GSE Funding Advantages and Mortgagor Benefits: Answers from Asset Pricing
AbstractWe take an asset pricing approach to model the funding advantage of Government Sponsored Enterprises (GSEs) such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In order to replicate some stylized facts, we extend a referenced model to incorporate defaultability of mortgage agencies. The model implies that the direct effect from having a government guarantee results in a funding advantage of 21 bp. This indicates that the funding advantage of 40 bps estimated in the literature may be a bad proxy for the dollar value of the liability to the government. For a GSE, which explicitly takes a guarantee into account, the funding advantage is passed through to mortgagors. If not, as much as 75% of the funding advantage is retained by the GSE. We relate this to empirical findings in the earlier literature. Finally, we discuss and illustrate how a government guarantee in itself can induce a stabilized mortgage market.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University of Aarhus, Aarhus School of Business, Department of Business Studies in its series Finance Research Group Working Papers with number F-2005-04.
Length: 27 pages
Date of creation: 23 Sep 2005
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: The Aarhus School of Business, Fuglesangs Allé 4, DK-8210 Aarhus V, Denmark
Fax: + 45 86 15 19 43
Web page: http://www.asb.dk/about/departments/bs.aspx
More information through EDIRC
Government sponsored enterprises; Mortgage backed bonds; Credit risk;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Lawrence White & W. Scott Frame, 2004.
"Fussing and Fuming over Fannie and Freddie: How Much Smoke, How Much Fire?,"
04-27, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
- W. Scott Frame & Lawrence J. White, 2005. "Fussing and Fuming over Fannie and Freddie: How Much Smoke, How Much Fire?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 159-184, Spring.
- W. Scott Frame & Lawrence J. White, 2004. "Fussing and fuming over Fannie and Freddie: how much smoke, how much fire?," Working Paper 2004-26, Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta.
- Kau, James B, et al, 1992. "A Generalized Valuation Model for Fixed-Rate Residential Mortgages," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 24(3), pages 279-99, August.
- Dwight Jaffee, 2003. "The Interest Rate Risk of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 5-29, August.
- Dennis R. Capozza & Dick Kazarian & Thomas A. Thomson, 1998. "The Conditional Probability of Mortgage Default," Real Estate Economics, American Real Estate and Urban Economics Association, vol. 26(3), pages 259-289.
- Cox, John C & Ingersoll, Jonathan E, Jr & Ross, Stephen A, 1985. "A Theory of the Term Structure of Interest Rates," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 53(2), pages 385-407, March.
- Titman, Sheridan D & Torous, Walter N, 1989. " Valuing Commercial Mortgages: An Empirical Investigation of the Contingent-Claims Approach to Pricing Risky Debt," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 44(2), pages 345-73, June.
- Wayne Passmore, 2003. "The GSE implicit subsidy and value of government ambiguity," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2003-64, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Helle Vinbaek Stenholt).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.