| ||||||||||
— Analysis —
The $700 billion bailout went down in flames at first. Now markets, investors, regulators and taxpayers are milling around trying to digest what to do next. To understand the mind-boggling enormity of this mess, it's instructive to picture how we got here. Focusing on subprime mortgages or mortgage-backed securities ignores the dense network of links and connections that form an opaque system of derivatives and debt. "Any number of other high-yielding asset classes could have started the crisis," says Paul Mizen, an economics professor and director of the Centre for Finance and Credit Markets at the University of Nottingham School of Economics. "It so happened that the subprime market soured first." Mizen was writing in the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review. The Deal decided to use Mizen's article -- "The credit crunch of 2007-2008: A discussion of the background, market reactions, and policy responses" -- as the basis for a graphic. This diagram -- admittedly simplified -- attempts to chart the chain of leveraged causation. It shows how a peak of $600 billion in subprime mortgages could metastasize into trillions of dollars of potentially toxic asset-backed securities, collateralized debt obligations and credit default swaps.
-- Browse other stories in this Special Report -- Enter the giants Big, big and beyond Chain of fools Brrrrrrrr Neither short nor sweet Doffing the cap The rationale for such complexities is credit-risk transfer. The realities: securities and leverage so much bigger, more complicated and detached from actual assets that value itself became an abstraction. Writes Mizen: "Investors are far removed from the underlying assets both physically (due to the global market for these assets) and financially (since they often have little idea about the true quality and structure of the underlying assets several links back in the chain)." Very simply, as the system seized up, no one knew what was held or what was its true value. Our depiction begins with those subprime mortgages. These were issued by loan originators but usually sold off. According to an earlier Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis study, about six in 10 subprime mortgages were securitized in 2003, the highest percentage ever. Securitized subprime mortgages became part of a much larger pool called residential mortgage-backed securities. That includes the only slightly less risky Alt-A mortgages and the higher-grade conventional, jumbo and FHA/VA mortgages. At first RMBS were packaged by mortgage type, but, more recently, they were mixed and matched. FDIC-insured institutions alone held $1.2 trillion of these in 2006. In turn, these mortgage-backed securities, which the credit agencies anointed with a AAA rating until June 2007, are part of a much bigger pool called asset-backed securities. That market totaled $10.7 trillion in 2006 and included commercial mortgage-backed securities, auto loans, credit cards and student loans. At the next level, the underlying assets and their values begin to lose definition. Asset-backed securities are divided primarily into a debt-recovery pecking order into tranches -- senior, mezzanine and equity -- and then pooled. These are called collateralized debt obligations. A CDO can be backed by everything from corporate bonds to real estate investment trusts. A collateralized loan obligation is a CDO backed by bank loans. A pool of residential mortgage-backed securities is another way to construct a CDO. (CDOs are also divided between cash CDOs, or those backed by debt instruments yielding cash, and synthetic CDOs, which are backed by other credit derivatives.)
Before these pools are transformed into CDOs, some intermediate steps typically occur. CDO managers borrow from banks, which finance the acquisition of the asset-backed securities. The banks warehouse and reconstitute them. Meanwhile, managers get sales orders for these CDOs, which are typically acquired by conduits or special investment vehicles, off-balance-sheet, bankruptcy-remote entities. Those are often funded by asset-backed commercial paper, or ABCP, short-term loans, which are in turn sold to banks. According to the research group Celent LLC, the CDO market in 2006 totaled $2 trillion. The creation of CDOs isn't the end of the game. CDOs themselves can be divided and combined in various fashions, then sold off. These funds-of-CDO-funds are called CDO squared. That process can be repeated with CDO squared, creating CDO cubed. Leverage fueled the acquisition of these instruments at every level. The result: A 20% drop in value could easily wipe out an investment. "Investors had concentrated risks by leveraging their holdings of mortgages in securitized assets, so their losses were multiplied," Mizen says. To mitigate the risk of failure, creditors and holders of these securities bought credit default swaps, a kind of insurance policy originally crafted for corporate debt. An enormous market evolved in the swaps themselves; it more than doubled from June 2005 to the end of 2007. At the start of this year, according to Moody's Investors Service, the notional value of contracts outstanding stood at $62.2 trillion, while replacement value eclipsed $2 trillion. The disassembly of these various securities could take years. Evisceration of the institutions has already begun. Of the six biggest issuers in 2006 of asset-backed securities, including mortgage-backed securities and CDOs, only two -- GMAC LLC and Royal Bank of Scotland Group plc -- remain in business. Countrywide Financial Corp., Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., Bear Stearns Cos. and Washington Mutual Inc. are history. Comments
From: Alex B,
Why chain of fools?
Posted on:
October 7, 2008 12:11 PM
From: Dave,
Agree w/ Alex B. The diagram is incomplete, since the taxpayer (who ultimately is underwriting this whole process) is omitted. I guess "A chain of smart guys and 1 fool (you, the taxpayer)" wouldn't have been a punchy title.
Posted on:
October 7, 2008 1:15 PM
From: KrisK,
Alex B, I wish you and me could also become one of those fools. Alas, this "fools club" membership is so exclusive that it's available for ppl of their own ilk. IB is so much more carterlized compared to smack world, that it sucks that only fools coming out of Harvard/Columbia/NYU can be a member!
Posted on:
October 7, 2008 2:36 PM
From: Per Kurowski,
In “Chains of fools” Mat Miller says “To understand the mind-boggling enormity of this mess, it's instructive to picture how we got here.” And he is so much more right than he knows. In the picture, prepared by the Federal Reserve bank of St. Louis there is not even the slightest reference to the credit rating agencies that stamped there AAA approval on debt obligations collateralized with lousy awarded mortgages to the subprime sector. Or is it that the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis is so embarrassed about having helped to empower the credit rating agencies to do something that sooner or later had to result in a systemic disaster that they now try to hide it and write their side of the story? Anyhow it seems that the chain of fools keeps getting to be longer and longer. http://www.subprimeregulations.blogspot.com/
Posted on:
November 10, 2008 4:13 PM
From: Deborah,
I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
Posted on:
December 19, 2008 10:46 PM
From: ed,
i love reading your blog whenever i can, i dont often get the time these days, but usually have a quick read in my dinner break or just after i get home from work, sometimes its quite interesting reading - thanks.
Posted on:
February 28, 2009 2:59 AM
From: chrissy,
its more nearer to 1 trillion that 700 billion now, but thats a very helpful animation and analysis, thanks, i understand it a bit more now.
Posted on:
March 23, 2009 6:36 PM
From: Immanuel Investment Management,
Swoop The Best Forclosure Deals In California Spots the Strongest Investment Buys for You and Provides You with a Complete Range Of Services that are very Affordable! Send an email to immanuel@globalreim.com to sign up for the latest listings or visit http://www.globalreim.com
Posted on:
April 29, 2009 7:53 PM
From: sandra,
i really love reading your website , although i just started doing overtime recently, so it is less frequent now
Posted on:
May 24, 2009 8:17 PM
From: Sarah Fowlan,
"The creation of CDOs isn't the end of the game. CDOs themselves can be divided and combined in various fashions, then sold off. These funds-of-CDO-funds are called CDO squared. That process can be repeated with CDO squared, creating CDO cubed." I agree, what about the financial crises of 2009??? Sarah.
Posted on:
May 28, 2009 7:01 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dissembly, or disaggregation, of mortgage backed securities (MBS) would seem to be the only way out of this mess.
It should now be clear the MBS model is fundamentally infirm, and only undoing it will suffice, but that will be a major undertaking and has serious implications for the entire financial sector, which is going to have to get used to not being able to raise unlimited capital using smoke and mirrors.
There is also a problem with how it can be done, constitutionally, without violating the Contracts Clause (and the Tenth Amendment, since the Contracts Clause is only a restriction on the states). I have proposed creating jurisdictions for federal Art. III or bankruptcy courts to challenge foreclosures if the original signed note, a complete record of payments received by the servicing agent, and the owner and holder of the note (not just his attorney) be required to personally testify in court (for a corporation that would be a senior official). That would require disaggregation of all those MBS, if not as securities then as transparent administrative processes that could enable evaluation not just of bundles but of each component of them, in nearly real time.
The federal jurisdictions need not overburden the federal courts, as I would expect it to impose similar judicial reform in state courts, something that has already begun.
I do not, as a libertarian, favor regulatory interventions in the sense of administrative agents directing the actions of people, setting standards, or requiring them to report on their activities. The Nondelegation Doctrine needs to be revived, not further buried.