CnocAmhran
Registered User
- Messages
- 4
BOI's tracker mortgage book is still costing them.
BOI's tracker mortgage book is still costing them.
[broken link removed]
At Y/E its margin was 3bps (page 36 of the above presentation)
This 3bps "gross margin" is required to cover both (i) the risk premium, (ii) the administration costs for the book, and (iii) generate a return on its capital
While not really appropriate as this cost is based on performing mortgages.
The servicing fee under its 2008 securitization was 8bps
So, before the there has been any risk priced in, BOI is loosing a minimum of 5bps on its tracker book.
Assuming a 1% risk premium and its losing 108bps on the book.
Hi Andy
Before I dig into the figures, I want to be clear that I am simply saying that performing trackers are no longer loss making for our banks. I am not suggesting that trackers are, or ever were, appropriately priced from a risk perspective.
The net interest margin of 3bps for 2014 that you reference is the average tracker rate at December 2014 of 112bps less the average cost of funds (annualised) to BoI during 2014 of 103bps. However, BoI's cost of funds fell significantly during 2014 - from a period average of 115bps in H1 to 103bps in H2. This trend has continued into 2015 and I would estimate that BoI's cost of funds today is materially lower than 100bps (the Central Bank recently estimated that bank funding costs could now be as low as 50bps based on current deposit rates). As such, I would suggest that the current NIM on BoI's performing tracker book is somewhere north of 10bps.
BoI may well have charged a fee of 8bps to service a securitised book of mortgages but that doesn't necessarily reflect the cost of performing this service, which presumably would be lower. Also, the servicing arrangements (per the prospectus linked to your post) extend to dealing with non-performing mortgages within the book. I would estimate that the costs of servicing performing trackers that BoI has retained on its balance sheet would be 2bps at most.
Putting it all together, it is clear that BoI is now generating a positive margin on its performing tracker book. If BoI was losing money on these loans, why wouldn't they incentivise early repayment?
Excellent intelligence there Andy >
On a similar vein of 'costs' - i'd love to know what it costs a bank to reposess property and / or petition bankruptcy..
For example, what financial forcasting methods do they use when assessing 'cost' of repossession route with PDH / BTL's - that are in a negative equity and only paying interest on loans (indefinitely)?
Intelligence is Power!
Power for the People
It all depends on how you define loss or profit. I have no doubt that tracker NIM will continue to grow as funding costs fall (and I've no doubt they've fallen further since Y/E). I would agree with you that performing trackers are profitable on a gross profit basis but BOI still has to cover its other operating costs (rent, staff, IT systems etc).
Further, simply breaking even is not enough - the "profit" has to fund an acceptable return on equity and provisions.
The linked prospectus may not have been the best example to use (the pool is populated with UK & Scottish mortgages) but I note the total arrears profile on the date of origination was 2.45% (significantly below that experienced in Ireland currently). Additionally, on top of the 8bps admin fee, there is a 2bps cash management fee. I note Ulster Banks 2006 Celtic # 11 was charging a 15bps fee.
However, I agree with you that BOI has no incentive to do deals with tracker holders. These are 20+ year products and margins are trending in their favor, as base rates rise the NIM will improve even more. Long term, these will be marginally profitable.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?