ReportWire

Tag: Fannie Mae

  • A Trump donor, now a regulator, leads effort to accuse president’s foes of mortgage fraud

    Behind a White House effort to saddle President Trump’s political foes with accusations of mortgage fraud is a 37-year-old home construction executive with a deep partisan past.

    Bill Pulte, a Florida native, rose in Trump’s orbit toward the end of his first term. After courting Trump for years on social media and through generous donations, he now runs the Federal Housing Finance Agency — a perch that has allowed him to target prominent figures who have crossed the president.

    In the last five months, Pulte has referred three claims of mortgage fraud against Trump’s foes to the Justice Department, leveled against Letitia James, the attorney general of New York; Adam Schiff, the Democratic senator from California; and this week, Lisa Cook, a governor on the board of the Federal Reserve.

    Each has denied wrongdoing. Trump announced on Monday night that he was moving to fire Cook.

    It is an unusual role for a director of the FHFA, which regulates Fannie Mae — the nation’s largest company by assets — and Freddie Mac. The two mortgage financing organizations, which support nearly half of the U.S. residential mortgage market, were taken over by the FHFA during the 2008 economic crisis.

    The grandson of one of Michigan’s wealthiest and most prolific homebuilders, Pulte made a name for himself on Twitter in 2019 with public cash giveaways to individuals in need. He dubbed himself the “inventor of Twitter philanthropy,” vowing to give two cars away in exchange for a Trump retweet that year, which he received. He subsequently built a following of over 3 million.

    Records show Pulte donated substantially to Trump, the Republican National Committee and related super PACs leading up to the 2024 election.

    Pulte’s letters to Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi have been tightly and cautiously written. But his social media posts, celebrating the targeted attacks, have not.

    “Trump becomes the first president ever to remove a sitting Federal Reserve governor,” he wrote on X, between retweets of right-wing commentators praising the move. “Mortgage fraud can carry up to 30 years in prison.”

    In another post on X, quoting a CNN headline, Pulte wrote that Trump’s firing of Cook was “escalating his battle against the central bank” — seeming to acknowledge that targeting Cook was motivated by Trump’s ongoing grievances with Fed leadership.

    Cook’s firing is legally dubious, and her attorney, Abbe Lowell, said in a statement that Cook plans on suing the administration while continuing to perform her duties for the Fed. Lowell also represents James in her defense against the Justice Department case.

    While the Supreme Court ruled in May that Trump may fire individuals from independent federal agencies, the justices singled out the Fed as an exception, calling it a “uniquely structured, quasi-private entity.” The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 states that the president may fire a member of its leadership only “for cause.”

    But cause has not been definitively established to fire Cook, with Pulte writing in his letter to Bondi that the Fed governor had only “potentially” committed mortgage fraud, accusing her of falsifying bank documents and property records to acquire more favorable loan terms.

    Pulte has accused Cook of listing two homes — in Ann Arbor, Mich., and in Atlanta — as her primary addresses within two weeks of purchasing them through financing. Cook said she would “take any questions about my financial history seriously” and was “gathering the accurate information to answer any legitimate questions and provide the facts.”

    Pulte’s other accusations, against James and Schiff, have been similarly superficial, publicly accusing individuals of potential criminality before a full, independent investigation can take place.

    And whether those investigations will be impartial is far from clear. Earlier this month, Bondi appointed Ed Martin, a conspiracy theorist who supported the “Stop the Steal” movement after Joe Biden’s election victory over Trump in 2020, as a special prosecutor to investigate the James and Schiff cases.

    Pulte accused James — who successfully accused Trump of financial fraud in a civil suit last year — of falsifying bank statements and property records to secure more favorable loan terms for homes in Virginia and New York. He made similar claims weeks later about Schiff, who maintains residences in California and the suburbs of Washington, D.C.

    Schiff, who led a House impeachment of Trump during the president’s first term and has remained one of his most vocal and forceful political adversaries since joining the Senate, dismissed the president’s claims as a “baseless attempt at political retribution.”

    A spokesperson for Schiff said he has always been transparent about owning two homes, in part to be able to raise his children near him in Washington, and has always followed the law — and advice from House counsel — in arranging his mortgages.

    In making his claims, Trump cited an investigation by the Fannie Mae “Financial Crimes Division” as his source.

    A memorandum reviewed by The Times from Fannie Mae investigators to Pulte does not accuse Schiff of mortgage fraud. It noted that investigators had been asked by the FHFA inspector general’s office for loan files and “any related investigative or quality control documentation” for Schiff’s homes.

    Investigators said they found that Schiff at various points identified both his home in Potomac, Md., and a Burbank unit he also owns as his primary residence. As a result, they concluded that Schiff and his wife, Eve, “engaged in a sustained pattern of possible occupancy misrepresentation” on their home loans between 2009 and 2020.

    The investigators did not say they had concluded that a crime had been committed, nor did they mention the word “fraud” in the memo.

    Michael Wilner

    Source link

  • Trump fires Fed governor Lisa Cook, opening new front in fight for control over central bank

    President Donald Trump said Monday night that he’s firing Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, an unprecedented move that would constitute a sharp escalation in his battle to exert greater control over what has long been considered an institution independent from day-to-day politics.Trump said in a letter posted on his Truth Social platform that he is removing Cook effective immediately because of allegations that she committed mortgage fraud.Cook said Monday night that she would not step down. “President Trump purported to fire me ‘for cause’ when no cause exists under the law, and he has no authority to do so,” she said in an emailed statement. “I will not resign.”Bill Pulte, a Trump appointee to the agency that regulates mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, made the accusations last week. Pulte alleged that Cook had claimed two primary residences — in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and Atlanta — in 2021 to get better mortgage terms. Mortgage rates are often higher on second homes or those purchased to rent.Trump’s move is likely to touch off an extensive legal battle that will probably go to the Supreme Court and could disrupt financial markets. Stock futures declined slightly late Monday, as did the dollar against other major currencies.If Trump succeeds in removing Cook from the board, it could erode the Fed’s political independence, which is considered critical to its ability to fight inflation because it enables it to take unpopular steps like raising interest rates. If bond investors start to lose faith that the Fed will be able to control inflation, they will demand higher rates to own bonds, pushing up borrowing costs for mortgages, car loans and business loans.Cook has retained Abbe Lowell, a prominent Washington attorney. Lowell said Trump’s “reflex to bully is flawed and his demands lack any proper process, basis or legal authority,” adding, “We will take whatever actions are needed to prevent his attempted illegal action.”Cook was appointed to the Fed’s board by then-President Joe Biden in 2022 and is the first Black woman to serve as a governor. She was a Marshall Scholar and received degrees from Oxford University and Spelman College, and she has taught at Michigan State University and Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government.Her nomination was opposed by most Senate Republicans, and she was approved on a 50-50 vote with the tie broken by then-Vice President Kamala Harris.Questions about ‘for cause’ firingThe law allows a president to fire a Fed governor “for cause,” which typically means for some kind of wrongdoing or dereliction of duty. The president cannot fire a governor simply because of differences over interest rate policy.Establishing a for-cause removal typically requires some type of proceeding that would allow Cook to answer the charges and present evidence, legal experts say, which hasn’t happened in this case.”This is a procedurally invalid removal under the statute,” said Lev Menand, a law professor at Columbia law school and author of “The Fed Unbound,” a book about the Fed’s actions during the COVID-19 pandemic.Menand also said for-cause firings are typically related to misconduct while in office, rather than based on private misconduct from before an official’s appointment.”This is not someone convicted of a crime,” Menand said. “This is not someone who is not carrying out their duties.”Fed governors vote on the central bank’s interest rate decisions and on issues of financial regulation. While they are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, they are not like cabinet secretaries, who serve at the pleasure of the president. They serve 14-year terms that are staggered in an effort to insulate the Fed from political influence.No presidential precedentWhile presidents have clashed with Fed chairs before, no president has sought to fire a Fed governor. In recent decades, presidents of both parties have largely respected Fed independence, though Richard Nixon and Lyndon Johnson put heavy pressure on the Fed during their presidencies — mostly behind closed doors. Still, that behind-the-scenes pressure to keep interest rates low, the same goal sought by Trump, has widely been blamed for touching off rampant inflation in the late 1960s and ’70s.President Harry Truman pushed Thomas McCabe to step down from his position as Fed chair in 1951, though that occurred behind the scenes.The Supreme Court signaled in a recent decision that Fed officials have greater legal protections from firing than other independent agencies, but it’s not clear if that extends to this case.Menand noted that the Court’s conservative majority has taken a very expansive view of presidential power, saying, “We’re in uncharted waters in a sense that it’s very difficult to predict that if Lisa Cook goes to court what will happen.”Sarah Binder, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said the president’s use of the “for cause” provision is likely an effort to mask his true intent. “It seems like a fig leaf to get what we wants, which is muscling someone on the board to lower rates,” she said.A fight over interest ratesTrump has said he would only appoint Fed officials who would support lower borrowing costs. He recently named Stephen Miran, a top White House economic adviser, to replace another governor, Adriana Kugler, who stepped down about five months before her term officially ended Aug. 1.Trump appointed two governors in his first term, Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman, so replacing Cook would give Trump appointees a 4-3 majority on the Fed’s board.”The American people must have the full confidence in the honesty of the members entrusted with setting policy and overseeing the Federal Reserve,” Trump wrote in a letter addressed to Cook, a copy of which he posted online. “In light of your deceitful and potentially criminal conduct in a financial matter, they cannot and I do not have such confidence in your integrity.”Trump argued that firing Cook was constitutional. “I have determined that faithfully enacting the law requires your immediate removal from office,” the president wrote.Cook will have to fight the legal battle herself, as the injured party, rather than the Fed.Trump’s announcement drew swift rebuke from advocates and former Fed officials.Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., called Trump’s attempt to fire Cook illegal, “the latest example of a desperate President searching for a scapegoat to cover for his own failure to lower costs for Americans. It’s an authoritarian power grab that blatantly violates the Federal Reserve Act, and must be overturned in court.”Trump has repeatedly attacked the Fed’s chair, Jerome Powell, for not cutting its short-term interest rate, and even threatened to fire him.Forcing Cook off the Fed’s governing board would provide Trump an opportunity to appoint a loyalist. Trump has said he would only appoint officials who would support cutting rates.Powell signaled last week that the Fed may cut rates soon even as inflation risks remain moderate. Meanwhile, Trump will be able to replace Powell in May 2026, when Powell’s term expires. However, 12 members of the Fed’s interest-rate setting committee have a vote on whether to raise or lower interest rates, so even replacing the chair might not guarantee that Fed policy will shift the way Trump wants.__Associated Press writer Fatima Hussein contributed.

    President Donald Trump said Monday night that he’s firing Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, an unprecedented move that would constitute a sharp escalation in his battle to exert greater control over what has long been considered an institution independent from day-to-day politics.

    Trump said in a letter posted on his Truth Social platform that he is removing Cook effective immediately because of allegations that she committed mortgage fraud.

    Cook said Monday night that she would not step down. “President Trump purported to fire me ‘for cause’ when no cause exists under the law, and he has no authority to do so,” she said in an emailed statement. “I will not resign.”

    Bill Pulte, a Trump appointee to the agency that regulates mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, made the accusations last week. Pulte alleged that Cook had claimed two primary residences — in Ann Arbor, Michigan, and Atlanta — in 2021 to get better mortgage terms. Mortgage rates are often higher on second homes or those purchased to rent.

    Trump’s move is likely to touch off an extensive legal battle that will probably go to the Supreme Court and could disrupt financial markets. Stock futures declined slightly late Monday, as did the dollar against other major currencies.

    If Trump succeeds in removing Cook from the board, it could erode the Fed’s political independence, which is considered critical to its ability to fight inflation because it enables it to take unpopular steps like raising interest rates. If bond investors start to lose faith that the Fed will be able to control inflation, they will demand higher rates to own bonds, pushing up borrowing costs for mortgages, car loans and business loans.

    Cook has retained Abbe Lowell, a prominent Washington attorney. Lowell said Trump’s “reflex to bully is flawed and his demands lack any proper process, basis or legal authority,” adding, “We will take whatever actions are needed to prevent his attempted illegal action.”

    Cook was appointed to the Fed’s board by then-President Joe Biden in 2022 and is the first Black woman to serve as a governor. She was a Marshall Scholar and received degrees from Oxford University and Spelman College, and she has taught at Michigan State University and Harvard University’s Kennedy School of Government.

    Her nomination was opposed by most Senate Republicans, and she was approved on a 50-50 vote with the tie broken by then-Vice President Kamala Harris.

    Questions about ‘for cause’ firing

    The law allows a president to fire a Fed governor “for cause,” which typically means for some kind of wrongdoing or dereliction of duty. The president cannot fire a governor simply because of differences over interest rate policy.

    Establishing a for-cause removal typically requires some type of proceeding that would allow Cook to answer the charges and present evidence, legal experts say, which hasn’t happened in this case.

    “This is a procedurally invalid removal under the statute,” said Lev Menand, a law professor at Columbia law school and author of “The Fed Unbound,” a book about the Fed’s actions during the COVID-19 pandemic.

    Menand also said for-cause firings are typically related to misconduct while in office, rather than based on private misconduct from before an official’s appointment.

    “This is not someone convicted of a crime,” Menand said. “This is not someone who is not carrying out their duties.”

    Fed governors vote on the central bank’s interest rate decisions and on issues of financial regulation. While they are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, they are not like cabinet secretaries, who serve at the pleasure of the president. They serve 14-year terms that are staggered in an effort to insulate the Fed from political influence.

    No presidential precedent

    While presidents have clashed with Fed chairs before, no president has sought to fire a Fed governor. In recent decades, presidents of both parties have largely respected Fed independence, though Richard Nixon and Lyndon Johnson put heavy pressure on the Fed during their presidencies — mostly behind closed doors. Still, that behind-the-scenes pressure to keep interest rates low, the same goal sought by Trump, has widely been blamed for touching off rampant inflation in the late 1960s and ’70s.

    President Harry Truman pushed Thomas McCabe to step down from his position as Fed chair in 1951, though that occurred behind the scenes.

    The Supreme Court signaled in a recent decision that Fed officials have greater legal protections from firing than other independent agencies, but it’s not clear if that extends to this case.

    Menand noted that the Court’s conservative majority has taken a very expansive view of presidential power, saying, “We’re in uncharted waters in a sense that it’s very difficult to predict that if Lisa Cook goes to court what will happen.”

    Sarah Binder, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, said the president’s use of the “for cause” provision is likely an effort to mask his true intent. “It seems like a fig leaf to get what we wants, which is muscling someone on the board to lower rates,” she said.

    A fight over interest rates

    Trump has said he would only appoint Fed officials who would support lower borrowing costs. He recently named Stephen Miran, a top White House economic adviser, to replace another governor, Adriana Kugler, who stepped down about five months before her term officially ended Aug. 1.

    Trump appointed two governors in his first term, Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman, so replacing Cook would give Trump appointees a 4-3 majority on the Fed’s board.

    “The American people must have the full confidence in the honesty of the members entrusted with setting policy and overseeing the Federal Reserve,” Trump wrote in a letter addressed to Cook, a copy of which he posted online. “In light of your deceitful and potentially criminal conduct in a financial matter, they cannot and I do not have such confidence in your integrity.”

    Trump argued that firing Cook was constitutional. “I have determined that faithfully enacting the law requires your immediate removal from office,” the president wrote.

    Cook will have to fight the legal battle herself, as the injured party, rather than the Fed.

    Trump’s announcement drew swift rebuke from advocates and former Fed officials.

    Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., called Trump’s attempt to fire Cook illegal, “the latest example of a desperate President searching for a scapegoat to cover for his own failure to lower costs for Americans. It’s an authoritarian power grab that blatantly violates the Federal Reserve Act, and must be overturned in court.”

    Trump has repeatedly attacked the Fed’s chair, Jerome Powell, for not cutting its short-term interest rate, and even threatened to fire him.

    Forcing Cook off the Fed’s governing board would provide Trump an opportunity to appoint a loyalist. Trump has said he would only appoint officials who would support cutting rates.

    Powell signaled last week that the Fed may cut rates soon even as inflation risks remain moderate. Meanwhile, Trump will be able to replace Powell in May 2026, when Powell’s term expires. However, 12 members of the Fed’s interest-rate setting committee have a vote on whether to raise or lower interest rates, so even replacing the chair might not guarantee that Fed policy will shift the way Trump wants.

    __

    Associated Press writer Fatima Hussein contributed.

    Source link

  • One of America’s top banks has shed nearly 40 million square feet of office space over 15 years. BofA CEO unpacks commercial real estate’s ‘slow burn of change’

    One of America’s top banks has shed nearly 40 million square feet of office space over 15 years. BofA CEO unpacks commercial real estate’s ‘slow burn of change’

    It’s no secret that the pandemic instigated much of the great downsizing of commercial real estate, but one financial services giant has been offloading leases for years before COVID-19 was even on our radar.

    Bank of America was one of the first major corporations to start majorly shedding its office space even before the frenzy of remote and hybrid work. It has let go of nearly 40 million square feet in the past 15 years, CEO Brian Moynihan said in a CNBC interview on Tuesday. Today, the bank still holds about 60 million square feet of commercial space, he said, which works for its hybrid work structure. 

    If employees come into the office just three or four days per week instead of the traditional five, that’s either 20% or 25% savings in real-estate costs, he argues, in light of an office management method called “hotelling” in which workers schedule to use their work spaces like desks, cubicles, or offices. It’s unclear if Moynihan’s move to start shedding office space was related to a hybrid work structure, years before the pandemic ushered it in, but the vast majority of major banks had five days in-office at that point. 

    The reason probably lies with another major event that occurred 15 years ago: the collapse of legendary investment bank Merrill Lynch amid the crash that followed the implosion of Lehman Brothers, when the banking industry was dramatically reshaped. Bank of America acquired Merrill Lynch and set about integrating the two very different banks’ footprints. Meanwhile, in a similar deal, JPMorgan acquired Bear Stearns, a painful integration that CEO Jamie Dimon later said he regretted.

    Moynihan’s recent comments come amid a flurry of moves out of commercial real estate in the financial services sector. Just this month, other major organizations including Fannie Mae and Wells Fargo announced major downsizing to their corporate spaces, and it’s expected that many more will follow suit. But this massive shedding of commercial space won’t happen overnight, Moynihan said. 

    “The revaluation is going through as we speak. You’re seeing that come through provisioning and reserves and charge-offs, but it’s relatively modest,” he said. “It takes a long time because this is a slow burn of change.” That’s because commercial leases typically last for much longer than residential leases. On average, they last three to five years, but some can last 10-plus. 

    Other companies letting go of commercial space

    The commercial real estate industry is so dire that even Fannie Mae, the national mortgage giant, has put its 713,500-square-foot space in Washington, D.C. on the market more than a decade before its lease was set to expire in June 2029, according to CoStar data. 

    The $770 million agreement was signed in 2015. Fannie Mae is the largest publicly traded company in the nation’s capital—and the breaking of the lease is just the latest in a string of organizations downsizing due to hybrid and remote work culture.

    “Like many other companies, we are continuing to embrace our flexible work environment by exploring office space options that support our workforce while being fiscally responsible,” a Fannie Mae spokesperson said in a statement to Washington Business Journal.

    Wells Fargo announced late last week that it would vacate its 29-story, 550,538-square-foot namesake tower in Raleigh, North Carolina. Employees who work there will be moved to other locations without losing their jobs.

    “As part of our multiyear effort to build a stronger, more efficient Wells Fargo, we continually assess our real estate portfolio to ensure we are best meeting the needs of employees and customers, responding to consumer and economic trends, and managing our costs responsibly,” a Wells Fargo spokesperson told Fortune in a statement. “We are committed to our Raleigh-based employees and will continue to have a major presence here, but we have more real estate than we need to support these employees.”

    This move isn’t surprising “because we’re seeing a lot of consolidation in commercial real estate in general,” Duke University economics professor Connel Fullenkamp told Raleigh news station WRAL. He said companies like Wells Fargo are reevaluating their use of real estate, with cost-cutting as a top factor.

    “I think we’re going to see moves like that out of companies, frankly, because they’re just finding themselves with too much space because of the overbuilding that’s been taking place, plus remote work,” Fullenkamp said. 

    Indeed, there may be as much as 1 billion square feet of unused U.S. office space by the end of the decade, according to a report by real estate firm Cushman & Wakefield. Moody’s Analytics has also called the office vacancy rate of 19.2% in 2023 “perilously close” to the 19.3% record-high vacancy rate in 1986 and 1991.

    “The overall outlook for commercial real estate in 2024 is muted,” Ermengarde Jabir, senior economist with Moody’s Analytics, previously told Fortune. “Office will continue to face the most strain in 2024.”

    Subscribe to the CFO Daily newsletter to keep up with the trends, issues, and executives shaping corporate finance. Sign up for free.

    Sydney Lake

    Source link

  • Homes are expensive right now, but these mortgage bonds look cheap

    Homes are expensive right now, but these mortgage bonds look cheap

    U.S. homes may be wildly unaffordable for first-time buyers, but mortgage bonds backed by those same properties could be dirt cheap.

    Shocks from the Federal Reserve’s dramatic rate increases have walloped the $8.9 trillion agency mortgage-bond market, the main artery of U.S. housing finance for almost the past two decades.

    Spreads, or compensation for investors, have hit historically wide levels, even through the sector is underpinned by home loans that adhere to the stricter government standards set in the wake of the subprime-mortgage crisis.

    Bond prices also have tumbled, sinking from a peak above 106 cents on the dollar to below 98, despite guarantees that mean investors will be fully repaid at 100 cents on the dollar.

    From $106 to $98 cents, agency mortgage-bond prices are falling.


    Bloomberg, Goldman Sachs Global Investment Research

    “It’s really, really struggled,” Nick Childs, portfolio manager at Janus Henderson Investors, said of the agency mortgage-bond market during a Thursday talk on the firm’s fixed-income outlook.

    Yet Childs and other investors also see big opportunities brewing. While mortgage bonds have gotten cheaper with the sector’s two anchor investors on the sidelines, the stalled housing market should breed scarcity in the bonds, which could help lift the sector out of a roughly two-year slump.

    Prices have tumbled since rate shocks hit, but also since the Fed continued winding down its large footprint in the sector by letting bonds it accumulated to help shore up the economy roll off its balance sheet.

    Banks awash in underwater securities have pulled back too. The repricing of similar bonds helped hasten the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank in March.

    “Banks have been not only absent, but selling,” said Childs, who helps oversee the Janus Henderson Mortgage-Backed Securities exchange-traded fund
    JMBS,
    an actively managed $2 billion fund focused on highly rated securities with minimal credit risk.

    “But we’re moving into an environment where supply continues to dwindle,” he said, given anemic refinancing activity and the dearth of new home loans being originated since 30-year fixed mortgage rates topped 7%.

    The bulk of all U.S. mortgage bonds created in the past two decades have come from housing giants Freddie Mac
    FMCC,
    +0.66%
    ,
    Fannie Mae
    FNMA,
    +1.09%

    and Ginnie Mae, with government guarantees, making the sector akin to the $25 trillion Treasury market. But unlike investors in Treasurys, investors in mortgage bonds also earn a spread, or extra compensation above the risk-free rate, to help offset its biggest risk: early repayments.

    While homeowners typically take out 30-year loans, most also refinanced during the pandemic rush to lock in ultralow rates, instead of continuing to make three decades of payments on more expensive mortgages. If someone refinances, sells or defaults on a home, it leads to repayment uncertainty for bond investors.

    “To put this another way, the biggest risk to mortgages is now off the table, yet spreads are at or near historic wides,” said Sam Dunlap, chief investment officer, Angel Oak Capital Advisors, in a new client note.

    That spread is now far above the long-term average, topping levels offered by relatively low-risk investment-grade corporate bonds.

    Agency mortgage bonds are offering far more spread that investment-grade corporate bonds. But these mortgage bonds will fully repay if borrowers default.


    Janus Henderson Investors

    Agency mortgage bonds typically are included in low-risk bond funds and can be found in exchange-traded funds. While they have been hard hit by the sharp selloff in long-dated Treasury bonds
    BX:TMUBMUSD10Y

    BX:TMUBMUSD30Y,
    there has also been hope that the worst of the storm could be nearly over.

    Goldman Sachs credit analysts recently said they favored the sector but warned in a weekly client note that it still faces “high rate volatility and a dearth of institutional demand.”

    As evidence of the U.S. bond selloff, the popular iShares 20+ Year Treasury Bond ETF
    TLT
    recently sank to its lowest level in more than a decade. It also was on pace for a negative 10% total return on the year so far, according to FactSet. Janus Henderson’s JMBS ETF was on pace for a negative 2.7% total return on the year through Friday.

    “Frankly, why they fit portfolios so well is that because the government backs agency mortgages, there is no credit risk,” Childs said. “So if a borrower defaults, you get par back on that. It just comes through as a typical payment.”

    Source link