Increasing volatility of credit
Derivatives reflect the market’s sentiment and expectation quickly in their prices. Improved understanding and transparency could foster the acceptance of real estate as an asset class. Further, derivative markets should provide accurate signals for an optimal allocation of capital and risk.
Higher attractiveness and better risk management possibilities due to property derivatives could drive property prices generally upward. In other words, the risk premium and accordingly the cost of capital shrinks, since risk can better be measured and managed. However, this will only occur when there is enough liquidity and risk management opportunities. The investment bank Merrill Lynch estimates that this scenario can begin to happen if derivative volumes traded reach at least the transaction value of direct property. The bank estimates the critical size in the UK to be GB £50 billion turnover per year for the commercial sector. With the rapid growth of the UK property derivatives market, such a feedback effect could soon be seen to start.
Another feedback effect concerns activity. Experts say that the introduction of a derivatives market potentially reduces trading volume in the spot market, since the transfer of risk and return through derivatives make physical transaction at least partly obsolete. However, evidence is mixed. Other studies show that the existence of derivatives have actually improved activity in the related spot market.
However, there is some concern that a successful derivatives market will lead to fewer transactions in the underlying property market, reducing the base market’s liquidity and increasing credit volatility. This may have a significant impact on the underlying indices used to measure property returns, particularly the capital growth indices, which rely on valuations based on transactional evidence. Derivative advocates argue that there will always be demand for physical property from investors who believe they can beat the market through picking individual properties and actively managing them.
The impact of payday loans market
There is mixed evidence on the impact of a derivatives market on its underlying asset market. Some studies have found a reduction in volatility after the introduction of derivatives while others conclude that volatility was not affected or even increased.
The general reasoning for an increase in payday loans volatility states that derivatives attract speculators who may destabilize the base market and create bubbles, and that the closing out of hedging positions shortly before expiration creates additional price variation. On the other hand, a decrease of volatility could result as derivatives make a market more complete, reduce transaction costs and enhance information flows. Also, the transfer of speculative activity from the base market to the derivative market may dampen volatility.
Others suggests that derivatives improve the efficiency of incomplete markets by expanding the opportunity set faced by investors. This in turn should reduce the volatility of the underlying asset. Research show that option listings have beneficial effects and improve the market quality and liquidity of the underlying stocks. They analyzed the impact of derivatives on their underlying assets for 174 stocks that had an option listed on either the American Stock Exchange (Amex), the Chicago Board Options Exchange (CBOE), the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), the Pacific Stock Exchange (PSE) or the Philadelphia Stock Exchange (PHLX) from 1983 to 1989. In particular, they observed a decrease in the bid-offer spreads and increases in quoted depth, trading volume, trading frequency and transaction size after the introduction of derivatives. In summary, the listing of options resulted in reduced transaction costs for the underlying stocks. Further, they found that information asymmetries decreased and pricing efficiency increased.
Derivatives to manage house credit and price risk
On the side of residential owner-occupied housing, Hinkelmann and Swidler (2006) are sceptic as to whether the market can take off. Mentally, homeowners tend to treat their home just as a consumption good rather than as an investment that involves price risk. Moreover, they would always be subject to a huge tracking error risk when hedging their homes with derivatives based on house price indices. This limits the effectiveness of hedging, and individuals may not use derivatives to manage house price risk. Ultimately, a lack of hedgers in the marketplace may lead to failure of residential housing derivatives such as the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME) housing futures contracts. It remains to be seen whether the involved challenges and hurdles can be successfully addressed.
History shows that the buildup period of a new market is very fragile. Property derivatives were launched in the early 1990s and actually failed. The debut on the London Futures and Options Exchange (FOX) crashed in a combination of bad timing and scandal over false trades designed to create the impression of higher activity (see experience in property derivatives).
Today, liquidity in the property derivatives market has a good chance of being increased. In 1981, the first interest rate swap was done. Although people were sceptic at the time, it is now a trillion dollar market. The property market could experience a similar sort of growth in derivative instruments.
Beyond commercial property loans
Beyond commercial property, the second current initiative for property derivatives in the US considers owner-occupied residential housing. This market, estimated to be more than US$ 21 trillion, is much larger than its commercial counterpart. However, large institutions have shown little appetite to trade derivatives on residential property indices, consisting of privately owned houses. Institutional investors focus on commercial property, and do not trade residential property in volumes needed to encourage growth in a derivatives market.
Several derivative products based on a housing index have been proposed to hedge housing exposure in academic literature. To improve the possibilities to pool and share housing investment risks, Case, Shiller and Weiss (1993) propose a market in futures contracts tied to regional house price indices. Englund, Hwang and Quigley (2002) suggest that there are large potential gains from policies or instruments that would permit households to hedge their lump investments in housing. Case et al. attribute the failure of the London FOX contracts in 1991 to the public’s lack of appreciation and understanding of such markets. Whether such appreciation for housing markets now exists remains an open question.
The US market is still looking for a common benchmark. Multiple public exchanges or platforms try to promote housing derivatives for builders, developers, lenders and professional investors with large positions in real estate based on different index families. Although the platforms have many differences, they all operate in a similar way to an ordinary stock market.
