|
I came to this conclusion after a detailed analysis of Ambac's portfolio (at
least what Ambac has made public, which was sufficient) covering exposure in
the Structured Finance, Sub-prime RMBS and the Consumer Finance business. Ambac's
management was forthcoming enough to publish a portion of their insured portfolio
which allowed me to review each structure.
I am short Ambac and MBIA (for whom I have also released
research), so be aware of my position as I present this opinion. I profit
not necessarily from whether ABK can continue as an ongoing concern (which
is in doubt and wouldn't hurt my shorts to say the least), nor from an infusion
of capital (whether it be debt or equity, either of which would be a poor
investment from my perspective) but from the significant decline in value
of the existing shares in which I have taken a bearish position. To determine
my short position, I calculated relative nominal book valuations, actual
economic book valuations and produced standard financial forecasts. Of interest
is the loss tail analysis wherein I have estimated the present value of the
future losses.
As it stands now, ABK's equity value will be totally wiped out with a 175
basis point move in their insured's underlying - which seems like a very, very
likely possibility. My Ambac analysis is much more granular than that of MBIA's
(see A
Super Scary Halloween Tale of 104 Basis Points Pt I & II, by Reggie Middleton )
where I discussed the predicament of the ratings agencies, the monolines, and
in particular, MBIA.
The referenced predicament is exacerbated by the fact that some, such as Ambac,
are truly insolvent, thus a mere waiving of the "Magic Ratings Wand" will not
pay the claims when they come due. More to the point, the monolines have grown
too big for their capital base, specifically their equity base. They are insuring
much more than they can handle in the case of an outlier event. I don't consider
the burst real estate bubble and the consequent mortgage debacle much of an
outlier, for anyone could have seen it coming if they simply opened their eyes.
Now, if a big monoline fails or is even downgraded, a large part of the credit
market goes with it. This level of catastrophe may be too much for the powers
that be. This portends a bailout of some sort or fashion, or maybe the players
will just be forced to take their market medicine. Only the future will tell.
Six Degrees of Separation: Guess who Ambac insures!
Bank of America issued a report on the monoline insurers on July 30th, 2007
that states that ABK's RMBS exposure to troubled companies is limited to only
4 cos. with vintages primarily in the early years excluding two relatively
well performing underwritings. Despite this, they failed to include in this
caveat the consumer finance insureds:
- Countrywide, which probably has one of the worst performing portfolios
in the industry;
- GMAC, who has also suffered significant losses that GM has been forced
to cover, hence hampering a clean sale of the company;
- Indymac, another company that is saddled with mortgage related losses that
is on the insured's list (Indymac and Countrywide have had their shares more
than halved in the last few months. I was short these companies. CFC may
go bankrupt);
- Lehman brothers has some losses to contend with as well, but I don't know
to what extent since I don't follow it - I do know that they are the 2nd
largest MBS house on the street, next to Bear Stearns;
- Greenpoint Mortgage Funding is defunct, wound down due to losses;
- Then we also have Citimortgage (SIV king whose own mortgage portfolio is
a mess);
- Accredited Mortgage Loan (bankrupt or close to it);
- Wachovia (just reported a billion plus writedown on mortgage assets);
- Countrywide Revolving Equity Trust/Alt-A trust (need I say more about undocumented
2nd lien loans from
this lender);
- Option One Mortgage Trust (nearly defunct due to mortgage losse);
- BofA, mulit-billion dollar mortgage asset writedown;
- and Newcastle - who I believe is either out of business or close to it.
I stopped following it some time ago.
These are the companies and exposure that I am familiar with, at first glance
in the consumer finance portion of Ambac's portfolio, without any research.
Just imagine if I took a real hard look at the insureds.
Now, using some common damn sense, would you think that the company that is
insuring these guys' mortgage and finance products with 90x leverage may be
having some problems that they may not be coming forward with. I have over
100 pages of proprietary analysis and calculations costing me weeks of analyst
hours, that tell me Ambac may be out of business soon - but I really didn't
need to do all of that math and research if I just glanced at the bullet list
above. I used the loss statistics from the BofA report as a baseline for the
losses in my models on Ambac. I know they are too conservative (and to be fair
to BofA, they were contrived before this mess got worse), but that should only
lend credibility to my findings. Click here to download
ambac loss tail.pdf.
The ACTUAL quality of the ABK's insureds is truly suspect in my opinion and
the underwriting quality of their insureds needs to be investigated further.
Unfortunately, I have very limited resources. I literally told my team that "this
is worth digging in and spending time on, for there are many who are now trying
to go long on this stock due to its price and nominal book valuation. If they
are wrong, it can be a very profitable opportunity". Well, that's what we did.
By investigating the losses on similar books written by the originators for
the vintage in question, one can guess the performance of the books underwritten
by AMBAC. The policy terms must be examined to see where the breakpoints are
for losses, of course. Exposure to Countrywide alone is a cause for suspicion,
IMO. As stated earlier, the default estimates in the B of A analysis are assuredly
too conservative, but are used for the sake of prudence over alarmism (with
some mandatory tweaks to edge them towards reality). Why do I say they are
conservative??? Take a look at the REO rates and land value forecasts in my
blog, and then look at the target prices for the insurers in question on the
first page of B of A's analysis, right before you query the prices of these
stocks today. For those that don't have access to the report, I will reveal
just this one tiny part:
Bank of America Top Picks (June 2007)
Ticker |
Rating |
Price |
Target |
Price as of
11/29/07 |
Profit on the
BofA Call |
% Profit |
SCA |
B |
$23.60 |
$37.00 |
$6.69 |
($16.91) |
(71.65%) |
MBI |
B |
$60.33 |
$85.00 |
$30.04 |
($30.29) |
(50.21%) |
Least Favorites
NONE
You really can't get rich listening to these guys. Hopefully, you can see
where the use of their default data is a conservative approach (even a bit
rosy), albeit tweaked ever so slightly for the sake of reality. As you may
have ascertained, I do not put a lot of faith in sell side research. I have
even less faith in the big three rating agencies research (although Fitch is
trying to be taken seriously). Thus, even if they deem ABK and MBIA not in
need of more capital, that is near meaningless in my book. These are the same
companies that rated the insured portfolios AAA a year or two ago that are
now taking up to 20%+ losses.
We also have to contend with the moral hazard/bailout issue. If you read my earlier
missive on MBIA, I detailed the rating agencies' dilemma.
The calculations in this analysis are only estimated losses in 4 insured categories
(of many, they are enough to generate significant losses). I am expecting higher
losses in Public Finance as well due to the loss of property tax revenues (lower
tax base) and income tax revenues led by housing value declines and loss of
corporate revenue and jobs, respectively. Many municipalities created huge
budgets during bubble times (like everyone else) and failed to prepare for
the bubble to burst. Now unfunded services run rampant. The shortfall will
have to be covered somewhere, and default on debt service is not out of the
question.
In the base case scenario created, we expect the company to report losses
to the tune of $8 billion+ in its Structured Finance, Subprime RMBS and the
Consumer Finance portfolio. This loss will wipe out the company's remaining
equity and it will need to raise an additional $2 billion in order to function
as an ongoing concern. Moreover, we think the company will need to reinsure
a higher percentage of its portfolio in order to transfer risk and free up
capital.
"The Truth! The Truth! You can't handle the Truth!"
I calculate that Ambac will need to raise an additional $2 billion in order
to continue as a going concern. In order to maintain AAA status they will need
$5.4 to $7 billion, according to how I perceived the comments of its CEO in
the last conference call (they say they are an average of $1.4 billion above
what is needed to maintain a AAA status from the three main rating agencies
- without my little economic reality marking here). In the base case scenario
below, Ambac will need to bolster its reserves by $6.8 billion. A fellow blogger
that I follow, Mike Shedlock, commented that Citibank has recently sold approximately
5% of itself to a foreign investor to raise $7.5 billion dollars. Citibank
is much more diversified, with a much larger capital base, than Ambac. Let's
be realistic here - no let's not - Let's be highly optimistic with pretty rose
colored glasses, and say that ABK can fetch a significant premium to Citibank's
valuation. ABK's current market valuation is $2.26 billion. Where in the world
will they get this kind of capital from and who will be the risk cowboy to
give it to them??? These guys are in a real solvency dilemma, and it is a shame
that the ratings agencies and the sell side guys have yet to admit it. I guess
it takes entrepreneurial investors and bloggers such as me to ferret out the
truth, and the truth is hard to find in detail. You remember what Jack Nicholson
said in "A Few Good Men"? "The Truth! The Truth! You can't handle the
Truth!" I had two analysts and I work on MBIA and ABK for weeks, when
I should have been able to just buy a report... Yet, everyone expept Ackman
from Pershing Square was unrealistically optimistic. There are some big losses
ahead of us folks. If the real estate bust was the impetus for the current
debacle, we have a long trip ahead of us because the real
estate bust has just started!
My full analysis is bulky, but well documented, and will be posted as a .pdf
if I get enough requests. Most should be satisfied with this lengthy summary.
Here we have done a loss tail analysis of the forecasted losses of the Structured
Finance, Direct RMBS and Consumer Finance portfolio, expecting the losses of
the vintage year 2005 to be paid over the next 5 years in 2006-2010. We have
calcluated the loss ratio of the company which is deteriorating from 2007 onwards
(denoted by Paid losses/Written premium ratio).
Base Case
Analysis |
Calendar year
payout |
| Year |
Gross
written
premium |
Expense
ratio |
Total
Expected
losses |
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
2011 |
2012 |
| 2003 |
1,144 |
172 |
972 |
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2004 |
1,048 |
157 |
891 |
|
61 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2005 |
1,096 |
164 |
932 |
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2006 |
997 |
150 |
847 |
|
|
|
504 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2007 |
1,006 |
151 |
855 |
|
|
|
|
1,260 |
|
|
|
|
|
| 2008 |
766 |
115 |
651 |
|
|
|
|
|
1,928 |
|
|
|
|
| 2009 |
690 |
103 |
586 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,880 |
|
|
|
| 2010 |
635 |
95 |
539 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,741 |
|
|
| 2011 |
597 |
89 |
507 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,437 |
|
| 2012 |
561 |
84 |
477 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
671 |
| |
Calendar year paid
losses |
22 |
61 |
200 |
504 |
1,260 |
1,928 |
1,880 |
1,741 |
1,437 |
671 |
| |
Cumulative losses |
22 |
83 |
283 |
787 |
2,047 |
3,975 |
5,855 |
7,596 |
9,033 |
9,704 |
| |
Report year written
premium |
1,144 |
1,048 |
1,096 |
997 |
1,006 |
766 |
690 |
635 |
597 |
561 |
| |
Paid Losses/Writtem
Premium ratio |
2% |
6% |
18% |
51% |
125% |
252% |
273% |
274% |
241% |
120% |
| |
Outstanding loss
reserves |
950 |
1,780 |
2,512 |
2,856 |
2,451 |
1,174 |
(120) |
(1,321) |
(2,251) |
(2,446) |
Alternatively, we have calculated the provisioning for losses that Ambac will
need to make every year on the basis of the anticipated losses that the company
will have to pay in coming years. In doing so we have assumed that the 85%
of the premium written from 2007 onwards (excluding 15% as underwrting expesnse)
will be transferred to the loss expense reserve every year. The loss reserve
uptill 2007 is taken from comapny's balance sheet. The losses have been calculated
on the basis of various default probabilities assummed in Strucutred Finance,
Direct Subprime RMBS and Consumer Finance portfolios. We have assumed a duration
of 5 years to spread the losses on various vintages over the coming years.
We anticipate the company will have to create a provisoin of $ 6.8 billion
under the base case scenario.
Base Case
Analysis |
Calendar year
payout |
| Year |
Gross
written
premium |
Loss
and
loss
expense
reserve |
2003 |
2004 |
2005 |
2006 |
2007 |
2008 |
2009 |
2010 |
2011 |
2012 |
| 2003 |
1,144 |
189 |
22 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
| 2004 |
1,048 |
254 |
- |
61 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
| 2005 |
1,096 |
304 |
- |
- |
200 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
| 2006 |
997 |
220 |
- |
- |
- |
504 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
| 2007 |
1,006 |
279 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
1,260 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
| 2008 |
766 |
930 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
1,928 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
| 2009 |
690 |
1,517 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
1,880 |
- |
- |
- |
| 2010 |
635 |
2,056 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
1,741 |
- |
- |
| 2011 |
597 |
2,563 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
1,437 |
- |
| 2012 |
561 |
3,040 |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
- |
671 |
| |
Calendar year paid
losses |
22 |
61 |
200 |
504 |
1,260 |
1,928 |
1,880 |
1,741 |
1,437 |
671 |
| |
Cumulative losses |
22 |
83 |
283 |
787 |
2,047 |
3,975 |
5,855 |
7,596 |
9,033 |
9,704 |
| |
Provision for
losses |
|
4 |
(150) |
(588) |
(1,202) |
(1,276) |
(1,294) |
(1,202) |
(930) |
(195) |
| |
| |
Total |
(6,832) |
In our base case analysis of the CDO and the Subprime RMBS portfolio, we have
assigned default probabilities based on collateral; wherein we have assumed
an average default probability on its subprime collateral of 6% and on its
ABS CDO mezzanine a default probability of 25%.
Average default probabilities (by Collateral) |
Subprime RMBS |
6% |
Other RMBS |
6% |
ABS CDO High Grade |
6% |
ABS CDO Mezzanine |
25% |
CDO Other |
10% |
Other ABS |
10% |
In our base case analysis of the consumer finance business, we have assigned
default probabilities largely based on ratings. We assigned a average default
probability of 2% on its AAA rating portfolio and 11% average default probability
on its BIG (Below Investment Grade) portfolio.
Average default probabilities (by Rating) |
AAA |
2% |
AA |
5% |
A |
6% |
BBB |
8% |
BIG |
11% |
Valuation
In the case of Ambac, and most of my analyses, I draw a distinction between
accounting (or nominal) book value and actual economic book value - the stuff
I get paid for as an investor. Below you will see comparable valuation based
upon nominal book value which actually has ABK underpriced. You will also see
the forensically scrubbed economic book value, which in the most optimistic
scenario (which I can tell you now, just ain't gonna happen) has Ambac valued
at about $9 per share. You don't want to know what the base case and pessimistic
scenario portend.
Ambac Financial
Corp |
Relative Valuation |
| |
| Nominal Book Value |
FY2007 |
All Figures in Millions
of Dollars, unless
othrerwise stated |
Mean
Multiple |
High
Multiple |
Low
Multiple |
| BVPS |
53.67 |
53.67 |
53.67 |
| |
|
|
|
Equity Value Per
Share |
$22.5 |
$34.4 |
$12.7 |
| |
| Current Stock Price |
$21.8 |
$21.8 |
$21.8 |
(Discount)/Premium to Fair
Market Value |
(3.11%) |
(36.60%) |
70.93% |
| |
|
|
|
Book value as marked to market
(Optimistic Scenario) |
| |
FY2007 |
All Figures in Millions
of Dollars, unless
otherwise stated |
Mean
Multiple |
High
Multiple |
Low
Multiple |
| BVPS |
21.4 |
21.4 |
21.4 |
| |
Equity Value Per
Share |
$8.97 |
$13.71 |
$5.09 |
| |
| Current Stock Price |
$21.8 |
$21.8 |
$21.8 |
(Discount)/Premium
to FMV |
142.89% |
58.93% |
328.49% |
| |
Book value as marked to market
(Base Case Scenario) |
| |
FY2007 |
All Figures in Millions
of Dollars, unless otherwise
stated |
Mean
Multiple |
High
Multiple |
Low
Multiple |
| BVPS |
-14.0 |
-14.0 |
-14.0 |
| |
Equity Value Per
Share |
($5.87) |
($8.98) |
($3.33) |
| |
| Current Stock Price |
$21.8 |
$21.8 |
$21.8 |
(Discount)/Premium
to FMV |
(470.93%) |
(342.71%) |
(754.38%) |
| Peers |
|
| |
| Name |
Ticker |
P/B '07 |
Price |
BVPS '07 |
| MBIA Financial |
MBI |
0.38 |
22.3 |
58.5 |
| Assured Guaranty |
AGO |
0.64 |
20.17 |
| The PMI Group |
PMI |
0.25 |
10.45 |
42.43 |
| Primus Guaranty |
PRS |
0.59 |
5.91 |
Security Capital
Assurance Ltd |
SCA |
0.24 |
5.32 |
Price to Book Value
| Average |
|
0.42 |
| High |
|
0.64 |
| Low |
|
0.24 |
The Effects of Adverse Spread Movement
An Increase in spread of 175 Bps would erode the entire equity
Residential Mortgage Back Security and CDO Exposure
Here you see Ambac has significant exposure to some of the worst vintage years,
and as detailed above has some of the worst possible clients one would want
ensure. These ingredients mix to become a very toxic cocktail, indeed.
| |
AMBAC |
Total subprime exposure with in insured portfolio |
|
Total MBS portfolio |
53.9 |
RMBS subprime exposure |
8.8 |
% of total RMBS portfolio |
16.3% |
| Sub prime porfolio by vintage |
|
|
| vintage 1998-2001 |
1.2 |
13.6% |
| vintage 2002 |
1.2 |
13.6% |
| vintage 2003 |
2.4 |
27.3% |
| vintage 2004 |
0.8 |
9.1% |
| vintage 2005 |
1.6 |
18.2% |
| vintage 2006 |
1 |
11.4% |
| vintage 2007 |
0.6 |
6.8% |
| Direct Subprime RMBS |
8.8 |
100.0% |
| |
| 36.4% of the subprime portfolio belongs to vintage years
of 2006-2007 when credit writing standards has been on its low. |
| |
|
|
| Total CDO portfolio (in US$bn) |
|
|
| High yield |
24.3 |
34.0% |
| Investment grade |
8.6 |
12.0% |
| ABS > 25% MBS |
29.2 |
40.8% |
| ABS < 25% MBS |
3 |
4.2% |
| Other |
2.80 |
3.9% |
| Market value CDOs |
3.60 |
5.0% |
| |
71.5 |
100.0% |
| |
| Breakdown of CDO of ABS's subprime collateral by rating |
2Q 07 |
3Q 07 |
| AAA |
3.8% |
7.4% |
| AA |
39.7% |
39.0% |
| A |
47.2% |
36.9% |
| BBB |
8.6% |
8.7% |
| Below investment grade |
0.7% |
8.0% |
Sensitivity Analysis - Default
probabilities - Base case |
| Vintage |
Sub-prime
RMBS |
Other
RMBS |
ABS
CDO
High grade |
ABS CDO
Mezzanine |
CDO
other |
Other
ABS |
| 1998 |
2% |
|
|
|
|
|
| 1999 |
2% |
|
|
|
|
|
| 2000 |
2% |
|
|
|
|
|
| 2001 |
2% |
|
|
|
|
|
| 2002 |
5% |
|
|
|
|
|
| 2003 |
5% |
|
|
|
|
|
| 2004 |
8% |
5% |
5% |
15% |
10% |
10% |
| 2005 |
8% |
5% |
5% |
15% |
10% |
10% |
| 2006 |
15% |
8% |
8% |
35% |
10% |
10% |
| 2007 |
15% |
8% |
8% |
35% |
10% |
10% |
| |
Sensitivity Analysis - Default
probabilities - Worst case |
| Vintage |
Sub-prime
RMBS |
Other
RMBS |
ABS
CDO
High
grade |
ABS CDO
Mezzanine |
CDO
other |
Other
ABS |
| 1998 |
5% |
|
|
|
|
|
| 1999 |
5% |
|
|
|
|
|
| 2000 |
5% |
|
|
|
|
|
| 2001 |
5% |
|
|
|
|
|
| 2002 |
10% |
|
|
|
|
|
| 2003 |
10% |
|
|
|
|
|
| 2004 |
20% |
10% |
10% |
30% |
15% |
15% |
| 2005 |
20% |
10% |
10% |
30% |
15% |
15% |
| 2006 |
30% |
15% |
15% |
70% |
15% |
15% |
| 2007 |
30% |
15% |
15% |
70% |
15% |
15% |
| Average defualt probabilities (by Collateral) |
| Subprime RMBS |
6% |
| Other RMBS |
6% |
| ABS CDO High Grade |
6% |
| ABS CDO Mezzanine |
25% |
| CDO Other |
10% |
| Other ABS |
10% |
|
Reggie Middleton
http://boombustblog.com/
Reggie
Middleton is the personification of the freethinking maverick--the penultimate
nonconformist as it applies to macro strategies, investment, and analysis.
He uses his background and knowledge in new media, distributed computing, risk
management, insurance, financial engineering, real estate, corporate valuation,
and financial analysis to pursue, analyze, and capitalize on global macroeconomic
opportunities.
Finding most available research lacking, both in quality
and quantity, Mr. Middleton assembled his own talented research staff. As forensic
research is a lynchpin for his own investing, "to actually put food on the
table," he stands behind it as doing what it is supposed to do - illustrate,
elucidate and educate.
He does not sell advice or research. He is an entrepreneur
who exists outside of mainstream corporate America and Wall Street. This allows
him the freedom to do things that many cannot--perform without conflicts of
interest and corporate politics. He prides himself on developing some of the
highest quality, actionable research available - regardless of price. He welcomes
any and all to peruse his blog of freely available analysis, opinion and participatory
social media; use his custom tools, download files, interact with the community
and make critical comparisons from a results orientated perspective. Reggie
believes ideas and implementations are improved and fine-tuned when bounced
off of the collective intellect of the many, in lieu of that of the few - in
essence, a form of collaborative open source financial analysis.
Visit his blog Boom
Bust Blog.
Copyright © 2007-2008 Reggie Middleton
Image rendition and html coding Copyright © 2000-2008
SafeHaven.com
« BullionVault.com
-- Buy gold online - quickly, safely and at low prices »
« Honest Money:
A History of U.S. Gold & Silver Currency -- by Douglas V. Gnazzo »
« Opinions expressed at SafeHaven are those of the
individual authors and do not necessarily represent the opinion of SafeHaven
or its management. Articles are available via RSS/XML. Please
visit RSSHelp for instructions. »
|