RP Data’s Tradeable Australian House Price Index

flattr this!

RP Data has just released a daily index of Australian house prices which is designed to be tradeable on the ASX. I expressed my scepticism about this product on PM last night (the audio is below; the transcript is available here).

Steve Keen's Debtwatch Podcast

 

The many hedge funds that have been looking for a way to short the Australian property market now have a vehicle. Of course, I would suggest careful assessment of the counter-party risk before taking advantage of it!

About Steve Keen

I am a professional economist and a long time critic of conventional economic thought. As well as attacking mainstream thought in Debunking Economics, I am also developing an alternative dynamic approach to economic modelling. The key issue I am tackling here is the prospect for a debt-deflation on the back of the enormous debts accumulated in Australia, and our very low rate of inflation.
Bookmark the permalink.

18 Responses to RP Data’s Tradeable Australian House Price Index

  1. hatless says:

    Surely the biggest issue with the index is the lack of fun­gi­bil­ity of houses. The index implic­itly puts every prop­erty in exis­tence into one of those on-line val­u­a­tion tools based on num­ber of bed­rooms, sub­urb and if it “has a view”.

    Who in their right mind would invest on the basis of such a subjectively-based index?

    The only ana­logue I can think of is bas­ing an index off rat­ings agency data. Now don’t they have a great rep­u­ta­tion for transparency!

  2. Greg Wood says:

    Con­sid­er­ing house prices more gen­er­ally, what capac­ity might for­eign invest­ment in hous­ing stock have to coun­ter­bal­ance price decline con­se­quen­tial to de-leveraging the domes­tic mort­gage debt?

    The point was made to me that, due to pop­u­la­tion growth, rents aren’t falling and a 2–3% return on invest­ment is an accept­able result, regard­less of cap­i­tal gain, to off­shore investors who are either cashed up or who are access­ing funds at 0–1%

  3. Daniel Scollay says:

    Hi Steve,

    Been read­ing for a while, just signed up today so I can com­ment. I enjoy read­ing your work.

    Regard­ing this new ser­vice, it does seem like the per­fect vehi­cle to short the Aussie prop­erty mar­ket. Seri­ous spruik­ers can now push the “buy now or miss out for­ever mes­sage” while simul­ta­ne­ously short­ing the mar­ket. Make money on both ends.…smart.

    Ques­tion: Do you antic­i­pate that median house prices will rise slightly in the next cou­ple of months due to the FHOG being taken away?

    My thought was that a decent per­cent­age of sales last year were made up of peo­ple using the FHOG for prop­er­ties between $300k-$600k. Now the punch bowl has been taken away, do you expect a lower amount of buy­ers in the low end of the mar­ket? I would think even though big dis­counts are hap­pen­ing at pri­vate treaties and auc­tions, the over­all data group will be higher with the absence of first home­buy­ers price range of prop­er­ties. Thoughts? Could be some­thing for the spruik­ers to beat their chests about for the next few months.

    Also of inter­est was a newslet­ter from a real estate com­pany that spe­cialises in man­ag­ing rental prop­er­ties for investors that was in my mail­box this week. They had a big piece on the Real Estate Insti­tute of Aus­tralia (REIA) about pres­i­dent Ms Pamela Ben­nett lob­by­ing the gov­ern­ment on the following:

    * Reten­tion of cur­rent arrange­ments for neg­a­tive gear­ing of prop­erty invest­ments.
    * No Cap­i­tal gains taxes on the fam­ily home
    * No increase in Cap­i­tal Gains tax on prop­erty invest­ments
    * Removal of stamp duty on prop­erty trans­ac­tions
    * An increase in the First Home Own­ers Grant

    Quotes from Ms Bennett:

    “Another extremely impor­tant issue for the hous­ing mar­ket is the cur­rent level of the FHOG avail­able to first home buy­ers. Intro­duced in July 2000, the grant is one of the most impor­tant hous­ing pol­icy instru­ments in assist­ing first home buy­ers with housing.

    The lack of finan­cial assis­tance to first home buy­ers is an issue that requires con­sid­er­able atten­tion to ensure that prop­erty is afford­able for young Aus­tralians and that they can one day aspire to own a home. REIA urges the Gov­ern­ment to not only retain the grant but to review the amount cur­rently pro­vided as the rel­a­tive size of the grant has declined markedly in rela­tion to house prices”

    These quotes are quite out­ra­geous IMO as every­one knows includ­ing REIA that the FHOG is the vital cog in keep­ing the ponzi that is the Aus­tralia prop­erty mar­ket going. The dis­gust­ing part is the scheme actu­ally does the direct oppo­site of its stated inten­tion in con­tin­u­ing the bub­ble mak­ing prop­erty fur­ther out of reach to young Australians.

    Is there a site/organisation that will counter the lob­by­ing of the Real Estate indus­try on these vital issues?

    Finally I thought Kevin Rudd’s speech when announc­ing his lead­er­ship chal­lenge was actu­ally quite telling. The dra­matic nature of the whole issue meant that some dirty laun­dry was aired. What raised my eye­brows was when he said in the speech that the world is going to have the next GFC. This was not the usual bab­ble about Australia’s fun­da­men­tals and pos­i­tive eco­nomic future.

  4. Steven Shaw says:

    Good point about the sub­jec­tive index, Hat­less. It also seems pretty odd to be overly inter­ested in an extra bed­room when it seems to be the price of land that mostly deter­mines the total price. In my area, land prices have done a x6 since the late 90s, whereas an equiv­a­lent build seems to be only about x1.5 (the build used to cost about twice the land cost, now the land costs about twice the build).

  5. Greg Wood says:

    Re the 6x increase in land cost, devel­op­ment costs haven’t gone up nearly that much. Developer’s have been mak­ing a filthy fortune.

    And with that they con­tinue to lobby for reduced infra­struc­ture costs, stamp duty etc., so as to make land more afford­able. As though their final prod­uct is mar­keted ‘cost plus’ rather than for the best price achiev­able in the mar­ket. Dis­grace­ful that they’re let get away with it. Where is the pub­lic media on this issue — in narcosis?

  6. Frank says:

    A quick glance at the links sug­gests that it is just a sta­tis­ti­cal index — not trad­able. Where is the trad­able aspect of it? I can’t see it.

  7. David Colquitt says:

    Steve, with all these type of prod­ucts beware the couter­party risk. We need look no fur­ther than the col­lapse of MF Global. I know lots of peo­ple who had in the money posi­tions with MF Global but when the bro­ker can’t pay the games up!

  8. RickW says:

    @Frank

    The index is not yet being traded:

    http://www.propertyobserver.com.au/residential/new-daily-index-shows-aussie-home-values-rose-0.8-in-february-christopher-joye/2012022953635

    quote 1st March — ASX prod­uct devel­op­ment man­ager Brian Good­man said today that the exchange is inves­ti­gat­ing “the cre­ation of exchange-traded prod­ucts with the objec­tive of allow­ing investors to repli­cate the per­for­mance char­ac­ter­is­tics of Aus­tralian res­i­den­tial prop­erty. The abil­ity to obtain and opti­mise res­i­den­tial prop­erty expo­sures with an exchange-traded prod­uct will enable investors to effi­ciently man­age expo­sure to this asset class.” end quote

  9. Steve Keen says:

    Hi Daniel,

    I think we do need an organ­i­sa­tion to counter the prop­erty lobby’s attempt to have the FHVB extended, and I’d be happy to be part of that. At present Pros­per Aus­tralia prob­a­bly leads the cam­paign against such influences:

    http://www.prosper.org.au/

  10. Steve Keen says:

    This is an issue Greg,

    But it can cut both ways when a price fall sets in. For­eign­ers can suf­fer twice then–via falling prices and a falling exchange rate. This is what hap­pened to Japan­ese spec­u­la­tors on Aus­tralian land prices after the 1990s bust.

    How­ever the addi­tional wild­card is wealthy Chi­nese buy­ing not for eco­nomic rea­sons but polit­i­cal insur­ance against events turn­ing sour in China.

    This issue def­i­nitely clouds the oth­er­wise clearcut Ponzi aspects of our real estate bub­ble and burst.

  11. Greg Wood says:

    Hi Steve
    My pre­vi­ous ques­tion was framed gen­er­ally but I did par­tic­u­larly have in mind the activ­ity of Chi­nese and Indian investors.

    For­eign money from other sources tends to invest in new devel­op­ment projects, thus still need­ing domes­tic mort­gages to pur­chase fin­ished prod­uct. How­ever there seems to be a notable trend of wealthy Chi­nese and Indi­ans invest­ing as land­lords. My wife con­sults with peo­ple who are behind in their util­ity accounts. The num­ber of her low-income clients rent­ing from Chi­nese or Indian land­lords seems to be dis­pro­por­tion­ate to what one might expect. This ran­dom sam­pling indi­cates instances of this investor class own­ing whole streets and blocks of houses.

    Such con­sol­i­da­tion of own­er­ship might be antic­i­pat­ing a future re-development ambi­tion. How­ever the rental arrange­ments seem almost feu­dal in char­ac­ter and that may rea­son­ably be con­sid­ered to be the intent. Given the global finan­cial sit­u­a­tion its a rel­a­tively safe haven for cash that has to go somewhere.

    It cer­tainly is a wild­card to the pure finan­cial analy­sis of domes­tic debt lev­els. I have no idea regard­ing the res­i­den­tial sta­tus of these land­lords, or the legit­i­macy of their ‘invest­ments’ under for­eign own­er­ship pur­chas­ing guide­lines. I bet the Govt doesn’t have a clue either. They’ll hap­pily sell the farm to keep things look­ing ‘sta­ble’ in the short term.

  12. alainton says:

    Surely there is a much more obvi­ous way to short prop­erty — invest in buy to let. With inter­est rates going down in a prop­erty reces­sion, rental prices going up — because of the short­age of house­build­ing, and land prices com­ing down its a no brainer. The trick is to avoid the mort­gage famine that delever­ag­ing brings — and which killed many over­lever­aged BTL com­pa­nies inn the UK in 2008–9, but if you arnt lever­aged and your balence sheets are burn­ing a hole in your pocket look­ing for a safe haven BTL is a good invest­ment for pen­sion funds/REITs etc. for sev­eral years of a prop­erty down­swing, before switch­ing back to equi­ties in the upswing.

  13. alainton says:

    Of course that only makes sense after the downswing.

  14. alainton says:

    In fact the his­tor­i­cal inabil­ity to short land — the only ratio­nal response is to increase liq­uid­ity — seems to be quite impor­tant macroeconomically.

    Imag­ine a sit­u­a­tion where some ponzi investors had over­paid near the top of the mar­ket but then the ratio­nal expec­ta­tions fairy comes along and every­one gets per­fect fore­sight. Oh dear the price of hous­ing is going to decline — we cant short that so we have to go liq­uid. An increase in liq­uid­ity pref­er­ence leads to a col­lapse in aggre­gate demand, raised unem­ploy­ment and a a fall in prop­erty prices, delver­ag­ing etc. So in this toy sce­nario ratio­nal expec­ta­tions cre­ates a dis­e­qui­lib­rium process — because asset prices were so out of equi­lib­rium in the first place.

    Now replace per­fect expec­ta­tion with a bell curve based on the rate of growth Near the top of the curve more peo­ple will expect growth so it will be pushed to the top and slightly beyond, after which the pres­sure will be down­wards as more peo­ple expect decline. What this shows is you don’t need a Min­sky like arbi­trary triple cat­e­gori­sa­tion of expec­ta­tions, or unre­al­is­tic rper­fectly ratio­nal expec­ta­tions in the face of uncer­tainty to drive the hous­ing (kun­znets) cycle, just a nor­mal curve of opti­mism in con­tin­ued growth of land prices.

  15. Philip Sturm says:

    Wow, I’m sure glad you made this post. I signed up look­ing for some infor­ma­tion on the effects pri­vate hedge funds and deriv­a­tive instru­ments have on the debt and money sys­tems, what with tril­lions upon tril­lions of dol­lars in notional value sort of just float­ing around in spec­u­la­tive space. With the cre­ation so much “wealth” (as long as things are good), how would that impact debt activ­ity and accel­er­a­tion? Do you have a stupid-man’s blog post about the inter­ac­tion of the shadow bank­ing sys­tems and debt cre­ation? Thank you for your work.

  16. Philip Sturm says:

    Adden­dum: My rough idea of the recent cri­sis was that pub­lic banks were pushed into direct com­pe­ti­tion with pri­vate invest­ment firms who were bypass­ing the tra­di­tional mort­gage mar­ket in favor of direct mort­gage orig­i­na­tion firms. Wall St. hedge funds became the direct finan­cial pool for financ­ing home loans, and they, as we all know, turned around and sold those secu­ri­tized deriv­a­tives to pub­lic banks, gov­ern­ments, pen­sions and so on. Since investors were look­ing for, above all else, ROI, pub­lic banks were los­ing out on investor dol­lars to the new-fangled finan­cial behe­moths who oper­ated almost com­pletely in the dark. This pushed them to open up new divi­sions, and of course the noto­ri­ous repeal of keep­ing the two kinds of bank­ing apart. So what this post is basi­cally show­ing is how these hedge funds can sim­ply bypass fund­ing mort­gage orig­i­na­tion alto­gether, and play the volatil­ity with­out any undue bur­dens of admin­is­tra­tion and orig­i­na­tion. Great. So basi­cally no one is going to put skin in the game and fund mort­gages, and you’re actu­ally going to have chumps bet­ting on the upside when no one can get a loan in the first place?

  17. Steve Keen says:

    Hi Philip,

    Not a lot in detail, but I rec­om­mend watch­ing the recent Cap­i­tal Account pro­gram where the word of the day is “Rehypothecation”.

    http://rt.com/programs/capital-account/bank-bubble-blowers-rehypothecation/

  18. Amotzza says:

    Hi Steve — what a dis­as­ter we are head­ing for in Aus­tralia. We have iden­ti­fied a sit­u­a­tion where 3 real estate agents value a prop­erty at $2m+. It has been on the mar­ket with one of them for 1 year. It is zoned rural and has been used to breed thor­ough­bred horses which are very dif­fi­cult to sell. It is likely to be rezoned in 2013 when a free­way from Mel­bourne reaches it. There are no buy­ers for this prop­erty at any price. The prop­erty has a $700,000 mort­gage. What are peo­ple to do in this situation.

Leave a Reply