Real Estate Market Archives - Page 9 of 15 - Real Estate News and Commentary

August 27, 2015November 23, 2021

Will stock volatility spill into real estate market

After a few days of steep stock market declines, I, like others, wonder if there will be spill over into the real estate market. Many have forgotten the consequences of the dot-com crash of the late 1990’s, and the brief housing market slowdown that followed in 2000. One thing is certain – there is no consensus from the financial talking heads about the meaning and impact of the equity markets on the economy; some are optimistic, while others caution for rippling effects across other sectors.

MarketWatch’s Steve Goldstein estimated that $1.8 Trillion have been lost in the market over the past week (Households just saw $1.8 trillion in wealth vanish as stocks fall; marketwatch.com, August 24, 2015). And because many rely on their 401k and other equities investments for down payment funds on their home purchase – housing may be impacted. If mortgage rates increase, as anticipated earlier this year, combined with a lack of down payments; home prices could be pressured downward.

In the face of a stock market meltdown, the good news is that the housing market has been gaining momentum, such that existing home sales are as strong as just before the housing decline! According to a National Association of Realtors® (realtor.org) August 20^th press release, existing home sales “are at the highest pace since February 2007.” July existing home sales increased 2%; which is the tenth consecutive month showing year-over-year gains. Additionally, median home prices increased 5.6% compared to the same time the previous year.

Pending home sales, a forward looking indicator of homes under contract, have also been strong. An NAR July 29^th press release indicated that pending home sales increased 8.2% year-over-year during June; which is the tenth consecutive month for such an increase. Lawrence Yun, NAR Chief Economist, surmised that “Strong price appreciation and an improving economy is finally giving some homeowners the incentive and financial capability to sell and trade up or down…”

Locally, the Greater Capital Area Association of Realtors® (gcaar.com) reported that Montgomery County single family home sales increased 13.3% year-over-year during July; while pending home sales increased 13.2% year-over-year. However, July’s median home sale price for Montgomery County single family homes dropped slightly, from $460,000 to $458,000.

An interesting detail is that although home sales continue to increase, the NAR August 20^th release reported that some buyer pools are shrinking; first time home buyers, cash buyers, and individual investor buyers have decreased compared to the same time the previous year. In light of this, some are beginning to question the validity of NAR’s recent existing home sales data reporting. In addition to dwindling home buyer pools, ZeroHedge pointed out a data discrepancy between increased home sales and decreased mortgage applications by (rhetorically) asking the NAR, “where are the buyers coming from… and how long is this sustainable?” (Existing Home Sales Extrapolation Surges To Highest Since Feb 2007; zerohedge.com, August 20, 2015).

ZeroHedge alluded to NAR’s history of predictions of strong home sales and rising home prices through 2006. Of course, the NAR announced in 2011 of about five years worth of home sale data revisions, calling it “re-benchmarking.” According to the NAR, “data-drift” was revealed in existing home sales data compiled from MLS boards; that was due to a number of factors, including: double listings, and inconsistencies.

Google+
Copyright © Dan Krell

If you like this post, do not copy; you can:
reference the article,
like it at facebook
or re-tweet.

Disclaimer. This article is not intended to provide nor should it be relied upon for legal and financial advice. Readers should not rely solely on the information contained herein, as it does not purport to be comprehensive or render specific advice. Readers should consult with an attorney regarding local real estate laws and customs as they vary by state and jurisdiction. Using this article without permission is a violation of copyright laws.

August 21, 2015September 1, 2019

Homeowners do better than renters

Many years ago, buying your first home used to be a rite of passage that usually coincided with starting a family. Your first home was not just a place to live; but was considered an investment that was expected to grow and provide a “nest egg” for your later years.

Several generations later, a lot has changed. We view investments differently, and have become amateur number crunchers trying to get the most of our money. But what was once considered a sound long term investment has now been deemed as poor judgment.

Of course to real estate investors, housing is a commodity; they take risks to reap rewards. Short term real estate investors (“flippers”) are often viewed as opportunists, buying homes at a discount and selling at retail value. The flipper’s goal is to have a quick turnaround between the time of acquisition and resale (flip), avoiding as much carrying cost as possible. The risk for the flipper is very high, especially in fickle markets; but the payoff can be very rewarding. It is not unusual for a flipper to lose money on a project because of delays, unexpected costs, and/or poor timing.

Long term real estate investors acquire homes to be used as rental properties, banking on the properties’ appreciation when it comes time to sell. Although the financial reward for this investor is long term, the risk is considered to be leveraged over time as well. However, unexpected costs and loss of rent can make such an investor rethink their plan and cut their losses.

For the rest of us, however; housing may not be such a great investment after all, according to many financial pundits. One such pundit, Morgan Housel (of Motley Fool fame), wrote about his meeting with Robert Shiller (of Case-Shiller fame) to give some telling insight about home values (Why your home is not a good investment; usatoday.com; May 10, 2014). Shiller told Housel that the housing market is “a provider of housing services” and “not a good provider of capital gains.”

According to Shiller, home prices from 1890 to 1990 (adjusted for real inflation) are “virtually unchanged.” Housel further added that home prices between 1890 and 2012, adjusted for real inflation, “went nowhere;” and decreased 10% from 1890 to 1980, when adjusted for real inflation. Shiller even suggested that “real” home prices could decrease over the next 30 years, due to a number of factors including obsolescence and advances in construction techniques.

With all the stats and figures, are those who touted the investment value of long term home ownership – wrong? Not necessarily. The consensus is that home ownership offers stability as well as many other benefits including: a place to live, a place to raise a family, and belonging to a community. These intangibles may be responsible for the research conclusions by Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies, that indicated there is an association between home ownership and growing wealth; where home owners fared better than renters (Herbert, McCue, and Sanchez-Moyano; Is Homeownership Still an Effective Means of Building Wealth for Low-income and Minority Households? Was it Ever? Joint Center for Housing Studies Harvard University, September 2013).

Is buying a home a bad investment? Housel pointed out that even Robert Shiller owns a home, and (at the time of the interview) indicated he would buy a home if he were in the market.

by Dan Krell
Copyright © 2015

If you like this post, do not copy; you can:
reference the article,
like it at facebook
or re-tweet.

Protected by Copyscape Web Plagiarism Detector

June 19, 2015December 13, 2022

DANGER Report not a mea culpa – but forecasts issues affecting housing market

News about the D.A.N.G.E.R. Report is making the media rounds, but maybe the excitement is more hyperbole than news. And contrary to the recent hype, the D.A.N.G.E.R. Report is not a mea culpa by the National Association of Realtors®.

D.A.N.G.E.R. is an acronym for “Definitive Analysis of Negative Game changers Emerging in Real estate.” The Report was commissioned by the National Association of REALTORS® as that is part of the NAR Strategic Thinking Advisory Committee’s attempt to identify issues affecting the future of the industry; the Swanepoel | T3 Group researched and authored the Report, which identifies trends and offers the residential real estate industry an impact assessment.

Described as a “…mix of yesterday, today and tomorrow…” the Report is intended to assist those in the industry to “…anticipate the forces taking shape that we can’t yet see;” by pointing out possible challenges, threats, and opportunities. Although the result is meant to “inspire” discourse, the reception has so far been mixed. NAR CEO Dale Stinton was quoted to say, “The D.A.N.G.E.R. Report is like 50 things that could keep you up at night. It isn’t a strategic plan. It isn’t telling you to do anything. It’s 50 potential black swans. It’s for your strategic planning processes. Digest it and cuss and fuss and decide whether it’s right or wrong…” (Anrea V. Brambila; ‘Danger’ report alerts industry to 50 biggest threats; inman.com; May 15, 2015).

One issue highlighted in the Report that has attracted the media attention is agent competency and ethics. The use of Report quotes such as, “the real estate industry is saddled with a large number of part-time, untrained, unethical, and/or incompetent agents…” is as if some in the media are saying “we told you so.” But the truth is that competency does not guarantee ethical behavior, and vice versa; the answers, like the issues, are more complex than you might expect – and do not assure advancement.

Like many of the issues reported in D.A.N.G.E.R., concern about agent competency and ethics is not new. The National Association of Realtors® has for years tried to influence public opinion of Realtors® and the industry by publicly promoting the high ethical standards by which Realtors® are held. Many are unaware that a code of ethics was adopted in 1913 by the association, and has since strived to instill and maintain a high level of integrity in the field. And yet with such emphasis on ethics, you might expect that public opinion would be much higher, but the limited research on consumer perception of ethics is mixed at best. And according to one study, consumers consider price, quality, and value more important than ethical criteria in purchase behavior (The myth of the ethical consumer – do ethics matter in purchase behaviour? The Journal of Consumer Marketing. 2001;18(7),560-577).

The D.A.N.G.E.R. Report may have missed the mark by not acknowledging that the industry’s transformation over many decades has been mainly influenced and driven by market forces, regulation, and technology. Discussing “black swans” with regard to these three areas may have been more valuable and practical to professionals and consumers.

However, as much as we try to identify unforeseen events; they are just that – unexpected and unanticipated. Take for instance the extreme changes that have occurred over the last ten years in the real estate industry – much of which were due to market forces, regulation, and technology.

Google+
Copyright © Dan Krell

If you like this post, do not copy; you can:
reference the article,
like it at facebook
or re-tweet.

March 4, 2015July 6, 2019

How to price your home in 2015

In case you haven’t been following along closely, the March 3^rd release of CoreLogic’s Home Price Index (corelogic.com) indicated that nationwide home prices increased 5.7% during January compared to the same period last year; and there was a 1.1% increase during January compared to December. And believe it or not, CoreLogic stated that nationwide home prices including distressed sales are only 12.7% below the peak; and only 8.6% below peak if you exclude distressed sales.

Of course, national home price data are an average of regions that vary economically, reflected in their respective housing market. CoreLogic Chief Economist Dr. Frank Nothaft stated, “House price appreciation has generally been stronger in the western half of the nation and weakest in the mid-Atlantic and northeast states…In part, these trends reflect the strength of regional economies. Colorado and Texas have had stronger job creation and have seen 8 to 9 percent price gains over the past 12 months in our combined indexes. In contrast, values were flat or down in Connecticut, Delaware and Maryland in our overall index, including distressed sales.” The only 2 states that realized negative price appreciation year over year (including distressed sales) during January were Maryland and Connecticut, where home prices appreciated (–0.3%) and (-0.6%) respectively.

If you include distressed sales, Maryland’s January home prices appreciated (–0.3%) year over year, (-0.1%) month over month, and is (-25.3%) from the peak. Regional differences, of course, exist: DC home prices including distressed sales appreciated 3.3.% year over year, (-0.4%) month over month, and is only (-1.4%) from the peak; Virginia home prices appreciated 1.4% year over year, (-0.2%) month over month, and is (-15.6%) from the peak.

The CoreLogic HPI Forecast projects nationwide home prices, including distressed sales, to appreciate 0.4% from January to February, with an annual appreciation of 5.3%.

CoreLogic expects consistent home price appreciation through 2015 and into 2016, due in part to a current shortage in housing inventory. Anand Nallathambi, president and CEO of CoreLogic, stated that “Many homeowners have taken advantage of low rates to refinance their homes, and until we see sustained increases in income levels and employment they could be hunkered down so supplies may remain tight. Demand has picked up as low mortgage rates and the cut in the FHA annual insurance premium reduce monthly payments for prospective homebuyers.”

According to the Greater Capital Area Association of Realtors® (gcaar.com) January Montgomery County single family home statistics, home inventory and home buyer activity increased compared to last January. Although total housing inventory increased 26.5% year over year, contracts (pending sales) increased 16.6%, and settlements (sales) increased 4.8%.

If you’re wondering how these statistics might affect your sale, you’re not alone; many home sellers are trying to shape a sensible marketing plan this spring, which includes deciding on a listing price. Consider that although listing inventory is currently relatively low, it is likely to spike within the next two months adding competition to a market competing for discerning home buyers.

Typical home buyers have been increasingly demanding value; besides looking for a “turnkey” (updated and ready to move in) home, they have also been sensitive to home prices. Since cash buyers are not as prevalent as they were two years ago, and many buyers are concerned about their monthly obligations and budgets; pricing your home correctly will be more important this year than it has in the past.

By Dan Krell
© 2015

February 25, 2015July 6, 2019

Stumbling housing market reignites housing policy debate

Surely 2015 is to be the year when the housing market would bounce back from its recent disappointing performance; at least that’s what I wrote back in November. But as January’s news from the National Association of Realtors® (NAR) is not as rosy as we expected; a housing policy debate, that has been subdued since 2010, gets heated.

The NAR revealed in a February 23^rd press release (nar.realtor) that although the pace of home sales increased compared to the same time last year, existing homes sales have declined to the lowest rate in nine months. The typically optimistic Lawrence Yun (NAR Chief Economist) was cited as saying “the housing market got off to a somewhat disappointing start to begin the year with January closings down throughout the country.” Adding that “seasonal influences” can make January data erratic, the combination of low inventory and home price gains over the pace of inflation seems to have slowed home sales – notwithstanding low mortgage interest rates.

Keeping mortgage interest rates low is not the sole solution; however, if it was, the housing market may have bounced back several years ago. Although a myriad of causes have been blamed for a lackluster housing market that has been trying to make a comeback for six years, most are correlational and incidental.

However, Richard X. Bove (Equity Research Analyst at Rafferty Capital Markets) recently made a case for a sole cause in his February 23^rd commentary (There’s a new mortgage crisis brewing; cnbc.com/id/102447414). Bove described how mortgage markets are in trouble; rules and regulations put into place to strengthen the market by increasing borrower standards have dried up a lot of the funding. And not necessarily in the way you might expect; besides shrinking the pool of qualified buyers, Bove suggested that the rules and regulations have made mortgage lending unprofitable and unpalatable for some lenders (leading them to walk away from the business).

As a response, it would seem as if the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) took steps to make mortgages increasingly available (returning to 3% down payment loans, and increasing the number of loans on Fannie and Freddie’s balance sheets). These actions, along with recorded losses in Q4 2014, Bove described, is making some nervous.

If you don’t remember, the FHFA was created in 2008 as a temporary conservator to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac; whose original goals included: ensuring a positive net worth for Fannie and Freddie; reducing Fannie and Freddie’s mortgage portfolios; and facilitating a streamlined and profitable model for Fannie and Freddie.

Bove’s catch-22 conclusion, of either hindering the housing market by stopping Fannie and Freddie’s growth or increasing Fannie and Freddie’s debt obligations with continued growth, is not a new dilemma. The debate has been ongoing since 2008.

Having faded somewhat since 2010, the housing policy debate heated up during testimony given by FHFA Director Mel Watt on January 27^th during the congressional hearing, “Sustainable Housing Finance: An Update from the Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency.” Trey Garrison of HousingWire succinctly portrayed opposing views (January 27, 2014; FHFA hearing: GOP fear housing policy headed for Crash 2.0; housingwire.com): “Democrats said policies in the past year are necessary to expand housing opportunities to lower income and challenged borrowers…” while, “…Republicans…said the administration is adopting dangerous policies that risk another housing crash that will put taxpayers on the hook for billions.”

By Dan Krell
© 2015

Google+ Copyright © Dan Krell

Google+
Copyright © Dan Krell