Tag Archives: volume
Stock Loans FAQs, Asset Based Loan, Securities Loan (Page 1 of 3)
F.A.Q. Stock Loans and Asset Based Loans
What is a Stock Loan?
Non-Recourse Stock Loans by definition is a loan against the value of a stock or portfolio of stocks whereby the shareholder (OWNER) can borrow up to 80% of the stock value (in some cases higher) of the portfolios market value “without selling the shares”. Like a home equity loan for stocks but much better. You borrow against the appraised value of the portfolio and pay a below prime interest rate for the term of the loan. And then at term end you either pay off the loan and receive your stock back with any stock appreciation, refinance the loan, or if the stock price has fallen below the LTV amount, forfeit the shares without paying back the loan (non-recourse) with no liability or effect on your credit rating.
What stocks are eligible for a Stock Loan?
Any publicly traded security are eligible. Stocks, bonds, mutual funds, ETF’s (exchange-traded fund), ADR’s (American Depositary Receipt), Penny Stocks (stocks on the pink sheets or bulletin board stock), Foreign Stocks and Bonds are ALL eligible. Typically, we look for a minimum $50,000 daily trading volume for each publicly traded stock.
Am I personally liable for this loan?” or “Can the company come after me on this loan if I do not make payments?
NO, this is a “non-recourse” loan; the lender cannot come after you personally. There is NO personal liability associated with the stock loan. The only security for the loan is the stock and the only recourse the lender has is against the stock. You have NO personal liability exposure.
Is the loan reported to the credit bureaus or reporting services?
NO, the Securities loan is not reported to the credit bureaus and there is NO public record of this loan. Even if you elect to walk away from the loan and default because, for example, you have more money then the stock is worth, it is NOT reported.
Are non-U.S. securities allowed to be used as collateral in stock loan transactions?
Yes. Some non-U.S. securities are allowed to be put up as collateral. Some of the other countries include Canada, UK, European countries, Japan, Israel, Australia, India, and Korea, to name just a few.
What are the Loan to Value (LTV) percentages for the loans?
The LTVÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s vary depending on the quality of the securities being collateralized. With high quality large cap stocks you can expect LTVs up to 80% (sometimes higher) while with small cap or pink sheet (penny stocks) securities the LTVÃÆââââ¬Å¡Ã¬Ã¢ââ¬Å¾Ã¢s will be more conservative and lower. This means it can be as high as 80% LTV but can be Lower. It depends upon the quality and type of security owned. Each loan is evaluated on a case-by-case basis. The highest LTVs are offered to high quality securities such as Blue Chip stocks.
How are the stocks evaluated?
Stability, trading volume and share price are factors in determining the interest rate, term and Loan to Value. Good stocks, like good investments, always get the best terms. Typically, we look for a minimum $50,000 daily trading volume for each publicly traded stock. The most attractive interest rates and terms and conditions are available to those stocks with good strong and steady volume and price, and low volatility. Prices over $5/share typically get best prices as long as volatility is low and volume is strong and steady. Strong and steady volume is highly prized as it allows some predictability. The leading indicators when determining the eligibility of a stock as collateral are going to be exchange, volatility, share price, liquidity, trends, filings, short term trading volume and long term trading volume.
Are Banks funding Apartment Loans, ReFinancing and Commercial MultiFamily Construction Projects?
A common question being asked in todays financial climate, “Are apartment financing, MultiFamily property refinancing or apartment construction loans still available?” The answer to this question is a resounding YES. I continue see loans funded for apartment purchases, apartment refinances and construction lending. This is awfully good news in a time of a protracted credit crunch; a credit squeeze which has now gone global in its scope.
A source close to my company, one with ties to the top counsels of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, recently confided that Fannie and Freddie have been making money ONLY in the Apartment and Mobile Home Lending sectors. The upshot is this: These two venerable institutions of probity are determined to increase liquidity and strengthen apartment lending programs. The Fed needs to hang its hat on something, so why not strengthen an already existing stable lending platform to promote future growth in an industry already doing well: Apartments.
This protracted credit squeeze began as a virus. This virus started with the housing industry and contaminated the commercial real estate market along with just about every stock, financial instrument, business man, woman or line of credit in the country. Apartments have been the least impacted the credit crunch, but sales volume has still registered sizeable decline.
What a mess it has become. The chill in the credit markets began in October 2006. By October of 2007, this chill had become a deep freeze.
To understand the steep decline in the commercial real estate industry, one need only look at the numbers: Total commercial sales volume for October 2008 was barely one-quarter of its October 2007 level and just over 20% of the levels it achieved in 2006. Now that is a drop!
The aggregate deal volume and sales volumes for commercial real estate as a whole is down 75%, October 2007 to 2008.
For apartments, the fall off in deal volume has been sharp and steady: The number of properties trading hands has fallen 60% from October 2006 to October 2007 and has fallen another 75% this past 12 months.
There are several explanations for this but perhaps the number one reason is price risk, as measured between the spread of cap rates and the 10-Year Treasuries. In the apartment sector, this spread has more than tripled, (not Good) to a spread of 263 bps from their narrowest point in July of 2006, when it was 81 bps.
Between 2000 and 2004, the total renter households declined by 1.9 million as home ownership increase from 66.9 percent to 69 percent.
In 2005 this house-hold, rental-living trend began to reverse itself. Since the beginning of 2007,the home ownership rate has fallen by 110 basis points, resulting in 1.5 million additional renter households. This reversal is most pronounced in the younger age segment but it cuts across all age lines. The trend is up for rental-living-units.
In the end, Apartments are holding up well. Financing IS available and more people than ever are in need of rental housing.