UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-Q
ý | QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934. |
For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2014
or
¨ | TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934. |
For the transition period from to
Commission File Number: 001-34139
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Freddie Mac
Federally chartered corporation | 8200 Jones Branch Drive | 52-0904874 | (703) 903-2000 | |||
(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) | McLean, Virginia 22102-3110 | (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) | (Registrant’s telephone number, including area code) | |||
(Address of principal executive offices, including zip code) | ||||||
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports); and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. ý Yes ¨ No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). ý Yes ¨ No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
Large accelerated filer ý | Accelerated filer ¨ | ||||
Non-accelerated filer (Do not check if a smaller reporting company) ¨ | Smaller reporting company ¨ | ||||
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ¨ No ý
As of October 23, 2014, there were 650,040,391 shares of the registrant’s common stock outstanding.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page | |
i | Freddie Mac | |
MD&A TABLE REFERENCE
Table | Description | Page | |
1 | Total Single-Family Loan Workout Volumes | ||
2 | Mortgage-Related Investments Portfolio | ||
3 | Selected Financial Data | ||
4 | Summary Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income | ||
5 | Net Interest Income/Yield and Average Balance Analysis | ||
6 | Derivative Gains (Losses) | ||
7 | Other Income (Loss) | ||
8 | Non-Interest Expense | ||
9 | REO Operations (Income) Expense | ||
10 | Composition of Segment Mortgage Portfolios and Credit Risk Portfolios | ||
11 | Segment Earnings and Key Metrics — Single-Family Guarantee | ||
12 | Segment Earnings Composition — Single-Family Guarantee Segment | ||
13 | Segment Earnings and Key Metrics — Investments | ||
14 | Segment Earnings and Key Metrics — Multifamily | ||
15 | Investments in Securities | ||
16 | Characteristics of Mortgage-Related Securities on Our Consolidated Balance Sheets | ||
17 | Additional Characteristics of Mortgage-Related Securities on Our Consolidated Balance Sheets | ||
18 | Mortgage-Related Securities Purchase Activity | ||
19 | Non-Agency Mortgage-Related Securities Backed by Subprime, Option ARM, and Alt-A Loans and Certain Related Credit Statistics | ||
20 | Non-Agency Mortgage-Related Securities Backed by Subprime, Option ARM, Alt-A and Other Loans | ||
21 | Ratings of Non-Agency Mortgage-Related Securities Backed by Subprime, Option ARM, Alt-A and Other Loans, and CMBS | ||
22 | Mortgage Loan Purchases and Other Guarantee Commitment Issuances | ||
23 | Freddie Mac Mortgage-Related Securities | ||
24 | Issuances and Extinguishments of Debt Securities of Consolidated Trusts | ||
25 | Changes in Total Equity | ||
26 | Single-Family Credit Guarantee Portfolio Data by Year of Origination | ||
27 | Characteristics of Purchases for the Single-Family Credit Guarantee Portfolio | ||
28 | Characteristics of the Single-Family Credit Guarantee Portfolio | ||
29 | Certain Higher-Risk Categories in the Single-Family Credit Guarantee Portfolio | ||
30 | Risk Transfer Transactions | ||
31 | Single-Family Loan Workout, Serious Delinquency, and Foreclosure Volumes | ||
32 | Quarterly Percentages of Modified Single-Family Loans — Current or Paid Off | ||
33 | Single-Family Relief Refinance Loans | ||
34 | Single-Family Serious Delinquency Statistics | ||
35 | Foreclosure Timelines for Single-Family Loans | ||
36 | Credit Concentrations in the Single-Family Credit Guarantee Portfolio | ||
37 | Single-Family Credit Guarantee Portfolio by Attribute Combinations | ||
38 | Multifamily Mortgage Portfolio — by Attribute | ||
39 | TDRs and Non-Accrual Mortgage Loans | ||
40 | REO Activity by Region | ||
41 | Single-Family REO Property Status | ||
42 | Credit Loss Performance | ||
43 | Severity Ratios for Single-Family Loans | ||
44 | Single-Family Impaired Loans with Specific Reserve Recorded | ||
45 | Single-Family Credit Loss Sensitivity | ||
46 | Mortgage Insurance by Counterparty | ||
ii | Freddie Mac | |
47 | Bond Insurance by Counterparty | ||
48 | Derivative Counterparty Credit Exposure | ||
49 | Activity in Other Debt | ||
50 | Freddie Mac Credit Ratings | ||
51 | Consolidated Fair Value Balance Sheets | ||
52 | Summary of Change in the Fair Value of Net Assets | ||
53 | Affordable Housing Goals and Results for 2013 | ||
54 | PMVS and Duration Gap Results | ||
55 | Derivative Impact on PMVS-L (50 bps) | ||
iii | Freddie Mac | |
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Page | |
iv | Freddie Mac | |
PART I — FINANCIAL INFORMATION
We continue to operate under the conservatorship that commenced on September 6, 2008, under the direction of FHFA as our Conservator. The Conservator succeeded to all rights, titles, powers and privileges of Freddie Mac, and of any shareholder, officer or director thereof, with respect to the company and its assets. The Conservator has delegated certain authority to our Board of Directors to oversee, and management to conduct, business operations so that the company can continue to operate in the ordinary course. The directors serve on behalf of, and exercise authority as directed by, the Conservator. See “BUSINESS — Conservatorship and Related Matters” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013, or 2013 Annual Report, for information on the terms of the conservatorship, the powers of the Conservator, and related matters, including the terms of our Purchase Agreement with Treasury.
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q includes forward-looking statements that are based on current expectations and are subject to significant risks and uncertainties. These forward-looking statements are made as of the date of this Form 10-Q and we undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this Form 10-Q. Actual results might differ significantly from those described in or implied by such statements due to various factors and uncertainties, including those described in: (a) the “FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS” sections of this Form 10-Q, our 2013 Annual Report, and our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q for the quarters ended March 31, 2014 and June 30, 2014; and (b) the “RISK FACTORS” and “BUSINESS” sections of our 2013 Annual Report.
Throughout this Form 10-Q, we use certain acronyms and terms that are defined in the “GLOSSARY.”
ITEM 2. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
You should read this MD&A in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and related notes for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014 included in “FINANCIAL STATEMENTS” and our 2013 Annual Report.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Overview
Freddie Mac is a GSE chartered by Congress in 1970 with a public mission to provide liquidity, stability, and affordability to the U.S. housing market. We have maintained a consistent market presence since our inception, providing essential mortgage liquidity in a wide range of economic environments. We are working to support the continued recovery of the housing market and the nation’s economy by: (a) providing America’s families with access to mortgage funding at low rates while helping distressed borrowers keep their homes and avoid foreclosure, where possible; and (b) providing consistent liquidity to the multifamily mortgage market, which includes providing financing for affordable rental housing. At the same time, we are working with FHFA, our customers and the industry to build a stronger housing finance system for the nation.
Conservatorship and Government Support for Our Business
We continue to operate in conservatorship that began in September 2008, under the direction of FHFA, as our Conservator. The conservatorship and related matters continue to have a wide-ranging impact on us, including our management, business, financial condition, and results of operations. There is significant uncertainty as to our future, as conservatorship has no specified termination date, and it is unknown what changes may occur to our business model during or following conservatorship, including whether we will continue to exist.
We are also subject to certain constraints on our business activities imposed by Treasury due to the terms of, and Treasury’s rights under, the Purchase Agreement. We are dependent upon the continued support of Treasury and FHFA in order to continue operating our business. We cannot over the long term build and retain capital from the earnings generated by our business operations, or return capital to stockholders other than Treasury.
For more information on the conservatorship and government support for our business, including the Purchase Agreement, see “BUSINESS — Conservatorship and Related Matters” and “NOTE 2: CONSERVATORSHIP AND RELATED MATTERS" in our 2013 Annual Report.
Consolidated Financial Results
During the third quarter of 2014, home price growth continued to moderate compared to the first nine months of 2013. Comprehensive income was $2.8 billion for the third quarter of 2014 compared to $30.4 billion for the third quarter of 2013. Comprehensive income for the third quarter of 2014 consisted of $2.1 billion of net income and $0.7 billion of other comprehensive income. Our results for the third quarter of 2014 include: (a) net interest income; (b) provision for credit losses; and (c) settlements of lawsuits regarding our investments in certain residential non-agency mortgage-related securities. Our net income for the third quarter of 2013 includes a benefit for federal income taxes of $23.9 billion that resulted from the release of our valuation allowance against our net deferred tax assets. Our total equity was $5.2 billion at September 30, 2014. As a result of our positive net worth at September 30, 2014, no draw is being requested from Treasury under the Purchase Agreement for the third quarter of 2014. Through September 30, 2014, we have paid aggregate cash dividends to Treasury in an amount that
1 | Freddie Mac | |
exceeds our aggregate draws received under the Purchase Agreement by $16.8 billion. At September 30, 2014, our aggregate funding received from Treasury under the Purchase Agreement was $71.3 billion.
Sustainability of Earnings
The level of earnings we have experienced in 2013 and 2014 is not sustainable over the long term. Our 2013 financial results included a significant benefit related to the release of the deferred tax asset valuation allowance. As a result, we no longer maintain a valuation allowance against our deferred tax asset. Additionally, our 2013 and 2014 financial results included settlements of representation and warranty claims and of residential non-agency mortgage-related securities litigation. We do not expect future settlements, if any, of representation and warranty claims related to pre-conservatorship loan originations to have a significant effect on our financial results. Our recent financial results, particularly the level of loan loss provisioning, also benefited significantly from strong home price appreciation, which is moderating. In addition, declines in the size of our mortgage-related investments portfolio, as required by FHFA and the Purchase Agreement with Treasury, will reduce earnings over the long term. Our financial results will also continue to be affected by changes in interest rates, yield curves, implied volatility, and mortgage spreads (which impact both derivatives and mortgage-related securities held by us), and therefore are subject to significant earnings and net worth variability from period to period.
Our Primary Business Objectives
Our business objectives reflect direction that we have received from the Conservator. We are focused on the following primary business objectives: (a) reducing taxpayer exposure to losses by reducing and managing our overall risk profile, especially to mortgage-related risks; (b) supporting U.S. homeowners and renters by providing lenders with a constant source of liquidity for mortgage products even when other sources of financing are scarce; (c) building a commercially strong and efficient business enterprise; and (d) positioning the company, in particular our people and infrastructure, to succeed in a to-be-determined “future state.”
On May 13, 2014, FHFA issued its 2014 Strategic Plan and the 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard. The 2014 Strategic Plan provides an updated vision for FHFA's implementation of its obligations as conservator of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae (the “Enterprises”), and establishes three reformulated strategic goals: (a) maintain, in a safe and sound manner, foreclosure prevention activities and credit availability for new and refinanced mortgages to foster liquid, efficient, competitive and resilient national housing finance markets; (b) reduce taxpayer risk through increasing the role of private capital in the mortgage market; and (c) build a new single-family securitization infrastructure for use by the Enterprises and adaptable for use by other participants in the secondary market in the future. The 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard establishes objectives and performance targets and measures for 2014 for the Enterprises related to the strategic goals set forth in the 2014 Strategic Plan. For more information, see "LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY MATTERS — FHFA's 2014 Strategic Plan for the Conservatorships of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae and the 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard" in our Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2014 and our current report on Form 8-K dated May 14, 2014.
Reducing Taxpayer Exposure to Losses by Reducing and Managing Our Overall Risk Profile, Especially to Mortgage-Related Risks
We are working diligently with FHFA to reduce the taxpayers' exposure and improve the return on the taxpayers' investment. We continue to actively manage and reduce the high credit risk related to our 2005-2008 Legacy single-family book by: (a) providing homeowners with alternatives that allow them to stay in their homes; (b) maximizing the proceeds from short sales and REO sales; (c) actively managing our servicers; (d) pursuing our rights with our sellers; (e) enforcing our rights with other counterparties; and (f) reducing our mortgage-related investments portfolio over time. The 2005-2008 Legacy single-family book represented 14% of our single-family credit guarantee portfolio at September 30, 2014, but comprised 83% of our credit losses in the first nine months of 2014. We are also continuing to reduce our exposure to credit risk in our New single-family book with STACR debt note and ACIS transactions. These transactions shift a portion of the mezzanine credit loss position on certain groups of loans in the New single-family book from us to third-party investors.
Providing Homeowners with Alternatives that Allow Them to Stay in Their Homes
We establish guidelines for our servicers to follow and provide them default management programs to use, in part, in determining which type of loan workout would be expected to provide us with an opportunity to manage our exposure to credit losses. Our servicers pursue repayment plans and loan modifications for borrowers facing financial or other hardships because the level of recovery on a reperforming loan may often be much higher than would be the case with a foreclosure or a foreclosure alternative. Since 2009, we have helped approximately 1,047,000 borrowers experiencing hardship complete a loan workout. Under our loan workout programs, our servicers contact borrowers experiencing hardship with a goal of helping them stay in their homes or avoid foreclosure. Across all of our modification programs, we modified $10.1 billion and $12.8 billion in UPB of loans in the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Our servicers seek and also facilitate the completion of foreclosure alternatives when a home retention solution is not possible.
Beginning in 2009, we introduced a variety of borrower-assistance programs, including HAMP, to help keep families in their homes. Our relief refinance initiative, including HARP (which is the portion of our relief refinance initiative for loans with LTV ratios above 80%), is another key program used by our seller/servicers to help keep families in their homes. In the nine
2 | Freddie Mac | |
months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, we purchased or guaranteed $21.6 billion and $86.6 billion in UPB of relief refinance loans, respectively, which included $11.6 billion and $54.9 billion in UPB of HARP loans, respectively. We have purchased HARP loans provided to more than 1.3 million borrowers since the initiative began in 2009, including approximately 67,000 borrowers during the nine months ended September 30, 2014. See “Table 33 — Single-Family Relief Refinance Loans” for more information about the volume of our relief refinance purchases.
As of September 30, 2014, the borrower’s monthly payment for all of our completed HAMP modifications was reduced on average by an estimated $500 at the time of modification, which amounts to an average of $6,000 per year, and a total of $1.6 billion in annual reductions (these amounts are calculated by multiplying the number of completed modifications by the average reduction in monthly payment, and have not been adjusted to reflect the actual performance of the loans following modification).
The table below presents our single-family loan workout activities for the last five quarterly periods.
Table 1 — Total Single-Family Loan Workout Volumes(1)
(1) | Based on workouts completed with borrowers for loans within our single-family credit guarantee portfolio. Excludes those modification, repayment, and forbearance activities for which the borrower has started the required process, but the actions have not been made permanent or effective, such as loans in modification trial periods. As of September 30, 2014, approximately 23,000 borrowers were in modification trial periods, including approximately 20,000 borrowers in trial periods for our non-HAMP modification programs. Also excludes certain loan workouts where our single-family seller/servicers have executed agreements in the current or prior periods, but that have not been incorporated into certain of our operational systems due to delays in processing. These categories are not mutually exclusive and a loan in one category may also be included within another category in the same period. Forbearance agreements exclude loans with long-term forbearance under a completed loan modification. Many borrowers enter into a short-term forbearance agreement before another loan workout is pursued or completed. We only report forbearance activity for a single loan once during each quarterly period within the year; however, a single loan may be included under separate forbearance agreements in separate periods. |
As shown in the table above, the volume of our workout programs declined in recent quarterly periods, which we attribute to overall improvements in the mortgage market as evidenced by rising home prices and declining serious delinquency rates. While we believe our home retention programs have been largely successful, many borrowers still need our assistance. See “RISK MANAGEMENT — Credit Risk — Mortgage Credit Risk — Single-Family Mortgage Credit Risk” for more information about loss mitigation activities and our efforts to keep families in their homes, including through our loan modification initiatives and our relief refinance mortgage initiative. Under the 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard, FHFA set goals
3 | Freddie Mac | |
for us relating to: (a) encouraging eligible borrowers to refinance their mortgages under HARP; and (b) assessing and developing additional plans for loss mitigation strategies. In June 2014, FHFA announced that it would begin a nationwide outreach campaign. This campaign includes open forum meetings with participation from us and Fannie Mae, in certain cities, to inform community leaders about HARP eligibility criteria and benefits.
Under the 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard, FHFA set a goal for us to develop and implement a plan for targeted sales of non-performing loans and REO properties that facilitate neighborhood stabilization, especially in markets that have been hardest hit by the housing downturn. In 2014, we worked with FHFA and Fannie Mae to develop a plan for both short sales and REO sales, including expanded auctions of properties, in certain cities that were hardest hit by the housing crisis. In these areas we have also: (a) expanded our efforts with locally-based private entities to facilitate REO dispositions; and (b) expanded our first look opportunities, which provide an initial period for REO properties to be purchased by owner occupants and non-profits dedicated to neighborhood stabilization before permitting investors to make offers. We are also assessing or piloting other new strategies for loss mitigation with FHFA and Fannie Mae, including implementing a temporary new modification initiative targeted to assist troubled borrowers in certain cities.
Maximizing the Proceeds from Short Sales and REO Sales
In cases where repayment plans and loan modifications are not possible or not successful, a short sale transaction typically provides us with a comparable or higher level of recovery than a foreclosure and subsequent property sale from our REO inventory. In large part, the benefit of a short sale is that we: (a) avoid the costs we would otherwise incur to complete the foreclosure; and (b) reduce the time needed to dispose of the property, and thus reduce our exposure to maintenance, property taxes, and other expenses associated with holding REO property.
We believe our REO disposition and short sale severity ratios in the nine months ended September 30, 2014 benefited from improved market conditions as well as changes made since 2012 to our process for evaluating the market value of impaired loan collateral and determining the list price for our REO properties when we offer them for sale. In addition, we believe that our REO disposition ratios have been positively affected by our efforts to repair a greater number of these properties prior to listing them for sale than in the past.
Actively Managing our Servicers
We continue to face challenges with respect to the performance of certain of our single-family servicers in managing our seriously delinquent loans. Our servicers represent and warrant to us that loans serviced on our behalf will be serviced in accordance with our servicing contract. These contractual obligations provide us with remedies for breaches in servicing. These contractual remedies include the ability to require the servicer to pay compensatory or other fees, repurchase the loan at its current UPB, and/or reimburse us for losses realized. Beginning in 2013, we increased our review of servicing related violations, which included issuing notices of defect to our servicers for certain violations of our servicing standards. As of September 30, 2014, we had: (a) $0.4 billion of outstanding repurchase requests for servicing related violations; and (b) an additional $0.2 billion of outstanding notices of defect, with our servicers, based on the UPB of the related loans. We also recognized $292 million of compensatory fees in the nine months ended September 30, 2014, primarily for servicer failures to complete a foreclosure within our timelines.
The serious delinquency rate of our single-family credit guarantee portfolio declined to 1.96% as of September 30, 2014 (which is the lowest level since January 2009) from 2.39% as of December 31, 2013, continuing the trend of improvement that began in 2010. However, we continue to have a large population of seriously delinquent loans, many of which have been delinquent for more than one year; these loans tend to be more challenging to resolve. As of September 30, 2014, we held investments in $33.2 billion of seriously delinquent single-family mortgage loans, approximately half of which have been delinquent for more than one year.
Foreclosures generally take longer to complete in states where a judicial foreclosure is required, compared to other states. As of September 30, 2014, our serious delinquency rates for the aggregate of those states that require a judicial foreclosure and those not requiring a judicial foreclosure were 2.72% and 1.33%, respectively. During the nine months ended September 30, 2014, the average time to foreclose on properties in states that require a judicial foreclosure was 1,025 days compared to 661 days in those states not requiring a judicial foreclosure for loans in our single-family credit guarantee portfolio, excluding those underlying our Other Guarantee Transactions. These averages are based on the loans that completed foreclosure during the period.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2014, excluding transfers between affiliated companies and assignments of servicing for newly originated loans, approximately $8.5 billion in UPB of loans in our single-family credit guarantee portfolio were transferred from our primary servicers to specialty servicers that specialize in workouts of problem loans. Approximately $5.4 billion in UPB of loans in these transfers were facilitated by us as part of our efforts to assist troubled borrowers, maximize foreclosure alternatives, increase problem loan workouts, and mitigate our credit losses.
Pursuing Our Rights with Our Sellers
We have contractual arrangements with our sellers under which, when they sell us mortgage loans, they represent and warrant that those loans have been originated in accordance with specified underwriting standards. If we subsequently discover
4 | Freddie Mac | |
that the representations and warranties were breached (i.e., that underwriting standards were not followed), we can exercise certain contractual remedies to mitigate our actual or potential credit losses. These remedies include the ability to require the seller to repurchase the loan at its current UPB and/or reimburse us for losses realized. In 2013, we substantially achieved the goal set for us (in the 2013 Conservatorship Scorecard) to complete our requests for remedies for breaches of seller representations and warranties related to pre-conservatorship loan activity. As a result, there has been a decline in our exposure to single-family mortgage seller/servicers for repurchase obligations arising from breaches of representations and warranties made to us for loans they underwrote and sold to us. As of September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, we had $0.4 billion and $1.6 billion, respectively, of outstanding repurchase requests with sellers, based on UPB of the loans.
We continue to seek remedies from seller/servicers in the normal course of business related to breaches of representations and warranties for loans they sold to us or service for us. In the nine months ended September 30, 2014, we recovered amounts from seller/servicers with respect to $1.7 billion in UPB of loans subject to our repurchase requests for selling and servicing violations, including $0.4 billion in UPB related to settlement agreements. Approximately 19% of the $1.7 billion in UPB associated with resolved repurchase requests in the nine months ended September 30, 2014 were satisfied by the reimbursement of losses (excluding amounts related to settlement agreements).
In May 2014, at the direction of FHFA, we announced certain changes to our representation and warranty framework for loans acquired on and after July 1, 2014. On October 20, 2014, FHFA announced an agreement in principle concerning changes to Freddie Mac's and Fannie Mae’s representation and warranty frameworks. See “LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY MATTERS — FHFA Announcements Concerning Representation and Warranty Framework and High LTV Mortgage Loans.”
Enforcing Our Rights with Other Counterparties
We continue to pursue claims for coverage under mortgage insurance policies. We use mortgage insurance, which is a form of credit enhancement, to mitigate our credit loss exposure. Primary mortgage insurance is generally required to be purchased at loan origination, typically at the borrower’s expense, for mortgages with LTV ratios greater than 80%, from an insurer that is typically selected by the lender.
We received payments under primary and other mortgage insurance of $1.0 billion and $1.6 billion during the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Although the financial condition of certain of our mortgage insurers has improved in recent quarters, there is still significant risk that some of these counterparties may fail to fully meet their obligations. We expect to receive substantially less than full payment of our claims from one of our top five mortgage insurance counterparties, as it is only permitted to partially pay claims under orders from its regulator.
Our ability to manage our exposure to mortgage insurers is limited as: (a) certain of our mortgage insurers are operating below our eligibility thresholds; and (b) our ability to revoke a mortgage insurer's status as an eligible insurer requires FHFA approval under certain circumstances. We consider the collectability of our claims against our mortgage insurers when determining the carrying amount of our receivables and estimating our loan loss reserves on our consolidated balance sheets.
Aligning mortgage insurer eligibility requirements is a key component of the 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard and the 2014 Strategic Plan. We are developing counterparty risk management standards for mortgage insurers, in conjunction with Fannie Mae, at the direction of FHFA, consisting of the following: (a) revised eligibility requirements, which include financial requirements under a risk-based framework; and (b) revised master policies that provide greater certainty of coverage and facilitate timely claims processing. The revised standards are designed to provide that mortgage insurers are able to withstand a stress economic scenario and fulfill their intended role of providing private capital to the mortgage market. Revised master policies with our mortgage insurance counterparties were implemented on October 1, 2014. FHFA published draft eligibility requirements for public input during a comment period that concluded on September 8, 2014. We expect to publish new eligibility requirements by the end of 2014, which will become effective 180 days after the publication date. Approved insurers that do not fully comply with the new financial requirements would be given a transition period of up to two years from the publication date.
At the direction of our Conservator, we are also working to enforce our rights as an investor with respect to the non-agency mortgage-related securities we hold, and are engaged in various efforts, in some cases in conjunction with other investors, to mitigate or recover losses on our investments in these securities. In the nine months ended September 30, 2014, we and FHFA reached settlements with a number of institutions pursuant to which we recognized $6.1 billion in our consolidated statement of comprehensive income. Lawsuits against a number of other institutions are currently pending. See “NOTE 15: CONCENTRATION OF CREDIT AND OTHER RISKS” for more information about our recent agreements with non-agency mortgage-related security issuers.
5 | Freddie Mac | |
Reducing Our Mortgage-Related Investments Portfolio Over Time
In July 2014, pursuant to the 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard, we submitted a plan to FHFA to meet (even under adverse market conditions) the portfolio reduction requirements of the Purchase Agreement. The plan is also designed to implement the other strategies discussed under "Investment Segment Strategies" below. In October 2014, FHFA requested that we revise the submitted plan to provide that we would manage the UPB of the mortgage-related investments portfolio so that it does not exceed 90% of the annual cap established by the Purchase Agreement. Under the revised plan requested by FHFA, we would be able to seek permission in writing with a documented basis for exception from FHFA to increase the plan's limit on the UPB of the mortgage-related investments portfolio to 95% of the Purchase Agreement annual cap. Under the plan (and as set forth in the 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard), we are focused on reducing the less liquid assets in our mortgage-related investments portfolio. The plan has not been approved by FHFA. The Scorecard provides that any sales of less liquid assets should be economically sensible transactions that consider impacts to the market and neighborhood stability.
From December 31, 2013 to September 30, 2014, the size of our mortgage-related investments portfolio declined by 10% or $47.4 billion, to $413.6 billion. Our less liquid assets accounted for $40.8 billion of this decline. Our less liquid assets are reduced through: (a) liquidations (e.g. prepayments); (b) sales (including sales related to settlements of non-agency mortgage-related securities); and (c) securitizations. For additional information on our less liquid assets, see “Limits on Investment Activity and Our Mortgage-Related Investments Portfolio.”
Supporting U.S. Homeowners and Renters by Providing Lenders with a Constant Source of Liquidity for Mortgage Products even when Other Sources of Financing are Scarce
We maintain a consistent market presence by providing lenders with a constant source of liquidity for mortgage products even when other sources of financing are scarce. This liquidity provides our customers with confidence to continue lending even in difficult environments. In the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, we purchased or issued other guarantee commitments for $184.3 billion and $359.6 billion in UPB of single-family conforming mortgage loans, respectively, representing approximately 884,000 and 1,753,000 homes, respectively. Origination volumes in the U.S. residential mortgage market declined significantly during the nine months ended September 30, 2014, as compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2013, driven by a significant decline in the volume of refinance mortgages. We attribute this decline to higher average mortgage interest rates in the nine months ended September 30, 2014 compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2013. Many borrowers have already refinanced their loans in recent years at relatively low interest rates, and thus may be less likely to do so in the future. We estimate that we, Fannie Mae, and Ginnie Mae collectively guaranteed approximately 90% of the single-family conforming mortgages originated in the nine months ended September 30, 2014.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2014, our multifamily new business activity totaled $14.1 billion, and provided financing for 934 properties amounting to approximately 214,000 apartment units. Approximately 90% of the units were affordable to families earning at or below the median income in their area.
Under the 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard, FHFA set several goals for us relating to increasing access to single-family mortgage credit for creditworthy borrowers. These goals include continuing to improve, and provide additional clarity regarding, our representation and warranty framework. FHFA is also working with Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae to develop responsible guidelines for mortgages with loan-to-value ratios between 95% and 97% to serve a targeted segment of creditworthy borrowers.
Building a Commercially Strong and Efficient Business Enterprise
Single-Family Guarantee Segment Strategies
Our single-family business is our largest business line. We continue to take steps to build a stronger, profitable business model for our ongoing business. Our goal is to strengthen the business model in order to run our business efficiently and effectively in support of homeowners and taxpayers and, if required as part of a future state for the enterprise, to be able to promptly return to private sector ownership. Our Single-family Guarantee segment is focused on strengthening our business model by:
• | Leveraging the fundamentals: We are leveraging our existing product offerings to better meet the needs of an evolving mortgage market. This includes working to reduce repurchase requests and penalties, in the form of fees, by providing greater certainty for seller/servicers that the loans they sell to us or service for us meet our requirements. We are doing this by enhancing the tools we make available to our customers (including Loan Prospector, Loan Quality Advisor, and Home Value Explorer), and expanding and leveraging the data standards of the Uniform Mortgage Data Program. We intend to continue to simplify, streamline, and strengthen our operations, while keeping pace with regulatory requirements, such as those implemented under the Dodd-Frank Act. |
• | Better serving our customers: Our customers are our sellers, servicers, and investor/dealers. Based on feedback we have received directly from our customers through our Customer Advisory Boards, surveys, and ongoing conversations, we are enhancing our processes and programs to improve our customers’ experience when doing business with us. |
6 | Freddie Mac | |
• | Managing the credit risk of the single-family credit guarantee portfolio: We are managing our credit risk by setting our underwriting standards at a level commensurate with the long-term credit risk appetite of the company. We use a process of delegated underwriting for the single-family mortgages we purchase or securitize. In this process, our contracts with seller/servicers describe our mortgage eligibility and underwriting standards, and the seller/servicers represent and warrant to us that the mortgages sold to us meet these standards. Beginning in 2009, we have made various changes to our credit policies, including changes to improve our underwriting standards, have purchased fewer loans with higher risk characteristics, and have assisted in improving our mortgage insurers’ and lenders’ underwriting practices. As a result, the credit quality of the New single-family book is significantly better than that of the 2005-2008 Legacy single-family book, as measured by original LTV ratios, FICO scores, delinquency rates, credit losses, and the proportion of loans underwritten with full documentation. However, in recent quarters, as refinancing volumes have declined, the composition of our loan purchase activity has been shifting to a higher proportion of home purchase loans, which generally have higher original LTV ratios than loans sold to us during 2010 through 2012. During these same quarters, the average borrower credit scores in our loan purchase activity have declined. |
• | Transferring the credit risk of the single-family credit guarantee portfolio: We consider credit risk transfer transactions to be a prudent way to manage risk in our business. In addition to three credit risk transfer transactions completed in 2013, we completed seven credit risk transfers in the first nine months of 2014, consisting of: (a) five STACR debt note transactions that transferred $3.9 billion in risk to third parties; and (b) two ACIS transactions that transferred $554 million in risk to third parties. While these credit risk transfer transactions have been relatively small compared to our overall mortgage credit risk exposure, we believe they have attracted broad interest in the market. We will continue to seek to expand and refine our offerings of credit risk transfer transactions in the future. The 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard includes a goal for us to complete credit risk transfer transactions for $90 billion in UPB using at least one transaction type in addition to STACR debt note transactions. We believe we have met this Scorecard goal. |
• | Optimizing the economics of the single-family credit guarantee portfolio: We strive to achieve the highest economic returns on our portfolio while considering and balancing our: (a) customer diversification; (b) housing mission and goals; and (c) customers' liquidity needs. However, economic returns on our guarantee activities are limited by, and subject to, FHFA's oversight. We also align our mortgage-related securities offerings and disclosures with customer needs and investor demand to balance the achievement of the above objectives while considering the relative performance of our securities in the market. |
Investments Segment Strategies
Our Investments segment is a key business operation, which has certain objectives in 2014, including:
• | Maintaining a presence in the agency mortgage-related securities market: Our activities in this market may include outright purchases and sales, dollar roll transactions, and structuring activities (e.g., resecuritizing existing agency securities into REMICs and selling some or all of the tranches). |
• | Maintaining a portfolio of liquid securities consistent with our liquidity management guidelines: In managing our mortgage-related investments, we evaluate the liquidity of our investments based on two categories: (a) single-class and multiclass agency securities (excluding certain structured agency securities collateralized by non-agency mortgage-related securities); and (b) assets that are less liquid than the agency securities noted above. We are focusing our efforts on reducing the balance of less liquid assets in the mortgage-related investments portfolio. Our more liquid assets collectively represented $168.1 billion and $174.7 billion at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively, or approximately 41% and 38% of UPB of the portfolio at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, respectively. |
• | Managing the single-family performing loans obtained through our cash purchase program: In conjunction with the single-family business, we purchase loans from lenders for cash and securitize the majority of these loans into Freddie Mac agency securities that may be sold to dealers or investors, or retained in our Investments segment mortgage investments portfolio as agency securities. |
• | Managing single-family reperforming loans and performing modified loans: This includes securitizing loans, structuring the resulting securities and selling some or all of the tranches, and could include selling loans or other disposition strategies in the future. |
• | Managing single-family delinquent loans along with the single-family business: This includes removing seriously delinquent loans from PC pools and selling loans, and could include other disposition strategies in the future. |
• | Reducing the overall balance of our holdings of non-agency mortgage-related securities through liquidations and sales, subject to a variety of constraints, including market conditions. |
• | Managing the treasury function, including funding and liquidity, for the overall company, through the issuance of short-term and long-term unsecured debt: We maintain a liquidity and contingency operating portfolio of cash and non-mortgage investments for short-term liquidity management. |
7 | Freddie Mac | |
• | Managing the interest-rate risk for the overall company through the use of derivatives and unsecured debt. |
Multifamily Segment Strategies
Our Multifamily business is a key business operation focusing on financing multifamily rental housing. We provide financing for affordable housing for renters nationwide and are a consistent source of liquidity to the multifamily mortgage market. We maintain a strong credit and capital management discipline, which we believe generates appropriate risk-adjusted returns on our business for taxpayers. We accomplish this primarily by focusing on our business model of purchasing, aggregating, and securitizing mortgage loans in order to transfer the expected credit risk associated with the loans to third-party investors. The Multifamily business model aligns with the objective that private investors absorb the first and predominant losses before any taxpayer exposure. We plan to continue to provide and support a consistent supply of affordable rental housing while reducing our exposure to credit risk through securitization.
The 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard includes a goal for us to maintain the dollar volume of new multifamily business activity for 2014 at or below the 2013 cap of $25.9 billion, excluding certain targeted loan types, such as those that support affordable housing. Additionally, the 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard set a goal for us to assess the economics and feasibility of adopting additional types of risk transfer structures and of increasing the amount of risk transferred in current risk transfer structures (i.e., K Certificate transactions). For this purpose, risk is broadly defined to include, but is not limited to, credit, counterparty or aggregation risk. During the nine months ended September 30, 2014, we settled K Certificate transactions of $12.9 billion in UPB.
Positioning the Company, in Particular Our People and Infrastructure, to Succeed in a To-Be-Determined “Future State”
Development of a New Secondary Mortgage Market
Under the direction of FHFA, we continue various efforts to build the infrastructure for a future housing finance system, including the following:
• | Common Securitization Platform: We continue to work with FHFA and Fannie Mae on the development of a new common securitization platform. In October 2013, Common Securitization Solutions, LLC (or CSS, which is equally owned by us and Fannie Mae) was formed to build and operate the platform. As part of the 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard, FHFA set certain goals relating to the continued development of the common securitization platform. We and FHFA expect this will be a multi-year effort. In addition, the 2014 Strategic Plan provides for us and Fannie Mae to work towards the development of a single (common) security as part of this effort. In August 2014, FHFA requested public input on the single security project as further discussed in "LEGISLATIVE AND REGULATORY MATTERS — FHFA Request for Input on Proposed Single Security Structure." In November 2014, we and Fannie Mae announced that a chief executive officer has been named for CSS. Additionally, we and Fannie Mae each appointed two executives to the CSS Board of Managers and signed governance and operating agreements for CSS. |
• | Uniform Mortgage Data Program: We and Fannie Mae continue to collaborate with the industry to develop and implement uniform data standards for single-family mortgages. The 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard set a goal for us to provide active support for the following mortgage data standardization initiatives: (a) the Servicing Data and Technology Initiative; (b) the Uniform Closing Disclosure Dataset; and (c) the Uniform Loan Application Dataset. We have also made improvements to our Uniform Collateral Data Portal, which provides us standardized appraisal data for loans we purchase and provides our sellers with real-time feedback that is intended to help them evaluate the quality of property appraisals. |
• | Lender placed insurance standards: As part of the servicing alignment initiative, we and Fannie Mae announced changes in servicing standards for situations in which servicers obtain property hazard insurance on properties securing single-family loans we own or guarantee. As a result, effective June 1, 2014, our seller/servicers may not receive compensation or other payment from insurance carriers nor may they use their own or affiliated entities to insure or reinsure a property. The 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard includes a goal for us to continue to develop approaches to reduce borrower costs for lender placed insurance. |
In addition, in the first nine months of 2014, we worked to help our seller/servicers improve their underwriting processes for loans that they sell to us, including the following:
• | We continued our initiative for enhanced early-risk assessment by seller/servicers through the use of Loan Prospector and Loan Quality Advisor, our automated tools for use in evaluating the credit and product eligibility of loans and identifying non-compliance issues; |
• | We implemented requirements for our seller/servicers in response to certain final rules from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, including rules concerning the requirements for borrowers' ability to repay and high-cost mortgages. See “BUSINESS — Legislative and Regulatory Developments — Dodd-Frank Act” in our 2013 Annual Report for further information on the final rules; |
8 | Freddie Mac | |
• | We adhered to recently implemented standard timelines, appeal requirements, and alternative remedies for resolution of repurchase obligations as part of our efforts to enhance post-delivery quality control practices and transparency associated with our new representation and warranty framework; and |
• | We continued to execute our loan review sampling strategy, specifically focusing on newly purchased mortgage loans, to evaluate compliance with our standards. |
Investing in Human Capital, Technology and Other Resources
We continue to make strategic investments to maintain and improve our ability to operate the company for the foreseeable future in conservatorship and potentially afterwards. Our human capital risks have stabilized over the last two years. However, the possibility remains that we may experience increased turnover again in the future as the Administration and Congress continue to debate our future business model.
Our information technology risk continues to decline. We are investing each year to maintain our technology and are focused on standardizing and simplifying the technology portfolio. We continue to focus on emerging information security risks. We are reviewing our information technology architecture design with a focus on simplifying our information technology environment. We are also improving our out-of-region disaster recovery capabilities.
Streamlining, Simplifying and Strengthening Operations
We continue to strengthen our operations. We are conducting a multi-year project focused on simplifying our control structure and eliminating redundant control activities. In 2013, we modified our risk and control assessment framework to increase our emphasis on risk management. We are also conducting detailed operational control design reviews to identify ways to simplify our controls structure. We are improving our risk management capabilities by further enhancing our three-lines-of-defense risk management framework. Our enhanced three-lines-of-defense risk management framework is designed to balance ownership of the risk by our business segments with corporate oversight and independent assessment. See "RISK MANAGEMENT — Operational Risks" for more information.
Mortgage Market and Economic Conditions
Overview
The U.S. real gross domestic product rose by 3.5% on an annualized basis during the third quarter of 2014, compared to increases of 4.6% in the second quarter of 2014 and 4.5% in the third quarter of 2013, according to the Bureau of Economic Analysis. The national unemployment rate was 5.9% in September 2014, compared to 6.1% in June 2014 and 6.7% in March 2014, based on data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. An average of approximately 227,000 monthly net new jobs (non-farm) were added to the economy during the nine months ended September 30, 2014, which shows evidence of continued improvements in the economy and the labor market. The average interest rate on new 30-year fixed-rate conforming mortgages trended slightly lower over the past three quarters, averaging 4.36% during the first quarter 2014, 4.23% in the second quarter 2014, and 4.14% during the third quarter of 2014, based on our weekly Primary Mortgage Market Survey. This is lower than the third quarter of 2013, when the average rate on new 30-year fixed-rate conforming mortgages was 4.44%. Lower mortgage interest rates during the third quarter of 2014 contributed to an increase in the volume of single-family mortgage refinance activity in the market compared to the second quarter of 2014.
Single-Family Housing Market
Although home prices increased on a national basis in the third quarter of 2014 and from September 2013 to September 2014 (based on our index), some localities continued to be affected by weakness in their housing market and experienced declines in home values during these periods. Home price appreciation has continued to moderate, with our nationwide index registering approximately a 5.1% increase from September 2013 to September 2014, compared with a 6.0% increase from June 2013 to June 2014. Despite increases in recent years, our national home price index reflects a cumulative decline of 10.7% since June 2006. These estimates were based on our own non-seasonally-adjusted price index of one-family homes funded by mortgage loans owned or guaranteed by us or Fannie Mae. Other indices of home prices may have different results, as they are determined using home prices relating to different pools of mortgage loans and calculated under different conventions than our own.
Based on data from the National Association of Realtors, sales of existing homes in the third quarter of 2014 were 5.12 million (on a seasonally-adjusted annual basis), increasing 5% from 4.87 million in the second quarter of 2014. Based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau and HUD, sales of new homes in the third quarter of 2014 were approximately 446,000 (on a seasonally-adjusted annual basis), increasing 4% from approximately 427,000 in the second quarter of 2014.
Multifamily Housing Market
The multifamily market continued to experience solid fundamentals during the nine months ended September 30, 2014. Recent data reported by Reis, Inc. indicated that the national apartment vacancy rate was 4.2% in both the third quarter of 2014 and 2013 and remains low compared to the cyclical peak of 8% reached at the end of 2009. In addition, Reis, Inc. reported that effective rents (i.e., the average rent paid by the tenant over the term of the lease adjusted for concessions by the landlord and costs borne by the tenant) grew by 1.1% during the third quarter of 2014. Vacancy rates and effective rents are important to
9 | Freddie Mac | |
loan performance because multifamily loans are generally repaid from the cash flows generated by the underlying property and these factors significantly influence those cash flows. According to the latest information available from Moody's Analytics, Inc. and Real Capital Analytics, Inc., apartment prices are now more than 10% above the peak level reached before the housing crisis, and reflect continued strong demand from investors for apartment properties.
Outlook
Forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties, some of which are beyond our control. These statements are not historical facts, but rather represent our expectations based on current information, plans, judgments, assumptions, estimates, and projections. Actual results may differ significantly from those described in or implied by such forward-looking statements due to various factors and uncertainties. For example, a number of factors could cause the actual performance of the housing and mortgage markets and the U.S. economy in the near term to be significantly worse than we expect, including adverse changes in national or international economic conditions and changes in the federal government’s fiscal or monetary policies. See “FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS” for additional information.
Although national home prices have increased in recent years, home prices at September 30, 2014 remained significantly below their peak levels in many geographic areas. Declines in the market’s inventory of vacant housing have supported stabilization and increases in home prices in a number of metropolitan areas. We believe that home prices will not increase at the same rate experienced in 2013, and that home price growth rates will continue to moderate gradually during the near term and will return towards growth rates that are consistent with long-term historical averages (approximately 2 to 5 percent per year). To the extent that a large volume of loans concentrated in a particular geographic area completes the foreclosure process in a short period, the resulting increase in the market’s inventory of homes for sale could cause home prices in that area to grow more slowly or decline.
Single-Family
We continue to expect that key macroeconomic drivers of the economy, such as income growth, employment, and inflation, will affect the performance of the housing and mortgage markets during the near term. We expect that economic growth will continue and mortgage interest rates will remain relatively low compared to historical levels, although they are expected to begin trending slowly upward. As a result, we believe that housing affordability for potential home buyers will remain relatively high in most metropolitan housing markets in the near term. We expect that the volume of home sales in 2014 will likely be slightly lower than in 2013. Important factors that we believe will continue to affect single-family housing demand negatively are the relatively high unemployment rate in certain areas and relatively modest family income growth.
We expect the UPB of our single-family credit guarantee portfolio will be relatively unchanged at the end of 2014 compared to the end of 2013, as the decline in purchase volume is expected to be offset by a similar decline in prepayments. We expect mortgage origination volumes in 2014, including refinancings, to be at the lowest level since 2000. Our loan purchase activity in the nine months ended September 30, 2014 declined to $184.3 billion in UPB compared to $359.6 billion in UPB during the nine months ended September 30, 2013. We expect this trend to continue in the fourth quarter of 2014 as refinancing volumes continue to remain low. During the nine months ended September 30, 2014, refinancings, including HARP, comprised approximately 46% of our single-family purchase and issuance volume compared with 76% in the nine months ended September 30, 2013. We expect HARP activity to continue to remain low during the fourth quarter of 2014 since the pool of borrowers eligible to participate in the program has declined.
Our guarantee fee rate charged on new acquisitions is significantly higher than that charged on our Legacy single-family books as a result of two across-the-board increases in guarantee fees implemented in 2012. In June 2014, FHFA released a request for input on the guarantee fees that we and Fannie Mae charge lenders, which was due in September 2014. We cannot predict what changes, if any, FHFA will require us to make to our guarantee fees as a result of the input received from this request.
Our charge-offs declined significantly during the nine months ended September 30, 2014 compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2013. We expect our charge-offs and credit losses to continue to be lower than the level we experienced in 2013, but to remain elevated in the near term in part due to the substantial number of delinquent and underwater mortgage loans in our single-family credit guarantee portfolio that will likely be resolved. For the near term, we also expect:
• | REO disposition and short sale severity ratios to remain high; and |
• | The number of seriously delinquent loans and the volume of our loan workouts to continue to decline. |
Multifamily
We expect that, at the national level, new supply of multifamily housing will be absorbed by market demand in the near term driven by a strengthening economy and favorable demographics. However, there may be certain local markets where new supply may outpace demand, which would be evidenced by excess supply and rising vacancy rates. As multifamily market fundamentals improved in recent years, other market participants, particularly banking institutions, increased their activities in the multifamily market. We expect that our new multifamily business activity, excluding affordable housing loans, loans for smaller multifamily properties, and loans for manufactured housing rental communities, will increase in the fourth quarter of
10 | Freddie Mac | |
2014 compared to the third quarter of 2014, but activity for 2014 will be below the cap specified by the 2014 Conservatorship Scorecard of $25.9 billion in UPB.
As a result of the solid market fundamentals and continuing strong portfolio performance, we expect our credit losses and delinquency rates to remain low in the near term. We expect the performance of the multifamily market to continue to be solid in the near term and believe the long-term outlook for the multifamily market continues to be favorable.
Limits on Investment Activity and Our Mortgage-Related Investments Portfolio
Our mortgage-related investments portfolio consists of agency securities, single-family non-agency mortgage-related securities, CMBS, housing revenue bonds, and single-family and multifamily unsecuritized mortgage loans. Our ability to acquire and sell mortgage assets is significantly constrained by limitations under the Purchase Agreement and those imposed by FHFA. Under the Purchase Agreement and FHFA regulation, the UPB of our mortgage-related investments portfolio is subject to a cap that decreases by 15% each year until the cap reaches $250 billion. In July 2014, we submitted a plan to FHFA to meet the portfolio reduction requirements of the Purchase Agreement. The plan is also designed to implement the other strategies discussed under "Our Primary Business Objectives — Building a Commercially Strong and Efficient Business Enterprise — Investment Segment Strategies." In October 2014, FHFA requested that we revise the submitted plan to provide that we would manage the UPB of the mortgage-related investments portfolio so that it does not exceed 90% of the annual cap established by the Purchase Agreement. Under the revised plan requested by FHFA, we would be able to seek permission in writing with a documented basis for exception from FHFA to increase the plan's limit on the UPB of the mortgage-related investments portfolio to 95% of the Purchase Agreement annual cap. The plan has not been approved by FHFA. The reduction in the mortgage-related investments portfolio will result in a decline in income from this portfolio over time.
The table below presents the UPB of our mortgage-related investments portfolio, for purposes of the limit imposed by the Purchase Agreement and FHFA regulation.
Table 2 — Mortgage-Related Investments Portfolio(1)
September 30, 2014 | December 31, 2013 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
More Liquid | Less Liquid | Total | More Liquid | Less Liquid | Total | ||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Investments segment — Mortgage investments portfolio: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Single-family unsecuritized mortgage loans | $ | — | $ | 82,607 | $ | 82,607 | $ | — | $ | 84,411 | $ | 84,411 | |||||||||||
Freddie Mac mortgage-related securities | 151,782 | 7,700 | 159,482 | 156,438 | 8,809 | 165,247 | |||||||||||||||||
Non-agency mortgage-related securities | — | 48,278 | 48,278 | — | 64,524 | 64,524 | |||||||||||||||||
Non-Freddie Mac agency mortgage-related securities | 15,676 | — | 15,676 | 16,889 | — | 16,889 | |||||||||||||||||
Total Investments segment — Mortgage investments portfolio | 167,458 | 138,585 | 306,043 | 173,327 | 157,744 | 331,071 | |||||||||||||||||
Single-family Guarantee segment — Single-family unsecuritized mortgage loans(2) | — | 30,161 | 30,161 | — | 37,726 | 37,726 | |||||||||||||||||
Multifamily segment — Mortgage investments portfolio(3) | 795 | 76,611 | 77,406 | 1,411 | 90,816 | 92,227 | |||||||||||||||||
Total mortgage-related investments portfolio | $ | 168,253 | $ | 245,357 | $ | 413,610 | $ | 174,738 | $ | 286,286 | $ | 461,024 | |||||||||||
Percentage of total mortgage-related investments portfolio | 41 | % | 59 | % | 100 | % | 38 | % | 62 | % | 100 | % | |||||||||||
Mortgage-related investments portfolio cap(4) | $ | 469,625 | $ | 552,500 | |||||||||||||||||||
(1) | Based on UPB. |
(2) | Represents unsecuritized seriously delinquent single-family loans. |
(3) | See "Table 10 — Composition of Segment Mortgage Portfolios and Credit Risk Portfolios" for the composition of this line item. |
(4) | Represents the portfolio cap under the Purchase Agreement and FHFA regulation at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. |
We evaluate the liquidity of the assets in our mortgage-related investments portfolio based on two categories: (a) single-class and multiclass agency securities (excluding certain structured agency securities collateralized by non-agency mortgage-related securities); and (b) assets that are less liquid than the agency securities noted above. Assets that we consider to be less liquid than agency securities include unsecuritized single-family and multifamily mortgage loans, certain structured agency securities collateralized with non-agency mortgage-related securities, and our investments in non-agency mortgage-related securities.
The UPB of our mortgage-related investments portfolio was $413.6 billion at September 30, 2014, a decline of $47.4 billion (or 10%) compared to $461.0 billion at December 31, 2013. Our less liquid assets accounted for $40.9 billion of this decline, primarily due to liquidations (i.e., principal repayments) and our efforts to reduce these assets. We sold $13.9 billion of less liquid assets (including sales related to settlements of non-agency mortgage-related securities litigation). In addition, we securitized $7.0 billion of single-family reperforming and modified loans. These amounts do not include sales of mortgage loans purchased for cash and subsequently securitized. During the third quarter of 2014, and included in the sales of less liquid assets amount above, we completed a pilot transaction in which we sold approximately $0.6 billion in UPB of seriously delinquent unsecuritized single-family loans (for which we received FHFA approval in April 2014). We may pursue additional sales in the future, subject to FHFA approval. We plan to continue reducing the balance of our less liquid assets, although we
11 | Freddie Mac | |
also continue to add certain of these assets to our mortgage-related investments portfolio as part of our business strategies (e.g., removal of seriously delinquent loans from PC pools and acquisitions of mortgage loans purchased for cash).
12 | Freddie Mac | |
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
The selected financial data presented below should be reviewed in conjunction with MD&A and our consolidated financial statements and related notes.
Table 3 — Selected Financial Data(1)
Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | ||||||||||||||
2014 | 2013 | 2014 | 2013 | ||||||||||||
(dollars in millions, except share-related amounts) | |||||||||||||||
Statements of Comprehensive Income Data | |||||||||||||||
Net interest income | $ | 3,663 | $ | 4,276 | $ | 10,676 | $ | 12,685 | |||||||
(Provision) benefit for credit losses | (574 | ) | 1,138 | (41 | ) | 2,264 | |||||||||
Non-interest income (loss) | 764 | 1,689 | 2,469 | 2,769 | |||||||||||
Non-interest expense | (816 | ) | (577 | ) | (2,267 | ) | (1,699 | ) | |||||||
Income tax (expense) benefit | (956 | ) | 23,960 | (3,374 | ) | 24,036 | |||||||||
Net income | 2,081 | 30,486 | 7,463 | 40,055 | |||||||||||
Comprehensive income | 2,786 | 30,437 | 9,175 | 41,765 | |||||||||||
Net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders(2) | (705 | ) | 50 | (1,712 | ) | (1,709 | ) | ||||||||
Net income (loss) per common share – basic and diluted | (0.22 | ) | 0.02 | (0.53 | ) | (0.53 | ) | ||||||||
Cash dividends per common share | — | — | — | — | |||||||||||
Weighted average common shares outstanding (in millions) – basic and diluted(3) | 3,236 | 3,238 | 3,236 | 3,238 | |||||||||||
September 30, 2014 | December 31, 2013 | ||||||||||||||
(dollars in millions) | |||||||||||||||
Balance Sheets Data | |||||||||||||||
Mortgage loans held-for-investment, at amortized cost by consolidated trusts (net of allowances for loan losses) | $ | 1,549,533 | $ | 1,529,905 | |||||||||||
Total assets | 1,922,784 | 1,966,061 | |||||||||||||
Debt securities of consolidated trusts held by third parties | 1,467,845 | 1,433,984 | |||||||||||||
Other debt | 435,706 | 506,767 | |||||||||||||
All other liabilities | 14,047 | 12,475 | |||||||||||||
Total stockholders’ equity | 5,186 | 12,835 | |||||||||||||
Portfolio Balances(4) | |||||||||||||||
Mortgage-related investments portfolio(5) | $ | 413,610 | $ | 461,024 | |||||||||||
Total Freddie Mac mortgage-related securities(6) | 1,620,355 | 1,592,511 | |||||||||||||
Total mortgage portfolio(7) | 1,898,343 | 1,914,661 | |||||||||||||
TDRs on accrual status | 82,749 | 78,708 | |||||||||||||
Non-accrual loans | 34,556 | 43,457 | |||||||||||||
Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | ||||||||||||||
2014 | 2013 | 2014 | 2013 | ||||||||||||
Ratios(8) | |||||||||||||||
Return on average assets(9) | 0.4 | % | 6.2 | % | 0.5 | % | 2.7 | % | |||||||
Allowance for loans losses as percentage of mortgage loans, held-for-investment(10) | 1.3 | 1.5 | 1.3 | 1.5 | |||||||||||
Equity to assets ratio(11) | 0.2 | 1.0 | 0.5 | 1.1 | |||||||||||
(1) | See “NOTE 1: SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES” in our 2013 Annual Report and in this Form 10-Q for information regarding our accounting policies and the impact of new accounting policies on our consolidated financial statements. |
(2) | For a discussion of how the senior preferred stock dividend is determined and how it affects net income (loss) attributable to common stockholders, see “NOTE 1: SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES — Earnings Per Common Share” in our 2013 Annual Report. |
(3) | Includes the weighted average number of shares that are associated with the warrant for our common stock issued to Treasury as part of the Purchase Agreement, because it is unconditionally exercisable by the holder at a cost of $0.00001 per share. |
(4) | Based on UPB. |
(5) | See ‘‘Table 2 — Mortgage-Related Investments Portfolio’’ for the composition of this line item. |
(6) | See ‘‘Table 23 — Freddie Mac Mortgage-Related Securities’’ for the composition of this line item. |
(7) | See ‘‘Table 10 — Composition of Segment Mortgage Portfolios and Credit Risk Portfolios’’ for the composition of this line item. |
(8) | The dividend payout ratio on common stock is not presented because the amount of cash dividends per common share is zero for all periods presented. The return on common equity ratio is not presented because the simple average of the beginning and ending balances of total stockholders’ equity, net of preferred stock (at redemption value) is less than zero for all periods presented. |
(9) | Ratio computed as net income (loss) divided by the simple average of the beginning and ending balances of total assets. |
(10) | Ratio computed as the allowance for loan losses divided by the total recorded investment of held-for-investment mortgage loans. |
(11) | Ratio computed as the simple average of the beginning and ending balances of total stockholders’ equity divided by the simple average of the beginning and ending balances of total assets. |
13 | Freddie Mac | |
CONSOLIDATED RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following discussion of our consolidated results of operations should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements, including the accompanying notes. Also see “CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND ESTIMATES” in our 2013 Annual Report for information concerning certain significant accounting policies and estimates applied in determining our reported results of operations.
Table 4 — Summary Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income
Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||||||||||
2014 | 2013 | Variance | 2014 | 2013 | Variance | |||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net interest income | $ | 3,663 | $ | 4,276 | $ | (613 | ) | $ | 10,676 | $ | 12,685 | $ | (2,009 | ) | ||||||||||
(Provision) benefit for credit losses | (574 | ) | 1,138 | (1,712 | ) | (41 | ) | 2,264 | (2,305 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Net interest income after (provision) benefit for credit losses | 3,089 | 5,414 | (2,325 | ) | 10,635 | 14,949 | (4,314 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Non-interest income (loss): | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gains (losses) on extinguishment of debt securities of consolidated trusts | (132 | ) | 135 | (267 | ) | (308 | ) | 197 | (505 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Gains (losses) on retirement of other debt | (8 | ) | 143 | (151 | ) | — | 136 | (136 | ) | |||||||||||||||
Derivative gains (losses) | (617 | ) | (74 | ) | (543 | ) | (4,894 | ) | 1,663 | (6,557 | ) | |||||||||||||
Net impairment of available-for-sale securities recognized in earnings | (166 | ) | (126 | ) | (40 | ) | (687 | ) | (213 | ) | (474 | ) | ||||||||||||
Other gains (losses) on investment securities recognized in earnings | (109 | ) | 620 | (729 | ) | 1,029 | (153 | ) | 1,182 | |||||||||||||||
Other income (loss) | 1,796 | 991 | 805 | 7,329 | 1,139 | 6,190 | ||||||||||||||||||
Total non-interest income (loss) | 764 | 1,689 | (925 | ) | 2,469 | 2,769 | (300 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Non-interest expense: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Administrative expenses | (472 | ) | (455 | ) | (17 | ) | (1,393 | ) | (1,331 | ) | (62 | ) | ||||||||||||
REO operations (expense) income | (103 | ) | 79 | (182 | ) | (112 | ) | 183 | (295 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act of 2011 expense | (198 | ) | (150 | ) | (48 | ) | (563 | ) | (366 | ) | (197 | ) | ||||||||||||
Other expenses | (43 | ) | (51 | ) | 8 | (199 | ) | (185 | ) | (14 | ) | |||||||||||||
Total non-interest expense | (816 | ) | (577 | ) | (239 | ) | (2,267 | ) | (1,699 | ) | (568 | ) | ||||||||||||
Income before income tax (expense) benefit | 3,037 | 6,526 | (3,489 | ) | 10,837 | 16,019 | (5,182 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Income tax (expense) benefit | (956 | ) | 23,960 | (24,916 | ) | (3,374 | ) | 24,036 | (27,410 | ) | ||||||||||||||
Net income | 2,081 | 30,486 | (28,405 | ) | 7,463 | 40,055 | (32,592 | ) | ||||||||||||||||
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of taxes and reclassification adjustments | 705 | (49 | ) | 754 | 1,712 | 1,710 | 2 | |||||||||||||||||
Comprehensive income | $ | 2,786 | $ | 30,437 | $ | (27,651 | ) | $ | 9,175 | $ | 41,765 | $ | (32,590 | ) | ||||||||||
Net Interest Income
The table below presents an analysis of net interest income, including average balances and related yields earned on assets and incurred on liabilities.
14 | Freddie Mac | |
Table 5 — Net Interest Income/Yield and Average Balance Analysis
Three Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||||||||
2014 | 2013 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Average Balance(1) | Interest Income (Expense) | Average Rate | Average Balance(1) | Interest Income (Expense) | Average Rate | ||||||||||||||||
(dollars in millions) | |||||||||||||||||||||
Interest-earning assets: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 9,842 | $ | 1 | 0.04 | % | $ | 32,549 | $ | 1 | 0.02 | % | |||||||||
Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell | 43,205 | 7 | 0.06 | 38,249 | 6 | 0.05 | |||||||||||||||
Mortgage-related securities: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mortgage-related securities(2) | 252,205 | 2,465 | 3.91 | 317,824 | 3,184 | 4.01 | |||||||||||||||
Extinguishment of PCs held by Freddie Mac | (110,511 | ) | (1,043 | ) | (3.78 | ) | (137,329 | ) | (1,323 | ) | (3.85 | ) | |||||||||
Total mortgage-related securities, net | 141,694 | 1,422 | 4.01 | 180,495 | 1,861 | 4.12 | |||||||||||||||
Non-mortgage-related securities(2) | 11,668 | 1 | 0.02 | 23,715 | 10 | 0.18 | |||||||||||||||
Mortgage loans held by consolidated trusts(3) | 1,539,913 | 14,148 | 3.68 | 1,516,255 | 14,197 | 3.75 | |||||||||||||||
Unsecuritized mortgage loans(3) | 167,683 | 1,643 | 3.92 | 199,385 | 1,872 | 3.76 | |||||||||||||||
Total interest-earning assets | $ | 1,914,005 | $ | 17,222 | 3.60 | $ | 1,990,648 | $ | 17,947 | 3.61 | |||||||||||
Interest-bearing liabilities: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Debt securities of consolidated trusts including PCs held by Freddie Mac | $ | 1,558,023 | $ | (12,845 | ) | (3.30 | ) | $ | 1,536,566 | $ | (12,846 | ) | (3.34 | ) | |||||||
Extinguishment of PCs held by Freddie Mac | (110,511 | ) | 1,043 | 3.78 | (137,329 | ) | 1,323 | 3.85 | |||||||||||||
Total debt securities of consolidated trusts held by third parties | 1,447,512 | (11,802 | ) | (3.26 | ) | 1,399,237 | (11,523 | ) | (3.29 | ) | |||||||||||
Other debt: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Short-term debt | 116,624 | (35 | ) | (0.12 | ) | 139,675 | (45 | ) | (0.13 | ) | |||||||||||
Long-term debt(4) | 326,610 | (1,647 | ) | (2.01 | ) | 386,354 | (1,996 | ) | (2.07 | ) | |||||||||||
Total other debt | 443,234 | (1,682 | ) | (1.52 | ) | 526,029 | (2,041 | ) | (1.55 | ) | |||||||||||
Total interest-bearing liabilities | 1,890,746 | (13,484 | ) | (2.84 | ) | 1,925,266 | (13,564 | ) | (2.82 | ) | |||||||||||
Expense related to derivatives(5) | — | (75 | ) | (0.02 | ) | — | (107 | ) | (0.02 | ) | |||||||||||
Impact of net non-interest-bearing funding | 23,259 | — | 0.03 | 65,382 | — | 0.09 | |||||||||||||||
Total funding of interest-earning assets | $ | 1,914,005 | $ | (13,559 | ) | (2.83 | ) | $ | 1,990,648 | $ | (13,671 | ) | (2.75 | ) | |||||||
Net interest income/yield | $ | 3,663 | 0.77 | $ | 4,276 | 0.86 | |||||||||||||||
Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||||||||
2014 | 2013 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Average Balance(1) | Interest Income (Expense) | Average Rate | Average Balance(1) | Interest Income (Expense) | Average Rate | ||||||||||||||||
(dollars in millions) | |||||||||||||||||||||
Interest-earning assets: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 14,188 | $ | 2 | 0.02 | % | $ | 32,484 | $ | 11 | 0.05 | % | |||||||||
Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell | 41,645 | 17 | 0.06 | 37,723 | 26 | 0.09 | |||||||||||||||
Mortgage-related securities: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Mortgage-related securities(2) | 260,172 | 7,629 | 3.91 | 320,768 | 9,844 | 4.09 | |||||||||||||||
Extinguishment of PCs held by Freddie Mac | (112,553 | ) | (3,177 | ) | (3.76 | ) | (127,730 | ) | (3,829 | ) | (4.00 | ) | |||||||||
Total mortgage-related securities, net | 147,619 | 4,452 | 4.02 | 193,038 | 6,015 | 4.15 | |||||||||||||||
Non-mortgage-related securities(2) | 9,952 | 5 | 0.06 | 21,671 | 32 | 0.20 | |||||||||||||||
Mortgage loans held by consolidated trusts(3) | 1,535,099 | 42,881 | 3.72 | 1,506,345 | 42,798 | 3.79 | |||||||||||||||
Unsecuritized mortgage loans(3) | 172,311 | 4,965 | 3.84 | 209,653 | 5,898 | 3.75 | |||||||||||||||
Total interest-earning assets | $ | 1,920,814 | $ | 52,322 | 3.63 | $ | 2,000,914 | $ | 54,780 | 3.65 | |||||||||||
Interest-bearing liabilities: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Debt securities of consolidated trusts including PCs held by Freddie Mac | $ | 1,551,918 | $ | (39,327 | ) | (3.38 | ) | $ | 1,528,800 | $ | (39,091 | ) | (3.41 | ) | |||||||
Extinguishment of PCs held by Freddie Mac | (112,553 | ) | 3,177 | 3.76 | (127,730 | ) | 3,829 | 4.00 | |||||||||||||
Total debt securities of consolidated trusts held by third parties | 1,439,365 | (36,150 | ) | (3.35 | ) | 1,401,070 | (35,262 | ) | (3.36 | ) | |||||||||||
Other debt: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Short-term debt | 117,795 | (110 | ) | (0.12 | ) | 129,762 | (134 | ) | (0.14 | ) | |||||||||||
Long-term debt(4) | 335,934 | (5,156 | ) | (2.05 | ) | 399,337 | (6,339 | ) | (2.12 | ) | |||||||||||
Total other debt | 453,729 | (5,266 | ) | (1.55 | ) | 529,099 | (6,473 | ) | (1.63 | ) | |||||||||||
Total interest-bearing liabilities | 1,893,094 | (41,416 | ) | (2.91 | ) | 1,930,169 | (41,735 | ) | (2.88 | ) | |||||||||||
Expense related to derivatives(5) | — | (230 | ) | (0.02 | ) | — | (360 | ) | (0.02 | ) | |||||||||||
Impact of net non-interest-bearing funding | 27,720 | — | 0.04 | 70,745 | — | 0.10 | |||||||||||||||
Total funding of interest-earning assets | $ | 1,920,814 | $ | (41,646 | ) | (2.89 | ) | $ | 2,000,914 | $ | (42,095 | ) | (2.80 | ) | |||||||
Net interest income/yield | $ | 10,676 | 0.74 | $ | 12,685 | 0.85 | |||||||||||||||
(1) | We calculate average balances based on amortized cost. |
(2) | Interest income (expense) includes accretion of the portion of impairment charges recognized in earnings where we expect significant increases in cash flows from the impaired securities. |
(3) | Mortgage loans on non-accrual status, where interest income is generally recognized when collected, are included in average balances. |
(4) | Includes current portion of long-term debt. |
(5) | Represents changes in fair value of derivatives in closed cash flow hedge relationships that were previously deferred in AOCI and have been reclassified to earnings as the interest expense associated with the hedged forecasted issuance of debt affects earnings. |
15 | Freddie Mac | |
Net interest income decreased by $613 million and $2.0 billion for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014, respectively, compared to the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013. The decreases in net interest income were primarily due to the negative impact of the reduction in the balance of mortgage-related assets in our mortgage-related investments portfolio due to continued liquidations. Beginning in April 2012, net interest income includes the legislated 10 basis point increase in guarantee fees, which is remitted to Treasury as part of the Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act of 2011.
The percentage of our net interest income from guarantee fees has increased in recent periods. We estimate that approximately one-third of our net interest income for the nine months ended September 30, 2014 was derived from guarantee fees. As our mortgage-related investments portfolio continues to decline, we expect that guarantee fees will account for an increasing portion of our net interest income.
During the three months ended September 30, 2014, we had sufficient access to the debt markets. For more information, see “LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES — Liquidity.”
(Provision) Benefit for Credit Losses
We maintain loan loss reserves at levels we believe are appropriate to absorb probable incurred losses on mortgage loans held-for-investment and loans underlying our financial guarantees. Our loan loss reserves are increased through the provision for credit losses and are reduced by a benefit for credit losses and by net charge-offs. The provision for credit losses primarily reflects our estimate of incurred losses for newly impaired loans as well as changes in our estimates of incurred losses for previously impaired loans. Assuming that all other factors remain the same, home price growth may reduce the likelihood that loans will default and may also reduce the amount of credit losses on the loans that do default.
Our (provision) benefit for credit losses was $(0.6) billion in the third quarter of 2014 compared to $1.1 billion in the third quarter of 2013, and was $(41) million in the nine months ended September 30, 2014 compared to $2.3 billion in the nine months ended September 30, 2013. The provision for credit losses in the three months ended September 30, 2014 reflects an increase in our loan loss reserve for newly impaired loans combined with a slight increase in our estimate of incurred losses on previously impaired loans attributed to declines in home prices in certain areas. The provision for credit losses in the nine months ended September 30, 2014 reflects an increase in our loan loss reserve for newly impaired loans that was partially offset by slight improvements in our estimate of incurred losses on previously impaired loans primarily due to the positive effect of an increase in home prices. The benefit for credit losses in the 2013 periods reflects: (a) declines in the volume of newly delinquent single-family loans; (b) lower estimates of incurred loss due to the positive effect of an increase in national home prices; and (c) $0.9 billion related to counterparty settlement agreements in the third quarter of 2013.
We do not expect future settlement agreements, if any, with seller/servicers to have a significant effect on our financial results.
Our provision for credit losses and amount of charge-offs in the future will be affected by a number of factors, including: (a) the actual level of mortgage defaults, including default rates among borrowers that participated in HARP and HAMP; (b) the effect of the MHA Program, the servicing alignment initiative, and other current and future loss mitigation efforts; (c) any government actions or programs that affect the ability of borrowers to refinance underwater mortgages or obtain modifications; (d) changes in property values; (e) regional economic conditions, including unemployment rates; (f) additional delays in the foreclosure process; and (g) third-party mortgage insurance coverage and recoveries.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2014, our charge-offs, net of recoveries for single-family loans, were significantly lower than those recorded in the nine months ended September 30, 2013 primarily due to lower volumes of foreclosures and foreclosure alternatives. Our single-family recoveries in the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013 included approximately $0.5 billion and $1.6 billion, respectively, related to repurchase requests made to our seller/servicers (including $0.3 billion and $1.1 billion, respectively, with respect to settlement agreements related to repurchase requests made to certain sellers). During the three months ended September 30, 2014, our charge-offs, net of recoveries for single-family loans, were higher than those recorded in the three months ended September 30, 2013 primarily due to lower recoveries as the third quarter of 2013 included settlement agreements with certain sellers. We continue to experience a high volume of foreclosures and foreclosure alternatives as compared to periods prior to 2008. As a result, we expect our single-family credit losses will continue to remain elevated in the near term even if the volume of new seriously delinquent loans continues to decline.
The total number of single-family seriously delinquent loans declined approximately 19% and 22% during the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively. As of September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, the UPB of our single-family loans classified as TDRs was $100.1 billion and $97.6 billion, respectively. However, these amounts include $82.2 billion and $78.0 billion, respectively, of single-family TDRs that were no longer seriously delinquent as of these dates. Loans that have been classified as TDRs remain categorized as such throughout the remaining life of the loan regardless of whether the borrower makes payments which return the loan to a current payment status. See “RISK MANAGEMENT — Credit Risk — Mortgage Credit Risk” for further information on our single-family credit guarantee portfolio, including credit performance, seriously delinquent loans, charge-offs, REO assets, our loan loss reserves balance, TDRs, and non-accrual loans.
16 | Freddie Mac | |
Non-Interest Income (Loss)
Gains (Losses) on Extinguishment of Debt Securities of Consolidated Trusts
During the three months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, we extinguished debt securities of consolidated trusts with a UPB of $14.8 billion and $15.5 billion, respectively (representing our purchase of single-family PCs with a corresponding UPB amount). Gains (losses) on extinguishment of these debt securities of consolidated trusts were $(132) million and $135 million during the three months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, we extinguished debt securities of consolidated trusts with a UPB of $37.6 billion and $39.0 billion, respectively. Gains (losses) on extinguishment of these debt securities of consolidated trusts were $(308) million and $197 million during the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
We recognized losses in the 2014 periods because interest rates declined between the time of issuance and repurchase of these debt securities. We recognized gains in the 2013 periods because interest rates increased between the time of issuance and repurchase of these debt securities.
See “Table 18 — Mortgage-Related Securities Purchase Activity” for additional information regarding purchases of mortgage-related securities, including those issued by consolidated PC trusts.
Gains (Losses) on Retirement of Other Debt
Gains (losses) on retirement of other debt were $(8) million and $143 million during the three months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Gains on retirement of other debt were $0 million and $136 million during the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
We recognized gains on the retirement of other debt during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 as a result of exercising our call option for other debt held at premiums.
For more information, see “LIQUIDITY AND CAPITAL RESOURCES — Liquidity — Other Debt Securities.”
Derivative Gains (Losses)
The table below presents derivative gains (losses) reported in our consolidated statements of comprehensive income. See “NOTE 9: DERIVATIVES — Table 9.2 — Gains and Losses on Derivatives” for information about gains and losses related to specific categories of derivatives. Changes in fair value and interest accruals on derivatives not in hedge accounting relationships are recorded as derivative gains (losses) in our consolidated statements of comprehensive income. At September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013, we did not have any derivatives in hedge accounting relationships; however, there are amounts recorded in AOCI related to closed cash flow hedges. Amounts recorded in AOCI associated with these closed cash flow hedges are reclassified to earnings when the forecasted transactions affect earnings. If it is probable that the forecasted transaction will not occur, then the deferred gain or loss associated with the forecasted transaction is reclassified into earnings immediately.
While derivatives are an important aspect of our strategy to manage interest-rate risk, they could increase the volatility of reported net income because, while fair value changes in derivatives from fluctuations in interest rates, yield curves, and implied volatility affect net income, fair value changes in several of the types of assets and liabilities being economically hedged do not affect net income. Therefore, there can be timing mismatches affecting current period earnings, which may not be reflective of the economics of our business.
Table 6 — Derivative Gains (Losses)
Derivative Gains (Losses) | |||||||||||||||
Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | ||||||||||||||
2014 | 2013 | 2014 | 2013 | ||||||||||||
(in millions) | |||||||||||||||
Interest-rate swaps | $ | (184 | ) | $ | 1,112 | $ | (3,505 | ) | $ | 6,408 | |||||
Option-based derivatives(1) | 78 | (238 | ) | 344 | (1,897 | ) | |||||||||
Other derivatives(2) | 116 | (40 | ) | 241 | (101 | ) | |||||||||
Accrual of periodic settlements | (627 | ) | (908 | ) | (1,974 | ) | (2,747 | ) | |||||||
Total | $ | (617 | ) | $ | (74 | ) | $ | (4,894 | ) | $ | 1,663 | ||||
(1) | Primarily includes purchased call and put swaptions and purchased interest-rate caps and floors. |
(2) | Primarily includes futures, foreign-currency swaps, commitments, credit derivatives and swap guarantee derivatives. Our last foreign-currency swaps matured in January 2014. |
Gains (losses) on derivatives are principally driven by changes in: (a) interest rates, yield curves, and implied volatility; and (b) the mix and balance of products in our derivative portfolio.
During the three months ended September 30, 2014, we recognized net losses on derivatives of $0.6 billion primarily as a result of the accrual of periodic settlements on interest-rate swaps as we were a net payer on our interest-rate swaps based on the coupons of the instruments.
17 | Freddie Mac | |
During the nine months ended September 30, 2014, we recognized net losses on derivatives of $4.9 billion primarily as a result of a flattening of the yield curve as shorter-term interest rates increased and longer-term interest rates declined. Also contributing to our net losses on derivatives was the accrual of periodic settlements on interest-rate swaps as we were a net payer on our interest-rate swaps based on the coupons of the instruments.
During the three months ended September 30, 2013, we recognized a loss on derivatives of $74 million as net fair value gains of $1.1 billion on our interest-rate swap portfolio were more than offset by: (a) a net loss of $908 million related to the accrual of periodic settlements on interest-rate swaps as we were a net payer on our interest-rate swaps based on the coupons of the instruments; and (b) a fair value loss of $238 million on our option-based derivatives. The net fair value gains on our interest-rate swap portfolio were primarily driven by time decay, as we continued to pay periodic settlements to counterparties as our interest-rate swaps moved closer to maturity.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2013, we recognized gains on derivatives of $1.7 billion primarily as a result of an increase in longer-term interest rates. We recognized fair value gains on our pay-fixed swaps of $14.8 billion which were largely offset by: (a) fair value losses on our receive-fixed swaps of $8.3 billion; (b) a net loss of $2.7 billion related to the accrual of periodic settlements on interest-rate swaps as we were a net payer on our interest-rate swaps based on the coupons of the instruments; and (c) fair value losses of $1.9 billion on our option-based derivatives resulting from losses on our purchased call swaptions.
Investment Securities-Related Activities
Impairments of Available-For-Sale Securities
We recorded net impairments of available-for-sale securities recognized in earnings, which were related to non-agency mortgage-related securities, of $166 million and $687 million during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014, respectively, compared to $126 million and $213 million during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013, respectively. During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014, these impairments were primarily driven by an increase in the population of available-for-sale securities in an unrealized loss position that we intend to sell. See “CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS ANALYSIS — Investments in Securities — Mortgage-Related Securities — Other-Than-Temporary Impairments on Available-For-Sale Mortgage-Related Securities,” as well as “NOTE 7: INVESTMENTS IN SECURITIES” and "NOTE 15: CONCENTRATION OF CREDIT AND OTHER RISKS — Non-Agency Mortgage-Related Security Issuers" for additional information.
Other Gains (Losses) on Investment Securities Recognized in Earnings
Other gains (losses) on investment securities recognized in earnings consists of gains (losses) on trading securities and gains (losses) on sales of available-for-sale securities. With the exception of principal-only securities, our agency securities, classified as trading, were valued at a net premium (i.e., net fair value was higher than UPB) as of September 30, 2014.
We recognized gains (losses) on trading securities of $(216) million and $(183) million during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014, respectively, compared to $(207) million and $(1.3) billion during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013, respectively. The losses on trading securities during the three months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013 were primarily due to the movement of securities with unrealized gains towards maturity. The losses on trading securities during the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013 were primarily due to the movement of securities with unrealized gains towards maturity, partially offset during the nine months ended September 30, 2014 by the effect of the decline in longer-term interest rates.
We recognized gains on sales of available-for-sale securities of $107 million and $1.2 billion during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014, respectively, compared to gains on sales of available-for-sale securities of $827 million and $1.2 billion during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013, respectively. The gains during the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014 primarily resulted from sales related to our structuring activity.
Other Income (Loss)
The table below summarizes the significant components of other income (loss).
18 | Freddie Mac | |
Table 7 — Other Income (Loss)
Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | ||||||||||||||
2014 | 2013 | 2014 | 2013 | ||||||||||||
(in millions) | |||||||||||||||
Other income (loss): | |||||||||||||||
Non-agency mortgage-related securities settlements | $ | 1,187 | $ | 549 | $ | 6,084 | $ | 660 | |||||||
Gains (losses) on mortgage loans | 168 | 114 | 383 | (440 | ) | ||||||||||
Recoveries on loans impaired upon purchase(1) | 53 | 64 | 162 | 213 | |||||||||||
Guarantee-related income, net(2) | 40 | 120 | 184 | 279 | |||||||||||
All other | 348 | 144 | 516 | 427 | |||||||||||
Total other income (loss) | $ | 1,796 | $ | 991 | $ | 7,329 | $ | 1,139 | |||||||
(1) | Principally relates to impaired loans purchased prior to 2010. Consequently, our recoveries on these loans will generally decline over time. |
(2) | Principally relates to securitized multifamily mortgage loans where we have not consolidated the securitization trusts on our consolidated balance sheets. |
Non-Agency Mortgage-Related Securities Settlements
Non-agency mortgage-related securities settlements were $1.2 billion and $0.5 billion in the three months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively, and $6.1 billion and $0.7 billion in the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively. We had ten settlements in the nine months ended September 30, 2014, while we had four settlements in the nine months ended September 30, 2013. For information on the settlements in the nine months ended September 30, 2014, see “NOTE 15: CONCENTRATION OF CREDIT AND OTHER RISKS — Non-Agency Mortgage-Related Security Issuers.”
Gains (Losses) on Mortgage Loans
We recognized gains (losses) on mortgage loans of $168 million and $114 million in the three months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively, and $383 million and $(440) million in the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The improvements in the 2014 periods were mainly due to gains on multifamily mortgage loans, primarily due to favorable changes in interest rates. The majority of these multifamily loans were designated for securitization and elected to be carried at fair value.
During the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, we sold $12.9 billion and $20.8 billion, respectively, in UPB of multifamily loans primarily through K Certificate transactions. We also sold seriously delinquent single-family loans (with an aggregate UPB of $0.6 billion) in a pilot transaction completed in the third quarter of 2014. These loans had been reclassified from held-for-investment to held-for-sale during the second quarter of 2014 in connection with this pilot transaction. This sale did not have a material effect on our financial results.
All Other
All other income (loss) includes income recognized from transactional fees, fees assessed to our servicers for technology use and late fees or other penalties, changes in fair value of STACR debt notes, and other miscellaneous income. All other income (loss) was $348 million and $516 million in the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014, respectively, compared to $144 million and $427 million in the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013, respectively. The increase in the 2014 periods was primarily due to increased income from the accrual of compensatory fees related to servicers that failed to meet our loan foreclosure timelines. On October 20, 2014, FHFA announced that FHFA, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae reached an agreement in principle on modifying compensatory fees and foreclosure timelines, the details of which will be announced in the near future. These changes may result in lower compensatory fees in the future. In addition, we have elected to carry STACR debt notes at fair value, and recorded gains in fair value during the three months ended September 30, 2014 due to a decline in market prices for these notes (which reduced the fair value of our liability) compared to losses in the three months ended September 30, 2013.
Non-Interest Expense
The table below summarizes the components of non-interest expense.
19 | Freddie Mac | |
Table 8 — Non-Interest Expense
Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | ||||||||||||||
2014 | 2013 | 2014 | 2013 | ||||||||||||
(in millions) | |||||||||||||||
Administrative expenses: | |||||||||||||||
Salaries and employee benefits | $ | 231 | $ | 207 | $ | 687 | $ | 626 | |||||||
Professional services | 128 | 144 | 392 | 387 | |||||||||||
Occupancy expense | 16 | 14 | 43 | 41 | |||||||||||
Other administrative expense | 97 | 90 | 271 | 277 | |||||||||||
Total administrative expenses | 472 | 455 | 1,393 | 1,331 | |||||||||||
REO operations expense (income) | 103 | (79 | ) | 112 | (183 | ) | |||||||||
Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act of 2011 expense | 198 | 150 | 563 | 366 | |||||||||||
Other expenses(1) | 43 | 51 | 199 | 185 | |||||||||||
Total non-interest expense | $ | 816 | $ | 577 | $ | 2,267 | $ | 1,699 | |||||||
(1) | Includes HAMP servicer incentive fees, costs related to terminations and transfers of mortgage servicing, and other miscellaneous expenses. |
Administrative Expenses
Our administrative expenses increased during the nine months ended September 30, 2014 compared to the nine months ended September 30, 2013 due to increases in salaries and employee benefits expense mainly due to expenses associated with our retirement plans.
REO Operations (Income) Expense
The table below presents the components of our REO operations (income) expense.
Table 9 — REO Operations (Income) Expense
Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
2014 | 2013 | 2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
REO operations (income) expense: | ||||||||||||||||
Single-family: | ||||||||||||||||
REO property expenses(1) | $ | 183 | $ | 238 | $ | 660 | $ | 721 | ||||||||
Disposition (gains) losses, net(2) | (127 | ) | (200 | ) | (408 | ) | (595 | ) | ||||||||
Change in holding period allowance, dispositions | (6 | ) | (3 | ) | (37 | ) | (27 | ) | ||||||||
Change in holding period allowance, inventory(3) | 111 | (5 | ) | 110 | 12 | |||||||||||
Recoveries(4) | (52 | ) | (97 | ) | (205 | ) | (279 | ) | ||||||||
Total single-family REO operations (income) expense | 109 | (67 | ) | 120 | (168 | ) | ||||||||||
Multifamily REO operations (income) expense | (6 | ) | (12 | ) | (8 | ) | (15 | ) | ||||||||
Total REO operations (income) expense | $ | 103 | $ | (79 | ) | $ | 112 | $ | (183 | ) | ||||||
(1) | Consists of costs incurred to maintain or protect a property after it is acquired in a foreclosure transfer, such as legal fees, insurance, taxes, and cleaning and other maintenance charges. |
(2) | Represents the difference between the disposition proceeds, net of selling expenses, and the fair value of the property on the date of the foreclosure transfer. |
(3) | Represents the (increase) decrease in the estimated fair value of properties that were in inventory during the period. |
(4) | Includes recoveries from primary mortgage insurance, pool insurance and seller/servicer repurchases. |
REO operations (income) expense was $103 million in the third quarter of 2014, compared to $(79) million in the third quarter of 2013 and was $112 million in the nine months ended September 30, 2014 compared to $(183) million in the nine months ended September 30, 2013. The change from REO operations income in the 2013 periods to REO operations expense in the 2014 periods was primarily due to: (a) an increase in holding period allowance for properties in REO inventory; and (b) lower gains on the disposition of REO properties. For more information on our REO activity, see “Segment Earnings — Segment Earnings — Results — Single-Family Guarantee,” “CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS ANALYSIS — REO, Net,” and “RISK MANAGEMENT — Credit Risk — Mortgage Credit Risk — REO Assets.”
Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act of 2011 Expense
Pursuant to the Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act of 2011, we increased the guarantee fee on single-family residential mortgages sold to us by 10 basis points in April 2012. We pay these fees to Treasury on a quarterly basis and refer to this fee increase as the legislated 10 basis point increase in guarantee fees.
Expenses related to the legislated 10 basis point increase in guarantee fees were $198 million and $150 million during the three months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively, and $563 million and $366 million during the nine months
20 | Freddie Mac | |
ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively. As of September 30, 2014, loans with an aggregate UPB of $820.3 billion were subject to these fees, and the cumulative total of the amounts paid and due to Treasury for these fees was $1.2 billion. We expect these fees to continue to increase in the future as we add new business and increase the UPB of loans subject to these fees.
Income Tax (Expense) Benefit
We reported an income tax (expense) benefit of $(1.0) billion and $24.0 billion for the three months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively, and $(3.4) billion and $24.0 billion for the nine months ended September 30, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The change to income tax expense in the 2014 periods from income tax benefit in the 2013 periods results from the release of the valuation allowance in the third quarter of 2013. For 2014, we expect that our effective tax rate will be marginally below the corporate statutory rate, which is currently 35%. See “NOTE 12: INCOME TAXES” for additional information.
Comprehensive Income
Our comprehensive income was $2.8 billion and $9.2 billion for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2014, respectively, consisting of: (a) $2.1 billion and $7.5 billion of net income, respectively; and (b) $0.7 billion and $1.7 billion of other comprehensive income, respectively. The other comprehensive income in these periods primarily related to fair value gains on our available-for-sale securities resulting from the impact of spread tightening on our non-agency mortgage-related securities and the movement of these securities with unrealized losses towards maturity.
Our comprehensive income was $30.4 billion and $41.8 billion for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013, respectively, consisting of: (a) $30.5 billion and $40.1 billion of net income, respectively; and (b) $(49) million and $1.7 billion of other comprehensive income (loss), respectively. Other comprehensive income (loss) for the three months ended September 30, 2013 was primarily due to the reversal of unrealized fair value gains in AOCI associated with certain available-for-sale securities sold, partially offset by fair value gains on our single-family non-agency mortgage-related available-for-sale securities. Other comprehensive income for the nine months ended September 30, 2013 was primarily due to fair value gains on our single-family non-agency mortgage-related available-for-sale securities.
Other comprehensive income (loss) in all periods also reflects the reversals of: (a) unrealized losses due to the recognition of other-than-temporary impairments in earnings; and (b) unrealized gains and losses related to available-for-sale securities sold during the respective period. See “CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS ANALYSIS — Total Equity” for additional information regarding total other comprehensive income.
Segment Earnings
Our operations consist of three reportable segments, which are based on the type of business activities each performs — Single-family Guarantee, Investments, and Multifamily. Certain activities that are not part of a reportable segment are included in the All Other category.
The financial performance of our Single-family Guarantee segment is measured based on its contribution to GAAP net income (loss). Our Investments segment and Multifamily segment are measured based on each segment's contribution to GAAP comprehensive income (loss), which consists of the sum of its contribution to: (a) GAAP net income (loss); and (b) GAAP total other comprehensive income (loss), net of taxes.
The Single-family Guarantee segment reflects results from our single-family credit guarantee activities. The Investments segment reflects results from three primary activities: (a) managing the company’s mortgage-related investments portfolio, excluding Multifamily segment investments; (b) managing the treasury function, including funding and liquidity, for the overall company; and (c) managing interest-rate risk for the overall company. The Multifamily segment reflects results from our investment (both purchases and sales), securitization, and guarantee activities in multifamily mortgage loans and securities. For more information, see "NOTE 13: SEGMENT REPORTING" in this Form 10-Q and our 2013 Annual Report.
In presenting Segment Earnings, we make significant reclassifications among certain financial statement line items in order to reflect a measure of management and guarantee income on guarantees and a measure of net interest income on investments that is in line with how we manage our business. These include reclassifying certain credit guarantee-related activities and investment-related activities between various line items on our GAAP consolidated statements of comprehensive income. We also allocate certain revenues and expenses, including certain returns on assets and funding costs, and all administrative expenses to our three reportable segments.
As a result of these reclassifications and allocations, Segment Earnings for our reportable segments differs significantly from, and should not be used as a substitute for, net income (loss) as determined in accordance with GAAP. Our definition of Segment Earnings may differ from similar measures used by other companies. However, we believe that Segment Earnings provides us with meaningful metrics to assess the financial performance of each segment and our company as a whole.
Our Segment Earnings for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2013 includes a benefit for federal income taxes of $23.9 billion within our All Other category that resulted from the release of our valuation allowance against our net deferred tax assets.
21 | Freddie Mac | |
In the first quarter of 2014, we revised our inter-segment allocations between the Multifamily and the Investments segments for the Multifamily segment's investment securities and held-for-sale loans. With this change, the Multifamily segment reflects the entire change in fair value of these assets in its financial results, and the Investments segment transfers the change in fair value of the derivatives associated with the Multifamily segment's investments securities and held-for-sale loans to the Multifamily segment. The purpose of this change is to better reflect the operations of the Multifamily segment on a stand-alone basis. Prior period results have been revised to conform with the current period presentation.
See “BUSINESS — Our Business Segments” in our 2013 Annual Report for further information regarding our segments, including the descriptions and activities of our segments, and “NOTE 13: SEGMENT REPORTING” in this Form 10-Q and our 2013 Annual Report for further information regarding the reclassifications and allocations used to present Segment Earnings.
The table below provides information about our various segment mortgage and credit risk portfolios at September 30, 2014 and December 31, 2013. For a discussion of each segment’s portfolios, see “Segment Earnings — Results.”
Table 10 — Composition of Segment Mortgage Portfolios and Credit Risk Portfolios(1)
September 30, 2014 | December 31, 2013 | |||||||
(in millions) | ||||||||
Segment mortgage portfolios: | ||||||||
Single-family Guarantee — Managed loan portfolio:(2) | ||||||||
Single-family unsecuritized seriously delinquent mortgage loans | $ | 30,161 | $ | 37,726 | ||||
Single-family Freddie Mac mortgage-related securities held by us | 159,482 | 165,247 | ||||||
Single-family Freddie Mac mortgage-related securities held by third parties | 1,385,660 | 1,361,972 | ||||||
Single-family other guarantee commitments(3) | 16,871 | 19,872 | ||||||
Total Single-family Guarantee — Managed loan portfolio | 1,592,174 | 1,584,817 | ||||||
Investments — Mortgage investments portfolio: | ||||||||
Single-family unsecuritized mortgage loans(4) | 82,607 | 84,411 | ||||||
Freddie Mac mortgage-related securities | 159,482 | 165,247 | ||||||
Non-agency mortgage-related securities | 48,278 | 64,524 | ||||||
Non-Freddie Mac agency mortgage-related securities | 15,676 | 16,889 | ||||||
Total Investments — Mortgage investments portfolio | 306,043 | 331,071 | ||||||
Multifamily — Guarantee portfolio: | ||||||||
Multifamily Freddie Mac mortgage-related securities held by us | 2,216 | 2,787 | ||||||
Multifamily Freddie Mac mortgage-related securities held by third parties | 72,997 | 62,505 | ||||||
Multifamily other guarantee commitments(3) | 9,205 | 9,288 | ||||||
Total Multifamily — Guarantee portfolio | 84,418 | 74,580 | ||||||
Multifamily — Mortgage investments portfolio: | ||||||||
Multifamily investment securities portfolio | 25,752 | 33,056 | ||||||
Multifamily unsecuritized loan portfolio | 51,654 | 59,171 | ||||||
Total Multifamily — Mortgage investments portfolio | 77,406 | 92,227 | ||||||
Total Multifamily portfolio | 161,824 | 166,807 | ||||||
Less: Freddie Mac single-family and certain multifamily securities(5) | (161,698 | ) | (168,034 | ) | ||||
Total mortgage portfolio | $ | 1,898,343 | $ | 1,914,661 | ||||
Credit risk portfolios:(6) | ||||||||
Single-family credit guarantee portfolio:(2) | ||||||||
Single-family mortgage loans, on-balance sheet | $ | 1,639,790 | $ | 1,630,859 | ||||
Non-consolidated Freddie Mac mortgage-related securities | 6,429 | 6,961 | ||||||
Other guarantee commitments(3) | 16,871 | 19,872 | ||||||
Less: HFA initiative-related guarantees(7) | (3,466 | ) | (4,051 | ) | ||||
Less: Freddie Mac mortgage-related securities backed by Ginnie Mae certificates(7) | (457 | ) | (541 | ) | ||||
Total single-family credit guarantee portfolio | $ | 1,659,167 | $ | 1,653,100 | ||||
Multifamily mortgage portfolio: | ||||||||
Multifamily mortgage loans, on-balance sheet(8) | $ | 52,179 | $ | 59,615 | ||||
Non-consolidated Freddie Mac mortgage-related securities | 74,688 | 64,848 | ||||||
Other guarantee commitments(3) | 9,205 | 9,288 | ||||||
Less: HFA initiative-related guarantees(7) | (827 | ) | (905 | ) | ||||
Total multifamily mortgage portfolio | $ | 135,245 | $ | 132,846 | ||||
(1) | Amounts represent UPB. |
22 | Freddie Mac | |
(2) | The balances of the mortgage-related securities in the Single-family Guarantee managed loan portfolio are based on the UPB of the security, whereas the balances of our single-family credit guarantee portfolio presented in this report are based on the UPB of the mortgage loans underlying the related security. The differences in the loan and security balances result from the timing of remittances to security holders, which is typically 45 or 75 days after the mortgage payment cycle of fixed-rate and ARM PCs, respectively. |
(3) | Represents the UPB of mortgage-related assets held by third parties for which we provide our guarantee without our securitization of the related assets. |
(4) | Excludes unsecuritized seriously delinquent single-family loans. The Single-family Guarantee segment earns management and guarantee fees associated with unsecuritized single-family loans in the Investments segment’s mortgage investments portfolio. |
(5) | Freddie Mac single-family mortgage-related securities held by us are included in both our Investments segment’s mortgage investments portfolio and our Single-family Guarantee segment’s managed loan portfolio, and Freddie Mac multifamily mortgage-related securities held by us are included in both the multifamily investment securities portfolio and the multifamily guarantee portfolio. Therefore, these amounts are deducted in order to reconcile to our total mortgage portfolio. |
(6) | Represents the UPB of loans for which we present characteristics, delinquency data, and certain other statistics in this report. See “GLOSSARY” for further description. |
(7) | We exclude HFA initiative-related guarantees and our resecuritizations of Ginnie Mae certificates from our credit risk portfolios and most related statistics because these guarantees do not expose us to meaningful amounts of credit risk due to the credit enhancement provided on them by the U.S. government. |
(8) | Includes both unsecuritized multifamily mortgage loans and multifamily mortgage loans in consolidated trusts. |
Segment Earnings — Results
Single-Family Guarantee
The table below presents the Segment Earnings of our Single-family Guarantee segment.
Table 11 — Segment Earnings and Key Metrics — Single-Family Guarantee(1)
Three Months Ended September 30, | Nine Months Ended September 30, | |||||||||||||||
2014 | 2013 | 2014 | 2013 | |||||||||||||
(dollars in millions) | ||||||||||||||||
Segment Earnings: | ||||||||||||||||
Net interest income (expense)(2) | $ | 19 | $ | 203 | $ | (27 | ) | $ | 300 | |||||||
(Provision) benefit for credit losses | (818 | ) | 885 | (742 | ) | 1,474 | ||||||||||
Non-interest income: | ||||||||||||||||
Management and guarantee income | 1,341 | 1,230 | 3,764 | 3,771 | ||||||||||||
Other non-interest income | 422 | 246 | 450 | 695 | ||||||||||||
Total non-interest income | 1,763 | 1,476 | 4,214 | 4,466 | ||||||||||||
Non-interest expense: | ||||||||||||||||
Administrative expenses | (302 | ) | (263 | ) | (855 | ) | (756 | ) | ||||||||
REO operations (expense) income | (109 | ) | 67 | (120 | ) | 168 | ||||||||||
Temporary Payroll Tax Cut Continuation Act of 2011 expense | (198 | ) | (150 | ) | (563 | ) | (366 | ) | ||||||||
Other non-interest expense | (40 | ) | (45 | ) | (159 | ) | (139 | ) | ||||||||
Total non-interest expense | (649 | ) | (391 | ) | (1,697 | ) | (1,093 | ) | ||||||||
Segment adjustments(3) | (75 | ) | (154 | ) | (233 | ) | (596 | ) | ||||||||
Segment Earnings before income tax expense | 240 | 2,019 | 1,515 | 4,551 | ||||||||||||
Income tax expense | (44 | ) | — | (438 | ) | (5 | ) | |||||||||
Segment Earnings, net of taxes | 196 | 2,019 | 1,077 | 4,546 | ||||||||||||
Total other comprehensive income, net of taxes | (1 | ) | 2 | (1 | ) | 14 | ||||||||||
Total comprehensive income | $ | 195 | $ | 2,021 | $ | 1,076 | $ | 4,560 | ||||||||
Key metrics: | ||||||||||||||||
Balances and Volume (in billions, except rate): | ||||||||||||||||
Average balance of single-family credit guarantee portfolio and HFA guarantees | $ | 1,653 | $ | 1,648 | $ | 1,652 | $ | 1,642 | ||||||||
Issuance — Single-family credit guarantees(4) | $ | 78 | $ | 101 | $ | 189 | $ | 370 | ||||||||
Fixed-rate products — Percentage of purchases(5) | 94 | % | 95 | % | 94 | % | 96 | % | ||||||||
Liquidation rate — Single-family credit guarantees (annualized)(6) | 17 | % | 26 | % | 15 | % | 31 | % | ||||||||
Average Management and Guarantee Rate (in bps, annualized)(7) | ||||||||||||||||