scholarly journals Subsidization as motor to residential mortgage securitization in the US

2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (4) ◽  
pp. 337-351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marietta E. A. Haffner
Keyword(s):  
Residential Mortgage ◽  
Mortgage Securitization ◽  
The Us

scholarly journals Profit and Risk under Subprime Mortgage Securitization

2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
M. A. Petersen ◽  
J. Mukuddem-Petersen ◽  
B. De Waal ◽  
M. C. Senosi ◽  
S. Thomas
Keyword(s):  
Risk Mitigation ◽  
Collateralized Debt Obligations ◽  
Mortgage Loans ◽  
Main Hypothesis ◽  
Subprime Mortgage ◽  
Important Indicator ◽  
Residential Mortgage ◽  
Maturity Mismatch ◽  
Mortgage Securitization ◽  
Collateralized Debt

We investigate the securitization of subprime residential mortgage loans into structured products such as subprime residential mortgage-backed securities (RMBSs) and collateralized debt obligations (CDOs). Our deliberations focus on profit and risk in a discrete-time framework as they are related to RMBSs and RMBS CDOs. In this regard, profit is known to be an important indicator of financial health. With regard to risk, we discuss credit (including counterparty and default), market (including interest rate, price, and liquidity), operational (including house appraisal, valuation, and compensation), tranching (including maturity mismatch and synthetic) and systemic (including maturity transformation) risks. Also, we consider certain aspects of Basel regulation when securitization is taken into account. The main hypothesis of this paper is that the SMC was mainly caused by the intricacy and design of subprime mortgage securitization that led to information (asymmetry, contagion, inefficiency, and loss) problems, valuation opaqueness and ineffective risk mitigation. The aforementioned hypothesis is verified in a theoretical- and numerical-quantitative context and is illustrated via several examples.

Investors Beware: Flaws in the Residential Mortgage Securitization Process

2010 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 88-98
Author(s):  
Laurie S. Goodman ◽  
Roger Ashworth ◽  
Brian Landy ◽  
Lidan Yang
Keyword(s):  
Residential Mortgage ◽  
Mortgage Securitization

Does securitization escalate banks’ sensitivity to systemic risk?

2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-22 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katerina Ivanov ◽  
Julia Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Systemic Risk ◽  
Value At Risk ◽  
Supply And Demand ◽  
Conditional Value At Risk ◽  
Empirical Literature ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Holding Companies ◽  
Residential Mortgage ◽  
The Us ◽  
The Impact

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to test empirically the impact of asset securitization and sale activities as well as the holdings of sub-prime related securitized products on the US bank holding companies’ (BHC) exposure to systemic risk. Design/methodology/approach This paper adopts a robust econometric method to estimate the conditional value-at-risk as a measure of BHCs' institutional sensitivity to market crushes. Using the data over the period of 2004-2016, the study also uses OLS with robust standard errors and panel estimation with random effects as two alternative estimation techniques to assess the impact of securitization activities on the sensitivity of BHCs to systemic risk. Findings Residential mortgage and other forms of securitization activities are positively related to an increase in the US BHCs' sensitivity to systemic distress. The significant cross effects of both securitized loans and holdings of securitized products play a crucial role in determining risks in financial sector. Originality/value This study contributes to the empirical literature on the effects of securitization on BHCs' risk exposures in several ways. First, the paper considers the complexity of the bank's risk profile; it focuses on BHCs' individual sensitivity to systemic distress and its dependence on the size of securitization and assets sold activities considering both supply and demand sides of securitization. Second, the time horizon under investigation sheds a light on the relationship between securitization and banks' risk exposures including the pre-crisis, crisis and post-crisis periods.

scholarly journals Residential mortgage crisis - an Islamic finance perspective

2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 154-159
Author(s):  
Mostafa Beheshti Seresht ◽  
Hasna Haj Najafi
Keyword(s):  
Civil Code ◽  
Islamic Finance ◽  
Main Claim ◽  
Residential Mortgage ◽  
Mortgage Crisis ◽  
The Us

In this paper, we try to analyze the US residential mortgage crisis in the light of the financial principles of Shari’ah. For this purpose, we will firstly present a summery of the US residential mortgage crisis. Then, in the second part of the paper, we will explore relevant financial principles of Shari’ah law. In this part, special attention is paid to analyze the residential mortgage crisis according to Shari’ah principles and Shia interpretation of Shari’ah through Civil Code of Iran. The main claim is that if mortgage transactions had been concluded in compliance with the principles of Shari’ah law, the whole chain of crisis would not have occurred.

Investors Beware:Flaws in the Residential Mortgage Securitization Process

2010 ◽  
pp. 100826072521054
Author(s):  
Laurie S. Goodman ◽  
Roger Ashworth ◽  
Brian Landy ◽  
Lidan Yang
Keyword(s):  
Residential Mortgage ◽  
Mortgage Securitization

The Eleventh Circuit Holds that Agreements in which Pharmaceutical Companies Pay Generic Companies Not to Compete May be Valid

2004 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 181-184
Author(s):  
Amy Garrigues
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Patent Holder ◽  
Trial Court ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
The Us ◽  
Antitrust Laws ◽  
Per Se ◽  
Appeals Court ◽  
Two Sides

On September 15, 2003, the US. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that agreements between pharmaceutical and generic companies not to compete are not per se unlawful if these agreements do not expand the existing exclusionary right of a patent. The Valley DrugCo.v.Geneva Pharmaceuticals decision emphasizes that the nature of a patent gives the patent holder exclusive rights, and if an agreement merely confirms that exclusivity, then it is not per se unlawful. With this holding, the appeals court reversed the decision of the trial court, which held that agreements under which competitors are paid to stay out of the market are per se violations of the antitrust laws. An examination of the Valley Drugtrial and appeals court decisions sheds light on the two sides of an emerging legal debate concerning the validity of pay-not-to-compete agreements, and more broadly, on the appropriate balance between the seemingly competing interests of patent and antitrust laws.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document