CoreLogic Equity Report

Transcription

1 CoreLogic Equity Report

2 REPORT NATIONAL OVERVIEW Home Price Growth Helped 2.5 Million Residences Return to Positive Equity in the Second Quarter 7.1 Million Mortgaged Residential Properties Still Have Negative Equity As Home Appreciation Moderates in the Second Half, the Pace of Improvement Will Likely Slow 14.5% OF MORTGAGED HOMES HAVE NEGATIVE Our analysis shows that 7.1 million, or 14.5 percent of all residential properties with a mortgage, were still in negative equity at the end of the first quarter. This compares to 9.6 million*, or 19.7 percent of all residential properties with a mortgage, at the end of the first quarter 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. 25.7% IN AGGREGATE VALUE OF NEGATIVE The national aggregate value of negative equity decreased $148 billion to $428 billion at the end of the second quarter. The decrease was driven in large part by improving home prices. Of the total $428 billion in negative equity, half represented first mortgages only, while the other half represented first liens with home equity loans. IF HOME PRICES INCREASED AN ADDITIONAL 5 PERCENT, 1.3 MILLION HOMES WOULD REGAIN POSITIVE. Equity rebuilding continued in the second quarter as the share of underwater mortgaged homes fell to 14.5 percent. In just the first half of the year, almost three and a half million homeowners have gained positive equity, but the pace of improvement will likely slow as price appreciation moderates in the second half. 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 OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES WITH 21.1% ARE UNDER-EQUITIED Borrowers with less than 20 percent home equity are referred to as under-equitied. Of the 41.5 million properties with positive equity, 10.3 million, or 21.1 percent, have less than 20 percent equity. Underwriting constraints may make it more difficult for under-equitied borrowers to obtain new home financing. 3.4% OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ARE NEAR-NEGATIVE Additionally, at the end of the first quarter, 1.7 million homes, or 3.4 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, 2.5 million residential properties returned to positive equity. Price appreciation had a positive impact on equity in homes over the first half of 2013, especially the second quarter, said Anand Nallathambi, president and CEO of CoreLogic. Despite the quarter s substantial decrease in negative equity, there s more ground left to gain with the 7.1 million U.S. residences that remain underwater. Anand Nallathambi, president and CEO of CoreLogic reproduced in any form without express written permission. 3

4 SNAPSHOT 62.5% AVERAGE LOAN TO VALUE 32.6% AVERAGE AMOUNT UNDERWATER 91.0% OF MORE EXPENSIVE HOMES HAVE The average loan-to-value ratio for all mortgaged homes is 62.5 percent, with total mortgage debt outstanding greater than $8.5 trillion. Of residential properties underwater, 1.3 million, or 2.6 percent, have a loan-to-value ratio of 100 percent to 105 percent. Another 2.8 million, or 5.8 percent, have a loan-to-value ratio greater than 125 percent. In between, with 105 percent to 125 percent loan to value, are 3 million residential properties, or 6.1 percent. The average amount underwater for all properties with a mortgage is 32.6 percent. Of the 7.1 million underwater properties, 4.3 million, or 61 percent, have first mortgages only. With an average balance of $217,000, these borrowers are underwater $51,000 on average. An additional 2.8 million upside-down borrowers, or 39 percent, hold both first and second liens. The average balance for this group is $292,000. The average underwater amount is $75,000. Home equity is concentrated at the higher end of the market. Just 80 percent of homes valued at less than $200,000 have equity as compared to 91 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% Q Q % 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 NV GA MS FL OH AZ MI NE IL MD TN AR NH AL SC CO LA MN OK WI NM RI MO VA NC KY DE IA NJ WA ID OR CA UT KS IN AK WV CT MA PA WY TX DC ME ND NY MT HI LESS THAN 80% LTV 80% TO 100% LTV 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 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% 90% 80% Equity Share Average LTV 70% 60% 50% 40% 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 Q4 2012* Q1 2013* Q Positive Equity Position LTV > 0 to < % 75.3% 74.6% 75.0% 75.2% 75.6% 74.8% 76.3% 77.7% 78.0% 78.3% 80.3% 85.5% > 0 to < % 53.3% 52.6% 52.9% 52.9% 53.2% 52.4% 53.5% 54.9% 55.0% 55.1% 57.1% 64.4% 80 to < % 21.9% 22.0% 22.1% 22.3% 22.4% 22.4% 22.8% 22.8% 23.0% 23.2% 23.1% 21.1% Near Negative Equity (95 to < 100) 4.8% 4.8% 4.9% 4.9% 4.9% 4.8% 4.9% 4.9% 4.7% 4.8% 4.8% 4.4% 3.4% Negative Equity Position LTV % 24.7% 25.4% 25.0% 24.8% 24.4% 25.2% 23.7% 22.3% 22.0% 21.7% 19.7% 14.5% 100 to < % 3.9% 3.9% 3.9% 3.9% 3.8% 4.0% 3.9% 3.7% 3.7% 3.7% 3.4% 2.6% 105 to < % 9.4% 9.7% 9.6% 9.5% 9.4% 9.7% 9.3% 8.8% 8.7% 8.8% 8.1% 6.1% % 11.5% 11.8% 11.5% 11.4% 11.1% 11.6% 10.6% 9.8% 9.6% 9.2% 8.3% 5.8% Number of Negative Equity Properties (millions) Amount of Negative Equity ($B) $792 $769 $780 $735 $737 $722 $743 $692 $690 $670 $629 $576 $428 Net Homeowner Equity ($B) $3,591 $3,623 $3,493 $3,556 $3,568 $3,578 $3,479 $3,611 $3,782 $3,769 $3,864 $4,217 $5,087 Mortgage Debt Outstanding ($B) $8,727 $8,705 $8,639 $8,576 $8,647 $8,654 $8,655 $8,635 $8,666 $8,606 $8,631 $8,644 $8,484 Average LTV 70.9% 70.6% 71.2% 70.7% 70.8% 70.7% 71.3% 70.5% 69.6% 69.5% 69.1% 67.2% 62.5% *Q and Q were 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 ARIZONA MICHIGAN GEORGIA 36.4% 31.5% 24.7% 22.5% 20.7% 17.3 PERCENT OF MORTGAGED HOMES IN FLORIDA AND 22.4 PERCENT OF MORTGAGED HOMES IN NEVADA ARE UNDERWATER BY AT LEAST 25 PERCENT. Top Five States Where Mortgaged Residential Properties Have Positive Equity MONTANA ALASKA WYOMING TEXAS NORTH DAKOTA 96.2% 96.1% 95.8% 95.7% 95.5% 64.4 PERCENT OF MORTGAGED HOMES IN THE U.S. HAVE AT LEAST 20 PERCENT. Near and Negative Equity Share by State MT ND WY AK TX ME HI DC NY WV OK KS IN PA KY IA UT NC NE AR CO WA OR CT MO MA TN SC AL ID VA NM WI DE MN LA CA NH NJ MD RI OH IL MS GA MI AZ FL NV NEGATIVE NEAR NEGATIVE 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% Source: CoreLogic Q reproduced in any form without express written permission. 10

11 STATE LEVEL DETAIL Q NEGATIVE BY STATE* STATE AVERAGE LTV LTV >0 TO <80% LTV 80% TO <100% NEGATIVE NEAR NEGATIVE (95% TO < 100% LTV) NEAR (100% TO <105% LTV) TOTAL MORTGAGED PROPERTY COUNT (THS.) Alabama 67.4% 89.6% 61.4% 28.2% 10.4% 4.5% 3.0% 357 Alaska 63.6% 96.1% 70.8% 25.3% 3.9% 2.3% 1.2% 88 Arizona 73.7% 75.3% 53.8% 21.5% 24.7% 4.0% 3.5% 1,305 Arkansas 70.1% 91.7% 61.1% 30.6% 8.3% 4.1% 2.3% 263 California 57.6% 84.6% 69.6% 15.0% 15.4% 2.6% 2.2% 6,726 Colorado 65.6% 90.5% 62.0% 28.6% 9.5% 4.1% 2.7% 1,153 Connecticut 57.3% 89.1% 71.6% 17.5% 10.9% 3.0% 2.4% 828 Delaware 64.5% 87.7% 65.2% 22.5% 12.3% 4.1% 3.0% 199 District of Columbia 52.3% 94.0% 77.6% 16.4% 6.0% 2.0% 1.4% 100 Florida 74.8% 68.5% 50.3% 18.2% 31.5% 3.7% 3.3% 4,125 Georgia 72.9% 79.3% 53.2% 26.2% 20.7% 5.0% 4.1% 1,614 Hawaii 49.0% 94.0% 81.7% 12.3% 6.0% 1.8% 1.3% 240 Idaho 65.9% 88.4% 67.4% 20.9% 11.6% 3.4% 2.7% 245 Illinois 70.0% 80.0% 57.7% 22.2% 20.0% 4.1% 3.4% 2,214 ALL U.S. Negative Equity Share: 14.5% Equity Share: 85.5% Average Loan to Value: 62.5% Loan to Value Share >0 to <80%: 64.4% Loan to Value Share 80% to <100%: 21.1% Near Negative Equity Share (95% to <100% Loan to Value): 3.4% Near Negative Equity Share (100% to 105% Loan to Value): 2.6% Total Mortgaged Property Count (ths.): 48,610 Indiana 65.7% 93.4% 69.8% 23.6% 6.6% 2.8% 1.8% 695 Iowa 67.2% 92.2% 64.9% 27.3% 7.8% 3.3% 2.0% 385 Kansas 66.3% 93.7% 69.9% 23.8% 6.3% 3.0% 1.8% 318 Kentucky 65.9% 92.5% 64.9% 27.7% 7.5% 3.2% 2.0% 310 Louisiana 78.0% 86.6% 61.6% 25.0% 13.4% 3.2% 2.2% 305 Maine 57.2% 94.5% 79.1% 15.3% 5.5% 2.0% 1.4% 63 States with Negative Equity Share Higher Than the National Average: 12 Borrowers with Negative Equity: 7.1 million Maryland 65.1% 82.7% 60.9% 21.8% 17.3% 4.0% 3.4% 1,361 Massachusetts 56.4% 88.5% 72.8% 15.7% 11.5% 2.6% 2.1% 1,495 Michigan 72.6% 77.5% 56.0% 21.5% 22.5% 4.0% 3.5% 1,381 Minnesota 65.4% 87.4% 62.2% 25.2% 12.6% 4.0% 3.0% 644 Mississippi 75.0% 81.7% 50.6% 31.1% 18.3% 6.2% 4.6% 49 Missouri 67.0% 89.7% 64.2% 25.5% 10.3% 3.8% 2.7% 787 CONTINUED ON PAGE 12 reproduced in any form without express written permission. 11

12 STATE LEVEL DETAIL Q NEGATIVE BY STATE* STATE AVERAGE LTV LTV >0 TO <80% LTV 80% TO <100% NEGATIVE NEAR NEGATIVE (95% TO < 100% LTV) NEAR (100% TO <105% LTV) TOTAL MORTGAGED PROPERTY COUNT (THS.) Montana 56.1% 96.2% 80.9% 15.3% 3.8% 1.7% 1.0% 119 Nebraska 71.9% 91.9% 59.5% 32.4% 8.1% 4.0% 2.2% 236 Nevada 85.0% 63.6% 45.4% 18.2% 36.4% 3.4% 3.1% 542 New Hampshire 67.0% 85.8% 61.4% 24.4% 14.2% 4.1% 3.3% 228 New Jersey 61.0% 85.1% 66.4% 18.7% 14.9% 3.7% 3.0% 1,872 New Mexico 65.7% 88.1% 64.0% 24.1% 11.9% 4.2% 3.1% 246 New York 47.7% 93.9% 79.8% 14.1% 6.1% 2.1% 1.5% 1,943 North Carolina 65.6% 92.1% 64.3% 27.7% 7.9% 4.0% 2.4% 1,615 North Dakota 57.1% 95.5% 80.7% 14.8% 4.5% 1.4% 1.0% 66 Ohio 72.5% 81.2% 55.5% 25.8% 18.8% 4.8% 3.9% 2,139 Oklahoma 69.7% 94.3% 62.0% 32.3% 5.7% 3.0% 1.4% 438 Oregon 63.3% 89.8% 67.7% 22.1% 10.2% 3.4% 2.6% 712 Pennslyvania 59.3% 92.7% 72.6% 20.1% 7.3% 2.8% 1.8% 1,908 Rhode Island 62.7% 81.2% 63.7% 17.5% 18.8% 3.3% 2.7% 229 ALL U.S. Negative Equity Share: 14.5% Equity Share: 85.5% Average Loan to Value: 62.5% Loan to Value Share >0 to <80%: 64.4% Loan to Value Share 80% to <100%: 21.1% Near Negative Equity Share (95% to <100% Loan to Value): 3.4% Near Negative Equity Share (100% to 105% Loan to Value): 2.6% Total Mortgaged Property Count (ths.): 48,610 South Carolina 66.0% 89.5% 61.4% 28.2% 10.5% 4.3% 2.9% 648 South Dakota N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A Tennessee 67.7% 89.6% 60.0% 29.6% 10.4% 4.2% 2.8% 977 Texas 61.1% 95.7% 75.8% 19.9% 4.3% 2.0% 1.2% 3,427 Utah 63.4% 91.9% 68.0% 23.8% 8.1% 3.7% 2.6% 479 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: 7.1 million Virginia 63.0% 87.9% 64.0% 23.8% 12.1% 3.8% 2.9% 1,340 Washington 61.5% 90.0% 67.6% 22.4% 10.0% 3.6% 2.7% 1,433 West Virginia 67.5% 93.1% 72.3% 20.8% 6.9% 1.7% 1.1% 28 Wisconsin 67.9% 87.8% 62.5% 25.4% 12.2% 4.0% 2.9% 694 Wyoming 60.7% 95.8% 75.8% 20.0% 4.2% 2.0% 1.2% 42 *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 36.5% 33.8% 25.6% 24.8% 24.3% MIAMI-MIAMI TAMPA-ST.PETE- PHOENIX-MESA- RIVERSIDE-SAN WARREN-TROY- BEACH-KENDALL, CLEARWATER, GLENDALE, ARIZ. BERNARDINO- FARMINGTON FLA. FLA. ONTARIO, CALIF. HILLS, MICH. Five metros with highest percentage of residences in positive equity 95.2% 95.0% 93.4% 93.3% 92.3% HOUSTON- DALLAS-PLANO- PHILADELPHIA, SANTA ANA- NASSAU- SUGARLAND- IRVING, TEXAS PA. ANAHEIM-IRVINE, SUFFOLK, N.Y. BAYTOWN, TEXAS CALIF. 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.) Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX 60.0% 95.2% 75.9% 19.4% 4.8% 2.1% 1.3% 955 Dallas-Plano-Irving, TX 61.9% 95.0% 74.7% 20.3% 5.0% 2.2% 1.4% 756 Philadelphia, PA 57.6% 93.4% 74.3% 19.1% 6.6% 2.8% 1.8% 888 Santa Ana-Anaheim-Irvine, CA 53.5% 93.3% 80.7% 12.6% 6.7% 2.1% 1.7% 549 Nassau-Suffolk, NY 46.8% 92.3% 79.4% 12.9% 7.7% 2.3% 1.8% 546 Portland-Vancouver-Hillsboro, OR-WA 62.5% 91.9% 69.6% 22.3% 8.1% 3.3% 2.5% 476 Seattle-Bellevue-Everett, WA 57.8% 91.8% 73.2% 18.7% 8.2% 3.0% 2.2% 636 New York-White Plains-Wayne, NY-NJ 50.0% 91.5% 77.8% 13.7% 8.5% 2.4% 1.8% 1,143 Denver-Aurora-Broomfield, CO 66.1% 90.8% 62.9% 27.9% 9.2% 3.7% 2.6% 634 St. Louis, MO-IL 65.7% 89.4% 63.6% 25.8% 10.6% 4.1% 2.8% 565 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Glendale, CA 54.3% 88.6% 75.4% 13.2% 11.4% 2.3% 2.0% 1,516 Baltimore-Towson, MD 62.9% 87.3% 64.9% 22.4% 12.7% 4.0% 3.2% 641 Edison-New Brunswick, NJ 59.3% 87.0% 68.6% 18.4% 13.0% 3.6% 2.9% 549 Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI 65.8% 86.7% 60.9% 25.9% 13.3% 4.2% 3.2% 548 San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA 58.9% 86.3% 69.1% 17.2% 13.7% 2.7% 2.3% 585 Oakland-Fremont-Hayward, CA 58.8% 84.3% 70.9% 13.4% 15.7% 2.5% 2.1% 536 Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV 63.6% 83.7% 62.0% 21.6% 16.3% 3.5% 2.8% 1,025 Sacramento--Arden-Arcade--Roseville, CA 67.3% 81.9% 65.3% 16.6% 18.1% 3.1% 2.7% 478 Chicago-Joliet-Naperville, IL 70.2% 76.9% 55.9% 21.0% 23.1% 4.1% 3.6% 1,509 Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA 74.0% 76.6% 50.7% 25.8% 23.4% 5.2% 4.4% 1,188 Warren-Troy-Farmington Hills, MI 73.5% 75.7% 55.0% 20.7% 24.3% 4.2% 3.8% 509 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 75.6% 75.2% 57.1% 18.1% 24.8% 3.1% 2.8% 819 Phoenix-Mesa-Glendale, AZ 74.5% 74.4% 53.5% 20.9% 25.6% 3.8% 3.4% 905 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL 78.5% 66.2% 46.7% 19.5% 33.8% 4.1% 3.7% 620 Miami-Miami Beach-Kendall, FL 74.1% 63.5% 47.9% 15.6% 36.5% 3.4% 3.0% 475 * 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. SECOND 17-EQTYQ QUARTER 2013 reproduced in any form without express written permission. 15