In a recent post, we introduced the Recursion Agency Multifamily Dataset,[1] a complete accounting of multifamily loans securitized in Agency pools, going back to 2009. We provided a breakdown of issuance for the total market and by agency in that post. A natural question that arises is how can we benchmark our new dataset?
​
In this case, we look at outstanding balance rather than issuance volume. The Agencies provide quarterly data on total outstanding balances on their web sites[2]. When we compare this to our own data, we get this:

Over the past 18 months, Recursion has undertaken an extensive effort to aggregate multifamily loans and properties across all three Agencies by Deal Type. The data is complete back to 2009 for all three Agencies and somewhat longer for individual deal types. This allows us to aggregate the loans to the pool and then CMO levels for in-depth analysis. An innovation is that we have tied the loans to the property level, giving us the ability to perform analyses on a wide variety of topics, including ESG considerations and much more[1].
​
For this note, we will provide a basic overview of the dataset. Here is the topmost view from the Agency level:

Recursion has undertaken an intensive effort to compute the size of the Agency CMO market back to 2000. The size of the Agency CMO market is calculated by building up from the loan level. This data is provided by agency disclosure of the portfolio of each collateral group and collected from text files, pdfs, and other formats across single-family and multifamily CMOs. The formats of the disclosure files differed across agencies and changed over time, presenting a challenge to unify.

The inconsistent data quality posed another challenge. The single metric we used to assess quality was assets = liabilities. The existence of Re-Remics and IOs introduced overcounting, which we eliminated using an algorithm that closed the asset-liability gap, with the remaining portion largely explained by over-collateralization. In the end, we were able to construct a direct relationship with all single-family and multifamily CMOs and the loans backing them up via the “exploded method”.
​
We performed these calculations by agency for both single-family and multifamily loans on a monthly basis. Below find bar charts of the progression of the single and multifamily CMO markets back to 2000 on a year-end basis. The single-family CMOs for the three agencies are fairly homogenous. For multifamily CMOs, we include the CMOs collateralized by Ginnie Mae multifamily pools backed by Ginnie construction loans and project loans. For Fannie Mae, we include Fannie Mae GeMS (CMO deals backed by Fannie DUS pools), and for Freddie Mac, we include all Freddie K deals-- classifying them as 100% CMO due to their structure.

Commercial Mortgage Alert recently cited Recursion multifamily data in an article about issuance trends in this asset class.

“Fannie purchased $6.5 billion of multifamily loans last month through its delegated underwriting and servicing, or DUS, model, according to data from Recursion Co. That compares with $4.93 billion of such purchases in August and $4.51 billion in July.”
​
CMA also published a list of the top 10 issuers of Fannie Mae DUS loans YTD September.

Recursion recognizes the importance of the rental market in an environment of extreme unaffordability and is the premier provider of Agency data and analytics in this sector.
​
For more information, please reach out to inquiry@recursionco.com.

In early May, Fannie Mae announced that its disclosures for its multifamily DUS program to include expanded social information, notably Area Median Income (AMI), went live[1]. With the June release, we now have data for two months, a summary of which is found below:
​
To begin, we look at the big picture of new loans issued within the DUS program for May and June combined. (All data will be presented this way unless otherwise specified.)

On May 25, 2022, Ginnie Mae announced that starting on June 8 it would enhance its pool and loan-level multifamily disclosures through the addition of an Affordable Status Field[1]. This field marks every FHA loan in pools with a Ginnie Mae guarantee as:

• AFF (Affordable) 
• BAF (Broadly Affordable) 
• NAF (Not Affordable) 
• blank (Unknown)[2]

​
We received this data on the 6th business evening, and below find some summary descriptions:

On March 24, the CFPB released HMDA data for 2021[1], with results obtained from 4,316 reporters, little changed from 4,472 reporters in 2020, but well below the 5,505 respondents reached in 2019[2]. There are yet more companies are expected to report to 2021 HMDA. However, our experience from previous year indicates little change in big picture when reporting is finalized. The drop reported in the number of reporters in 2020 vs 2019 is largely due to a reduction in the number of loans that a bank needed to underwrite, requiring a report to be filed starting in 2020.
​
This data is used for market sizing by regulators and market participants, but it also represents a treasure trove of information regarding lender and consumer behavior across a wide variety of economic and market regimes. 2021 was notable for being the second year of the Covid-19 pandemic, which is associated with expansive monetary and fiscal policies and surging house prices.

This report will briefly assess trends across a variety of topics.
 
Market Activity
After surging by 47% in 2020 to 24.8 million from 2019, the number of loan activities reported in 2021 HMDA ticked up by just 2% to 25.2 million, almost 40% below the record high 41.5 million attained in 2003. Similarly, the number of loans originated reported in 2020 jumped by 57% from the prior year to 14.2 million, while in 2021 the figure rose by only 3% to 14.6 million, down by about one-third from the 2003 peak of 21.4 million.

While surging house prices continue to be the focus of market participants, the rental market is increasingly attracting the attention of policymakers, both because of the impact on inflation[1] and the importance of this market for the economic wellbeing of lower-income households[2]. In both cases, there is a widespread consensus regarding the need for new supply to ameliorate these problems. There are many factors that come into play regarding the construction of new rental units, including the availability of private and public sources of credit.
​
As part of its quarterly release of the "Financial Accounts of the United States"[3], the Federal Reserve publishes data that allows us to break down the trend in total multifamily lending into major categories of credit risk holders: