|
Whitney: Credit crunch far from over
The star analyst tells Fortune
magazine that housing woes will force
banks to keep taking writedowns.
Jon Birger, Fortune Magazine,
money.cnn.com, 08/04/08
The credit crisis is far from over,
star analyst Meredith Whitney tells
Fortune magazine in its upcoming
issue.
Whitney, who audaciously - and
correctly - predicted last October
that Citigroup would have to cut its
dividend, tells the magazine that
banks in general today are still
facing much bigger credit losses than
what they've reported so far.
The Oppenheimer & Co. analyst warned
last year - and continues to warn
today - that the "incestuous"
relationship between the banks and the
credit-rating agencies during the real
estate bubble will have a long-lasting
impact on banks' ability to recover.
For years the ratings agencies, which
are paid by the issuers of bonds, gave
high marks to securities backed by
subprime mortgages. Many of those
bonds, of course, turned out to be
anything but safe.
With Moody's) and Standard & Poor's
now trying to make up for past wrongs,
the pace of downgrades on mortgage
securities is quickening.
This is a problem, because every time
their portfolios are hit by
significant credit downgrades, banks
are forced to improve their capital
ratios. Often that means issuing reams
of new stock, which leads to serious
dilution, as shareholders at Citi,
Merrill Lynch, and Washington Mutual
now know.
"You're going to have this stealth
pressure on bank balance sheets until
you start to see the ratio of
downgrades to upgrades change,"
Whitney tells the magazine. (This is
an excerpt from "The Woman Who Called
Wall Street's Meltdown and What She
Sees Next" in the August 18 issue of
Fortune.
Read the complete story.)
Modern-day Cassandra
Whitney's bearishness has deep roots.
In fact, she was the first analyst to
sound the alarm loudly about subprime
mortgages, predicting back in October
2005 that there would be
"unprecedented credit losses" for
subprime lenders. The problem, as she
saw it, was that loose lending
standards and the proliferation of
teaser-rate mortgage products had
artificially inflated the U.S.
home-ownership rate.
A lot of the new homeowners were in
over their heads, she believed, and
would have trouble making their
monthly payments when home prices
started to fall and their teaser rates
got bumped up.
Whitney's current concern is that
banks aren't slashing costs and
cutting losses in their loan
portfolios fast enough. On the cost
side, she says, banks have yet to come
to terms with the disappearance of the
securitization market, which she
believes will stay in hibernation for
the next three years.
Why does this matter? From 2001
through 2005, for every dollar of bank
capital used to make mortgage loans,
ten were supplied via investors in
mortgage securities. All that
secondary-market capital is now
sidelined, but the staffing levels of
bank lending departments don't yet
reflect it.
By Whitney's reckoning, banks have
laid off about 7% of their employees;
she thinks the cuts need to reach 25%.
Time to get real
She also argues that banks need to
"get real" about how they're valuing
their problem mortgage-related debt,
much as Merrill Lynch has now done.
Merrill recently sold a large package
of toxic mortgage debt for just 22
cents on the dollar.
Whitney's idea of "real" is pretty
drastic. Whereas most banks are
estimating 20% to 25% peak-to-trough
declines in housing prices, the Case-Shiller
housing futures traded on the Chicago
Mercantile Exchange portend a much
steeper 33% decline, she points out.
In fact, Whitney thinks the actual
declines will be worse - closer to 40%
- because of the loss of the
securitization market and the paucity
of mortgage credit available. And that
means more defaults: "The consumer's
ability to refinance his way out of
trouble has diminished greatly."
Whitney's critics, and there are many
among bankers and analysts, contend
her bearishness at this point shows
she simply doesn't now how to measure
the remaining downside risk.
Her response: If she has no idea how
to properly value bank stocks now,
it's because the metrics don't work.
Price-to-earnings ratios are useless
when earnings are nonexistent. And
valuing banks on price-to-book ratios
is just as futile. Those book values -
which reflect underlying assets and
liabilities - are moving targets.
"Citibank has lost 50% of its book
value since last year," says Whitney,
who is married to pro wrestler John
Layfield.
"I do not think we are near the end of
write-downs," she tells Fortune, "so I
continue to see capital levels going
lower, capital raises diluting
existing shares further, and stocks
going lower."
|