Reading a non-performing note tape: are you buying the borrower or the collateral?
Two buyers looking at the same $40k purchase on a defaulted first can describe the same trade in completely different terms, and both descriptions are legitimate strategies rather than one being right and one wrong. One view treats the note as a borrower play. Buy the debt cheap, get the borrower back on a payment they can actually make, and after a year of clean payments either hold the income or sell the paper to a buyer who specializes in seasoned reperformers. The house never becomes the noteholder's problem, and foreclosure is treated as expensive, slow, and a last resort, with timelines that vary enormously by state. The other view treats the note as a collateral play. Buy at a fraction of what the house is worth, assume the borrower is gone, and let the discount be the cushion. Anything the borrower does short of walking away is a bonus that was never underwritten in. What belongs on the underwriting sheet before a bid is submitted is a clear answer to which of those two theses the purchase price actually supports. A reperform thesis needs a realistic read on the borrower's payment capacity and a state-specific view of modification and workout timelines. A collateral thesis needs the discount to hold up against a full foreclosure and disposition cost, worst case, with no credit given for borrower cooperation. Pricing that only works if both theses come true at once is usually pricing that has not been stress tested.
Buying your first non-performing note, which resolution do you underwrite to?
11 votes