Fiserv
Thoughts & Comments
Case-Shiller's Recent Strength: It's Not Just Seasonality
The skeptics will need to come up with some other reason to explain away the apparent stabilization in the housing market

Thomas Brown  ( about me )
Posted 09/29/2009
bankstocks.com
tbrown@bankstocks.com

For months now, housing skeptics have told us that recent signs of stabilization in home prices—as seen in, for instance, a flattening in the Case-Shiller home price index for most of this year—is a result of mere “seasonality” rather than any real strength in the market. Prices tend to go up during the spring versus the winter, as the weather warms up, and then rise some more during the summer as families move while the kids are out of school. Take out that seasonal influence, the bears say, and home prices are still headed down, down, down.  

Or not. The release of the July Case-Shiller numbers, out this morning, makes a bit of a hash of the bears’ argument. From 2000 through 2008, the change in the month-on-month change in the index (that is, the second-derivative of monthly change) has averaged minus-19 bps from June to July, and was only up once, in 2003. Which is to say, sequential monthly improvement in the index usually deteriorates seasonally in July. This month, though, the change in the rate of change rose by 18 bps. So instead of a seasonally monthly slowing, we’re seeing month-on-month acceleration.

 

Case-Shiller
Home Price Index
20-City Composite
July M/M Change-June M/M Change
(basis points)
2000-2009
(not seasonally adjusted)

2000

-54

2001

-13

2002

-12

2003

18

2004

-41

2005

-19

2006

-18

2007

-2

2008

-35

Average

-19

 

 

2009

18

Source: Standard & Poor's

As far as that goes, the seasonally adjusted version of the index shows that prices do indeed seem to be stabilizing:

 

The evidence is growing that the long slide in home prices is at last coming to an end. For months, skeptics have dismissed recent price strength as merely the product of the calendar. Now, it seems, they’ll have to dismiss it all some other way.

What do you think? Let me know!


  Add your comment

 

 

JEM Posted On 9/29/2009 1:34:37 PM

Is there a correlation to when home prices started to tick up and we had government intervention happen (i.e. first time home owner incentives - foreclosure moratorium)? Statistically we are seeing the firming of prices I would agree with you if I thought this increase in demand was sustainable rather than merely delaying the inevitable.

No Way Posted On 9/29/2009 1:51:17 PM

Tom: You are just flat out wrong on your historical Case-Shiller data. The real numbers for July vs. June are (points & % change): 2000: 1.01; 0.7% 2001: 0.91; 0.8% 2002: 1.84; 1.4% 2003: 1.60; 1.1% 2004: 2.61; 1.6% 2005: 2.57; 1.4% 2006: 0.14; 0.3% 2007: -0.72; -0.4% 2008: -1.41; -0.8% I don't know where your numbers came from, but download the spreadsheet from S&P and see for yourself. Just look at the graph Mish has up that you referenced. It clearly shows July as a positive price appreciation month, and conforms to the data above which I developed independently.

Matt Stichnoth Posted On 9/29/2009 2:43:42 PM

No Way: My bad. Table refers to change in rate of monthly change in index (second derivative) not monthly changes. I originally mislabelled table. It has been corrected. Relevant paragraph in article has been corrected as well. MS

WCN Posted On 9/29/2009 3:13:52 PM

Is there any further granularity by segments of the market? or does it not matter? Concern I have is that index is skewed by lower priced homes given its national perspective. With unemployment in California (largest housing market in U.S.) approaching 12% vs. national ave of 9.7% I wonder what prospects are for those homeowners who are now (and have been) out of work and are "underwater" on their mortgages. Seems like many refinanced when values were higher, and no longer have the equity to support a new/restructured mortgage, even if bank was willing to restructure. Would be really interested in better understanding what is going on with BoA and Wells residential mortgage portfolios.

Michael Kayes, CFA Posted On 9/29/2009 3:16:35 PM

The more important issue, perhaps, is the shape of the bottom. Will housing prices flatten out, gradually, move higher, or rally sharply? And which of these scenarios is built in to expectations for companies tied to housing? A lot more questions than answers at this point. MK

Dan Posted On 9/29/2009 4:11:48 PM

Tom, I'd be interested to see your response to the following bear arguments... Thanks Dan 1) Mark Hanson's granular work on the CA foreclosure/housing situation (http://mhanson.com/blog) 2) Amherst Securities' recent estimate that the overhang of foreclosures in the pipeline approaches 7 million. From the report summary: "The single largest impediment to a recovery in the housing market is the large number of loans that are either in delinquent status or in foreclosure that are destined to liquidate. This creates a huge shadow inventory. We estimate this housing overhang at 7 million units, 135% of a full year of existing home sales. We look at the impact on a number of local markets, then look to the causes of the overhang: (1) transition rates are high, (2) cure rates are low and (3) loans are taking longer to liquidate. We are concerned that, in light of this housing overhang, the stabilization we have seen in home prices the last few months is temporary."

mopedman Posted On 9/29/2009 10:13:43 PM

I play the stock market too much to not realize it will be easily dismissed somehow. The question is are the one's doing it actually buying related stocks. Is the money really pouring back into the funds now and do they want to keep things down until they get more of it in. It's already too high to suit them..because they were waiting for a fall.

tomO Posted On 9/29/2009 11:05:10 PM

There is a huge backlog of foreclosures yet to hit the market we my see a second down leg in home prices when they do...

banker1 Posted On 9/30/2009 1:47:25 PM

tomO - dead on. i would love to see this chart pulled back to like 1980 - you can really get a sense of the bubble that is in the middle of being burst.....A LOT MORE DOWNSIDE

MILKWEED Posted On 10/1/2009 9:29:36 AM

How many houses do we need anyway? This is what really matters. http://news.morningstar.com/articlenet/article.aspx?id=281220

Economist Posted On 10/14/2009 10:04:17 AM

banker1- I believe CS index actually only goes back to 1987, although I don't know its history, only the availability of downloadable data. There is a house price index from the FHFA that goes back to 1975, but this index is not seasonally adjusted and depends on both purchases and appraisal data.
Ad for inter-arch
Ad for Bankstocks
 

     Bankstocks.com is a public web site operated by individuals who also operate investment advisory firms that serve as investment advisers to hedge funds (the "Firms"). Some articles are authored by employees of the Firms while others are authored by third parties. Under no circumstances does any article posted on Bankstocks.com represent a recommendation to buy or sell a security. This article is intended to provide insight into the financial services industry and is not a solicitation of any kind. The Firms do not vouch for the accuracy of any information contained in any article posted herein and the views expressed in any article herein do not necessarily reflect the views of the Firms. The Firms buy and sell securities on behalf of their fund investors and may do so, before and after any particular article herein is published, with respect to the securities discussed in any article posted herein. The Firms’ appraisal of a company's prospects is only one factor that affects the Firms’ decision whether to buy or sell shares in that company. Other factors might include, but are not limited to, the presence of mandatory limits on individual positions, decisions regarding portfolio exposures, and general market conditions, and liquidity needs. As such, there may not always be consistency between the views expressed in this article and the Firms’ trading on behalf of their fund investors. There may be conflicts between the content posted on Bankstocks.com and the interests of the Firms. For an explanation of these conflicts, including an explanation of our trading policy, and how we resolve them, click here.

Neither the authors nor any Bankstocks.com team members can provide investment advice or respond to individual requests for recommendations. However, we encourage your feedback and welcome your comments on any of the articles on this site. Neither the authors nor Bankstocks.com has undertaken any responsibility to update any portion of this article in response to events which may transpire subsequent to its original publication date.