FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4820220> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4820220 abstract "Exposure to commercial real estate (CRE) loans at regional and small banks and thrifts has soared over the last two decades. As banks’ balance sheets become more concentrated in these types of loans, banks have become more sensitive to swings in CRE fundamentals. The concentration in CRE loans peaked in 2007, just as commercial real estate prices started a historic free fall, declining more than 30 percent in just two years. Over this same time CRE concentration has been a significant factor in recent bank failures. Default and loss models of CRE mortgages have previously been estimated using loan data from large, income-generating properties financed by insurance companies and the commercial real estate mortgage (CMBS) market. Early research used data from insurance companies (Synderman (1991), Esaki et al (1999), Vandell et al (1993), Ciochetti et al (2003), while more recently researchers have used data from the CMBS market (Ambrose and Sanders (2003), Archer et al (2002), Deng et al (2004), Seslen and Wheaton (2010), An et al (2009). Black et al (2010) found that loans in CMBS pools that had been originated by portfolio lenders, such as insurance companies or commercial banks, were of a higher quality and outperformed loans originated by conduit lenders or investment banks. The CMBS and insurance company loans used in these studies differ in structure and underlying collateral from the loans backed by bank CRE loans. Roughly a third of bank CRE loans are backed by owner-occupied CRE and another 20 to 30 percent by land and construction loans. The owner-occupied properties, which lack an external and explicit rental stream, are usually not candidates for securitisation. The loans in bank portfolios backed by land acquisition, development, and construction (ADC) projects are even less similar to those in CMBS and in insurance company portfolios. Land and construction loans are short term and the collateral is the raw land or the partially completed construction project. Finally, the loans on banks’ books backed by existing income-generating commercial properties are likely to be different from those found in CMBS pools or in insurance company portfolios.Regional and small banks also make much smaller loans than those usually seen in CMBS pools or in insurance company portfolios. Clearly, each of these types of loans has performed differently during this recent financial crisis, yet we are still dependent on default and loss models estimated using data from only one type of loan.Ours is the first paper to estimate CRE default and loss models using a loan-level dataset drawn from bank portfolios. We develop a unique dataset consisting of loan-level information on CRE portfolios for a sample of banks entering FDIC receivership over the past several years. We use this dataset to estimate a series of default and loss models. We estimate these models on the loans backed by existing CRE properties and compare the results with those from other papers that estimate CRE default using data from the CMBS and insurance companies. We then extend our analysis to the performance of land and construction loans, providing the first loan-level analysis of the performance of such loans.Full publication: Property markets and financial stability" @default.
• W4820220 created "2016-06-24" @default.
• W4820220 creator A5058194767 @default.
• W4820220 creator A5067979033 @default.
• W4820220 date "2011-01-01" @default.
• W4820220 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W4820220 title "Commercial Real Estate Loan Performance at Failed U.S. Banks" @default.
• W4820220 cites W1508723482 @default.
• W4820220 cites W1549358943 @default.
• W4820220 cites W1550734267 @default.
• W4820220 cites W1579960085 @default.
• W4820220 cites W1975047433 @default.
• W4820220 cites W2086618172 @default.
• W4820220 cites W2127366265 @default.
• W4820220 cites W2134062971 @default.
• W4820220 cites W2144827081 @default.
• W4820220 cites W3125271369 @default.
• W4820220 cites W3125490343 @default.
• W4820220 cites W3125778203 @default.
• W4820220 doi "https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1927423" @default.
• W4820220 hasPublicationYear "2011" @default.
• W4820220 type Work @default.
• W4820220 sameAs 4820220 @default.
• W4820220 citedByCount "2" @default.
• W4820220 countsByYear W48202202014 @default.
• W4820220 countsByYear W48202202015 @default.
• W4820220 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4820220 hasAuthorship W4820220A5058194767 @default.
• W4820220 hasAuthorship W4820220A5067979033 @default.
• W4820220 hasConcept C10138342 @default.
• W4820220 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W4820220 hasConcept C158725981 @default.
• W4820220 hasConcept C2777764128 @default.
• W4820220 hasConcept C71387314 @default.
• W4820220 hasConcept C73283319 @default.
• W4820220 hasConcept C82279013 @default.
• W4820220 hasConceptScore W4820220C10138342 @default.
• W4820220 hasConceptScore W4820220C144133560 @default.
• W4820220 hasConceptScore W4820220C158725981 @default.
• W4820220 hasConceptScore W4820220C2777764128 @default.
• W4820220 hasConceptScore W4820220C71387314 @default.
• W4820220 hasConceptScore W4820220C73283319 @default.
• W4820220 hasConceptScore W4820220C82279013 @default.
• W4820220 hasLocation W48202201 @default.
• W4820220 hasOpenAccess W4820220 @default.
• W4820220 hasPrimaryLocation W48202201 @default.
• W4820220 hasRelatedWork W1659217345 @default.
• W4820220 hasRelatedWork W2349092850 @default.
• W4820220 hasRelatedWork W2370293998 @default.
• W4820220 hasRelatedWork W2394235789 @default.
• W4820220 hasRelatedWork W2607446980 @default.
• W4820220 hasRelatedWork W2946596850 @default.
• W4820220 hasRelatedWork W336894197 @default.
• W4820220 hasRelatedWork W44773475 @default.
• W4820220 hasRelatedWork W2179084778 @default.
• W4820220 hasRelatedWork W2941860658 @default.
• W4820220 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4820220 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4820220 magId "4820220" @default.
• W4820220 workType "article" @default.