Invest money

If you look at the most stressful events in a person’s life, buying a home is on the top ten list. After all, it’s a big decision – both emotionally and financially. Many home buyers go through an anxious period after they’ve arranged for their mortgage and get ready to move into their new home. Knowing you’ll get a pocketful of cash would sure help, wouldn’t it?

That’s a big part of the attraction of cash-back mortgages. A plump cheque is a psychological boost to home buyers who have just made one of the biggest financial commitments of their lives. As mortgage brokers, we like to work with our clients to ensure that they look beyond the temporary “feel good” of the cash, and weigh their options wisely.

Remember that the cash-back option comes with a trade-off: if you choose not to take the cash back, you can get a lower interest rate. Over time, you could see substantial savings in interest payments.

So, start with the most important question: What will the cash be used for? Is this purchase a priority, and is it worth the difference in the rate? Perhaps you have a plan to take advantage of the cash-back to purchase the household appliances for your new home. The extra $3,000 for new kitchen or laundry appliances may be an urgent immediate need and a higher priority overall than the lower interest rate for your mortgage term.

But here is the second question to discuss with your mortgage broker: What will be the impact of the rate difference over time? You’ll need real-life figures to work out the details for your personal situation, but let’s look at an example*:

Let’s say that your cash-back option pays 1% of the mortgage amount on a two-year deal, 3% on five years, and 5% cash back on a ten-year closed mortgage. And let’s assume that you’re looking at borrowing $100,000 for a 5-year term, amortized over 25 years. Not long ago, you might be looking at the difference between cash back and a rate of 6.60%, or a discounted interest rate of 5.29%.

So what’s the bottom line? Your cash-back option would give you $3,000 up-front, but over your 5-year term, you would pay a little over $6,300 more in interest costs than you would have with the discounted rate. The exact cost of the cash-back option in this example is $3,330.44 – paid out over 5 years.

Is that a good deal? It depends. Did you get the much-needed appliances for your home… or use the funds to manage a high-priority expense? Then you probably got good value from the option. If – five years later – you can’t remember where the money went, then perhaps you didn’t make the best trade-off.

Read More »

Forget everything you thought you knew about the benefits of taking a variable-rate mortgage instead of locking in for the long term.

A new study suggests the security of a five-year mortgage costs little or nothing beyond a riskier variable-rate mortgage, providing you get a jumbo-sized rate discount.

“Interest costs on discounted closed five-year mortgages have been close to, and often lower than, those of variable-rate mortgages since late 1996,” senior Canada Mortgage and Housing Corp. economist Ali Manouchehri writes in the study.

Homeowners have made variable-rate mortgages hugely popular in the past few years in the belief that you can save on interest costs by pegging your mortgage rate to your lender’s prime lending rate. As the prime rises, or as has generally happened in the past few years, fallen, so goes your mortgage rate.

The prime rate at the major banks is now 4.5 per cent, while the posted five-year rate at the big banks is 6.15 per cent. In just one year, the variable-rate choice would save you about $1,700 on monthly payments toward a $150,000 mortgage amortized over 25 years (assuming a level prime rate).

Historically, you would also have saved a lot. The CMHC study shows that five-year mortgages taken out from 1993 through 1998 would have cost anywhere from $50,000 to $5,000 in additional interest paid over the term of the loan (the example is based on a $100,000 mortgage amortized over 25 years).

The flaw with this analysis is that it doesn’t reflect real-world mortgage pricing. These days, very few people take out a mortgage without a sizable discount off the posted rates at major banks.

For that reason, the CMHC’s Mr. Manouchehri decided to compare discounted five-year mortgages with discounted variable-rate mortgages. Incidentally, five years is the most popular term by far for fixed-rate mortgages at about 59 per cent of the total.

The size of the discounts Mr. Manouchehri applied was based on the difference between posted major bank rates and the best deals available from other lenders. For five-year mortgages, he used a discount of 1.25 of a percentage point; for variable-rate mortgages, it was 0.4 of a point off prime.

For five-year mortgages taken out between 1993 and mid-1996, the five-year mortgage was costlier in terms of interest costs. Since then, however, variable-rate mortgages have generally been a little bit more expensive.

Obviously, there’s nothing in this study that decides the fixed-rate versus variable-rate debate once and for all.

In fact, the CMHC study may just confuse anyone who recalls some research done for Manulife Financial back in 2000 by York University finance professor Moshe Milevsky. His research found that the extra interest charged on a five-year mortgage would have cost $20,000 on average between 1950 and 2000 for a $100,000 mortgage amortized over 15 years.

To make some sense of the variable-rate versus five-year question, let’s go back to the CMHC study.

It shows that five-year mortgages, discounted or otherwise, were especially bad choices for a three-year period starting in mid-1993. Rates were high for a while back then, but they subsequently fell.

You were a spectator to these rate declines if you were stuck in a five-year mortgage, while people in variable-rate mortgages would have benefited almost immediately.

It’s a different world now, though. Five-year mortgage rates are close to a 50-year low, which suggests they’re far more likely to rise over their term than fall.

So what’s the best choice here, variable-rate or five-year fixed rate? People who want to pay rock-bottom mortgage rates for as long as possible will probably still want a variable-rate mortgage. Remember, you can lock this sort of mortgage into a fixed term without penalty in most cases.

The case for the five-year term looks almost as strong, though. First, the CMHC study tells us there may not be a significant cost to locking your mortgage in for five years, and you might even save a little over a variable-rate mortgage.

Second, the likelihood of higher rates in the years to come would suggest that this is a good time to lock in.

If you had a variable-rate mortgage discounted to 4 per cent, the prime would have to go up by 0.85 of a percentage point to equal the current five-year rate. That’s not a lot of ground to cover in the span of 12 to 18 months when the economy is doing well.

Arguably, the variable-rate versus fixed-rate debate is all about risks and rewards. Right now, the five-year option offers much less risk, and almost as much reward.

Read More »