Uncategorized

A new twist in investor loans in non-QM

admin | June 14, 2019

This document is intended for institutional investors and is not subject to all of the independence and disclosure standards applicable to debt research reports prepared for retail investors.

Loans backed by investment properties have started flowing into non-QM MBS deals with a new twist: underwriting closer to CMBS than RMBS. Investor loans underwritten more to debt service coverage ratios or DSCR rather than borrower income have become a large part of some non-QM securitizations. Prepayment speeds on DSCR loans appear to be more predictable and credit performance relatively benign, but the relatively novel form of underwriting is still untested.

Investor loans fall outside the bounds of QM

Loans backed by investment properties have become a significant contributor to overall private MBS issuance since the beginning of last year. And while these loans often surface in non-QM deals, they are not technically either QM or non-QM. The investor loans are backed by 1- to 4-family residences, but they fall outside the scope of the Qualified Mortgage rules because they are commercial and not consumer loans. Their exempt status gives originators latitude to underwrite using non-traditional means. Originators still use a borrower’s FICO and LTV, but instead of using the borrower’s income the originator uses actual or estimated rental incomes often in combination with the borrower’s assets.

Investor Debt Service Coverage Ratio (DSCR) loans have become more prevalent in certain non-QM trusts. Screening for these loans is not an exact science, however, given inconsistent data disclosure across issuers. A good clue to DSCR loans is the absence of borrower debt-to-income (DTI) ratio as the originator can only calculate it by verifying the borrower’s income. By definition these loans should also be non-full documentation loans given the lack of income verification. (Exhibit 1)

Exhibit 1: Estimated population of DSCF loans in non-QM trusts

Source: Amherst Insight Labs, Amherst Pierpont Securities

Identifying DSCR loans through missing DTI ratios squares with rating agency disclosures. Per S&P, for example, none of the mortgage loans in VERUS 2018-INV1 or VERSUS 2018-INV2 use the mortgagors’ incomes for underwriting, in line with 100% missing DTI. Further, S&P identifies 26% of the collateral in HOF 2018-1 as underwritten using DSCR/asset depletion underwriting, generally consistent with an estimate of 23% from missing DTI.

A history of more stable prepayments

Comparing prepayment trends across DSCR and traditional investor loans suggests that prepayment rates on DSCR loans tend to be relatively more stable. Focusing on two shelves with the largest populations of DSCR loans as a percentage of overall issuance, Invictus’ VERUS shelf and Neuberger Berman’s Homeward Opportunities (HOF) shelf, suggests that prepayment rates DSCR loans tend to be lower and less volatile. This simple analysis does not control for key prepayment characteristics like refi incentive and loan size. With that caveat, prepayment speeds on DSCR loans should nevertheless be more stable for the near term given the limited number of channels for refinancing these loans. (Exhibit 2)

Exhibit 2: Shelf level prepayments – DSCR and traditional investor loans

Source: Amherst Insight Labs, Amherst Pierpont Securities

No clear differences so far in credit

Comparing delinquency rates across DSCR and traditional investor loans across the two programs shows relatively benign credit performance across both types of loans and no clear difference in performance between the two. Delinquency rates on DSCR loans in the VERUS program appear to be somewhat consistent and modestly elevated versus the traditional investor loans. Delinquency rates on traditional investor loans are more volatile and have been modestly higher than those of DSCR loans in certain months where DQ rates on traditional investor loans have been up to 250 bp more than DSCR loans. The difference in performance is more pronounced in the HOF program, where delinquency rates on DSCR loans have been consistently higher than traditional investor loans by 150 bp or more. While credit performance has been relatively consistent and benign across both types of investor loans, home prices and rents have steadily appreciated through most of the lives of these shelves. Given that a CMBS-style underwriting is relatively unproven in residential mortgage origination, it is hard to predict how credit performance may diverge on these types of loans in a downturn in home prices and rents. (Exhibit 3)

Exhibit 3: Shelf level delinquency rates – DSCR and traditional investor loans

Source: Amherst Insight Labs, Amherst Pierpont Securities

No compensating attributes

Comparing DSCR loans to more traditionally underwritten investor loans in the same trusts suggests that there is little in the way of collateral characteristics to compensate for the lack of borrower income verification. Of the $1.6 billion in investor loans across the 17 trusts with meaningful concentrations of DSCR loans, more than 70% of those loans were underwritten with no borrower income verification. The DSCR loans had an average WAC nearly 100 bp higher than traditionally underwritten investor loans. The DSCR borrowers had an average FICO seven points lower and an average LTV two points less than traditional investor loans. Both sets of investor loans had a significant concentration of cash out refinancing;. 47% of the DSCR loans were also cash out refis. Despite the large population of cash out refis, the average LTV on the DSCR loans were 64. (Exhibit 4). That means the market has a clear view so far of differences in prepayments and credit across loans distinguished largely by the difference between DSCR and traditional income underwriting.

Exhibit 4: A comparison of DSCR and traditional investor loans in non-QM trusts

Source: Amherst Insight Labs, Amherst Pierpont Securities

admin
jkillian@apsec.com
john.killian@santander.us 1 (646) 776-7714

This material is intended only for institutional investors and does not carry all of the independence and disclosure standards of retail debt research reports. In the preparation of this material, the author may have consulted or otherwise discussed the matters referenced herein with one or more of SCM’s trading desks, any of which may have accumulated or otherwise taken a position, long or short, in any of the financial instruments discussed in or related to this material. Further, SCM may act as a market maker or principal dealer and may have proprietary interests that differ or conflict with the recipient hereof, in connection with any financial instrument discussed in or related to this material.

This message, including any attachments or links contained herein, is subject to important disclaimers, conditions, and disclosures regarding Electronic Communications, which you can find at https://portfolio-strategy.apsec.com/sancap-disclaimers-and-disclosures.

Important Disclaimers

Copyright © 2024 Santander US Capital Markets LLC and its affiliates (“SCM”). All rights reserved. SCM is a member of FINRA and SIPC. This material is intended for limited distribution to institutions only and is not publicly available. Any unauthorized use or disclosure is prohibited.

In making this material available, SCM (i) is not providing any advice to the recipient, including, without limitation, any advice as to investment, legal, accounting, tax and financial matters, (ii) is not acting as an advisor or fiduciary in respect of the recipient, (iii) is not making any predictions or projections and (iv) intends that any recipient to which SCM has provided this material is an “institutional investor” (as defined under applicable law and regulation, including FINRA Rule 4512 and that this material will not be disseminated, in whole or part, to any third party by the recipient.

The author of this material is an economist, desk strategist or trader. In the preparation of this material, the author may have consulted or otherwise discussed the matters referenced herein with one or more of SCM’s trading desks, any of which may have accumulated or otherwise taken a position, long or short, in any of the financial instruments discussed in or related to this material. Further, SCM or any of its affiliates may act as a market maker or principal dealer and may have proprietary interests that differ or conflict with the recipient hereof, in connection with any financial instrument discussed in or related to this material.

This material (i) has been prepared for information purposes only and does not constitute a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities, related investments or other financial instruments, (ii) is neither research, a “research report” as commonly understood under the securities laws and regulations promulgated thereunder nor the product of a research department, (iii) or parts thereof may have been obtained from various sources, the reliability of which has not been verified and cannot be guaranteed by SCM, (iv) should not be reproduced or disclosed to any other person, without SCM’s prior consent and (v) is not intended for distribution in any jurisdiction in which its distribution would be prohibited.

In connection with this material, SCM (i) makes no representation or warranties as to the appropriateness or reliance for use in any transaction or as to the permissibility or legality of any financial instrument in any jurisdiction, (ii) believes the information in this material to be reliable, has not independently verified such information and makes no representation, express or implied, with regard to the accuracy or completeness of such information, (iii) accepts no responsibility or liability as to any reliance placed, or investment decision made, on the basis of such information by the recipient and (iv) does not undertake, and disclaims any duty to undertake, to update or to revise the information contained in this material.

Unless otherwise stated, the views, opinions, forecasts, valuations, or estimates contained in this material are those solely of the author, as of the date of publication of this material, and are subject to change without notice. The recipient of this material should make an independent evaluation of this information and make such other investigations as the recipient considers necessary (including obtaining independent financial advice), before transacting in any financial market or instrument discussed in or related to this material.