No Shopping in the U.S. Mortgage Market: Direct and Strategic Effects of Providing Information

A. Alexandrov, Sergei Koulayev
{"title":"No Shopping in the U.S. Mortgage Market: Direct and Strategic Effects of Providing Information","authors":"A. Alexandrov, Sergei Koulayev","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2948491","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We document and analyze price dispersion in the U.S. mortgage market. We find significant price dispersion in posted prices in the retail channel: for example, a consumer with a prime credit score and with a 20% down payment for a conforming loan might see a spread in interest rates of 50 basis points, controlling for all relevant consumer/property characteristics, including discount points. This amounts to extra 342 dollars per year, for every 100,000 of the loan. We also show, from survey evidence, that close to half of consumers did not shop before taking out a mortgage, and that most consumers do not seem to realize that there is price dispersion. Using a proprietary dataset of lenders' ratesheets, we estimate an equilibrium model of costly search where majority of consumers hold incorrect beliefs regarding price dispersion. In addition to search costs, we show that non-price factors, such as consumer preference of one lender over another, also play an important role in preventing consumers from searching more. In one of our counterfactuals, we show that if 20% of consumers had obtained one extra quote, consumers would save $4 billion dollars a year, most coming from the indirect/equilibrium effect of firms lowering prices in response to more shopping. In another counterfactual, we show that if consumers were to focus on mortgage cost only, they would save about $9 billion dollars a year.","PeriodicalId":196559,"journal":{"name":"LSN: Consumer Credit Issues (Sub-Topic)","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"48","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"LSN: Consumer Credit Issues (Sub-Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2948491","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 48

Abstract

We document and analyze price dispersion in the U.S. mortgage market. We find significant price dispersion in posted prices in the retail channel: for example, a consumer with a prime credit score and with a 20% down payment for a conforming loan might see a spread in interest rates of 50 basis points, controlling for all relevant consumer/property characteristics, including discount points. This amounts to extra 342 dollars per year, for every 100,000 of the loan. We also show, from survey evidence, that close to half of consumers did not shop before taking out a mortgage, and that most consumers do not seem to realize that there is price dispersion. Using a proprietary dataset of lenders' ratesheets, we estimate an equilibrium model of costly search where majority of consumers hold incorrect beliefs regarding price dispersion. In addition to search costs, we show that non-price factors, such as consumer preference of one lender over another, also play an important role in preventing consumers from searching more. In one of our counterfactuals, we show that if 20% of consumers had obtained one extra quote, consumers would save $4 billion dollars a year, most coming from the indirect/equilibrium effect of firms lowering prices in response to more shopping. In another counterfactual, we show that if consumers were to focus on mortgage cost only, they would save about $9 billion dollars a year.
美国抵押贷款市场不购物:提供信息的直接和战略影响
我们记录并分析了美国抵押贷款市场的价格差异。我们发现零售渠道中公布的价格存在显著的价格差异:例如,拥有优质信用评分和20%首付的合格贷款的消费者可能会看到50个基点的利率差异,控制所有相关的消费者/财产特征,包括折扣点。这相当于每10万美元的贷款每年多出342美元。我们还从调查证据中显示,近一半的消费者在申请抵押贷款之前没有购物,而且大多数消费者似乎没有意识到价格的差异。使用专有的贷款利率表数据集,我们估计了一个昂贵搜索的均衡模型,其中大多数消费者对价格分散持有错误的信念。除了搜索成本外,我们还发现非价格因素,如消费者对贷方的偏好,在阻止消费者搜索更多贷款方面也起着重要作用。在我们的一个反事实中,我们表明,如果20%的消费者获得了一个额外的报价,消费者每年将节省40亿美元,其中大部分来自企业降低价格以应对更多购物的间接/均衡效应。在另一个反事实中,我们表明,如果消费者只关注抵押贷款成本,他们每年将节省约90亿美元。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信