Knowledge@Wharton Finance and Investment Research Article

View Article on Knowledge@Wharton Mobile

Subprime Crisis: A Bouquet of Opportunity Masked a Reek of Risk

Published: June 20, 2008 in Knowledge@Wharton
Article Image
Print Get PDF of Article Send a Comment
Share this Article

The subprime mortgage crisis is a tremor that turned into an earthquake, threatening this year to plunge the U.S. economy into its first recession since 2001. Who is to blame? Wall Street alchemists, overeager borrowers and aggressive lenders who all let their eye for opportunity trump their nose for risk.

In this special report, prepared by writer Jeff Brown, Knowledge@Wharton looks at the crisis in depth, asking seven Wharton faculty members what caused it, how the immediate effects can be minimized, and what should be done to prevent a similar crisis in the future.

The results presented here include video interviews with the faculty members, a timeline describing key points in the crisis, an interactive feature demonstrating the cascade of events that fell like a line of dominos toward disaster, a glossary, and an op-ed piece and two articles. One of the articles examines the causes of the crisis and remedies that have been tried and proposed. The second explores the response by the Federal Reserve. In addition, we provide links to stories we have published on the subject over the past 18 months.

The crisis had its roots in the U.S. housing boom that began early in the decade. Low interest rates allowed home buyers to take out larger loans, giving them money to bid up home prices. At the same time, advances in loan securitization and automated mortgage underwriting made it easy and profitable for Wall Street to convert newly issued mortgages into securities that could be sold to investors.

Wall Street alchemists found new ways to turn risky mortgages -- subprime loans originally designed for borrowers with low income or poor credit -- into securities that looked almost risk-free. Investors were eager to buy these securities, which promised higher yields than U.S Treasury bonds and other "safe" holdings.

But cracks began to appear in 2006. Most subprime loans carried adjustable interest rates, and growing numbers of borrowers were falling behind after annual interest-rate resets pushed up their monthly payments. By the summer of 2007, prices of securities based on subprime loans were in freefall, as investors worried they would not get the interest and principal payments promised. Surprised about the depth of this problem, investors started to lose confidence in many other types of securities based on various forms of debt. Lenders became reluctant to lend.

Worried that this credit crunch would stall the economy, the Federal Reserve began a series of interest-rate cuts and initiated new lending programs to brokerage houses and commercial and investment banks, accepting risky mortgage-backed securities as collateral for the first time. Congress and President Bush approved an economic stimulus package early in 2008, and Washington was thrown into a debate over whether to help the estimated two million homeowners at risk of foreclosure.

While the credit crunch is showing signs of easing, debate is likely to continue for some time. How can borrowers and lenders be helped without encouraging risky behavior in the future? Should the system for turning loans into securities be modified? Is the patchwork of regulatory agencies pieced together since the 1930s equipped to handle today's financial and economic issues?

Back to Top

Here's what you think...

Total Comments: 6

#1    How will these entities be unwound?

A couple of months ago, FASB (Financial Accounting Standards Board) signaled their intention to no longer allow QSPEs (Qualified Special Purpose Entities). In view of the importance to holders of mortgage backed securities of passing on the majority of the risk of their mortgage portfolios to off-balance vehicles, how will the great unwinding of QSPEs complicate the management of the housing bubble's burst?
By: John McLeod, HousingDoom.com blog
Sent: 08:20 PM Fri Jun.20.2008 - US

#2    subprime crisis INDIAN context

When you see a well-managed country like the U.S. suffer from this mortgage backed securitization, then what about India, where proper data relating to the credit history of borrowers are not available for rating purposes. The intensity of the impact would be much higher than in the U.S.
By: dennis johnson, ICICI bank,PO
Sent: 12:19 AM Mon Jun.23.2008 - IN

#3    What were they thinking?

...There simply, in my opinion, was a lack of oversight by the banks and obviously their staff [who put] wholesale credit offers on the table without any real consideration for the potential of the borrower to pay the bank back.

Who is to blame?

The banks and the borrowers. Some of the banks had no oversight whatsoever and extended credit to borrowers who would eventually ... go belly up. And some of the borrowers either never took the time to evaluate their ability to repay, or... took advantage of the lack of oversight...

Local, state and federal oversight gets a pass on this one - how much can they review and monitor?

By: Ralph Weinsheink, Broadway Rose LLC
Sent: 08:12 AM Thu Jun.26.2008 - US

#4    Subprime in Indian Context

While the US is a credit-based economy, India is savings-based. Also, I believe there is no concept of subprime in home loans as they are given only against strong collaterals, especially in the absence of credit history data. Thirdly, I have not heard of securitization of mortgages in India as practiced in the US. Finally, interest rates are going up in India as real estate is booming; that curbs demand and risk-taking. This is quite the opposite of what happened in the US, where lowering rates promoted higher risk-taking.
By: Mohan Ramachandran, GEICO Direct
Sent: 06:27 PM Thu Jun.26.2008 - US

#5    Subprime Crisis

Everybody who could matter shut their eyes conveniently to what was happening right under their noses in the US housing market. The crisis was the result of pure greed, lax laws and total regulatory failure on the part of both US FED & SEC.
In India, RBI was ringing alarm bells loudly since the last two years that a real estate bubble was building up, including housing loans and increased risk weightage. Both banks and the real estate developers were unhappy and cried a lot. But then today we are much better off. Though real estate cooled off quite a bit, there are no mortgage failures.
By: Lakshmi Narasimha Rao Sista, CEO, Chanakya Mangement Consultants (P) Ltd.
Sent: 10:39 AM Sun Jul.06.2008 - IN

#6    Subprime in Indian context

Only in recent times have banks been over eager to extend loans of any type. Getting housing loans for a salaried person is not too difficult, and a reasonable credit check is done. Also, lately with better earning capability, more of the middle class is aspiring for property ownership. The demand is expected to be high for a few years and hence property prices are unlikely to fall greatly.
A generation ago, a salaried person would aspire to own a property by the time he retires. With increased wages, ownership among the young and well paid is increasing. Most Indians usually buy property for keeps, and unless there is a severe downturn in the economy leading to severe unemployment, especially in the white collared jobs, defaults are unlikely.
BPO employees getting laid off on account of recession in US are in the vulnerable category and it is possible that there could be a mini sub prime crises emanating from the default, and falling off of demand.
By: Sridhar Balasundaram, Saud Bahwan Automotive,Lexus
Sent: 02:24 PM Mon Jul.14.2008 - OM
Comments are only open for the first 30 days after publishing.

Back to Top