CoreLogic Equity Report

Transcription

1 CoreLogic Equity Report

2 REPORT NATIONAL OVERVIEW Equity Distribution Improves as Price Gains Extend from 2012 into ,000 Residential Properties Returned to Positive Equity During the First Quarter Of Residential Properties With a Mortgage, 9.7 Million Are Still in Negative Equity 19.8% OF MORTGAGED HOMES ARE UNDERWATER An analysis shows that 9.7 million, or 19.8 percent of all residential properties with a mortgage, were still in negative equity at the end of the first quarter. This compares to 10.5 million*, or 21.7 percent of all residential properties with a mortgage, at the end of Negative equity means that a borrower owes more on a home than it is worth. These properties may be referred to as underwater or upside down. NEGATIVE 8.7% IN AGGREGATE VALUE The national aggregate value of negative equity decreased $50 billion to $580 billion at the end of the first quarter. The decrease was driven in large part by improving home prices. Of the total $580 billion in negative equity, half represented first mortgages only, while the other half represented first liens with home equity loans. IF PRICES INCREASED AN ADDITIONAL 5 PERCENT, 1.6 MILLION HOMES WOULD REGAIN POSITIVE. During the past year, 1.7 million borrowers have regained positive equity. We expect the pent-up supply that falling negative equity releases will moderate price gains in many of the fast-appreciating markets this spring. Dr. Mark Fleming, chief economist for CoreLogic * Q data was revised. Revisions with public records are standard, and to ensure accuracy, CoreLogic incorporates the newly released public data to provide updated results. reproduced in any form without express written permission. 2

3 PROPERTIES WITH LESS THAN 20 PERCENT 23% OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ARE UNDER-EQUITIED Borrowers with less than 20 percent home equity are referred to as under-equitied. Of the 39 million properties with positive equity, 11.2 million have less than 20 percent equity. In the first quarter, 23 percent of all properties with a mortgage were under-equitied. Underwriting constraints may make it more difficult for under-equitied borrowers to obtain new home financing. 4.4% OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ARE NEAR-NEGATIVE Additionally, at the end of the first quarter, 2.1 million homes, or 4.4 percent, had less than 5 percent equity. This is referred to as near-negative equity, which puts these properties at risk should home prices fall. In the quarter, 850,000 residential properties returned to positive equity. The negative equity burden continues to recede across the country thanks largely to rising home prices. We are still far below peak home price levels, but tight supplies in many areas, coupled with continued demand for single family homes, should help us close the gap. Anand Nallathambi, president and CEO of CoreLogic reproduced in any form without express written permission. 3

4 SNAPSHOT 67.2% AVERAGE LOAN TO VALUE 32.8% AVERAGE 88.0% OF MORE EXPENSIVE HOMES HAVE The average loan-to-value ratio for all mortgaged homes is 67.2 percent, with total mortgage debt outstanding greater than $8.6 billion. Of residential properties underwater, 1.6 million, or 3.4 percent, have a loanto-value ratio of 100 percent to 105 percent. Another 4.1 million, or 8.4 percent, have a loan-to-value ratio greater than 125 percent. In between, with 105 percent to 125 percent loan to value, are 4 million residential properties, or 8.1 percent. The average amount of equity for all properties with a mortgage is 32.8 percent, representing more than $4.2 billion. Of the 9.7 million underwater properties, 6 million, or 62 percent, have first mortgages only. With an average balance of $211,000, these borrowers are underwater $48,000 on average. An additional 3.7 million upside-down borrowers, or 38 percent, hold both first and second liens. The average balance for this group is $294,000. The average underwater amount is $79,000. Equity is concentrated at the higher end of the housing market. Just 73 percent of homes valued at less than $200,000 have equity as compared to 88 percent valued at more than $200,000. reproduced in any form without express written permission. 4

5 NATIONAL DISTRIBUTION A LOOK AT LOAN-TO-VALUE RATIOS Loan-to-Value Segment National Equity Distribution by LTV Segment 9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% 50% to 54% 55% to 59% 60% to 64% 65% to 69% 70% to 74% 75% to 79% 80% to 84% 85% to 89% 90% to 94% 95% to 99% 100% to 104% 105% to 109% 110% to 114% 115% to 119% 120% to 124% 125% + Source: CoreLogic Q Equity Share by State and Equity Cohorts GA NV FL OH AZ MI MS NH TN AL IL NE CO SC MO MN MD NC RI DE OK VA LA WI AR KY UT CA ID OR IN IA WA NM WV KS NJ AK WY CT PA MA TX ME DC MT ND NY HI LESS THAN 80% LTV 80% TO 100% LTV 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Source: CoreLogic Q reproduced in any form without express written permission. 5

6 NATIONAL DISTRIBUTION A LOOK AT LOAN-TO-VALUE RATIOS Equity Share with Average LTV by Property Value 100% 95% 90% 85% Equity Share Average LTV 80% 75% 70% 65% 60% 55% 50% 0-100K 100K - 200K 200K - 300K 300K - 400K 400K - 500K 500K + Source: CoreLogic Q Cumulative Distribution of Equity by Loan Value 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 120+ LTV 100 to 120 LTV 80 to 100 LTV 50 to 80 LTV 0 to 50 LTV 10% 0% 0-100K 100K - 200K 200K - 300K 300K - 400K 400K - 500K 500K + Source: CoreLogic Q reproduced in any form without express written permission. 6

7 NATIONAL DISTRIBUTION A LOOK AT LOAN-TO-VALUE RATIOS Default Rate by LTV 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% Less than 50% 50% to 54% 55% to 59% 60% to 64% 65% to 69% 70% to 74% 75% to 79% 80% to 84% 85% to 89% 90% to 94% 95% to 99% 100% to 104% 105% to 109% 110% to 114% 115% to 119% 120% to 124% 125% + Source: CoreLogic Q reproduced in any form without express written permission. 7

8 NATIONAL LEVEL DETAIL NATIONAL RESIDENTIAL Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q Q4 2012* Q Positive Equity Position LTV > 0 to < % 74.9% 75.3% 74.6% 75.0% 75.2% 75.6% 74.8% 76.3% 77.7% 78.0% 78.3% 80.2% > 0 to < % 53.2% 53.3% 52.6% 52.9% 52.9% 53.2% 52.4% 53.5% 54.9% 55.0% 55.1% 57.2% 80 to < % 21.7% 21.9% 22.0% 22.1% 22.3% 22.4% 22.4% 22.8% 22.8% 23.0% 23.2% 23.0% Near Negative Equity (95 to < 100) 4.8% 4.8% 4.8% 4.9% 4.9% 4.9% 4.8% 4.9% 4.9% 4.7% 4.8% 4.8% 4.4% Negative Equity Position LTV % 25.1% 24.7% 25.4% 25.0% 24.8% 24.4% 25.2% 23.7% 22.3% 22.0% 21.7% 19.8% 100 to < % 3.9% 3.9% 3.9% 3.9% 3.9% 3.8% 4.0% 3.9% 3.7% 3.7% 3.7% 3.4% 105 to < % 9.5% 9.4% 9.7% 9.6% 9.5% 9.4% 9.7% 9.3% 8.8% 8.7% 8.8% 8.1% % 11.7% 11.5% 11.8% 11.5% 11.4% 11.1% 11.6% 10.6% 9.8% 9.6% 9.2% 8.4% Number of Negative Equity Properties (millions) Amount of Negative Equity ($B) $822 $792 $769 $780 $735 $737 $722 $743 $692 $690 $670 $631 $580 Net Homeowner Equity ($B) $3,515 $3,591 $3,623 $3,493 $3,556 $3,568 $3,578 $3,479 $3,611 $3,782 $3,769 $3,859 $4,211 Mortgage Debt Outstanding ($B) $8,734 $8,727 $8,705 $8,639 $8,576 $8,647 $8,654 $8,655 $8,635 $8,666 $8,606 $8,631 $8,644 Average LTV 71.3% 70.9% 70.6% 71.2% 70.7% 70.8% 70.7% 71.3% 70.5% 69.6% 69.5% 69.1% 67.2% *Q was revised. reproduced in any form without express written permission. 8

9 NATIONAL SNAPSHOT Under-Equity and Negative Equity Share Combined by County 80+ LTV Share As of Q % 25-35% 35-45% 45-55% 55% + Source: CoreLogic reproduced in any form without express written permission. 9

10 STATE HIGHLIGHTS Top Five States Where Mortgaged Residential Properties Have Negative Equity NEVADA FLORIDA MICHIGAN ARIZONA GEORGIA 45.4% 38.1% 32.0% 31.3% 30.5% 20 PERCENT OF MORTGAGED HOMES IN NEVADA AND FLORIDA ARE UNDERWATER BY AT LEAST 25 PERCENT. Top Five States Where Mortgaged Residential Properties Have Positive Equity MONTANA NORTH DAKOTA ALASKA TEXAS WYOMING 94.4% 94.1% 93.9% 92.8% 92.6% 57.2 PERCENT OF HOMEOWNERS IN THE U.S. HAVE AT LEAST 20 PERCENT. Near and Negative Equity Share by State MT ND AK TX WY HI NY OK KS ME WV DC IA AR KY PA NE IN NC NM UT CO WA OR MA TN MO CT LA SC WI ID VA AL MN DE NJ CA NH MS MD RI OH IL GA AZ MI FL NV NEGATIVE NEAR NEGATIVE 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% Source: CoreLogic Q reproduced in any form without express written permission. 10

11 STATE LEVEL DETAIL Q NEGATIVE BY STATE* STATE NEGATIVE AVERAGE LTV LTV >0 TO <80% LTV 80% TO <100% NEAR NEGATIVE (95% TO <100% LTV) NEAR (100% TO <105% LTV) TOTAL MORTGAGED PROPERTY COUNT (THS.) Alabama 17.4% 82.6% 72.6% 52.9% 29.7% 6.6% 4.9% 355 Alaska 6.1% 93.9% 66.2% 65.1% 28.8% 4.4% 2.2% 89 Arizona 31.3% 68.7% 79.1% 46.2% 22.5% 4.5% 3.9% 1,303 Arkansas 10.2% 89.8% 71.4% 59.1% 30.8% 4.9% 2.8% 264 California 21.3% 78.7% 63.4% 60.2% 18.5% 3.4% 2.8% 6,747 Colorado 14.2% 85.8% 68.7% 55.5% 30.3% 5.4% 3.9% 1,153 Connecticut 15.8% 84.2% 61.9% 65.3% 18.9% 3.9% 3.1% 830 Delaware 18.7% 81.3% 70.8% 57.2% 24.1% 5.5% 4.5% 199 District of Columbia 9.7% 90.3% 55.8% 71.1% 19.2% 3.2% 2.2% 100 Florida 38.1% 61.9% 81.5% 43.6% 18.3% 4.0% 3.6% 4,144 Georgia 30.5% 69.5% 80.4% 42.2% 27.2% 5.9% 5.2% 1,621 Hawaii 7.5% 92.5% 50.7% 78.9% 13.6% 2.2% 1.6% 238 Idaho 16.4% 83.6% 69.8% 60.1% 23.5% 4.4% 3.5% 246 Illinois 29.2% 70.8% 77.6% 48.4% 22.3% 4.9% 4.2% 2,223 ALL U.S. Negative Equity Share: 19.8% Equity Share: 80.2% Average Loan to Value: 67.2% Loan to Value Share >0 to <80%: 57.2% Loan to Value Share 80% to <100%: 23.0% Near Negative Equity Share (95% to <100% Loan to Value): 4.4% Near Negative Equity Share (100% to 105% Loan to Value): 3.4% Total Mortgaged Property Count (ths.): 48,692 Indiana 11.6% 88.4% 69.5% 60.7% 27.6% 4.6% 3.2% 692 Iowa 9.9% 90.1% 69.0% 60.9% 29.2% 4.5% 2.7% 383 Kansas 9.1% 90.9% 68.7% 64.0% 26.9% 4.2% 2.7% 312 Kentucky 10.3% 89.7% 68.1% 59.4% 30.4% 4.9% 2.9% 310 Louisiana 15.9% 84.1% 80.5% 58.2% 25.9% 4.0% 2.8% 298 Maine 9.2% 90.8% 62.3% 70.2% 20.6% 3.2% 2.3% 61 States with Negative Equity Share Higher Than the National Average: 12 Borrowers with Negative Equity: 9.7 million Maryland 22.6% 77.4% 69.4% 55.5% 21.9% 4.9% 4.0% 1,368 Massachusetts 15.0% 85.0% 60.2% 67.9% 17.1% 3.3% 2.6% 1,501 Michigan 32.0% 68.0% 80.7% 44.6% 23.3% 4.8% 4.2% 1,374 Minnesota 17.5% 82.5% 69.1% 56.1% 26.4% 5.2% 3.9% 642 Mississippi 22.3% 77.7% 77.3% 48.1% 29.6% 6.7% 5.1% 50 Missouri 15.3% 84.7% 70.8% 56.9% 27.8% 5.3% 3.9% 788 CONTINUED ON PAGE 12 reproduced in any form without express written permission. 11

12 STATE LEVEL DETAIL Q NEGATIVE BY STATE* STATE NEGATIVE AVERAGE LTV LTV >0 TO <80% LTV 80% TO <100% NEAR NEGATIVE (95% TO <100% LTV) NEAR (100% TO <105% LTV) TOTAL MORTGAGED PROPERTY COUNT (THS.) Montana 5.6% 94.4% 59.2% 75.8% 18.6% 2.4% 1.6% 120 Nebraska 11.1% 88.9% 74.4% 54.5% 34.4% 5.8% 3.5% 234 Nevada 45.4% 54.6% 96.0% 33.0% 21.6% 4.2% 3.6% 544 New Hampshire 21.3% 78.7% 72.1% 53.8% 24.8% 5.4% 4.4% 226 New Jersey 19.0% 81.0% 65.0% 61.7% 19.3% 4.2% 3.5% 1,878 New Mexico 13.3% 86.7% 67.2% 61.5% 25.2% 4.8% 3.5% 248 New York 7.7% 92.3% 49.4% 76.9% 15.4% 2.5% 1.8% 1,939 North Carolina 12.2% 87.8% 70.4% 57.2% 30.6% 5.6% 3.7% 1,622 North Dakota 5.9% 94.1% 58.9% 77.2% 16.9% 2.2% 1.4% 67 Ohio 26.3% 73.7% 77.4% 48.0% 25.7% 5.7% 4.8% 2,151 Oklahoma 7.8% 92.2% 71.5% 57.4% 34.8% 4.9% 2.4% 436 Oregon 14.8% 85.2% 67.0% 60.9% 24.3% 4.4% 3.4% 713 Pennslyvania 10.3% 89.7% 63.3% 67.2% 22.5% 3.9% 2.7% 1,913 Rhode Island 25.8% 74.2% 69.0% 56.9% 17.2% 4.1% 3.5% 230 ALL U.S. Negative Equity Share: 19.8% Equity Share: 80.2% Average Loan to Value: 67.2% Loan to Value Share >0 to <80%: 57.2% Loan to Value Share 80% to <100%: 23.0% Near Negative Equity Share (95% to <100% Loan to Value): 4.4% Near Negative Equity Share (100% to 105% Loan to Value): 3.4% Total Mortgaged Property Count (ths.): 48,692 South Carolina 15.9% 84.1% 70.1% 54.8% 29.2% 5.6% 4.1% 649 South Dakota N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tennessee 15.2% 84.8% 70.9% 53.6% 31.2% 5.9% 4.0% 979 Texas 7.2% 92.8% 64.5% 67.6% 25.2% 3.6% 2.2% 3,436 Utah 13.9% 86.1% 67.7% 59.4% 26.8% 5.2% 3.9% 483 Vermont N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A States with Negative Equity Share Higher Than the National Average: 12 Borrowers with Negative Equity: 9.7 million Virginia 17.0% 83.0% 67.7% 58.7% 24.3% 4.9% 3.7% 1,333 Washington 14.7% 85.3% 65.4% 60.9% 24.4% 4.6% 3.6% 1,437 West Virginia 9.3% 90.7% 70.6% 64.3% 26.4% 3.1% 1.8% 27 Wisconsin 16.3% 83.7% 70.9% 57.7% 25.9% 4.9% 3.7% 694 Wyoming 7.4% 92.6% 64.9% 66.4% 26.2% 3.9% 2.3% 41 *Only those properties with mortgages are included. reproduced in any form without express written permission. 12

13 METROPOLITAN AREA HIGHLIGHTS LARGEST 25 METROS Five metros with highest percentage of residences in negative equity 41.1% 40.7% 34.5% 34.2% 33.6% TAMPA-ST.PETE- MIAMI-MIAMI ATLANTA-SANDY CHICAGO-JOLIET- WARREN-TROY- CLEARWATER, BEACH-KENDALL, SPRINGS- NAPERVILLE, ILL. FARMINGTON FLA. FLA. MARIETTA, GA. HILLS, MICH. Five metros with highest percentage of residences in positive equity 91.7% 91.0% 90.8% 90.4% 89.0% DALLAS-PLANO- HOUSTON- NASSAU- PHILADELPHIA, NEW YORK- IRVING, TEXAS SUGARLAND- SUFFOLK, N.Y. PA. WHITE PLAINS- BAYTOWN, TEXAS WAYNE, N.Y.-N.J. reproduced in any form without express written permission. 13

14 METROPOLITAN AREA HIGHLIGHTS Q NEGATIVE BY CBSA* METROPOLITAN AREA** AVERAGE LTV LTV LTV 80% TO >0 TO <80% <100% NEGATIVE NEAR NEGATIVE (95% TO <100% LTV) NEAR (100% TO <105% LTV) TOTAL MORTGAGED PROPERTY COUNT (THS.) Dallas-Plano-Irving, TX 65.8% 91.7% 65.0% 26.7% 8.3% 3.8% 2.4% 757 Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX 64.2% 91.0% 65.6% 25.5% 9.0% 3.9% 2.6% 957 Nassau-Suffolk, NY 48.3% 90.8% 77.5% 13.3% 9.2% 2.5% 2.0% 542 Philadelphia, PA 61.8% 90.4% 69.0% 21.3% 9.6% 3.9% 2.7% 889 New York-White Plains-Wayne, NY-NJ 52.4% 89.0% 74.4% 14.6% 11.0% 2.8% 2.2% 1,146 Santa Ana-Anaheim-Irvine, CA 58.5% 88.9% 73.0% 15.9% 11.1% 2.9% 2.3% 551 Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA 65.5% 88.3% 63.4% 24.9% 11.7% 4.2% 3.3% 478 Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA 61.8% 87.1% 65.6% 21.5% 12.9% 3.9% 3.1% 639 Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, CO 69.7% 85.4% 54.8% 30.6% 14.6% 5.2% 3.9% 633 Edison-New Brunswick, NJ 62.0% 84.4% 65.3% 19.1% 15.6% 4.0% 3.2% 550 St. Louis, MO-IL 69.3% 84.3% 57.1% 27.2% 15.7% 5.4% 4.1% 562 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale, CA 59.2% 83.8% 67.0% 16.8% 16.2% 2.9% 2.4% 1,521 Baltimore-Towson, MD 66.7% 82.7% 59.7% 22.9% 17.3% 4.8% 3.9% 643 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI 69.6% 81.6% 54.7% 26.9% 18.4% 5.4% 4.1% 544 San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA 64.6% 80.5% 60.5% 20.0% 19.5% 4.0% 3.0% 587 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 68.6% 78.0% 55.5% 22.5% 22.0% 4.6% 3.5% 1,022 Oakland-Fremont-Hayward, CA 65.9% 77.4% 60.9% 16.5% 22.6% 3.3% 2.7% 537 Sacramento--Arden-Arcade--Roseville, CA 75.3% 74.2% 53.0% 21.2% 25.8% 3.8% 3.2% 480 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 83.2% 68.6% 45.8% 22.8% 31.4% 3.7% 3.2% 821 Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ 80.4% 67.5% 44.8% 22.6% 32.5% 4.3% 3.7% 905 Warren-Troy-Farmington Hills, MI 81.6% 66.4% 44.1% 22.3% 33.6% 4.7% 4.2% 512 Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL 78.8% 65.8% 45.1% 20.7% 34.2% 4.9% 4.4% 1,516 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 82.0% 65.5% 39.2% 26.3% 34.5% 5.9% 5.4% 1,191 Miami-Miami Beach-Kendall, FL 78.4% 59.3% 44.1% 15.2% 40.7% 3.6% 3.2% 478 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL 85.8% 58.9% 39.8% 19.1% 41.1% 4.3% 4.0% 622 * Metropolitan Areas used are CBSAs as defined by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) or the Metropolitan Division of a CBSA where available. ** This table represents the largest 25 Metropolitan Areas by mortgage count, sorted by highest equity share. reproduced in any form without express written permission. 14

15 METHODOLOGY The amount of equity for each property is determined by comparing the estimated current value of the property against the mortgage debt outstanding (MDO). If the MDO is greater than the estimated value, then the property is determined to be in a negative equity position. If the estimated value is greater than the MDO, then the property is determined to be in a positive equity position. The data is first generated at the property level and aggregated to higher levels of geography. CoreLogic data includes 49 million properties with a mortgage, which accounts for more than 85 percent of all mortgages in the U.S. CoreLogic uses its public record data as the source of the MDO, which includes both first-mortgage liens and second liens and is adjusted for amortization and home equity utilization in order to capture the true level of MDO for each property. The calculations are not based on sampling, but rather on the full data set to avoid potential adverse selection due to sampling. The current value of the property is estimated using a suite of proprietary CoreLogic valuation techniques, including valuation models and the CoreLogic Home Price Index (HPI). Only data for mortgaged residential properties that have a current estimated value is included. There are several states or jurisdictions where the public record, current value or mortgage coverage is thin. These instances account for fewer than 5 percent of the total U.S. population. ABOUT CORELOGIC CoreLogic (NYSE: CLGX) is a leading property information, analytics and services provider in the United States and Australia. The company s combined data from public, contributory and proprietary sources includes over 3.3 billion records spanning more than 40 years, providing detailed coverage of property, mortgages and other encumbrances, consumer credit, tenancy, location, hazard risk and related performance information. The markets CoreLogic serves include real estate and mortgage finance, insurance, capital markets, transportation and government. CoreLogic delivers value to clients through unique data, analytics, workflow technology, advisory and managed services. Clients rely on CoreLogic to help identify and manage growth opportunities, improve performance and mitigate risk. Headquartered in Irvine, Calif., CoreLogic operates in seven countries. For more information, please visit CORELOGIC and the CoreLogic logo are trademarks of CoreLogic, Inc. and/or its subsidiaries. CONTACT For more information, please call or tdahl@corelogic.com. FIRST 17-EQTY QUARTER 2013 reproduced in any form without express written permission. 15