1. Asset Valuations

Asset prices have generally increased since May, and, when adjusted for low interest rates, valuation pressures appear roughly in line with their historical norms

At the time of the May Financial Stability Report, improvements in investor risk sentiment and market functioning had started to boost asset prices. Over the past six months, asset prices in key markets have continued to rise in light of the rebound in economic activity, policy actions to mitigate the financial amplification of the COVID-19 shock, and investor optimism. The U.S. broad-market stock price index has risen substantially from its low point this year and touched record highs in recent months, although volatility remains high and there is considerable uncertainty about the path of earnings. Spreads on corporate bonds and leveraged loans have decreased significantly. After accounting for the low level of interest rates, however, measures of the compensation for risk are roughly in line with their historical norms.

Prices for commercial properties have started to fall, although they remain elevated relative to incomes. Low transaction volumes—especially for distressed properties—make commercial property valuations particularly difficult to judge. Farmland prices remain elevated relative to rents and incomes. Supported by low mortgage rates, housing prices have increased along with strong home sales.

Asset prices remain vulnerable to significant declines, given a high degree of uncertainty around the course of the pandemic and the pace of the recovery

Prompt and forceful policy responses—including fiscal stimulus, lower interest rates, and various asset purchase and emergency lending programs—have supported a stronger-than-expected economic recovery. However, uncertainty remains high, and investor risk sentiment could shift swiftly should the economic recovery prove less promising or progress on containing the virus disappoint. Some segments of the economy, such as energy as well as travel and hospitality, are particularly vulnerable to a prolonged pandemic. Within CRE, retail, office, and lodging properties exhibit the highest vulnerability.

Table 1 shows the size of the asset markets discussed in this section. The largest asset markets are those for residential real estate, corporate public equities, CRE, and Treasury securities.

Table 1. Size of Selected Asset Markets
Item Outstanding
(billions of dollars)
Growth,
2019:Q2-2020:Q2
(percent)
Average annual growth,
1997-2020:Q2
(percent)
Residential real estate 39,290 4.6 5.6
Equities 37,188 4.5 8.0
Commercial real estate 20,444 2.0 7.0
Treasury securities 19,867 25.1 8.8
Investment-grade corporate bonds 6,354 8.7 8.6
Farmland 2,561 1.3 5.3
High-yield and unrated corporate bonds 1,572 20.0 7.6
Leveraged loans* 1,185 -.6 14.3
Price growth (real)
Commercial real estate**   -.9 2.5
Residential real estate***   3.7 2.1

Note: The data extend through 2020:Q2. Growth rates are measured from Q2 of the year immediately preceding the period through Q2 of the final year of the period. Equities, real estate, and farmland are at market value; bonds and loans are at book value.

* The amount outstanding shows institutional leveraged loans and generally excludes loan commitments held by banks. For example, lines of credit are generally excluded from this measure. Average annual growth of leveraged loans is from 2000 to 2020:Q2, as this market was fairly small before then.

** One-year growth of commercial real estate prices is from June 2019 to June 2020, and average annual growth is from 1998:Q4 to 2020:Q2. Both growth rates are calculated from value-weighted nominal prices deflated using the consumer price index.

*** One-year growth of residential real estate is from June 2019 to June 2020, and average annual growth is from 1997:Q4 to 2020:Q2. Nominal prices are deflated using the consumer price index.

Source: For leveraged loans, S&P Global Market Intelligence, Leveraged Commentary & Data; for corporate bonds, Mergent, Inc., Corporate Fixed Income Securities Database; for farmland, Department of Agriculture; for residential real estate price growth, CoreLogic; for commercial real estate price growth, CoStar Group, Inc., CoStar Commercial Repeat Sale Indices; for all other items, Federal Reserve Board, Statistical Release Z.1, "Financial Accounts of the United States."

Treasury yields are near historical lows

Treasury yields across the maturity spectrum have generally changed little since May and are near historical lows (figure 1-1). Model estimates of Treasury term premiums remain at record lows (figure 1-2).3 The low yields of longer-dated Treasury securities and historically low term premiums are consistent with market expectations for interest rates to be low for a long time. In addition, a forward-looking measure of Treasury market volatility derived from options prices dropped to a historical low, in sharp contrast to the turmoil in March (figure 1-3).

1-1. Yields on Nominal Treasury Securities
Figure 1-1. Yields on Nominal Treasury Securities
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: The 2- and 10-year Treasury rates are the constant-maturity yields based on the most actively traded securities.

Source: Federal Reserve Board, Statistical Release H.15, "Selected Interest Rates."

1-2. Term Premium on 10-Year Nominal Treasury Securities
Figure 1-2. Term Premium on 10-Year Nominal Treasury Securities
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: Term premiums are estimated from a three-factor term structure model using Treasury yields and Blue Chip interest rate forecasts.

Source: Department of the Treasury; Wolters Kluwer, Blue Chip Financial Forecasts; Federal Reserve Bank of New York; Federal Reserve Board staff estimates.

1-3. Implied Volatility of 10-Year Swap Rate
Figure 1-3. Implied Volatility of 10-Year Swap Rate
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: Implied volatility on 10-year swap rate, 1 month ahead, derived from swaptions.

Source: Barclays.

Federal Reserve actions, including asset purchases, continue to sustain the functioning of Treasury markets. Measures that capture the market's ability to absorb large orders without significant price disruptions, such as the quantity of outstanding offers to buy and sell Treasury securities, have largely recovered to pre-pandemic levels (figure 1-4).

1-4. Treasury Market Depth
Figure 1-4. Treasury Market Depth
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: Market depth is defined as the average top three bid and ask quote sizes for on-the-run Treasury securities.

Source: Repo interdealer Broker community.

Corporate debt market spreads returned to historical norms, market functioning improved, and issuance resumed

Supported by very low Treasury yields, yields on corporate bonds dropped to historically low levels (figure 1-5). Spreads of yields on corporate bonds over comparable-maturity Treasury yields narrowed considerably and stand at about their historical medians (figure 1-6).4 However, spreads in sectors heavily affected by the pandemic, such as the energy, airline, and leisure industries, remain quite elevated. Reflecting a pickup in risk appetite, the excess bond premium—measured as the gap between corporate bond spreads and expected credit losses—fell below its historical median (figure 1-7).5

1-5. Corporate Bond Yields
Figure 1-5. Corporate Bond Yields
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: The triple-B series reflects the effective yield of the ICE Bank of America Merrill Lynch triple-B U.S. Corporate Index (C0A4), and the high-yield series reflects the effective yield of the ICE BofAML U.S. High Yield Index (H0A0).

Source: ICE Data Indices, LLC, used with permission.

1-6. Corporate Bond Spreads to Similar-Maturity Treasury Securities
Figure 1-6. Corporate Bond Spreads to Similar-Maturity Treasury
Securities
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: The triple-B series reflects the options-adjusted spread of the ICE Bank of America Merrill Lynch triple-B U.S. Corporate Index (C0A4), and the high-yield series reflects the options-adjusted spread of the ICE BofAML U.S. High Yield Index (H0A0).

Source: ICE Data Indices, LLC, used with permission.

1-7. Corporate Bond Premium over Expected Losses
Figure 1-7. Corporate Bond Premium over Expected Losses
Accessible Version | Return to text

Source: Federal Reserve Board staff calculations based on Lehman Brothers Fixed Income Database (Warga); Intercontinental Exchange, Inc., ICE Data Services; Center for Research in Security Prices, CRSP/Compustat Merged Database, Wharton Research Data Services; S&P Global Market Intelligence, Compustat.

The announcement of a range of measures to support market functioning and the flow of credit in late March, particularly the corporate credit facilities, led to significant improvement in corporate bond market functioning and provided a backstop to support borrowing by corporations (see the box "Federal Reserve Actions and Facilities to Support Households, Businesses, and Municipalities during the COVID-19 Crisis"). Bid-ask spreads have tightened.

Corporate bond issuance by both investment- and speculative-grade firms has been very strong, as companies have increased their cash buffers and refinanced their debt at lower interest rates and longer maturities. Despite the decline in spreads and the increase in new issuance, corporate credit quality has deteriorated since May—as evidenced by defaults and firm ratings downgrades—though it has shown some signs of stabilization in recent months.

Spreads on leveraged loans in the secondary market have tightened significantly since the spring and are now close to their post-2008 medians (figure 1-8). Spreads on newly issued leveraged loans have also tightened.

1-8. Secondary Market Spreads of Leveraged Loans
Figure 1-8. Secondary Market Spreads of Leveraged Loans
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: The data show secondary-market discounted spreads to maturity. Spreads are the constant spread used to equate discounted loan cash flows to the current market price.

Source: S&P, Leveraged Commentary & Data.

Equity prices rose sharply, with higher valuations supported, in part, by low interest rates

Valuations in equity markets have risen substantially as equity prices have continued to move up since the previous Financial Stability Report. Prices relative to forecasts of corporate earnings have also risen considerably and are currently near the top of their historical distribution, even though there is significant uncertainty in the earnings outlook among market participants (figure 1-9). However, while the gap between the forward earnings-to-price ratio and the expected real yield on 10-year Treasury securities—a rough measure of the premium that investors require for holding risky corporate equities—has declined since May, it remains above its historical median due to the low level of Treasury yields (figure 1-10). This development suggests that investor risk appetite, though higher since May, is still within historical norms.

1-9. Forward Price-to-Earnings Ratio of S&P 500 Firms
Figure 1-9. Forward Price-to-Earnings Ratio of S&P 500 Firms
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: Aggregate forward price-to-earnings ratio of S&P 500 firms. Based on expected earnings for 12 months ahead.

Source: Federal Reserve Board staff calculations using Refinitiv (formerly Thomson Reuters), Institutional Brokers Estimate System Estimates.

1-10. Spread of Forward Earnings-to-Price Ratio of S&P 500 Firms to 10-Year Real Treasury Yield
Figure 1-10. Spread of Forward Earnings-to-Price Ratio of S&P
500 Firms to 10-Year Real Treasury Yield
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: Aggregate forward earnings-to-price ratio of S&P 500 firms. Based on expected earnings for 12 months ahead. Real Treasury yields are calculated from the 10-year consumer price index inflation forecast and the smoothed nominal yield curve estimated from off-the-run securities.

Source: Federal Reserve Board staff calculations using Refinitiv (formerly Thomson Reuters), Institutional Brokers Estimate System Estimates; Department of the Treasury; Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, Survey of Professional Forecasters.

While equity price volatility has fallen since the late spring, it remains elevated by historical standards. Further, option-implied volatility, a close proxy for expected volatility, did not fall as much as realized volatility (figure 1-11). Elevated volatility and the divergence between expected and realized volatility suggest investors are pricing in concerns about downside risks and considerable uncertainty about future outcomes.

1-11. S&P 500 Return Volatility
Figure 1-11. S&P 500 Return Volatility
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: Realized volatility estimated from 5-minute returns using an exponentially weighted moving average with 75 percent of the weight distributed over the past 20 days.

Source: Bloomberg Finance L.P.

Prices of commercial properties are still elevated relative to incomes

Since the May Financial Stability Report, CRE prices have declined moderately (figure 1-12). However, capitalization rates, which measure annual income relative to prices for recently transacted commercial properties, have remained near historically low levels, suggesting elevated valuation pressures may still exist (figure 1-13).6

1-12. Commercial Real Estate Prices (Real)
Figure 1-12. Commercial Real Estate Prices (Real)
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: Series deflated using the consumer price index and seasonally adjusted by Federal Reserve Board staff. The data begin in 1998 for the equal-weighted curve and 1996 for the value-weighted curve.

Source: CoStar Group, Inc., CoStar Commercial Repeat Sale Indices; Bureau of Labor Statistics, consumer price index, via Haver Analytics.

1-13. Capitalization Rate at Property Purchase
Figure 1-13. Capitalization Rate at Property Purchase
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: Data are a 12-month moving average of weighted capitalization rates in the industrial, retail, office, and multifamily sectors, based on national square footage in 2009.

Source: Real Capital Analytics; Andrew C. Florance, Norm G. Miller, Ruijue Peng, and Jay Spivey (2010), "Slicing, Dicing, and Scoping the Size of the U.S. Commercial Real Estate Market," Journal of Real Estate Portfolio Management, vol. 16 (May– August), pp. 101–18.

Evidence of significant strains are present in other data sources. Vacancy rates have turned higher, and rent growth has either slowed or turned negative. Prices of real estate investment trusts (REITs) that invest in lodging and retail properties remain well below their pre-pandemic levels, although prices of those that invest in industrial properties have somewhat recovered since the spring. Additionally, delinquency rates on CMBS, which normally contain riskier loans, have spiked. Finally, the July Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey on Bank Lending Practices (SLOOS) indicated that a major fraction of banks reported weaker demand for CRE loans and tighter lending standards, on net, in the second quarter of 2020 (figure 1-14).

1-14. Change in Bank Standards for Commercial Real Estate Loans
Figure 1-14. Change in Bank Standards for Commercial Real Estate
Loans
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: Banks' responses are weighted by their commercial real estate loan market shares. The shaded bars with top caps indicate periods of business recession as defined by the National Bureau of Economic Research: March 2001–November 2001, December 2007–June 2009, and February 2020–June 2020. Survey respondents to the Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey on Bank Lending Practices are asked the changes over the quarter.

Source: Federal Reserve Board, Senior Loan Officer Opinion Survey on Bank Lending Practices; Federal Reserve Board staff calculations.

Farmland prices remain high relative to rents

According to data through the second quarter of 2020, farmland prices continued to decline modestly at the national level and at a slightly faster pace in several midwestern states, where prices were more elevated (figure 1-15). Despite the declines, farmland prices remain high relative to rents (figure 1-16).

1-15. Farmland Prices
Figure 1-15. Farmland Prices
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: The data for the United States start in 1997. Midwest index is a weighted average of Corn Belt and Great Plains states that comes from staff calculations. Values are given in real terms. Data are through July 2020.

Source: Department of Agriculture; Federal Reserve Board staff calculations.

1-16. Farmland Price-to-Rent Ratio
Figure 1-16. Farmland Price-to-Rent Ratio
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: The data for the United States start in 1998. Midwest index is the weighted average of Corn Belt and Great Plains states. Data are through July 2020.

Source: Department of Agriculture; Federal Reserve Board staff calculations.

House price growth accelerated over the summer, while the price-to-rent ratio remains slightly above its long-run trend

Since the previous Financial Stability Report, average house price growth has accelerated somewhat (figure 1-17). Nationwide, prices appear to be a little above their long-run average relationship with property rents (figure 1-18). Housing price-to-rent ratios continued to vary significantly across regional markets (figure 1-19).

1-17. Growth of Nominal Prices of Existing Homes
Figure 1-17. Growth of Nominal Prices of Existing Homes
Accessible Version | Return to text

Source: CoreLogic Real Estate Data; Zillow, Inc., Zillow Real Estate Data.

1-18. Housing Price-to-Rent Ratio
Figure 1-18. Housing Price-to-Rent Ratio
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: Log of the price-to-rent ratio. Long-run trend is estimated using data from 1978 to 2001 and includes the effect of carrying costs on the expected price-to-rent ratio. The last value of the trend is normalized to equal 100.

Source: For house prices, CoreLogic; for rent data, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

1-19. Selected Local Housing Price-to-Rent Ratio Indexes
Figure 1-19. Selected Local Housing Price-to-Rent Ratio Indexes
Accessible Version | Return to text

Note: The data are seasonally adjusted. The data for Phoenix start in 2002. Monthly rent values for Phoenix are interpolated from semiannual numbers. Percentiles are based on 19 metropolitan statistical areas.

Source: For house prices, CoreLogic Real Estate Data; for rent data, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The strength in the housing sector reflects robust demand from households and is being supported by the low level of interest rates. However, downside risk remains, given the unusually large number of mortgage loans in forbearance programs and the uncertainty around their ultimate repayment.

 

References

 

 3. Treasury term premiums capture the difference between the yield that investors require for holding longer-term Treasury securities—for which realized returns are more sensitive to risks from future inflation or volatility in interest rates than the realized returns of shorter-term securities—and the expected yield from rolling over shorter-dated ones. Return to text

 4. Spreads between yields on corporate bonds and comparable-maturity Treasury securities reflect the extra compensation investors require to hold debt that is subject to corporate default or liquidity risks. Return to text

 5. For a description of the excess bond premium, see Simon Gilchrist and Egon Zakrajšek (2012), "Credit Spreads and Business Cycle Fluctuations," American Economic Review, vol. 102 (June), pp. 1692–720. Return to text

 6. Capitalization rates reflect the reported incomes used for underwriting loans on new transactions. They therefore represent a selected sample of properties and, as transaction volumes remain depressed, may not reflect the loss of income other data sources are reporting. Return to text

Back to Top
Last Update: November 16, 2020