Without audience targeting are Google Ads Dead? Think again…
Early this month Google announced new restrictions for targeting specific audiences. The restrictions apply to content related to housing, employment, credit, and those who are disproportionately affected by societal biases. The news of these restrictions created quite a stir among industry brokers and lenders who heavily rely upon targeted Google ad campaigns. All which may have you asking if these changes will kill future reverse mortgage advertising on the world’s most popular search engine. In just a moment we’ll hear from our online SEO expert Josh Johnson to find out.
[read more]
Google’s restrictions are not necessarily novel nor unexpected. It was just over two years ago Facebook faced scrutiny from federal regulators for allowing those offering credit or housing finance to restrict ad audiences by race or religion among other questionable metrics that would violate HUD’s fair housing rules. An investigation by ProPublica broke this news in October 2016. It was nearly two years later in August 2018 that HUD filed a formal complaint against the social media giant for discriminatory advertising practices. Seven months after HUD’s complaint Facebook announced sweeping changes. Both Facebook and later Google, took a blunt approach much to the chagrin of lenders and service providers.
What ad filters are going away? In its official release Google revealed, “credit products or services can no longer be targeted to audiences based on gender, age, parental status, marital status, or ZIP code.”
Is this the end of Google ads for reverse mortgages? To answer that question I reached out to Josh Johnson who heads up Reverse Focus’ Online Dominance SEO program and Google marketing. Here’s his explanation.
Here’s what makes Google unique from other platforms and why reverse mortgage Google ads will continue to reach the intended audience.
To summarize, older homeowners are intentionally seeking out reverse mortgage information on Google which means, yes-your ads will be seen by your target audience, even though you can no longer target specific age groups.
[/read]
Here’s why the government is granting a $50 million dollar boost to FHA’s Mutual Mortage Insurance Fund
The White House budget submitted to Congress in June signaled a strong performance of the Home Equity Conversion Mortgage program. HUD’s summary of loan levels predicted the HECM portion of FHA’s portfolio was expected to generate a negative credit subsidy of -2.54% in Fiscal year 2022. Translated that means it’s expected that incoming receipts will exceed claims paid that year. According to a June report in Reverse Mortgage Daily fiscal year 2021 which we just concluded is also expected to generate a negative subsidy of -2.39%.
[read more]
While these short-term improvements in the HECM’s cash flow are a positive sign, the value of the HECM portion of FHA’s MMI fund is the source of continued concern. Case in point, the wild fluctuation of the HECM program’s standalone capital ratios. While the capital ratio of traditional FHA loans climbed steadily in the years 2016-2020, the HECM portion varied widely each fiscal year from a negative ratio of 11.81% in 2016, 18.3% in 2017, 18.83 in 2019, 9.22% in 2019, and .78% in 2020. Those numbers are highly sensitive to home price values and interest rates- both of which the housing agencies have no control. That means should home values slip the program’s valuation could easily go back into the red quickly.
One thing HUD and FHA are striving to control the costs of is HECM servicing- the chief reason the Biden administration boosted FHA’s administrative contract budget by $50 million for the fiscal year 2022. In its budget review, HUD states, “The primary cause of the increase is the growing expense of servicing the Secretary-held HECM portfolio.” A portfolio the agency says is growing while being challenged with Covid-19 and natural disaster claims.
The servicing of HECM loans has long been an area of concern and dispute among industry participants. One of the challenges is that HECMs are not assigned to FHA’s service contractor until the loan balance reaches 98%. Another sticking point is the question of how efficiently FHA’s HECM loan servicer is dealing with property vacancies and the sale of homes to recoup expenses.
In July 2018 then FHA Commissioner Brian Montgomery in a media call pointed to a potential source of HECM losses. “We are digging deep in the portfolio to find out of the problem is on the front end or the back end. My sense is that it’s more on the back end in terms of the losses we are experiencing. Part of ‘triaging’ is [determining] why that is happening”, said Montgomery. Adding, “looking at the back end of the process, once the loans are assigned to HUD is the area we are focused on. I am not sure further [principal limit] cuts are going to fix that problem.”
Proposals to fix the ‘back-end problems’ ranged from contracting with a new servicer, expanding the Cash for Keys program to the HECM for exiting homeowners, and allowing existing servicers of HECMs not in assignment to continue servicing the loan after the loan balance reaches 98% of the original maximum claim amount.
While such reforms have not come to fruition, some anticipated a change of the loan servicer for HECM loans in assignment as FHA sought new contracts in late 2020. On October 5th HUD’s decision was announced. “NOVAD Management Consulting (NOVAD) will remain responsible for servicing Assigned Secretary-Held Home Equity Conversion Mortgages (HECM) and HECM Subordinate Mortgages,” said HUD in a statement. Novad has served as FHA’s HECM servicer since 2014. While some argued for a new servicer to address increasing expenses, others like the former HUD Deputy Secretary of HUD Brian Montgomery argued keeping the existing servicer may ultimately reduce costs for the program.
[/read]
1 Comment
While HUD as an individual agency may not have control over home prices (inflation) or interest rates, they are one of many agencies reporting to the President of the United States. POTUS through the other agencies has plenty of control over these factors. This makes POTUS ultimately responsible for managing HECM losses through other agencies.
As I read this, a consistent theme is that HUD looks at the HECM program in isolation without understanding either the borrower or the impact of other government programs such as Medicaid. Anyone remotely familiar with what really is happening with borrowers, their families, and Medicaid would know that many HECM foreclosures are driven by Medicaid rules. Medicaid and HUD both report to POTUS, so he has complete responsibility for coordinating the rules.