CoreLogic’s State of the Nation’s Housing 2018

Bob Schwab shared CoreLogic’s State of the Nation’s Housing 2018 report recently, and I wanted to pass that information along to you. This is the 30th anniversary of the report, which features CoreLogic’s home price and rent growth information. This year’s report article was authored by Molly Boesel, and you can see it in its entirety below:

From the State of the Nation’s Housing 2018 Report

The State of the Nation’s Housing 2018

On June 19, the Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University released their 30th anniversary edition of the State of the Nation’s Housing report. The 2018 report highlighted some major themes including lack of housing supply, rising home prices and rents, and housing affordability.

The U.S. housing market continues to be plagued by a lack of supply of homes for sale. Months of supply available for sale is a key measure of housing supply, and is at levels that are below where they would be for the housing market to be balanced. The Harvard report points out that negative equity as reported by CoreLogic no longer appears to be a drag on sales. Negative equity shrank from 12.1 million mortgages in 2011 to 2.5 million in 2017. Rather, a factor in the low housing supply is slow growth in single-family construction that has not kept up with demand.

Low housing supply has contributed to increases in home prices. Home prices, according to the CoreLogic HPI were up by 5.9 percent for all of 2017. Prices for the lowest-cost homes (those homes priced at 75 percent or less than median) were up by 8.5 percent, compared with 4.7 percent for the highest-cost homes (those homes priced at 125 percent or more than median). Along with home price increases, there have also been increases in rents. The report highlights the CoreLogic Single-Family Rental Index (SFRI). While the SFRI is still showing increases in rent through the beginning of 2018, there has been a deceleration in the rate of increase.

Living in the Bay Area, we know the increases in home prices and rents have outpaced increase in incomes and have contributed to affordability problems. High prices and low supply constrain access to homeownership, but affordability issues are more immediate for some households. The CoreLogic SFRI shows that the lowest-cost rentals are showing the fastest rent growth, adding to affordability challenges to low-and-moderate income households. The Joint Center reports that in 2016, 38.1 million households were cost-burdened, meaning they spent more than 30 percent of their incomes on housing. While this number was down by 800,000 from 2015, it is still 6.5 million higher than it was in 2001.

I also believe the low supply in California has multiple factors.  People are not moving up, but remodeling because they don’t know where they would move. Seniors also have the same problem and if they stay in California, some counties will not accept their current tax base and they often have to sell in order to buy.  It is a domino effect.

I’ve included the graph above for context, and have the entire PDF report available if you’d like to see it. For any housing-specific questions, shoot me a note!

Interest rates and purchasing power

According to Certified Mortgage Consultant Bob Schwab, interest rates you secure when buying a home not only greatly impacts your monthly housing costs, but also impacts your purchasing power. Check out his comments here:
According to Freddie Mac’s latest Primary Mortgage Market Survey, interest rates for a 30-year fixed rate mortgage are currently at 4.61%, which is still near record lows in comparison to recent history! The interest rate you secure when buying a home not only greatly impacts your monthly housing costs, but also impacts your purchasing power. Purchasing power, simply put, is the amount of home you can afford to buy for the budget you have available to spend. As rates increase, the price of the house you can afford to buy will decrease if you plan to stay within a certain monthly housing budget.
The chart below shows the impact that rising interest rates would have if you planned to purchase a home within the national median price range while keeping your principal and interest payments between $1,850-$1,900 a month. With each quarter of a percent increase in interest rate, the value of the home you can afford decreases by 2.5% (in this example, $10,000). Experts predict that mortgage rates will be closer to 5% by this time next year.
Jay Vorhees of JVM Lending has a take on higher rates and how they affect qualifying, too:
How Do Higher Rates Affect Qualifying? Potentially A Lot.
We’ve said that at least a hundred times over the years but this time it is a reality b/c the Fed is no longer buying bonds to push rates down, and b/c the Fed is very determined to push rates up in general. We saw a slight dip in rates recently largely b/c of economic turmoil in Italy, but rates are expected to climb another 1/2 percent this year alone.
Rule of thumb: A 1/2 percent increase in rate will increase a mortgage payment by about $30 for every $100,000 borrowed. Hence, if a buyer is looking at a $600,000 mortgage, her payment will increase by about $180 if rates go up 1/2 percent. In regard to qualifying, an increase in rate could easily shave off $25,000 to $50,000 from a buyer’s maximum.
For example, let’s say “Jeremy” the buyer is pre-approved for a maximum $750,000 purchase with 20% down at a rate of 4.75%. Let’s also assume Jeremy’s maximum payment (Principal, Interest, Taxes, Insurance) is $4,000 and his income is $8,900 per month, giving him a maximum debt ratio of just under 45% (all numbers are rounded). If rates increase 1/2 percent, Jeremy’s maximum qualification would drop to about $715,000 b/c that is the most Jeremy could buy in the higher rate environment without pushing his payment over his $4,000 limit.
In other words, if Jeremy’s rate increases from 4.75% to 5.25%, he will lose about $35,000 of purchasing power. What can poor Jeremy do?
A. Consider an Adjustable Rate Mortgage (ARM). Jeremy can knock as much as 1/2 percent off of his rate by considering a 7/1 ARM. Knowing that very few buyers ever keep their mortgages more than 7 years will help him rest easy with his ARM.
B. Buy now while the getting is good! If Jeremy is hellbent on a 30-year fixed rate loan, he should buy now to lock in today’s rates. BUT – we will still remind Jeremy that even if rates are in the mid-5’s, they are STILL a “gift” by historical standards.
C. Buy a $50 tent and a motorcycle, and skip the house thing. I did that in my early twenties, and it was really fun. Jeremy might want to do the same. But don’t worry, we won’t suggest it. Lastly – should Jeremy worry that higher rates might hurt home prices? According to this blog, no :).
Note:  for those living in a rabbit hole, last week the Feds raised interest rates and stated instead of one more rate hike, it will most likely be two more this year and then 3 more in 2019.

Are home values really inflated?

For the 71st month in a row, the housing market experienced year-over-year gains. As of January, the median existing-home price for all housing types was $240,500, which was a 5.8 percent increase from January 2017 ($227,300). According to Bob Schwab from Finance of America, this may lead many to believe that home values are overinflated.

Schwab, and Zillow, disagree with that common opinion. Zillow says: “If the housing bubble and bust had not happened, and home values had instead appreciated at a steady pace, the median home value would be higher than its current value.”

I’ve pulled some information and graphs from Schwab’s article to help demonstrate why home prices are exactly where they should be. First, a graph showing actual median home sales prices from 2000 through 2017:

By itself, this graph shows home values rising early in the century, then tumbling down, and now climbing back up. This may give off the impression that a pattern is emerging, and another tumble is coming. But, if you look at this second chart, indicating where prices would naturally go with the market had there not been a boom and bust, you see something different:

The blue bars represent where prices would have been if they increased normally, at an annual appreciation rate of 3.6 percent. By adding that percentage to the actual 2000 price and repeating for each year, we can see that prices were overvalued during the boom, undervalued during the bust, and a little bit lower than where they should be right now!

All in all, thanks to Bob Schwab for pointing out that we should be comfortable with current home values, and understand that the market actually isn’t overinflated, based on historic appreciation levels.