Housing Bubble

Oh my.

Single family home prices in Stockton, CA. Real estate data as of July 4 2008.

Jonathan Miller published the November Radar Logic RPX housing market report over the weekend. It's easy to spot that Sacramento is leading the nation down.

[aside: Radar Logic is cool. They measure Price Per Square Foot and try to do it across all properties, condos and single family homes, new and existing construction. No small task. The price per square foot approach is intended to measure value of the property regardless of the size of the property itself. In the real estate derivatives trading business, Radar is getting all the mindshare. Case Shiller is falling behind. more here.]

In the report just published for November, Sacramento saw a price-per-square-foot decline of 18%. Zowie. For those of you unfamiliar with California's central valley, this is an area dominated by lots of new construction, in huge projects, partly as Bay Area super-exurb. So the underlying economy in the Central Valley isn't nearly as dynamic as San Francisco, San Jose, or Los Angeles. Also much less dominated by the high-end, Sacramento is feeling the subprime fallout harder than most.

So Radar Logic is publishing for November. What are the real-time stats saying? Sacramento is not seeing any relief yet. Here's our price per square foot for Sacramento through February 1 2008.

Price Per Square Foot for single family homes in Sacramento, CA through Feb 1 2008. Notice the price is slightly higher than the Radar Logic number. That's because we track Condominiums separately and this is for the city of Sacramento specifically. The important factor is the direction.

Sacramento Housing Market Data Links:

Our free Sacramento Real Estate Research page

Here's a solid Sacramento Area Blog for more local flavor.

Been getting a few requests about our opinion on the various proposes economic stimulus packages in the works - including sharply reduced short term rates, and some kind of tax relief. How will they impact the housing market? Are we seeing any psychological impact already?

First things first: Are we in recession already? Is a recession inevitable?

From where we sit, the current-recession answer is, No, it doesn't appear so. Slowdown, yes. But exports are strong with the weak dollar, and there other signs of okay-ness out there. Gonna be hard to avoid one before the end of the year though.

Here's my favorite way to look at recession probability. The folks at ECRI publish a weekly leading economic indicator (WLI). In several decades they've not missed a recession call and have had no false-positives. This data is good.

Weekly Leading Indicators. Recession Watch from ECRI

What's this chart tell us? This data leads the economy by 6-9 months. ECRI looks for the Three P's of drop in its economic statistics before it calls a recession. Pronounced (check), persistent (check), pervasive (allllmost).

We're in the danger zone here, which is why immediate monetary (interest rates) and fiscal (taxes, etc) stimulus might just work.

Where does the housing market fall into all this?

We know that the real estate market is generally lousy. But really, really low mortgage rates mean that you can lock in affordability, if you have the credit. From Bloomberg:

The yield curve as of January 27 2008. Low rates are good. source: Bloomberg. [whose New York offices I visited last week, incidentally. Very cool. Googlesque. Maybe nicer.]

For a long time, our worst case scenario here at Altos has been recession plus high interest rates. We've avoided that so far. As a result the pain in the housing market is most pronounced at the margins: Overstretched, with weak credit. New home construction. Here's what I mean.

Seattle, Kirkland, and Redmond home prices as of January 25, 2008. Not the persistent weakness at the low-end of the market. This scenario is similar to what we're seeing in most economically strong parts of the country.

So the weakness, while felt across the spectrum, is most acutely painful at the low-end of the market. That implies that a deep recession with it's job loss and income uncertainty is what it'll take to knock the final leg of the stool out from under the the rest of the market.

Conclusion: stimulate away, Uncle Sam, and do it quick.

Some posts just write themselves.

Inventory of homes on the market in San Jose California as of January 2008

Single Family Home Prices in San Jose California as of January 1, 2008

Can't. Help. It. Must. Write. More.

Ugly? You betcha. Do these tell the whole story? Not a chance. In Silicon Valley, San Jose is the dominant market, of course. San Jose is a diverse community, with lots of sub-prime and other crazy loans in the past few years. But also some really great neighborhoods with prosperous, fully employed folks. Lots of big, but not-risky loans too. Here's how the market in a desirable part of town, Willow Glen, is holding up. I've done the price chart in Quartiles so you can see the trends at each price point in the market.

Homes in the Willow Glen neighborhood in San Jose, CA zip 95125. Prices holding up much better than the broader market in San Jose.

Available homes in Willow Glen neighborhood of San Jose CA as of January 1 2008. Inventory is up, but much less than the rest of the city.

Link: San Jose Housing Market.

If you've watched the Case Shiller Index numbers this year, you might have noticed that Denver, Colorado is the lone market still registering positive housing price gains for 2007. (BTW: if you prefer Uncle Sam's OFHEO numbers, you'll have just this week discovered that the US housing market is under pressure.)

We've been watching Denver too, because that a market that's been bucking the trend. We recently opened our subscription service for real estate professionals in Denver, as well as home buyers and sellers there.

Here's what the median price looks like for the Denver MSA, in a rolling average over the past several months.

Denver Real Estate Market as of December 2007. Median Home Price rolling average. Single Family Homes.

You can see from the chart, home prices in the Denver area have so far missed the bursting that's hitting most of the rest of the country. Up just fractionally, but steadily this year.

Why the resilience? A couple reasons probably: 1) Colorado real estate didn't have as much upside in the last few years to begin with. 2) The economy and investment levels are still strong. 3) Denver is just a little bit of a laggard economically behind the coastal cities. That implies the burst simply hasn't hit Denver yet.

Looking at the rolling average smooths out weekly noise, so the trend is easier to see. But using a three month rolling average, it'll lag the real-time market a bit. The next chart is the weekly sample.

Denver Median Home Price thru December 2007. Real-time sample. Single Family Homes

In this image we're just starting to see the weeklies break below the 90-day rolling average. Too early to make a big bet, perhaps, but a noticeable change nonetheless.

Plus, if you look at the city of Denver the change is much more pronounced. Zowie! That's quite a drop. (caveat: don't discount the seasonal impact that's surely happening in some capacity here.)

City of Denver median single family home prices.

Keep an eye on Denver. I'll be fascinated to see if that town is able to demonstrate real staying power, or if it's just a few months behind.

Links:

Free research for the Denver housing market

Free research for the Aurora housing market

etc.

The Journal today shows off its peerless graphic design team with a fantastic illustration of the past three years of subprime mortgage lending.

Wall Street Journal charts the sub-prime tidal wave

The accompanying article reveals little that the bubblistas haven't been crowing about for years, but a few bits bear repeating here. The first reiterates my view that the housing market correction has many years before recovery.

The data also show that some of the worst excesses of the subprime binge continued well into 2006, suggesting that the pain could last through next year and beyond, especially if housing prices remain sluggish. Some borrowers may not run into trouble for years.

[As an aside, am I the only one who noticed how many of this year's Inc. Magazine 500 fastest growing companies were mortgage lenders?]

The second gets to a less commonly asked question about the whole subprime blowup--who really is the "victim" here? Does anyone really deserved to be bailed out by the feds?

Last September, Darla Ball, a printer and copier saleswoman, purchased a $460,000 home in Las Vegas using an adjustable-rate subprime loan with an initial rate of 8.2%. At the time, she says, she expected to refinance before her interest rate resets to 14% next year, which will raise her monthly payments to $8,000 from $3,700. But in the past year, she says, prices of comparable homes in her subdivision have fallen to $310,000, which means she would not qualify for a new $460,000 mortgage, unless home values go back up to that level, an unlikely scenario. She says she has stopped paying her mortgage and is trying to negotiate with her lender. "I'm going to lose my home anyway," she says, "so why pay?"

Let me get this straight, Darla. You knowingly took a deal from a lender willing to front you the cash, despite your already bad credit, with super low payments to get yourself into your dream home. Now you're living there and NOT EVEN PAYING? Bad luck, sure. A risky investment that didn't pay off, that happens. I'm sure you didn't at the time have a deep appreciation for the highly leveraged scenario you put yourself in. God knows we've all made risky investment decisions that in retrospect were crazy-stupid. (As they say, experience is not something we get until just after we need it.)

What riles me is that this is a perfectly legal deal with two parties taking risk in exchange for an enticing return. Is this really a situation that deserves to be bailed out? So-called predatory lending gets a lot of headlines. No doubt fraud has been comitted in many cases. It's just a bit hard to must a ton of sympathy for any of the participants. [Another aside: Make sure you read Michael Lewis' hilarious satire of this position on Bloomberg.]

Here's a couple of Altos Research mentions in the Seattle Post Intelligencer last week.

Altos client and blogger Sandy Kaduce is a contributor to the paper's blog site, wrote last week about the changing nature of the market.

On Friday, writer Aubrey Cohen called to get our take on the Seattle housing market numbers. The numbers that come out of the Northwest MLS are just starting to show year over year declines. (If you're an Altos watcher, you've seen this coming for a long time now of course.) Aubrey notes that the mix of property types being sold have an impact on the over all "median price" of a market. He uses one of my favorite qutoes to describe the 2007 (where the pain is starting low).

And the recent problems in the subprime mortgage market, which serves people with poor credit, have a disproportionate effect on cheaper homes, meaning those that do sell are more likely to be at the higher end of the market, buoying the median price, said Michael Simonsen, chief executive of Altos Research in Mountain View, Calif.

"You don't buy a $1 million waterfront property on a subprime mortgage," he said.

The bubble is bursting all around us and the National Association of Realtors comes out with a report that San Francisco Bay Area median home prices increased by 13% in the second quarter. Nooooo, can it be? If you can't trust NAR, who can you trust?

Stephen Bedikian of RealIQ has a nice piece today over at Inman News sorting through the confusion. He cites some Altos numbers to help make sense of the turmoil. Stephen concludes:

So what actually happened? Sales transactions increased with a greater proportion on the high end versus the previous quarter. There appears to have been little actual appreciation as evidenced by the Case Shiller and OFHEO numbers, while inventory increased and prices of many listed properties were reduced. So next time you read that median house prices have increased in your area, don't celebrate prematurely. Conduct more research before you reach a conclusion about market conditions in your area.

In addition to Stephen's suggestion of diversifying your stats, I'll add that if you're not looking local, you're not looking anywhere. The Bay Area market? Are you kidding? This spring, you could indeed watch a few key markets, like Palo Alto and up the Peninsula stay strong. But look even a few miles inland, say Antioch, and the carnage was everywhere.

To be fair to NAR, we reported the same trends for some of those parts of the Bay Area in February, March, and April. We also noted that by May, the Spring price growth had already begun to recede. (Notably correlated, by the way, with the widening spreads on jumbo mortgages that started at that time. Surprise! The high-end starts to fade when fat mortgages get more expensive.) So here we are five months later and NAR is telling you that San Francisco had a strong spring. Thanks guys.

[ps. sorry about the long hiatus from the blogosphere. Hope you've been enjoying Scott's posts on real estate e-marketing tactics. Our plan is to intersperse both topics together. Thanks to Stephen for getting me off my ass and posting. I like his work, we'll have to do more together in the future.]

Las Vegas has long been the most maligned city when the housing bubblers do their maligning. The logic of complaints/fears goes something like this:

1. Housing demand of 2000-2005 was driven in large part by second home buyers
   
2. Off the charts levels of new construction keeps supply high
3. When the bubble bursts, those second home buyers are going to be the first to run.
4. Demand will crater. Prices will surely follow.

While no one is popping the champagne any time soon, a year into the housing market burst...erm...correction... and prices for second homes (mostly condos) in Las Vegas are still hanging tough.

This investigation was triggered over breakfast with Altos client Aaron Wheeler of Oakville Properties who mentioned his Las Vegas team is having a surprisingly strong year. (Oakville is headquartered in California, but does a good business matching people with the right properties in Las Vegas.)

Here's a chart that touches on what Aaron was talking about.

Price trends for condos in Las Vegas, NV in 2007. Each line is a Quartile, or 25% of the market. Some fluctuations at the high end. But we haven't observed the bottom dropping out of the market.

What gives? Why hasn't the Las Vegas housing market tanked yet*?

The answer is that Las Vegas real estate appears to be buoyed by those same second homes that the bubblistas were so afraid of.

When I was a kid, the second home market was a cabin on Lake Somethingorother in Northern Wisconsin. Somewhere in the '90s Las Vegas became the second home city of choice for vacation-bound Chicagoans. And Angelenos. And Hong Kongers.

So it turns out that this housing bubble is deflating in unexpected ways. And the Las Vegas housing market is an exaggerated version of the country's experience. Let's sum it up this way:

The economy is pulling real estate, not the other way around. Las Vegas is a global destination and the world's economy is BOOMING.

The pressure is building at the low end of the market. Mortgages are getting tougher and more expensive. But investment is strong, people are working. And the top-end globally is rolling. The whole country benefits from global economic strength. Vegas real estate maybe more so. Who knew?

Jessica at Inman this morning reports that, in a fit of fear of a bursting bubble, the SoCal MLS has stopped publishing it's Days on Market stats.

Even if you give them the benefit of the doubt that a Days On Market stat can be misleading as a standalone indicator of housing market conditions, the move is just plain silly. Bite the bullet guys, sweeping bad news under the rug doesn't make the bad news go away. It just makes it harder to manage intelligently for home buyers and sellers.

So since you can no longer get a view from the SoCal MLS, you'll have to get it from us. And we, of course, don't present DoM as a standalone indicator.

Among lots of other market data, when we survey a market, we calculate an mean Days on Market vs. a median Days on Market. (The mean, remember, is the average. It'll skew higher if just a few porperties are on the market for super long times. The median is the measure of half the market. So half the homes are on less than X days.) It's fascinating to watch in a changing market, for example, the median drop while the average stays high. That illustrates the freshest properties--and the ones priced right--are turning over quickly while the stale, overpriced, unappealing properties are lingering.

Because I know you're interested, here's a chart illustrating the median Days on Market for some key Southern California real state markets. You can see we're past the seasonal Spring Fling of new properties coming on and the Dog Days are approaching. Though higher than it's been for years, 2+ months is actually not that crazy painful (easy for me to say). This is the median, remember so there are lots of properties hanging around for several (many) months.

Southern California Homes Days on Market as of July 15 2007

[update] Here's average DoM too, note the effect of stale properties staying on the market and skewing the average higher than the median:

Average Days on Market for Los Angeles, Irvine, Pasadena, Thousand Oaks, California July 15 2007

Further Research Details available here:

Los Angeles Real Estate Market

Irvine Real Estate Market

Pasadena Real Estate Market

Thousand Oaks Real Estate Market

In case you missed it, long term interest rates are rising. In some respects this is actually good news. The yield curve, charting interest rates along their maturity duration, is no longer inverted. Recall that an inverted yield curve means short-term rates are higher than long-term rates, an awkward financial state that commonly signals a coming recession. So a positively sloped curve reflects general economic strength. That's the good news.

The yield curve first inverted nearly a year ago. It was a time of pick-your-poison for the housing market. To get "right", either we were going to see recession, where the resulting joblessness would pummel housing demand. Or we'd be faced with rising long term interest rates, making mortgages more expensive and pummeling housing demand.

As of June 2007 the yield curve is no longer inverted. The Market sees significantly less recession risk. Chart courtesy Bloomberg

Well, the economy has spoken. The bears are capitulating one by one, recognizing that the housing market downturn is not sufficient to drive the economy into a tailspin.

Instead we're faced with something much more mundane in the housing market cycle. Higher mortgage rates. Higher rates, coupled with tighter lending from the subprime cleanup. We've had such low rates for such a long time that returning to normal levels will seem like a foreign country. Every upward move in rates makes homes less affordable.

Macro shifts, a declining dollar, protectionism all seem to be lurching us out of the mortgage rate utopia and back to the real world. Time to lock in that 30-year before we get to gasp 7%, methinks.

The S&P/Case-Shiller index for March 2007 was released today. The San Francisco Home Price index showed it's first increase in a year and came in at 211.09 vs. 210.78 in February. This increase should come as no surprise to our clients (or readers of this blog for that matter.) We whispered to clients on February 26 that the March numbers looked like they were heading higher.

(For the uninitiated, the Case Shiller index tracks existing single family home prices. The index compares prices now to January 2000 where the index = 100. These indexes are then traded as options and futures on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange.)

Broadly speaking, this is not a big surge in San Francisco Bay Area home prices. No

Tracking Home Prices for the San Francisco Bay Area.

In other notable markets reported today with the S&P Case Shiller Index: Los Angeles, Miami, and San Diego were down the biggest of the 10 major metros that are traded on the Merc. Full data table is here.

Money Management firm and Bond King PIMCO has staked out one of the most bearish positions on the Housing Market of any of the serious Wall Street players. Theirs is also one of the most well quantified. The thoughtfulness bears paying attention to. Pun intended.

PIMCO founder and CIO Bill Gross does a monthly economic outlook podcast which I look forward to the first week of each month. Intricate, playful, and self-referential, Gross constructs his essays in a mini version of the Hofstadter style. To grossly oversimplify, Gross has been generally bearish on the economy, primarily driven by his view of housing market recession for over a year. [aside: the article and podcasts are here. But I'm I the only one who finds Apple's iTunes UI absolutely horrible? It takes me hours to navigate through that morass.]

Today, I'd like to call attention to an article by PIMCO portfolio manager Mark Kiesel. He writes this month that he's "still renting." Citing the litany of housing bubble factors (affordability, excess money, rampant speculation, easy lending, inventories, vacancies, delinquencies, etc.) Mark assumed we'd hit a housing market peak and sold his home in 2006 (in Los Angeles presumably). He has been renting ever since. Mark considers that he'll be renting for another year or two. We'll posit here that Mark is wrong: he's looking at 5 or more years.

It turns out that Mark is one of the few who has the cojones to put his money where his bed is. We've had the discussion at the Casa Simonsen breakfast table. Here's how the scenario plays out:

Me: There's a reasonable chance that we'll lose maybe half a million dollars in home equity over the next few years.

The Wife: You think it's that much? Really?

M: Well, there are plenty of scenarios where the housing bubble pops in a catastrophic way. Or it could be flat for 10 years. Remember we never thought the NASDAQ could lose 80% of it's value.

TW: Well then, Mr. Smarty Pants, that business of yours better pick up the slack. 'Cause we're not going to go live in an apartment.

M: Righto. [goes to get coffee]

TW: No coffee for you. Coffee is for closers.

...And life goes on. (That Wife is a funny one.) Despite the fact that we're acutely aware of the capital at risk, we ain't taking any action.

Our situation underscores the trouble with Mark's plan. Even assuming that PIMCO's fundamental analysis is spot-on and the worst case bubble scenario happens, Kiesel faces the speculative problem of market-timing. What if Kiesel is right, but off by say, four years? In fact, Kiesel addresses the condition, but misses the implication:

Over time, housing prices and interest rates should decline, resulting in improved affordability. This adjustment, however, will take time and occur over a period of years, not months. Housing is illiquid and prices are sticky. As a result, potential buyers should exercise patience and not jump back into the housing market too early. A year ago, I described the state of the US housing market as “the next NASDAQ bubble.” The NASDAQ took over 2 ˝ years to go from peak to trough. I suspect that housing prices could display a similar pattern, and we are still over a year away from the bottom. Given these risks, I prefer renting versus owning, and an investment strategy which favors defense versus offense.

Home Prices as measured by ECRI

So now it's 2011 and your kids are half-grown, you're not in the school district you wanted, but you're a few hundred grand richer. Or maybe not, because a stable home environment has given you the opportunity to focus on building wealth in other areas (see The Wife's comments above).

Much Ado

So much of the hous