Abstract:Housing markets tend to display both positive serial correlation as well as a considerable volatility over time. We present a stochastic model illustrating the connection between adaptive expectations and market fluctuations. All macro economic and demographic variables stay fixed over time and price movements are driven by expectations only. In the case where agents face unconstrained mortgage financing, the housing market oscillations are regular and depend on mortgage to income ratios. When credit institutions are introduced, which view houses as mortgage collaterals, the dynamics get complex. Periods of mild oscillations are mixed with violent collapses in an unpredictable manner.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to highlight the short run incentives for increasing LTV ratios that develop among mortgagees and mortgagors in the presence of excess return to housing. The paper provides a conventional framework for analyzing the capital structure of housing investments where higher LTV‐ratios comes about as stronger appreciation is met by increased mortgage rates and both mortgagees and mortgagors are short sighted.Design/methodology/approachThe comment applies a capital structure approach to housing investments, highlighting the return to home equity. The paper distinguishes between price and leverage gains and presents a framework where the excess return to housing provides incentives for increasing LTV ratios. To illustrate, the Norwegian housing market is applied. The paper discusses short run market developments and the potential need for macro prudential regulations while introducing credit risk policy, nominal return targets and risk pricing.FindingsThe implementation of a simplistic capital structure approach to housing investments brings about a framework that allows us to present the incentives for, as well as the risk associated with, higher LTV ratios for both mortgagees and mortgagors. Short sightedness among mortgagees, driven by nominal return targets, allows mortgagors higher LTV‐ratios and increased risk taking.Originality/valueWhile standard when analyzing commercial real estate, the capital structure approach – and the formal distinction between price and leverage gains for homeowners – is to the best of the authors' knowledge novel when analyzing housing finance. To understand the mechanisms impacting this playing field is important for both market analysts and regulators.

No abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to highlight the relation between the loan-to-value (LTV) ratio and the price-rent (PR) ratio. The paper intends to relate the PR-ratio to housing return and the potential for a leverage gain in housing investments by considering the funding structure of housing investments. Design/methodology/approach Combining a PR-ratio approach with the housing return in the case of mortgage-financed housing, as presented by Borgersen and Greibrokk (2012), this paper relates LTV to the PR-ratio. Findings When formalising the relationship between leverage and housing return, as given by Muellbauer and Murphy (1997), the paper finds the effect of a higher LTV on the user cost of housing as the net effect of a higher borrowing cost and the associated leverage gain. The latter depends on the relationship between house price growth and the mortgage rate and, because the leverage gain has an ambiguous effect on the user cost of housing, the relation between the LTV-ratio and the PR-ratio is context-specific. Originality/value The paper aims to contribute to the literature on PR ratios in two ways. First, by explicitly including the LTV-ratio in the user cost of mortgage financed housing and, correspondingly, in the PR-ratio derived from the user cost. Second, by including the funding structure of housing investments the expression for the capital gain, which often is discussed in the PR-ratio literature, is related to the funding structure and includes both a price gain and a leverage gain.

No abstract