Each quarter, HSH.com publishes a report that looks at the annual income required to quality for a residential mortgage in the 50 largest metropolitan areas in the United States. To do this, they look at the median home price for each city and then apply a 28% debt-to-income ratio (principal and interest payments divided by before tax salary). They also assume a 20% down payment and a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage. In their latest report, that comes with an interest rate of 3.15%.

Below is a chart showing what they consider to be the 10 most affordable and the 10 least affordable metros (chart via the New York Times). I don't think the cities on this list will necessarily surprise many of you (though I didn't think Pittsburgh was this affordable), but it is interesting to see it all quantified. It's also worth thinking about what might happen to these figures as that 3.15% number comes down. Shockingly, the price of highly-levered assets tends to be correlated with financing costs.

Below is an interesting chart from the WSJ showing total home equity cashed out in the United States by quarter. What is clear is that the US is nowhere near its pre-2008 peak in terms of total dollars. However, if you look at the percentage of homeowners who refinanced their home in 2018 and took out cash at a higher interest rate, it was nearly 60% of all refis. This is up in the pre-2008 territory and it's about 3x more than the average from 2009 to 2017.

Now, you could argue that this is a fairly rationale outcome after a long period of economic expansion and home price appreciation. And interest rates were, on average, even lower in the 2012 to 2016 period. But, the WSJ posits that this could be a signal that people simply need the cash -- which is why the majority are willing to accept a higher interest rate. Here is another chart from a different WSJ article:

Housing debt (mortgage balances) has come way down since 2008, but non-housing debt has come way up and now exceeds that of the former. Non-housing consumer debt rose by about $1 trillion in real dollars from 2013 to 2019, principally driven by student loans and car loans. Noteworthy is the fact that student loans are rising fairly linearly (along with dramatically), whereas car loans and credit card debt seem to follow the overall economy.

When people are feeling richer (and confident about their economic prospects) they go out and buy things, like cars.

Charts: WSJ

Aaron Terrazas, who is a Senior Economist at Zillow, recently gave this presentation about the US and Virginia Beach housing markets. (I discovered it through City Observatory.)

There are a bunch of interesting graphs/stats in the presentation. Home values in Virginia Beach, for example, have yet to fully recover from the 2007-2008 financial crisis. They are still 8% below their pre-crisis peak, which was in July 2007. (I presume the presentation is dealing in nominal dollars.)

I’ll give two more examples. 

Below is a chart comparing average home prices for rural (dark blue/purple), suburban (blue), and urban (green) homes. In the late 90′s, suburban and urban homes were roughly equal in terms of average prices. But since then, urban homes have shown greater appreciation. The spread also appears to be widening.

And here is a graph showing the share of mortgage borrowers in a negative equity position. That is, the value of the home is less than the outstanding balance of the mortgage.

Now this is only covers people who have a mortgage. According to this Washington Post article, about 34% of all US homeowners don’t have one. Either they have paid it off or they never had one.

Still, the above numbers stood out to me. They speak to the severity of the financial crisis. At the end of 2011 and the beginning of 2012, over 30% of borrowers were in a negativity equity position. And in Virginia Beach it was more than 1/3 of all borrowers at the peak.

For the full presentation, click here.

Each quarter, HSH.com publishes a report that looks at the annual income required to quality for a residential mortgage in the 50 largest metropolitan areas in the United States. To do this, they look at the median home price for each city and then apply a 28% debt-to-income ratio (principal and interest payments divided by before tax salary). They also assume a 20% down payment and a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage. In their latest report, that comes with an interest rate of 3.15%.

Below is a chart showing what they consider to be the 10 most affordable and the 10 least affordable metros (chart via the New York Times). I don't think the cities on this list will necessarily surprise many of you (though I didn't think Pittsburgh was this affordable), but it is interesting to see it all quantified. It's also worth thinking about what might happen to these figures as that 3.15% number comes down. Shockingly, the price of highly-levered assets tends to be correlated with financing costs.

Below is an interesting chart from the WSJ showing total home equity cashed out in the United States by quarter. What is clear is that the US is nowhere near its pre-2008 peak in terms of total dollars. However, if you look at the percentage of homeowners who refinanced their home in 2018 and took out cash at a higher interest rate, it was nearly 60% of all refis. This is up in the pre-2008 territory and it's about 3x more than the average from 2009 to 2017.

Now, you could argue that this is a fairly rationale outcome after a long period of economic expansion and home price appreciation. And interest rates were, on average, even lower in the 2012 to 2016 period. But, the WSJ posits that this could be a signal that people simply need the cash -- which is why the majority are willing to accept a higher interest rate. Here is another chart from a different WSJ article:

Housing debt (mortgage balances) has come way down since 2008, but non-housing debt has come way up and now exceeds that of the former. Non-housing consumer debt rose by about $1 trillion in real dollars from 2013 to 2019, principally driven by student loans and car loans. Noteworthy is the fact that student loans are rising fairly linearly (along with dramatically), whereas car loans and credit card debt seem to follow the overall economy.

When people are feeling richer (and confident about their economic prospects) they go out and buy things, like cars.

Charts: WSJ

Aaron Terrazas, who is a Senior Economist at Zillow, recently gave this presentation about the US and Virginia Beach housing markets. (I discovered it through City Observatory.)

There are a bunch of interesting graphs/stats in the presentation. Home values in Virginia Beach, for example, have yet to fully recover from the 2007-2008 financial crisis. They are still 8% below their pre-crisis peak, which was in July 2007. (I presume the presentation is dealing in nominal dollars.)

I’ll give two more examples. 

Below is a chart comparing average home prices for rural (dark blue/purple), suburban (blue), and urban (green) homes. In the late 90′s, suburban and urban homes were roughly equal in terms of average prices. But since then, urban homes have shown greater appreciation. The spread also appears to be widening.

And here is a graph showing the share of mortgage borrowers in a negative equity position. That is, the value of the home is less than the outstanding balance of the mortgage.

Now this is only covers people who have a mortgage. According to this Washington Post article, about 34% of all US homeowners don’t have one. Either they have paid it off or they never had one.

Still, the above numbers stood out to me. They speak to the severity of the financial crisis. At the end of 2011 and the beginning of 2012, over 30% of borrowers were in a negativity equity position. And in Virginia Beach it was more than 1/3 of all borrowers at the peak.

For the full presentation, click here.