NPN Loan Sale Market Price

NPN Loan Sale Market Price

Dion DePaoliPro Member
Real Estate Broker · Northwest Indiana, IN · Member since 2011 · 2k+ posts · 2k+ votes

Here is a nice article for newbie investors to read and understand about the REALITY of NPN loan sale pricing. The idea that loans trade for massively steep discounts is not completely true. To be clear, these are FHA NPN loans, so these types of loans may carry some insurance on the principal, that is not for the entire balance mind you. A previous sale to these pools was closed at 53.4% of UPB where FHA insurance was no longer in effect. We can only assume the insurance is still active in this trade, but we are not certain. In addition, we can be sure of the pools overall level of insurance and many concepts apply to what can be claimed and what the reimbursement is from FHA. The key layman idea, is it is not a full repayment of the loan and the loan must be disposition for a claim to be turned in generally, so it works similar to insurance on other things to that extent.

It is also important to note the other restrictions that come with the purchase, which is no progress in foreclosure for at least 6 months. Forcing the Investor and Servicer to try and find alternatives to foreclosure.

Since may folks have been what prices look like, I have inserted price translations based on the information given. Most of these pools have on average a 110%+ LTV and have trade for 60.0% of UPB (unpaid principal balance) or 66% of BPO (Broker Price Opinion or FMV). Other portfolio characteristics will have affected pricing which will include geography (judicial and non-judicial foreclosure along with eviction time and costs), some degree of foreclosure seasoning, previous servicing strategies, etc. So we can recognize those ideas in absence as influences of pricing, however this is also a sale for 8,000+ loans. This is good market insight and do not be so quick to shrug off the price indication it provides.

Hope this clears up misconceptions and manages some expectations and market price, this is reality contrary to what you may have thought or been told.

ARTICLE:

The Federal Housing Administration sold over 8,000 nonperforming loans at an Oct. 30 sale and recovered 60% of the unpaid principal balance of the loans.

This is a slightly better than the previous loan sale in June, when the winning bidders paid on average 53% of the UPB.

The official results show that FHA rejected bids on two of the 11 loan pools at the Oct. 30 sale. The two pools had extremely low broker price opinions relative to the unpaid principal balance of the loans.

Pool 103 with 1,700 loans had a UPB of $330 million and a total BPO of $196 million. [LTV = 168% - did not trade at 60%] FHA might have been testing the market with this offering and the bids did not meet its minimum requirements.

DLJ Mortgage Capital Inc. successfully bid for the 105 and 106 pools. The 105 pool had a UPB of $148 million and a BPO of $133 million. [60% UPB = $88.8M or 66.67% of BPO, the LTV = 111%]

The Credit Suisse subsidiary offered to pay 61.5% of the UPB or 68.5% of the BPO for the 105 pool. [LTV +/- 112%]

Overall, 17 companies bid for 10,600 FHA nonperforming loans on Oct. 30 and the agency sold 8,172 loans. Servicers that put those FHA loans up for sale have generally exhausted all loss mitigation options.

However, the successful bidders cannot foreclose on these loans for six months. This restriction is designed to give the new servicer a chance to restructure the loan and keep the borrower in their home.

0Reply
21 views

3 Replies

Jump to latestLatest
  • Dallas, TX · Member since 2013 · 4k+ posts · 744 votes
    12y

    @Dion DePaoli,

    Good post and I hope new comers will read and understand it. There are not two many note buyers will bid on FHA notes with all the restrictions.


    Joe Gore

  • Doug SmithPro Member
    Lender · Tampa, FL · Member since 2013 · 2k+ posts · 2k+ votes
    12y

    Pricing was a huge topic of concern for Fund Managers at a conference I spoke at in early December. Pool pricing dramatically jumped in the latter half of 2013 which trickles down to smaller note buyers. I noticed that larger real estate aggregation funds that only 12-18 months ago had no interest in notes were asking a lot of questions about how they can get into the note game. More capital coming into this sector has already given prices a pop. A flood of new cash from funds that are repositioning their portfolios with a skew toward notes are going to make it harder to make appropriate spreads. 2014 is going to be interesting.

  • Dion DePaoliPro Member
    OP
    Real Estate Broker · Northwest Indiana, IN · Member since 2011 · 2k+ posts · 2k+ votes
    12y
    Originally posted by @Doug Smith:
    Pricing was a huge topic of concern for Fund Managers at a conference I spoke at in early December. Pool pricing dramatically jumped in the latter half of 2013 which trickles down to smaller note buyers. I noticed that larger real estate aggregation funds that only 12-18 months ago had no interest in notes were asking a lot of questions about how they can get into the note game. More capital coming into this sector has already given prices a pop. A flood of new cash from funds that are repositioning their portfolios with a skew toward notes are going to make it harder to make appropriate spreads. 2014 is going to be interesting.

    Doug, while I agree the market has many new players coming and some going, I would argue this pricing frankly is not new or of a higher level. These have been pricing levels that I have seen since 2009. Downstream trades have seen relaxed pricing due to the dynamics of portfolio management but on a portfolio level of price, these are what they are. In addition to portfolio dynamics, managers have been able to raise funds which have come back to reality with expectations of return. The price of entry forced investors to come to terms with levels of return even though some investors may have believed they 'held out' for lower pricing to hit their hurdle rates. In 2008 to 2010 as many folks choked on NPN's, risk assessments where high and investors wanted adequate compensation for the perceived risk.

    This same feedback has come from my observations and dealings as well as discussions and dealings with some of the top market guys like JP Morgan, WP Global and Citi. The portion not sold does add some insight as to the willingness for investors to bite off too much negative equity, the portion not sold had an LTV of 168%, however the sale was not transacted, so the Seller felt the price was too low.

    The real barrier of entry is return expectation not the assets. Investors who hold out for 20% returns can find things to buy however they are in competition against those with cheaper capital constraints and thus find less and less product they can transact on.

Join the conversationCreate a free account to reply, vote on answers and follow this thread.