非银行与抵押贷款证券化

IF 5 3区 经济学 Q1 BUSINESS, FINANCE
You Suk Kim, Karen Pence, Richard Stanton, J. Waldén, N. Wallace
{"title":"非银行与抵押贷款证券化","authors":"You Suk Kim, Karen Pence, Richard Stanton, J. Waldén, N. Wallace","doi":"10.1146/annurev-financial-111620-025204","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article reviews the dramatic growth of nonbank mortgage lending after the Global Financial Crisis, especially to borrowers with lower credit scores, and the related importance of mortgage-backed securitization. Our literature review suggests that the existing theoretical and empirical work on securitization is more relevant to bank than to nonbank lenders, thus leaving outstanding questions as to why nonbank market shares have increased to their current levels and how best to structure nonbank oversight. To highlight key differences in the mortgage-lending incentives of banks and nonbanks, we build a simple theoretical model of bank versus nonbank mortgage lending and use it to generate and test empirical hypotheses. We find, in particular, that loans issued by nonbanks are more likely to prepay early than loans issued by banks, the difference not explainable by nonbank borrowers prepaying more rationally. Using regulatory filings from nonbanks that are typically unavailable to academic researchers, we examine the balance sheets and liquidity and capital positions of large Ginnie Mae nonbank servicers, which face and pose more risk in the current mortgage system. We find that on average these servicers have reasonable liquidity and capital positions relative to standard regulatory thresholds, particularly in 2022:Q1 after a few quarters of elevated profits. However, some large Ginnie Mae servicers appear to have inadequate capital, as gauged by risk-based capital measures. If defaults rise on a large scale, the liquidity and capital positions of these servicers may amplify the disruption in the mortgage and housing markets. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Financial Economics, Volume 13 is November 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.","PeriodicalId":47162,"journal":{"name":"Annual Review of Financial Economics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Nonbanks and Mortgage Securitization\",\"authors\":\"You Suk Kim, Karen Pence, Richard Stanton, J. Waldén, N. Wallace\",\"doi\":\"10.1146/annurev-financial-111620-025204\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article reviews the dramatic growth of nonbank mortgage lending after the Global Financial Crisis, especially to borrowers with lower credit scores, and the related importance of mortgage-backed securitization. Our literature review suggests that the existing theoretical and empirical work on securitization is more relevant to bank than to nonbank lenders, thus leaving outstanding questions as to why nonbank market shares have increased to their current levels and how best to structure nonbank oversight. To highlight key differences in the mortgage-lending incentives of banks and nonbanks, we build a simple theoretical model of bank versus nonbank mortgage lending and use it to generate and test empirical hypotheses. We find, in particular, that loans issued by nonbanks are more likely to prepay early than loans issued by banks, the difference not explainable by nonbank borrowers prepaying more rationally. Using regulatory filings from nonbanks that are typically unavailable to academic researchers, we examine the balance sheets and liquidity and capital positions of large Ginnie Mae nonbank servicers, which face and pose more risk in the current mortgage system. We find that on average these servicers have reasonable liquidity and capital positions relative to standard regulatory thresholds, particularly in 2022:Q1 after a few quarters of elevated profits. However, some large Ginnie Mae servicers appear to have inadequate capital, as gauged by risk-based capital measures. If defaults rise on a large scale, the liquidity and capital positions of these servicers may amplify the disruption in the mortgage and housing markets. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Financial Economics, Volume 13 is November 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47162,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Annual Review of Financial Economics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Annual Review of Financial Economics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-financial-111620-025204\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Annual Review of Financial Economics","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-financial-111620-025204","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

本文回顾了全球金融危机后非银行抵押贷款的急剧增长,特别是对信用评分较低的借款人,以及抵押贷款支持证券化的相关重要性。我们的文献综述表明,现有的证券化理论和实证工作与银行的相关性大于与非银行贷款人的相关性,因此留下了悬而未决的问题,即为什么非银行市场份额增加到目前的水平,以及如何最好地构建非银行监管。为了强调银行和非银行抵押贷款激励机制的关键差异,我们建立了一个银行与非银行抵押信贷的简单理论模型,并用它来生成和检验实证假设。我们特别发现,非银行发放的贷款比银行发放的更有可能提前还款,非银行借款人更合理地提前还款无法解释这一差异。利用学术研究人员通常无法获得的非银行监管文件,我们检查了大型Ginnie Mae非银行服务商的资产负债表、流动性和资本状况,这些服务商在当前的抵押贷款系统中面临并构成了更大的风险。我们发现,相对于标准监管阈值,这些服务商平均拥有合理的流动性和资本头寸,尤其是在2022年第一季度,在几个季度的利润上升之后。然而,根据基于风险的资本衡量标准,一些大型Ginnie Mae服务商的资本似乎不足。如果违约大规模增加,这些服务商的流动性和资本状况可能会加剧抵押贷款和住房市场的混乱。《金融经济学年度评论》第13卷预计最终在线出版日期为2022年11月。请参阅http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates用于修订估算。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Nonbanks and Mortgage Securitization
This article reviews the dramatic growth of nonbank mortgage lending after the Global Financial Crisis, especially to borrowers with lower credit scores, and the related importance of mortgage-backed securitization. Our literature review suggests that the existing theoretical and empirical work on securitization is more relevant to bank than to nonbank lenders, thus leaving outstanding questions as to why nonbank market shares have increased to their current levels and how best to structure nonbank oversight. To highlight key differences in the mortgage-lending incentives of banks and nonbanks, we build a simple theoretical model of bank versus nonbank mortgage lending and use it to generate and test empirical hypotheses. We find, in particular, that loans issued by nonbanks are more likely to prepay early than loans issued by banks, the difference not explainable by nonbank borrowers prepaying more rationally. Using regulatory filings from nonbanks that are typically unavailable to academic researchers, we examine the balance sheets and liquidity and capital positions of large Ginnie Mae nonbank servicers, which face and pose more risk in the current mortgage system. We find that on average these servicers have reasonable liquidity and capital positions relative to standard regulatory thresholds, particularly in 2022:Q1 after a few quarters of elevated profits. However, some large Ginnie Mae servicers appear to have inadequate capital, as gauged by risk-based capital measures. If defaults rise on a large scale, the liquidity and capital positions of these servicers may amplify the disruption in the mortgage and housing markets. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Financial Economics, Volume 13 is November 2022. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
26
×
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