shadow

Network FBLenders pay a toll to get applications from mortgage brokers. The long-established toll keepers are D+H and Marlborough Stirling. These two technology companies get a slice of every deal lenders receive through their online platforms.

But lenders are growing weary of this expense, which is reportedly as much as 5-6 basis points per funded mortgage in the case of D+H (i.e., up to $180 on a $300,000 mortgage). Lenders resent having to pay more for bigger deals when D+H’s processing costs are much the same regardless of deal size. So they’re taking matters into their own hands.

The talk out there is that a consortium of lenders is making a play for Marlborough Stirling’s MorWeb platform. The MorWeb business is rumoured to have been hemorrhaging cash. Its parent, Capita plc, has reportedly been running a process to find a buyer for weeks now, as MorWeb clings on to just 5-9% market share (our best estimate). If lenders are successful in buying MorWeb, their connectivity costs could drop by 50%.

But lenders may have competition for MorWeb. Word is, Dominion Lending Centres and a few other broker networks have been separately eyeing the company. With DLC controlling roughly 40% of broker market volume, it could make MorWeb viable overnight by cutting lenders’ costs (relative to D+H), pumping $30+ billion in volume through the system and charging its own access fees.

If the MorWeb transaction doesn’t pan out, lenders seem open to cutting deals with Canada’s largest superbrokers for direct access. Lenders would then invest some of their D+H savings back into the brokerages (perhaps 1 bp a deal, or a small flat amount per mortgage). That could fund new technology and marketing initiatives for broker firms, among other things.

Case in point is a firm like Mortgage Alliance. It’s decided to build its own direct channels to lenders. Just today it announced a link to First National, Canada’s largest non-bank lender. Last month it hooked in to Paradigm Quest and its brands Merix and Lendwise.

It’s Been a Long Time Coming

Most monopolies don’t last. D+H might have avoided his fate had it restructured its pricing and built in value that end-users (brokers) crave. Brokers have long been underwhelmed by Expert’s functionality, as this sample ILMB Facebook post conveys:

Facebook-on-DH2

 

D+H could have broadly released tools like online application APIs (accessible to tech-savvy broker-owners, not just superbrokers), better links to third-party CRM systems, a native CRM system, a slick mobile app with document imaging (it demo’d this a few years back…where did it go?), secure email document sharing and so on. That might have instilled broker loyalty.

Instead, it’s seemingly opted to milk its cash cow — and despite all of its well-drafted lender contracts, that could cost it long-term.


Here’s to hoping that D+H surprises everyone with innovation at this weekend’s MPC conference in Vancouver. 

shadow

Interview with mic FBNow that FICOM’s B.C. broker compensation disclosure is a done deal, many want to know how it helps consumers make better broker decisions.

We asked the Office of the Registrar of Mortgage Brokers for its take…

CMT: What do you want consumers to do with this new required compensation disclosure?

FICOM: Consumers may use that knowledge in any number of ways. For example:

  • They may ask how compensation paid by one lender compares to that paid by another.
  • They may ask how compensation influences advice.
  • They may use compensation to assist them to judge the value of the services they receive.

CMT: Have you produced any consumer materials to assist mortgage shoppers in interpreting this information?

FICOM: In our April 2016 open letter, we recognize that the development of information for consumers is an important part of the disclosure requirements. Materials will be available for consumers when the guidelines come into force on June 30, 2017.

We encourage industry to explore how it can contribute to our shared goal of an informed consumer, and look forward to ongoing discussions.

******

So it appears that FICOM will develop some sort of guidelines to help consumers decipher the raft of new compensation information they’re about to receive. That’s terrific. A key concern about FICOM’s new policy is that some consumers could make bad decisions without compensation data being put into context (as this study has shown).

One obvious example is the borrower who compares disclosures and then chooses the broker who “buys down” rates more, and displays less commission. Such brokers work on volume. By their very nature, they can’t afford to spend as much time advising clients—compared with full-service mortgage professionals. By receiving less analysis and guidance on term selection, interest saving strategies and mortgage restrictions, some discount broker clients could potentially choose mortgages with higher overall borrowing costs. (This is coming from someone who runs a discount brokerage company.) 

This is where FICOM can add value. It can counter some of these side effects by helping consumers understand:

  • What is routine for broker compensation, volume bonuses and status benefits
  • The potential tradeoff between compensation and advice
  • The importance of overall borrowing cost and contract terms, over upfront rates and compensation
  • How the breadth of products a broker can access (or chooses to access) can impact their recommendations
  • How research suggests that brokers save borrowers more (overall), regardless of the lender compensation earned by the typical broker

Ideally the disclosures would focus on differences in compensation (i.e., identifying when a broker is making abnormal reward for facilitating a mortgage). Barring that, FICOM would do consumers a favour by crafting practical information like that above — and tossing in a few examples that borrowers can easily digest. Without this context, comp disclosure could distract many folks from what matters most: overall borrowing cost, not price.

shadow

A member of the federal Conservative Party has spoken out against the government’s latest salvo of mortgage rules.

MP Pat Kelly, a former mortgage professional and president of AMBA before becoming the representative for Calgary Rocky Ridge, told the House of Commons last week that he doubts the government’s blanket approach to mortgage rule-making.

“I’m concerned for young families who…may now have a harder time achieving their dream of home ownership,” Kelly said (the full speech can be viewed in the video below).

CMT spoke to Kelly for his position on the changes and on how they were implemented.

“Many people are concerned about affordability in some housing markets, yet the policy appears to have a one-size-fits-all solution that will have perhaps unintended consequences…for the 27 million Canadians that don’t live in Vancouver and Toronto,” he said.

Kelly noted that many members are hearing from consumers who are worried about the restrictions—particularly the new stress test requirements, since that’s the issue they most clearly understand and can relate to.

“We’re right to be concerned about [taxpayer risk]. But addressing this correctly and in a way that doesn’t target the wrong borrowers is important,” he added.

Even members of the Finance Minister’s own party have publicly questioned the consequences of his mortgage policies. “I have some concerns about it and I want to look at it more closely to see how it affects [the market] and trickles down,” Liberal MP Randeep Sarai told The Hill Times. “We want to make sure young families are not excluded from the markets…”

In the House of Commons, Kelly also expressed uneasiness about how the Minister’s announcement impacts competition in the mortgage business, adding that he’s “disappointed that this important policy change was imposed on consumers, Parliament and the mortgage industry with no consultation or notice.”

“When you change rules that affect millions of consumers, consultation with industry is generally expected,” he explained. Parliamentarians, even members of the Finance Minister’s own caucus, only heard the rules on the day they were announced.

Kelly also suggested that the government look at its own over-borrowing before dictating how all Canadian households must manage their finances. He suggested that making homes harder to purchase nationwide was “hypocritical of a government who said in the House that low interest rates are a great time to invest, a statement they made in response to their out-of-control deficit…A home that you raise your family in is an investment. A $40-billion deficit is not an investment.”

shadow

Ten years ago this week, CMT sprang to life. What started as a consumer education site has transformed into a chronicle of what makes this business tick and its constant change.

We’ve reported on 2,800 stories since 2006 and my oh my, what changes we’ve seen since then—from the days of zero-down rentals, 95% LTV insured HELOCs and 40-year insured amortizations to today’s 20%-down uninsured rentals, 80% LTV uninsured HELOCs and (possibly soon to be) 25-year conventional amortizations.

A decade goes by quick and CMT has had a tremendous team along the way. My eternal thanks to:

  • a content editor who is second to none and embodies the 16-hour workday, Steve Huebl
  • our trusty copy editor Gina Fusco, whose definition of “maternity leave” is editing stories at 7:30 a.m.
  • the late Elizabeth McLister, who proofed every last word in the first four years, 
  • my amazing wife and broker, Melanie, for “paying the rent” while I do fun stuff like write, and
  • Mortgage Professionals Canada for its tremendous support of this publication.

We’ve had no shortage of spirited debates over the years, with a dash of controversy to keep things interesting. I’m not sure if I’ll make it another decade, but for now it stays fun. Whatever side of the mortgage debate you’re on, hopefully you’ve at least found the content stimulating.

Thanks for all your readership these past 10 years. Gratefully yours…….Rob

shadow

Based on CMHC’s debt ratio distribution, up to 15-20% of high-ratio buyers may no longer qualify for the same home they could buy yesterday. Maybe more. That’s because today’s new mortgage qualifying rate (MQR) policy could push them above the 39% GDS limit.

Many young buyers will now be riding pine until they scrape together a bigger down payment, get a raise, settle for up to an ~18% cheaper home or find a co-buyer.

Thankfully, the feds did add one key exception for buyers who already have a firm purchase agreement, dated Oct. 16 or before. That would theoretically exempt folks, for example, who bought on pre-sale and won’t close for a few years. Unfortunately, lots of lenders will still enforce the MQR when these people go to apply, thus limiting their options. Nevertheless, this attempted foresight gives federal regulators at least 20 IQ points on B.C. politicians, who recklessly applied B.C’s 15% foreign buyers’ tax retroactively.

 

Low-Ratio Implementation Date Pushed Back

The Department of Finance (DoF) says it won’t enforce the MQR on low-ratio insured mortgages until Nov. 30. Its original proclamation said Oct. 17. More on that.

Mortgage finance companies now have another six weeks to find balance sheet buyers for their low-ratio refis, rentals, jumbos and long-am mortgages. We’re hearing that most of the big boys have found funding backups for these loans, albeit at material rate premiums for deals closing on or after Nov. 30. These rate surcharges will make MFCs more prone to undercutting from deposit-taking lenders, and set back mortgage competition by 5-10 years.

 

Time for Higher Covered Bond Limits

With policy-makers’ unilaterally deciding to pare back government’s role in mortgage-backed securities, perhaps it’s time to rethink covered bond limits. The DoF is still talking a big game about maintaining mortgage “competition” (in some parallel universe). But on earth, the reality is that there’s no liquid market to sell uninsured mortgages at competitive economics, except the covered bond market.

Unfortunately CBs are accessible mainly to banks, and CBs can’t comprise more than 4% of their assets. But foreign investors have been eating up covereds at near 0% coupons. Since the DoF is now heaving billions worth of low-ratio mortgages onto banks’ balance sheets, the least they could do is give banks more leeway to sell these uninsured NON-TAXPAYER-BACKED mortgages to willing investors (I wonder if we emphasized these words enough for housing critics. Thinkin’ I might need a bigger font…).

shadow

“In essence, bank loyalty is not a factor for borrowers in shopping for a mortgage loan.”

That was the conclusion of Accenture in last year’s Digital Banking Survey (an excellent report we haven’t had the opportunity to cover until now). 

The consulting firm elaborated by stating:

  • “…Banks are in the unenviable position of competing in a commoditizing industry.”
  • “Differentiation based on price or products and services is a zero-sum game for many banks. They get trapped in an endless loop of one-upping and matching each other on discounts and product offers where no one wins.”
  • “Brands ultimately become interchangeable in customers’ eyes.”
  • “Borrowers tend to select a mortgage originator based on product price and their expectation for an easy, speedy transaction process.”
  • “Consumer perceptions that switching is hard have eased…”

Accenture listed an assortment of strategies that banks can use to win over today’s new breed of customers. It just so happens that all of those ideas can also be adopted by forward-thinking mortgage brokers and non-bank lenders.

Many of its recommendations are online related, which is not coincidental. Last year, Accenture found that, “For the first time in our research, consumers ranked online banking services as the number one reason for staying with their bank, ahead of branch locations and low fees.”

Among other things, the firm suggested that banks:

  • Add robust mortgage research tools to their websites.
  • Automate back-end systems to provide real-time approval and closing updates.
  • Incent borrowers to download the bank’s mobile app.
  • Develop self-serve interfaces so borrowers can submit documents, track deal status and electronically close mortgages via their computer or smartphone. (The goal: cut back-office staffing and fulfillment costs.)
  • Provide term and product advice to borrowers via video chat.
  • Securely share mortgage closing statuses with realtors (if the client consents).
  • Facilitate connections between borrowers and service providers (e.g.,  home inspectors, renovators, handymen, movers, lawn services, furniture retailers, lawyers and so on).

In 2015, almost 7 in 10 Canadians surveyed preferred to get their mortgage from their primary bank, says Accenture. But change is in the air.

The firm asked that same group how they’d categorize the relationship with their bank. Three out of four (75%) characterized it as merely “transactional,” as opposed to an “advice-driven” relationship. (That was up 10 percentage points from the prior year.)

Meanwhile, close to half (46%) of consumers said they’d be willing to receive robo-advice in lieu of human advice. People cited speed and convenience as the #1 reason why. What an eye-opening stat given that mortgage advisors’ raison d’être is personal guidance.

“The digital borrower’s need for a loan officer can be satisfied via call centre and online chat capabilities,” Accenture added.

That said, we’re still far from the point where the Internet replaces face-to-face contact throughout the mortgage process. A full 79% of borrowers still get mortgages in a branch or office. Canada’s major banks and their armies of mortgage specialists and branch reps remain dominant, but dominance is not insurmountable. In the U.S., despite its structural banking differences, only 44% of borrowers get a mortgage through a branch/office location.

shadow

Credit application FBPeople who apply for mortgages are up to three times more likely to seek additional credit in the 12 months that follow.

That stat comes from TransUnion Financial Services, which ran a study a few months back surveying U.S. mortgage applicants with a prime or better credit rating.

(Side note: TransUnion didn’t report any Canadian-specific data in this survey, but it’s a fair bet that things aren’t drastically different up here.)

The finding is important because “it quantitatively confirms the conventional wisdom,” said Ezra Becker, co-author of the study and senior vice president of research and consulting for TransUnion. The report also found that mortgage applicants were:

  • 50% more likely to open a credit card over the next 12 months following their mortgage inquiry
  • Up to three times more likely to seek a car loan compared to overall consumers.

This proclivity to borrow (more) is partly why lenders covet mortgage borrowers. Such customers are ripe for cross-selling and in the broker space, probably no one does that better than Scotiabank. Hopefully TD and other deposit-taking lenders in our channel take the same opportunity to offer financial services promos to new broker-referred clients. And for all the brokers who complain about branch signings, think about how much you’d complain if banks deemed our channel unprofitable (because of insufficient cross-sell opportunity) and pulled out entirely.

TransUnion’s study also found something else somewhat curious. Credit card spending actually rises just before a mortgage is about to be paid off. In fact, in the month prior to discharge, consumers were found to increase credit card spending up to three times the level they spent just six months earlier.

“A long held assumption among lenders is that new mortgage applicants spend less on their credit cards prior to their mortgage closing event – either to ensure their credit picture does not change or simply because they anticipate spending more once they move into their new home,” said Charlie Wise, VP at TransUnion and study co-author. “Our research indicates that millions of consumers actually increase their card spending in the months before the new mortgage origination. Whether it’s to purchase furnishings or make updates to their existing property, many consumers who move increase their spending before moving into their new residence.”

shadow

Market share FBThe Globe and Mail reports that “unregulated lenders” now own a 15% share of Canada’s mortgage market, according to a Finance Department memo it obtained. That sounds somewhat concerning as a layperson, doesn’t it?

It sounds like Canada has some drunken, unrestrained Wild West lending going on. You can hear Joe Public thinking, “These yahoos must be selling those insidious teaser rates and doling out those NINJA (no income, no job, no assets) mortgages that sunk the U.S. market in 2008.”

That’s unfortunate…because it’s not true.

Right off the bat, let’s dispense with the term “unregulated” as it applies to prime mortgage lending. It’s complete baloney (I’d rather use another term but kids might be reading).

Virtually all prime non-bank lenders are regulated. They must conform to:

  • Federal regulations that apply to the banks providing their funding
  • Federal regulations that apply to insurers providing their default insurance and securitization
  • Provincial regulations applying to mortgage brokerages, administrators, etc.

On top of this, non-deposit-taking lenders must withstand the regular audits and scrutiny of their OSFI-regulated bank funders and investors.

All told, this puts them under a microscope that’s just as intense as the major banks, if not more so. Anyone who thinks banks would risk their capital and reputation by funding them otherwise is woefully misinformed.

Note, of course, that the aforementioned regulations do not generally apply to private subprime lenders. Those lenders account for roughly 1 in 16 mortgage originations, according to CIBC (see its chart below). Yet, they present arguably no material systemic risk because they’re predominately investor- and self-funded, require higher borrower equity, and price and underwrite commensurate with their risk appetite. (Incidentally, the rise in private lending is directly attributable to policy-maker’s own actions — i.e., stricter federal lending guidelines.)

Source: CIBC, Teranet

Source: CIBC, Teranet

The Globe further reports, “The government memo estimated that about 90 per cent of the business of unregulated lenders is subject to federal mortgage rules, which include meeting the strict underwriting standards set by CMHC and the Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions, Canada’s banking regulator.”

The message here is that non-deposit-taking lenders have countless checks and balances and ample supervision to assure their stability. That’s vital because, as the Department of Finance is quick to point out, they’re “enhancing competition in the mortgage market.” Moreover, they account for roughly half of broker originations.

So let’s not allow news stories without context to send the wrong idea about non-traditionally regulated lenders. They and their mortgage broker partners are overwhelmingly responsible for keeping rates and prepayment penalties down, and that keeps more money in Canadians’ pockets.

shadow

Laptop Online FBThe growth of rate comparison sites over the last six years has paralleled the surge in online mortgage shopping.

With the burgeoning demographic of web-savvy mortgage consumers comes greater demand for decision support tools. More than a few firms in our space are presently developing technology to help borrowers compare rates, costs, features and terms.

The latest example comes from RateHub.ca, which just got a grant from the National Research Council of Canada’s Industrial Assistance Program (NRC-IRAP). RateHub will receive up to half a million dollars to develop personalized online product recommendations for its site users. (By the way, this funding is available to other industry participants as well, but the qualification process is not easy.)

RateHub says its technology will allow users, among other things, to enter detailed financial information and receive personalized mortgage product recommendations. The site will develop tools for credit card, savings account and insurance comparisons as well.

“The benefit to the mortgage shopper is being able to go online at their convenience and find a product that is suited to their individual situation,” RateHub CEO Alyssa Furtado told us. “It will make the at-home, online research process much more accurate and seamless. As mortgage brokers know, not all borrowers are created equal. We want to improve the online experience, and take specific borrowing circumstances into consideration, such as investment properties, those with income from freelance work, etc., to help the user find what they are looking for and deliver a tailored rate and product.”

This naturally begs the question: Could automated mortgage recommendations ever replace the advice of a mortgage professional?”

Furtado doesn’t go that far, at least publicly. She sees the increasing range of tools available to web-based consumers as complementary to the services of a broker rather than being in direct competition. alyssa-furtado

“They can and do work hand-in-hand,” she said. “We know most consumers start their mortgage research online, and there is an expectation by the average user to be able to find the information they are searching for [online].”

“A mortgage broker will always have offline experience and be able to offer offline services that benefit the (more knowledgeable) mortgage buyer, like being able to negotiate on behalf of the customer.”

The risk is that consumers blindly gravitate to the lowest rate, or that the comparison technology leaves out key contract considerations.

Those concerns aside, the ability to better filter mortgage options online saves people time and makes for smarter borrowers. That’s clearly a win for consumers as information power leads to more effective negotiating and lower borrowing costs. 


Sidebar: Here’s some technical research if you want to read more on the cost of information asymmetry in Canada’s mortgage market.


By Steve Huebl & Robert McLister

 

shadow

RMA and BFGBroker Financial Group (BFG) and Real Mortgage Associates Inc. (RMA) announced today that they plan to unite. The two brokerage companies say they’ll enter a joint share purchase agreement and take ownership in the other.

The reported benefits of the deal are sharing of technology, administrative resources, payroll, compliance and corporate relationships. Of course, with mortgage revenue being volume-based, the combination should also help the two garner slightly better compensation from certain lenders. “The industry pays on volume,” says BFG CEO Joe Rosati.

Both firms are relatively small as far as broker networks go. The companies haven’t disclosed their volume but we hear it’s in the $1.5 to $2 billion neighbourhood, combined. By teaming up, the two will also improve their economics with financial partners for greater cross-sell opportunities.

Both organizations will continue to operate their separate brands. Some might think that focusing finite resources on one brand would be wiser, but Rosati says the two firms don’t want to disrupt their brokers’ branding and operations.

The advantage that BFG heralds most is its “Scarlett” broker technology, with its CRM, digital marketing and back-office functionality. (Here’s a look at “Scarlett.”) “A partnership with BFG gives RMA access to a piece of technology that is vital to the future growth of our organizations,” said RMA President David Yuzpe in the company’s release today.

Brokerage consolidation is well underway in the mortgage business. This deal is just the latest example and the trend will only intensify. In a thin-margin industry that measures profits in basis points, scale can make or break a business model. The big boys (e.g., DLC, VERICO, Mortgage Alliance, TMG, etc.) are all looking to capture the highest producing agents. Hence, smaller shops may increasingly try to protect themselves and bulk up, to make their offerings more compelling. In that vein, this combination appears to be a sound move for both BFG and RMA.