Home Prices Fared Best in Markets Where Borrowers Chose Fixed Mortgages

Last updated on October 18th, 2010

best prices

Home prices fell the least in housing markets where most borrowers took out fixed-rate mortgages, according to a perspective by Freddie Mac deputy chief economist Amy Crew Cutts.

Cutts, who praised the fixed-rate mortgage for being an “American Economic Shock Absorber,” noted that home prices are down less than five percent in states where prime, FHA loan, or VA loan long-term fixed-rate mortgages are predominant.

“In fact, home prices have slipped two percent or less in the states with the highest percentages of these mortgages – South Dakota (85 percent), North Dakota (84 percent), and Texas (70 percent),” she wrote in a blog post.

But home values fell on average 39 percent or more from their recent peaks in 2006 or 2007 in areas where exotic and adjustable-rate mortgages festered, thanks in part to payment shock.

Just 51 percent of mortgages in hard-hit Nevada were fixed mortgages – similar numbers are seen in other hot spots like California (52%) and Florida (54%).

Why Did Borrowers Choose ARMs?

The big question is why borrowers in these foreclosure-riddled states chose adjustable-rate mortgages.

Was it out of necessity because home prices were just too high, and electing to take an ARM was the only way to keep the debt-to-income ratio within guidelines?

Or were homeowners tempted by the idea of the option arm, which allowed them to make 1% mortgage payments and bank on the notion of future home price appreciation?

Regardless, fixed-rate mortgages seem to be the hot ticket right now, and that’s certainly not a bad thing going forward if we want to avoid mortgage crisis in the future.

On the flip-side, a study conducted last month found that long-term fixed-rate loans aren’t necessarily the end-all, be-all solution to, ahem, fix housing.


Leave A Response