A little more room to go for prime ‘AAA’ 2.0
admin | May 17, 2019
This document is intended for institutional investors and is not subject to all of the independence and disclosure standards applicable to debt research reports prepared for retail investors.
The recent strong bid for prime private MBS 2.0 has led ‘AAA’ classes to significantly outperform comparable agency MBS, and ‘AAA’ may have a bit more room to run. ‘AAA’ pass-throughs still trade at a lower price and higher yield than agency jumbo MBS with better projected convexity. For portfolios that do not need agency liquidity or financing, the private MBS looks like better relative value. That should allow 2.0 to extend the last few years of good performance.
The case for relative value versus agency MBS
‘AAA’ pass-throughs have closed the price spread to TBA by roughly $1-00 so far this year, but they still have some advantages over agency jumbo MBS in price, yield and projected convexity. A recently priced ‘AAA’ pass-through serves as a good example.
SEMT 2018-3 A4 is a super-senior ‘AAA’ pass-through with characteristics comparable to Fannie Mae CK 3.5% pool FN MA3399. The pass-through trades at $1-18 behind TBA 3.5% while the pool trades $0-30 back. That leaves the price of the pass-through $0-20 behind the CK pool. The price difference gives the pass-through a projected incremental 11 bp of yield and 5 bp of base case total return. Despite having roughly a $170,000 larger average loan size, the pass-through has markedly better estimated convexity– -3.04 for the private pass-through with -4.40 for the CK. Private pass-throughs generally offer better convexity than agency jumbo paper despite higher average loan balances likely because of greater friction for refinancing a non-agency loan. Given better convexity and lower dollar price, the private ‘AAA’ shows better projected total return than the CK in both a rally and a selloff (Exhibit 1).
Exhibit 1: Private-label pass-throughs can offer total return advantage over CKs
Note: Projected total return assumes a linear shift in rates to the 1-year horizon, reinvestment at LIBOR and constant OAS repricing. All market levels as of 5/14/19. Source: YieldBook, Amherst Pierpont
The CK pool will likely have a smaller bid-ask and easier access to financing than the ‘AAA’ pass-through, and that could outweigh the better ‘AAA’ price, yield and convexity for portfolios that need agency liquidity. Each portfolio will need to weigh the tradeoffs.
Risk and return in prime 2.0
Prime ‘AAA’ pass-throughs have not always topped the performance charts for prime 2.0 (Exhibit 2). Within prime private label, some parts of the cash flow and capital structure have offered better risk adjusted return than others. Given their shorter duration, hybrid super seniors have provided better risk adjusted returns than fixed rates. ‘AAA’ mezzanine bonds backed by hybrid ARM collateral have offered attractive risk adjusted returns as well as a result of relatively wider spreads, attractive carry and pristine collateral performance. Across the subordinate stack, non-investment grade BB and B bonds have offered the most attractive risk adjusted returns also driven by carry and collateral performance. However, those bonds trade in limited size and frequency and as a result, risk adjusted returns may be modestly overstated.
Exhibit 2: Risk and return across prime 2.0 April 2017-April 2019
Note: We then scan the entirety of the PLS cash flow and capital structure to see what bonds have offered the best risk-adjusted returns over the past two years. We cut the ‘AAA’ classes by both coupon type and cash flow structure, splitting the ‘AAA’ bonds into fixed rate and hybrid cash flows. We then further cut the bonds by cash flow features separating principal and interest bonds from derivatives and further separating P&I bonds by structure. ‘AAA’s are also cut into super senior and senior mezzanine bonds, which trade at a spread concession to super seniors. We cut the subordinate stack by original rating and look only at fixed rate bonds. We also calculate a simple average return on a passive investment in the entire prime cash flow and capital structure. Simply comparing risk adjusted returns on super senior AAA pass-throughs to the Citi Mortgage Index over a two-year horizon, pass-throughs have offered a 5 bp better nominal return than the agency MBS index, averaging 24 bp per month. The pass-throughs offer a better risk adjusted return over that horizon as well with a Sharpe ratio of 1.55 versus .94 for the agency index. Obviously, there are some shortfalls to this methodology, as discussed earlier, private label pass-throughs are generally shorter duration than their agency counterparts due to the shifting interest structure and as such the duration relative to the index will in all likelihood not be aligned. Additionally, agency MBS is far more liquid with more transparent pricing, given the liquidity give in PLS there may be some dampening of potential price volatility. However given the fact that these are monthly returns and super senior AAA pass-throughs are arguably the most liquid and transparent asset in the private label market, this effect should be negligible. Excludes IO and Inverse IO. Source: Intex, IDC, Amherst Insight Labs, Amherst Pierpont Securities
This material is intended only for institutional investors and does not carry all of the independence and disclosure standards of retail debt research reports. In the preparation of this material, the author may have consulted or otherwise discussed the matters referenced herein with one or more of SCM’s trading desks, any of which may have accumulated or otherwise taken a position, long or short, in any of the financial instruments discussed in or related to this material. Further, SCM may act as a market maker or principal dealer and may have proprietary interests that differ or conflict with the recipient hereof, in connection with any financial instrument discussed in or related to this material.
This message, including any attachments or links contained herein, is subject to important disclaimers, conditions, and disclosures regarding Electronic Communications, which you can find at https://portfolio-strategy.apsec.com/sancap-disclaimers-and-disclosures.
Copyright © 2023 Santander US Capital Markets LLC and its affiliates (“SCM”). All rights reserved. SCM is a member of FINRA and SIPC. This material is intended for limited distribution to institutions only and is not publicly available. Any unauthorized use or disclosure is prohibited.
In making this material available, SCM (i) is not providing any advice to the recipient, including, without limitation, any advice as to investment, legal, accounting, tax and financial matters, (ii) is not acting as an advisor or fiduciary in respect of the recipient, (iii) is not making any predictions or projections and (iv) intends that any recipient to which SCM has provided this material is an “institutional investor” (as defined under applicable law and regulation, including FINRA Rule 4512 and that this material will not be disseminated, in whole or part, to any third party by the recipient.
The author of this material is an economist, desk strategist or trader. In the preparation of this material, the author may have consulted or otherwise discussed the matters referenced herein with one or more of SCM’s trading desks, any of which may have accumulated or otherwise taken a position, long or short, in any of the financial instruments discussed in or related to this material. Further, SCM or any of its affiliates may act as a market maker or principal dealer and may have proprietary interests that differ or conflict with the recipient hereof, in connection with any financial instrument discussed in or related to this material.
This material (i) has been prepared for information purposes only and does not constitute a solicitation or an offer to buy or sell any securities, related investments or other financial instruments, (ii) is neither research, a “research report” as commonly understood under the securities laws and regulations promulgated thereunder nor the product of a research department, (iii) or parts thereof may have been obtained from various sources, the reliability of which has not been verified and cannot be guaranteed by SCM, (iv) should not be reproduced or disclosed to any other person, without SCM’s prior consent and (v) is not intended for distribution in any jurisdiction in which its distribution would be prohibited.
In connection with this material, SCM (i) makes no representation or warranties as to the appropriateness or reliance for use in any transaction or as to the permissibility or legality of any financial instrument in any jurisdiction, (ii) believes the information in this material to be reliable, has not independently verified such information and makes no representation, express or implied, with regard to the accuracy or completeness of such information, (iii) accepts no responsibility or liability as to any reliance placed, or investment decision made, on the basis of such information by the recipient and (iv) does not undertake, and disclaims any duty to undertake, to update or to revise the information contained in this material.
Unless otherwise stated, the views, opinions, forecasts, valuations, or estimates contained in this material are those solely of the author, as of the date of publication of this material, and are subject to change without notice. The recipient of this material should make an independent evaluation of this information and make such other investigations as the recipient considers necessary (including obtaining independent financial advice), before transacting in any financial market or instrument discussed in or related to this material.