Skip to main content

Subprime shakeout: questions loom

As the subprime mortgage shakeout continues to ripple through the markets, FT Alphaville looks at two different elements of this story: the macroeconomic perspective, and the contagion effects made possible by financial innovation.

As was pointed out
in these pixels on Wednesday, there are two elements to the subprime mortgage shakeout in the US.

The first, macroeconomic, concerns the extent to which the woes in the subprime sector of the mortgage market spill over into the broader US housing market, and spark a slowdown in overall consumer spending.

The second is a question regarding financial innovation, which has created transmission mechanisms across the wider credit markets, whereby problems can leap between seemingly unrelated markets such as US mortgages and European leveraged loans, which are funding the current buy-out boom.

As Paul J Davies wrote here yesterday: “if contagion between markets is fueled by such mechanisms then the sell-off in credit could be the harbinger for a much broader systemic sell-off of risk across all asset classes - that at least is the most bearish, apocalyptic version of current market concerns.”


The Alphaville post goes on to survey reactions to the subprime fallout from various bloggers and market analysts. While some are expressing little surprise over the current state of things, others are busy making a case for "containment".


But as S&P and Moody's move to cut their ratings on mortgage backed securities (the very securities which they often trumpeted as investment grade), worries over the extent of the damage continues to mount.


Still, there is no time better than the present for some good old-fashioned spin. So with that in mind, let's take a quick look at how the "well-contained" subprime mortgage fiasco has affected investors in other areas of the market.


Minyanville writer Kevin Depew has been chronicling the way in which the subprime "containment has been spreading" for some time, now. Here's a look back at the growing problems in the debt markets from late April, in which Depew observes that a "behavioral contagion" of fear might cause a panic to spread through other portions of the debt markets. Lots of amusing commentary here.


My favorite of all the "containment" statements heard so far (and I'm only a casual observer) is this quote from a recent article that appeared in The Economic Times:

“Risk aversion appears to be mainly contained within credit markets."

The best part about this line is that it's taken from an article entitled, "Subprime woes spread to stocks and dollar". Think about that one for a minute...

For more background perspective on the subprime and mortgage-backed securities market, see our recent roundup entitled, "Not another subprime post?!".

Popular posts from this blog

The Dot-Com Bubble in 1 Chart: InfoSpace

With all the recent talk of a new bubble in the making, thanks in part to the Yellen Fed's continued easy money stance, I thought it'd be instructive to revisit our previous stock market bubble - in one quick chart.

So here's what a real stock market bubble looks like. 

Here's what a bubble *really* looks like. InfoSpace in 1999-2001. $QQQ$BCORpic.twitter.com/xjsMk433H7
— David Shvartsman (@FinanceTrends) February 24, 2015
For those of you who are a little too young to recall it, this is a chart of InfoSpace at the height of the Nasdaq dot-com bubble in 1999-2001. This fallen angel soared to fantastic heights only to plummet back down to earth as the bubble, and InfoSpace's shady business plan, turned to rubble.

As detailed in our post, "Round trip stocks: Momentum booms and busts", InfoSpace rocketed from under $100 a share to over $1,300 a share in less than six months. 

In a pattern common to many parabolic shooting stars, the stock soon peaked and began a…

New! Finance Trends now at FinanceTrendsLetter.com

Update for our readers: Finance Trends has a new URL! 

Please bookmark our new web address at Financetrendsletter.com

Readers sticking with RSS updates should point your feed readers to our new Finance Trends feedburner.  



Thank you to all of our loyal readers who have been with us since the early days. Exciting stuff to come in the weeks ahead!

As a quick reminder, you can subscribe to our free email list to receive the Finance Trends Newsletter. You'll receive email updates about once every 4-8 weeks (about 2-3 times per quarter). 

Stay up to date with our real-time insights and updates on Twitter.

Moneyball: How the Red Sox Win Championships

Welcome, readers. To get the first look at brand new posts (like the following piece) and to receive our exclusive email list updates, please subscribe to the Finance Trends Newsletter.

The Boston Red Sox won their fourth World Series titleof the 21st century this week.

Having won their first Series in 86 years back in 2004, the last decade-plus has marked a very strong return to form for one of baseball's oldest big league clubs. So how did they do it?

Quick background: in late 2002, team owner and hedge fund manager,John W. Henry(with his partners)bought the Boston Red Sox and its historic Fenway Park for a reported sum of $695 million.

Henry and Co. quickly set out to find their ideal General Manager (GM) to help turn around their newly acquired, ailing ship.

This brings us to one of my favorite scenes from the 2011 film, Moneyball, in which John W. Henry (played by Arliss Howard) attempts to woo Oakland A's GM Billy Beane (Brad Pitt) over to Boston with an excellent job off…