Avant launches new mortgage fixed for 30 years at 2.85% to 3.1%

Can a borrower get the best of both worlds here?

Earliest years of a mortgage are the biggest drain; so take the 30 year fixed at the outset.

Then in 10 years (or whatever) you'll either be trading up or ready to switch.

Yes, you'll pay some costs to switch, but after 10 years will it be onerous?
 
Why wouldn’t that person fix for 7-10 years then?
 
Avant can use the standardised approach or the IRB approach (I don't know which).

AFAIK for the standardised approach they would use risk weights provided by the Central Bank specifically for the Irish market.

Also AFAIK foreign bank can't use more favourable risk weights than incumbents.
 
They use the weights appropriate to Ireland and not Spain.

My understanding is that the standardised approach results in higher risk weights than the IRB.

But this is only part of cost of higher mortgages here. It is more of an excuse than an explanation.

For example, it does not explain why some banks have the same rates for all LTVs. I would assume that the model would require more capital for a 90% LTV mortgage than a 40% LTV mortgage.

It does not explain why permanent tsb and Bank of Ireland have lower rates for new customers than existing customers.

Brendan
 
The LGD assumptions banks need to make that are driving the models are way more onerous than people give the banks credit for. Especially when the extreme stress scenarios are run.

The average LTV’s of course matter and things are much better here in that regard but the length of time from first missed payment to acquisition/disposal of the property with the banks legal costs involved too make it so that the LGD, even in conservative LTV scenarios starting off, means the banks losses pile up in extreme stress test scenarios when the loan sits in FULL default for literally years….think of the trapped capital, opportunity cost of said capital. Foreign banks have looked at this - those that are here are leaving (Natwest/UB), those that aren’t are like no thanks.

In regard to competition and speaking about Avant joining the three remaining players (AIB/BOI/PTSB)……its not even close and wont be anytime soon. Retail presence matters for origination even in this digital age. Barring some big changes the future mortgage market mix in Ireland in say five years is going to look depressingly similar today with the majority of the UB/KBC share given over to AIB/BOI/PTSB.

Dont count on Avant being a committed player here long term, its my understanding, Avant are here in Ireland to help itself with a specific asset liability duration matching issues it has at the parent related to its insurance subsidiary and Ireland provided a unique opportunity in the European/EURO area to net some of those liabilities off (given our high rates vs Euro rates). If underlying ECB/sovereign rates rise in the core EU area and Avant can pick up 2% paper there it will.
 
Last edited:
Well I would start by saying that having the option to fix for 20 or 30 years is not something that we have ever seen before in Ireland. This is a remarkable development in the Irish mortgage market

I would go on to say that not only is a 20/30 year fix a great new option, but that the rates being charged are in line with current variable and short term fixed rates. And that this surprises me as I would have expected that a new product like this would have come with a hefty price tag.

Sixteen years ago tracker mortgages were the new development in the Irish market. They were a great product. From todays perspective the difference between borrowers who took out mortgages in 2005 is between those who got trackers and those who didn't. Which tracker you got is largely immaterial. They varied, AFAIK, between ECB +0.5% and ECB +1.1%.

At these rates getting a fixed rate for the whole term of the mortgage is a great opportunity. There is little downside and there might be huge upside.

As to my 30 year old friend, undoubtedly if she can afford the repayments I would recommend the 20 year product, it is cheaper, it clears the mortgage more quickly and it leaves the borrower indifferent to rates more than 20 years from now.
 
The 30-year-old friend or most people Might be better off going for a 30-year fixed mortgage and front-loading their pension and taking every cent they can in tax breaks,
Being able to get a 30 year fixed rate at around 3% at present and paying it off early and leaving pension tax breaks behind you is only for the very rich,

This is often not very well understood by well off people, for most both paying off their mortgage and paying into a pension will be a long working life process,

taking out long term fixed-rate mortgages that people can manage along with starting a long term pension that people can manage brings us more into line with other EU Countries,

one of the advantages is if you are unlucky enough to fall into Ill health and want have to retire early you can see your outgoings and Income up to your retirement, and beyond,
 
Last edited:
NoRegretsCoyote said:
Underwriting standards and borrower behaviour have been dramatically better since about 2012, so over time the parameters used by the banks for their own internal models will improve too.
Click to expand...
I know nothing about how banks do their underwriting, but from what I understand reading this and similar posts, it seems they reflect historic default rates rather than make any effort to look at reality.

Does this model make lending in 2013 when the average house prices were under €150k riskier than lending in 2021 when average house prices are over €250k ?
 
cremeegg said:
I know nothing about how banks do their underwriting, but from what I understand reading this and similar posts, it seems they reflect historic default rates rather than make any effort to look at reality.
Click to expand...
Underwriting and risk weighting of loans are not the same thing.
 
Hi Cremeegg

This is not that complex an issue.

But I am trying to untangle the issues one by one.


I will repeat the question - could you answer it and just it for the moment.

He is taking out a 30 year mortgage.

Would you recommend that he fixes for the 30 years at 3.1% or that he fixes for 20 years at 2.75%



Brendan Burgess said:
He is taking out a 30 year mortgage with Avant at 90% LTV.

They have insisted that he choose one or other of these two products. This is the only choice he has.

30 years fixed at 3.1%

20 years fixed at 2.75%

Which would you recommend?
Click to expand...

Thanks
Brendan
 
If he can afford the repayments he should go for the 20 years.
 
cremeegg said:
If he can afford the repayments he should go for the 20 years.
Click to expand...

Clearly I am not explaining my question very well.

He is taking out a 30 year mortgage. That has already been decided.

the only issue is whether he should fix for 20 years or 30 years.

Brendan
 
Is there another chart Can he/she take out a 30-year Mortgage with Avant and fix it for 20 years, leaving another 10 years to be repaid after the fixed period of 20 years is up
The Chart on no 1 post clearly says
Fixed-term
I take Fixed-term meaning length of the mortgage, is the Contract open-ended,
 
Ah, I had not realised that.

Apologies, Cremeegg. Crossed wires.

I had assumed that you could take out a 30 year mortgage and fix for 20 years.

That makes the decision trickier.

It seemed obvious to me that one should take out a 30 year mortgage and fix for 20 years.

Back to the drawing board...

Brendan
 
I beg to differ. Rates could go up tomorrow. FR is excellent for someone in the early stages of a loan where they perhaps have come from years of rent hikes & would benefit greatly from fixed cost housing for x years. 30 years is pretty long for a loan, so the odds of rates going up in that time are far higher than they are if you take out a 15 year mortgage tomorrow.
 
Can anybody confirm that the 15- to 30-year Avant fixed rates are available to switchers? Or are they only available to first-time buyers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register