If your sales are from December but your value is in Feb or March and you know the prices are wanting to rise or could rise but you don't have any sales to support it, you have to project based upon what the overall market is doing. Otherwise, you would have usable sales from days or just a few weeks earlier that would support the value without a market conditions adjustment.
So show us how this works. If inventories are declining, does that always prove that prices are increasing (I have seen the opposite). If doms are increasing, does that always mean prices are falling? If prices on pending sales can't be verified, what does that information tell you other than there is an offer on the table? If listing prices are increasing but properties are not selling, does that always mean prices are increasing? If sales price to list price ratios are stable, does that always mean prices are stable? And how do you translate increasing doms to a dollar or percentage change in values. It is easy to throw this crap at the wall, but I challenge you to provide a single source where these techniques are demonstrated in a manner that the majority of appraisers will agree with (and remember, experience is not support).Appraisers should be able to evaluate market trends by looking at inventory trends, DOM trends, pending sales, listings, Sale Price to List Price ratio trends, etc., in addition to closed sales. Everyone knows, that in many markets, there is typically an increase in purchase demand in the spring and decreased purchase demand at various other times of the year and appraisers should be able to do better than just throw up their hands and say "I don't know" when it comes to evaluating these trends and marking a market condition adjustment when warranted.
GSE folks make a lot of claims that can't be verified because they hide the data. Not really very different than appraisers who suggest their conclusions are based on experience, except that there are mechanisms to make appraisers prove it.FYI, one of the arguments that I heard someone at the GSE's make regarding appraisal waivers is that their models are better than appraisers in detecting market trends and are quicker to detect changes in market trends/market direction. I am not saying that I agree with their argument, but your post certainly feeds into that mindset.
Theres not much hidden data that would help apprasers anyway. The data they collect is mostly from appraisers and the data that's not is used for portfolios management and risk.So show us how this works. If inventories are declining, does that always prove that prices are increasing (I have seen the opposite). If doms are increasing, does that always mean prices are falling? If prices on pending sales can't be verified, what does that information tell you other than there is an offer on the table? If listing prices are increasing but properties are not selling, does that always mean prices are increasing? If sales price to list price ratios are stable, does that always mean prices are stable? And how do you translate increasing doms to a dollar or percentage change in values. It is easy to throw this crap at the wall, but I challenge you to provide a single source where these techniques are demonstrated in a manner that the majority of appraisers will agree with (and remember, experience is not support).
GSE folks make a lot of claims that can't be verified because they hide the data. Not really very different than appraisers who suggest their conclusions are based on experience, except that there are mechanisms to make appraisers prove it.
I'm not concerned that they have anything that would help appraisers. I'm concerned because they are liars and thieves and when they pronounce what their "analysis" shows, it can neither be trusted nor verified. And, as we know, their conclusions can be politically motivated (see Freddie's Research Note that begat the narrative that appraisers are racists). And only a damn fool would argue the GSEs care about veracity when their HPI garbage is acceptable support for anything. A WAG estimate is likely to be superior than a statewide market conditions adjustment.Theres not much hidden data that would help apprasers anyway. The data they collect is mostly from appraisers and the data that's not is used for portfolios management and risk.
Don't want to bust your bubble but the Money Center Banks and the GSEs and virtually everyone including legacy media have always been lying thieves. Is it possible you were just to busy to realize this and now you see more clearly ?I'm not concerned that they have anything that would help appraisers. I'm concerned because they are liars and thieves and when they pronounce what their "analysis" shows, it can neither be trusted nor verified. And, as we know, their conclusions can be politically motivated (see Freddie's Research Note that begat the narrative that appraisers are racists). And only a damn fool would argue the GSEs care about veracity when their HPI garbage is acceptable support for anything. A WAG estimate is likely to be superior than a statewide market conditions adjustment.
Fannie's zip code level HPI benchmarks the prior sale price to price inflation at +48%. However, CU calculates the current appraisal at only +34% because it divides the increase by the numerator not the denominator. I've tested this across many markets and get the same miscalculation.
Does this instill confidence in CU?
View attachment 97700
Uh, I never had any notion they were anything but.Don't want to bust your bubble but the Money Center Banks and the GSEs and virtually everyone including legacy media have always been lying thieves. Is it possible you were just to busy to realize this and now you see more clearly ?