re-fixing. When borrowers re-fix without an increase in the underlying principal, they are not subject to a further affordability test.

At higher mortgage rates the ‘headroom’ is smaller (and vice versa). The new mortgage rate is based on the average two-year fixed rate, which during 2023 was higher than the average five-year fixed rate, meaning the ‘stress rate headroom’ would be higher if someone was taking out a five-year deal. If customers don’t re-fix they revert to lenders’ SVRs, which are higher than prevailing fixed term rates, meaning the ‘headroom’ would be lower.

Distribution of borrowers across stress rates

While on average we find a positive ‘headroom’, things could be different for individual borrowers. Chart 2 shows the distribution of fixed mortgages coming to the end of their term in 2023, grouped by stress rate and highlights the proportion (red bar) that were stressed below the average two-year fixed rate over 2023 (5.62%).

Chart 2: Stress rates for fixed-rate mortgages reaching maturity in 2023

Sources: FCA Product Sales Data and Bank of England calculations.

Note: The first bar captures all stress rates below the average two-year fixed mortgage rate over 2023 (5.62%). To coincide with the average mortgage rate, the second bar has a slightly higher range than other bars. The last bar captures all stress rates above 7.50%.

Our analysis suggests that, despite the significant increase in mortgage rates, only 4.30% of all fixed-rate mortgages reaching maturity in 2023 were tested at a stress rate lower than the average two-year fixed mortgage rate over 2023 (5.62%). The majority of borrowers would still have had some ‘headroom’ at mortgage rates of 6.50%, which was the highest point mortgage rates reached in 2023. As shown in Chart 2, stress rates for borrowers exiting their fixed-rate periods in 2023 are concentrated between 6.50% and 7.25%, so at mortgage rates above that level, the number of borrowers without the ‘headroom’ provided by the affordability test would have increased significantly.

Conclusion

The interest rate borrowers pay on their mortgage is a key element of affordability, albeit not the only one. In our analysis, we find that the ‘stress’ assessment carried out by lenders at origination will generally have subjected borrowers coming to the end of their fixed-rate terms in 2023 to higher stress rates than the prevailing mortgage rates when re-fixing.

The wider implications of our analysis on the housing market are hard to disentangle, given the multiple factors at play; one potential implication is that ‘stressing’ is likely to have helped limit any forced sales from affordability pressures. Overall, our post highlights the important and not widely acknowledged impact that ‘stressing’ may have had in supporting the resilience of individual borrowers and the overall market.

Daniel Norris, Elio Cucullo and Vasilis Jacovides work in the Bank’s Prudential Framework Division.

If you want to get in touch, please email us at bankunderground@bankofengland.co.uk or leave a comment below.

Comments will only appear once approved by a moderator, and are only published where a full name is supplied. Bank Underground is a blog for Bank of England staff to share views that challenge – or support – prevailing policy orthodoxies. The views expressed here are those of the authors, and are not necessarily those of the Bank of England, or its policy committees.