1004MC Addendum Error

[Delta85]

No, I don't go so far as to verify each listing. I do, however, read each one, pretty thoroughly. I often find reasons to disqualify a particular listing after doing so. It gets rid of a lot of the way out there stuff, like, for example, mixed use properties that are found under the single family category of listings.

My MLS very often gets data wrong or leaves data out of the listing, either on purpose or not. Given the amount of data that gets churned to produce these 1004mc forms there would be no way to totally verify what you are reading without speaking to the realtors and matching the data with assessors records for each and every sale/listing. There is no way even the most anal and detailed oriented appraiser could do this every time for each report. This is why I put a comment on the 1004mc form indicating my MLS is often wrong or missing details and that I am not liable if this effects my reporting.

 

[George Hatch]

There's a difference between the amount of effort appropriate for qualifying the data used in a trend analysis vs what you would do to qualify the data you're using as direct comparables in a Sales Comparison analysis. It's similar to the difference between background vs foreground.

The MC analysis is about the forest, not the trees. Your own observations about the prevailing trends are at least as relevant to the analysis as the statistical analysis that supports it. Of the two, you can get by without the statistical support but you can't get by without your own observations and judgment.

 

[residentialguy]

This is how I set up my export. Could be something wrong in my fields.
List #
Status
AGF sq ft
beds
bath
list price
sold price
list date
status previous
closed date
DOM

 

[George Hatch]

This is how I set up my export. Could be something wrong in my fields.
List #
Status
AGF sq ft
beds
bath
list price
sold price
list date
status previous
closed date
DOM

I think another possibility is if the Matrix solution is using a different field for "off market date". The "status previous" field may be the right choice, or at least a good choice for the "off market date" but if they're using a different field for that category then that could explain the difference when these listings are being counted. Some of the MLS systems have several columns that cover the different dates, and the Matrix downloads I've worked with have had some problems with completeness and consistency between their dates and their DOM counters.

I've had to do a couple somewhat Rube Goldberg workarounds to get past inconsistencies and funky field content in some of those Matrix systems - their solution may have approached it from a different angle. Or not, I honestly can't tell without looking at it.

Another thing to consider is whether both worksheets are being fed the same DOM columns, there being a difference between "days on market" vs "cumulative days on market".

In my region the MLS systems in San Diego and Orange Counties a couple of the LA County boards use Tempo software, which allows for custom downloads and is pretty consistent with respect to data quality. The Desert Area and Victorville boards use Rapattoni software which incorporated my worksheet directly into their system, the results being printable as one of their "report" options. But most of the other Riverside/San Bernardino county boards use Matrix software, which was noticeably more difficult for me to work with. Maybe they cleaned it up some since then. I did hear that they enabled users to build custom download formats so that's definitely a step in the right direction, but the other problems I had with them were missing or inconsistent DOM counters, bad enough that I had to bypass their DOM counters and "build" one of my own that the worksheet could actually rely upon.

Like I said, the layout and data consistency was a PITA. Hopefully it's easier to work with now.

 

[George Hatch]

BTW, I have another worksheet that tabulates the closed sales (only) going back 2 years and breaks them down by quarter. That analysis includes median GLA and median price/sf fields so users can keep an eye on the data distribution in those periods. I don't usually include that worksheet in my reports but I like having the info in the file because it enables me to comment on the patterns over the last couple years.

i would think a quarterly breakdown going back a couple years would be especially useful to users working in areas where there are actually seasonal aspects to their markets. Here in SoCal we don't really have seasons.

 

[residentialguy]

They do have a "off market date", but I used "status previous" instead. Maybe that's the hiccup.

I used DOM, not CDOM

 

[residentialguy]

BTW, I have another worksheet that tabulates the closed sales (only) going back 2 years and breaks them down by quarter. That analysis includes median GLA and median price/sf fields so users can keep an eye on the data distribution in those periods. I don't usually include that worksheet in my reports but I like having the info in the file because it enables me to comment on the patterns over the last couple years.

i would think a quarterly breakdown going back a couple years would be especially useful to users working in areas where there are actually seasonal aspects to their markets. Here in SoCal we don't really have seasons.

That would be useful here. Is that available?

 

[George Hatch]

Send me a PM with your email and I'll shoot you a copy of it. It uses the same download format as my 1004mc worksheet; the difference is that you change your search to only include closed sales and set that sale date back 2 years instead of the listing date.

To be honest, I kinda like being able to correlate a rising median sale price to a rising median GLA, or the reverse, depending on what's going on. Median price is rising even though median GLA is falling - now that's really saying something when that happens.

With your comparo, my primary concern isn't so much whether you're using the "right" column for that field at this point, but if you're using the same one the Matrix system is using; so as to compare apples to apples. If we are comparing apples we shouldn't be getting these variances. Math is math.

 

[Elliott]

Still waiting to know the value of an angel on the head
of a pin.

 

[Mike Kennedy]

No, I don't go so far as to verify each listing. I do, however, read each one, pretty thoroughly. I often find reasons to disqualify a particular listing after doing so. It gets rid of a lot of the way out there stuff, like, for example, mixed use properties that are found under the single family category of listings.

...........Ditto.

p.s. others have posted tools they use. The one I use accomodates both the Revised Fannie date requirements and also accomodates non-GSE time parameters.....24 month retro by List Date recommended, tool enables the Appraiser to set search parameters by any criteria you define.....works exceedingly well.
http://www.1004-mc.com/