Finance and capital markets
- CNN: Understanding the crisis
- Bailout 1: Liquidity vs. solvency
- Bailout 2: Book value
- Bailout 3: Book value vs. market value
- Bailout 4: Mark-to-model vs. mark-to-market
- Bailout 5: Paying off the debt
- Bailout 6: Getting an equity infusion
- Bailout 7: Bank goes into bankruptcy
- Bailout 8: Systemic risk
- Bailout 9: Paulson's plan
- Bailout 10: Moral hazard
- Bailout 11: Why these CDOs could be worth nothing
- Bailout 12: Lone Star transaction
- Bailout 13: Does the bailout have a chance of working?
- Bailout 14: Possible solution
- Bailout 15: More on the solution
Why a CDO could be worth nothing even though they are "collateralized". Created by Sal Khan.
Want to join the conversation?
- My question is why does Sal say at10:08that the investor in the equity tranche "gets nothing"? Wasn't he getting 31% interest on his 1 million investment before the mortgages defaulted? If he invested his money four years before the collapse, he might have received back all that he invested plus $240,000 in interest (4 X $310,000 = $1,240,000). Only those who invested late might have lost but that was a really unwise move for them because all signs of "credit crisis" were there...(20 votes)
- Not exactly, the equity tranche example gets 31% if everyone pays their mortgage. Since the mortgage pools contain high-risk loans, we can expect that everyone did not pay for an extended period of time. Even so, some amount of interest may have been paid. With your question, you are reinforcing one of Sal's points. The companies took excessive risks, received the benefit when times were good, and then got a handout when the risk came to roost.(28 votes)
- The people at 5M, who decides that they get paid first? Is it all in contracts or is that just how it works. And socially, what is the difference of the people lending at 5%, and those lending at 31%. Are those people just other banks, or private lenders?(5 votes)
- Think of it this way. Company A Has 10 billion dollars in mortgages they gave out to people who needed credit; they are all paying more or less the same interest rate, based on the national rates and their credit score and other factors, same as if you'd gone to your bank. Now, Company A pays for this huge block of mortgages by selling bonds, which investors then buy up. An investor has choices; he can buy bonds with higher seniority, but lower return ratess; He can buy with high rates but low seniority, and many options in between. So Company A sells him a bond with the interest rate he chose, and the seniority he chose; if He picked the safest layer, he might only get 4% return, but when the company goes under, he gets first dibs on the money. The lower in seniority you go, the longer you have to wait; If you were in the highest risk layer, you could very well get nothing; it's the risk for such a high rate.
Like all other securities, these CDOs can be bought by investors, hedge funds, banks, etc, or any other financial institution. Some companies that got into the CDO business would often keep the highest risk CDOs for themselves, because the demand wasn't large enough among the public for them. They ended up with what looked like a huge asset- bonds paying huge yields, at a time when no one defaulted on their mortgages- but also a huge risk, because basically every default came straight out of their high risk layer.(5 votes)
- why wouldnt the government just bail out the mortgages by giving money to the people who are defaulting on their mortgages so that they can pay the mortgage back? This would help them and the bank, even if it would lead to inflation. This would help the struggling middle and lower class, not just the rich bankers who took big risks, got big rewards and are now facing the snakes behind the ladders.(2 votes)
- Two reasons:
1) who is going to pay for that? Taxpayers. People don't want to pay higher taxes to help other people pay mortgages to make banks happy.
2) Some people are concerned that this sends the wrong message for the future: don't worry if you take out too big a mortgage (home buyer), or don't worry if you lend too much money to someone who might not pay it back (bank), because we will just make you whole for any bad decisions you make.(5 votes)
- So the SPV/SPE is created to issue mortgages to many buyers, then the same company issues debt securities backed by the same mortgages? Is it basically debt holding up debt?(2 votes)
- On a companies balance sheet would it say " CDO" under assets ?
2) would it say which trunch and out of how may trunches ?
3) Also I think sal forgot to mention that the 31% is the maximum the first trench can get.and that the company might keep some of the % for itself as operating and profit ???
- I doubt it'd say CDO under assets, they would probably be clumped in with other assets in a hierarchical listing. I think Sal mentions something about that in an earlier video.
2) No and no(1 vote)
- Sal often mentions "security" but never describes what it is. It sounds like a security is a kind of asset. What makes it different from an asset then?(1 vote)
- A security is a kind of asset. A security in essence, is a document claiming that some company or government owes the bearer money, and if the said company refuses to pay, the bearer can take a specific asset from them.(2 votes)
- wouldn't it make more sense if the equity tranche was in the bottom (and not on top)?(1 vote)
- Imagine it as pouring water into a cup: first gets filled the lower parts and then, if ther eis enoguh water.. the upper layers. This is the idea of placing the safest tranches in the bottom. As the money flows in, it "falls" directly to the bottom.(2 votes)
- How does a company find the people to lend it money?
I guess what I'm trying to ask is that what incentive does it offer to the investor ?
2) how are they bought and sold ?? Where is the market if I wanted to buy any ?(2 votes)
- "I guess what I'm trying to ask is that what incentive does it offer to the investor ? "
Is very simple, investors invest to get a return, this is in the form of interest on a loan or dividends on shares.(1 vote)
- as a layman i want to understand how does it impact central bank if at the end all the toxic assets turn out to be of zero value. how does it affect central bank by printing more and more money till such time it is not causing inflation ?(2 votes)
- If the toxic assets are worth nothing, then the Federal Reserve is the big loser. It lost a lot of money by buying these CDOs. However, the operations of the Federal Reserve do not change. It still has to print more money to reach its target inflation level.(0 votes)
- around7:20, he says to assume the housing market isnt going well and has lost value so the homes lose value. Wasn't the whole reason people were investing so much in these because the housing market was going up? Which would then make extra money for all involved?(1 vote)
The government has said a lot about the fact that this $700 billion might not just be a blank check, that we're actually buying assets. And, who knows, maybe we'll even make a profit on the assets. And I've hinted and other people have hinted that, well, that's very unlikely because these assets, they're probably not worth what the government's going to pay for it. And one could argue that even some of these are worth 0. And I've gotten some letters and I've heard other people on the news actually say, well, how could they be worth 0? They're backed by mortgages, which are backed by houses, which are the collateral. That's where the collateral comes from, the collateralized debt obligations. So in this video I'm going to do, hopefully, a reasonably straightforward example to show you why some of these collateralized debt obligations could be worth very little or maybe even nothing. So let's do something simple. Let's not talk in terms of millions of homes, let's talk in terms of 10 homes. Let's say I were to create a very small mortgage-backed security. Essentially, I give out 10 mortgages. Right? Let's say each mortgage is $1 million. Let's say that's 10 times 1 million more. 10 times $1 million. And the people who I give those mortgages to buy ten $1 million houses. Right? So, I create a corporation, a special purpose entity, for the sake of this mortgage-backed security for constructing these collateralized debt obligations. That's my company I create, the balance sheet of it. What are the assets? Well, I have 10 mortgages times a million so I have $10 million in loans, essentially, $10 million in mortgages. And they're collateralized or they're backed by the underlying houses that these mortgages were used to buy. $10 million in mortgages, $10 million more, right? Now, how is this special purpose entity-- we'll call it an S.P.E.-- how is this S.P.E. funded? Well, it's essentially funded by the people who are buying the collateralized debt obligations. And collateralized debt obligations are essentially just debt that is used to fund these mortgages. And what's interesting about a collateralized debt obligation-- see in a mortgage-backed security, I would have just given these $10 million mortgages and then, in this corporation, I would have just issued a thousand shares. And so each share would hold 1/1000 of this value, right? That's a mortgage-backed security. But in a collateralized debt obligation, I split it into buckets. So what I do is, let's say I borrow three tranches. Just call that buckets. So I go to some people and I borrow, I don't know, of that $10 million that I said you lent out, I borrow-- I don't know-- let me say-- I'll make up a number-- $5 million. %5 million from these people, and these are the senior debt holders. So essentially, both this debt holder and this debt holder has to get wiped out before this guy gets impaired. Impaired just means that you get less money than you lent, right? So I borrow $5 million from somebody else and I'm going to pay them the lowest interest rate because this is the safest bucket. So think of it this way: let's say these 10 mortgages, let's say that I'm getting 8%. And let's say that I'm paying, let me draw, they're giving me $5 million. Let's say that I'll pay these guys 5%. And why are they willing to take a lower interest rate? Because essentially any default on this side will hit these two buckets before it hits these people. So this'll be an arguably very safe debt instrument. And I'll do more about that in a second. And let's say I borrow another $4 million from some other people. So they gave me $4 million. I have to pay a little bit higher interest to them. I have to pay 6% interest to them, right? And then, finally, I borrow another $1 million. I borrow $1 million from people who are willing to take the biggest risk. So if there's any defaults over here, these people are going to be wiped out before these people get touched. And actually, we can figure out the appropriate amount of interest, right? How much money is coming in per month before anyone starts defaulting? Let's see, I'm getting $800,000 in per month. That's the inflow. And then on the outflow, I have to pay these people 5 million times 5%. That's $250,000. So that's how much I'm paying to that tranche. $250,000. And then four times 6%. That's $240,000, minus 240. So that's what, 800 minus 490. So then I have 310,000 left, right? So I can essentially pay this $310,000 per year to this tranche. So they're going to actually get a 31% interest. And that sounds great. That's why they call that the equity tranche normally in a CDO because those people get a lot of upside. But guess what: if there's any default, these people get wiped out first. And just to make this example clear, let's do it very simply because you could model this out and assume some type of prepayment et cetera, et cetera. Let me scratch this out right here. Let's say that one year out, half of the mortgages, I don't know, the people refinance or they move or they sell their house or whatever. So they just prepay the mortgage. So let's say in one year. Let me redraw this balance sheet in one year. So in one year, let's say five of those borrowers-- so this is a year later. Magenta is my color for a year later. A year later, half of those borrowers just refinance or they sell their house. And so they just pay us back $5 million, right? So we get $5 million. I'll put that on the asset side of the balance sheet, right? This is assets. There's a bunch of videos on assets and liabilities and balance sheets if this confuses you. And there's no equity in this company, right? Because assets minus liability is equity. And I did that because these are special purpose entities. Their whole purpose is to structure these securities. Their purpose really isn't to be an ongoing operation that has net income in and of itself, although there probably was equity in the bank who constructed this probably took at all. OK, so we said half the people refinance. Those people were great. They were worth giving the money to because they paid off their loans in whole. But guess what? The other half of the people, the title of subprime was deserving of them, and they default. And we have to foreclose on them a year later, right? But all is not lost, right? We don't lose that $5 million that we lent those other 5 million people because they had homes, right? These are collateralized debt obligations. We are able to take their houses. Unfortunately, it's a really weak real estate market and let's say, just for the sake of argument, we take those five houses from the people who didn't pay, right? Five paid, five didn't pay. We take the five who didn't pay houses. And let's say, when we sell them, let's say we're only able to get, I don't know, 60% on those houses, right? So 60% of $5 million. We're essentially only able to get $3 million for the houses we've foreclosed on. So a year later, what are all of our assets? We get the $5 million in cash from the people who are good and paid off their mortgages. And then we get the $3 million from the people who foreclosed. And then we only got 60% of the original purchase price of the homes. We only got that on the foreclosure. That makes sense because credit's getting tighter, and it's a tough mortgage market, and all these houses were in South Florida or Las Vegas or whatever. But what happens now? There's really no purpose for this entity to even exist anymore because everyone's paid off. There's no income streams coming in or out. So essentially we will just dissolve the corporation and give everyone what they're due. Well, this guy, he gets first dibs on it, right? He took the lowest interest rate in exchange for having the lowest risk. So that guy right there, I'll draw him in green because he's good to go. This tranche right here, he gets a full $5 million. That's great. He got 5% interest and he got all of his money back. Sounds great. The CDOs look safe so far. But what about this next tranche, this $4 million guy. He didn't do so good, right? The $4 million guy, that's what he was owed, that's what he essentially lent the special purpose entity. This $4 million tranche of CDOs. He's owed $4 million, but guess what? After you pay this guy $5 million, there's only $3 million left. So this guy only gets $3 million. So for every $4 he lent, he only gets $3. So this guy gets $0.75 on the dollar. That's a seven, right there. I write my sevens like a European. But what happens to that equity tranche, this guy up here? This $1 million, right? He thought he was a genius. He lent this money and he was getting a 31% interest. Sounded good and, frankly, the bank probably wasn't able to unload this to anyone because pension funds and a lot of these foreign governments, they only buy the safer assets, right? So this is the stuff that's probably sitting on a lot of these investment bank balance sheets. These are the smelly, toxic, stinky assets that people are talking about. And guess what? There's nothing left to pay this $1 million to this guy. You pay $5 to this guy. This guy only got $0.75 on the dollar, right? He was impaired by $1 million here. And then this last tranche up here: he gets nothing. So the question is: these CDOs that are on banks's balance sheets, are they these CDOs? Are they a share in that tranche of debt, in which case, they're very safe. But I would argue in which case the banks probably aren't looking to unload them as quickly, or they can probably find buyers. Are they this tranche, in which case maybe they're worth $0.75, but you know even at $0.75, you're just going to break even? Maybe they're worth, at $0.60 on the dollar, maybe they're a good deal. Or are they this stuff? And if they're this stuff, then they really, really, really are worth nothing, at least in the example I just gave.