|Share on Facebook Facebook||Share on StumbleUpon StumbleUpon|
|Share on LinkedIn LinkedIn||Submit on Reddit reddit|
|Tweet Twitter||Pin it Pinterest|
|Share on Google+ Google+||Share on Digg Digg|
|Post to Tumblr Tumblr||Share on Delicious Delicious|
Muni Bond Defaults Remain RareMichael Cohick, Senior ETF Product ManagerDecember 20, 2019
In August, Moody’s Investors Service released its annual municipal bond market snapshot, US Municipal Bond Defaults and Recoveries, 1970-2018, with updates through 2018. The report continues to affirm two hallmark benefits offered by muni bonds. First, municipal bankruptcies remain rare overall, even though they may have become more common over the last 10 years. (There were no rated municipal defaults in 2018.) Second, muni bonds continued to be highly rated in 2018, with more issuers upgraded than downgraded. (According to Moody’s, though, on average, the size of the downgrades was larger than for the upgrades.)
Last year, we noted that the report featured a significant update to Moody’s entire dataset extending back to 1970 and that the recalculation Moody’s undertook had not only rendered key metrics more meaningful, but also offered greater explanatory power. (This enabled more powerful inferences regarding long-term trends.) One important “observation” noted in this year’s report was that, over the 48-year study period: “any one default may only reflect the idiosyncrasies of that individual credit, and not be representative of any general sector trend.”
Muni Bond Defaults and Bankruptcies Remain Rare
The report noted, once again, the fundamental difference between municipal and corporate credits.
While the five-year all-rated cumulative default rate (CDR) of municipal bonds throughout the study period (1970-2018) might have increased a tiny bit to 0.10% (1970-2017: 0.09%) it still remains quite low. Likewise when compared to the five-year CDR of 6.6% for global corporates over the same time period. There were neither any rated municipal defaults in 2018, nor any new defaults in Puerto Rico (although many Commonwealth of Puerto Rico entities remained in default during the year). There was, however, one unrated default during the same period.
While there may have been a dearth of new rated defaults in 2018, Moody’s did note that there had been “some notable developments concerning default, bankruptcy and recovery,” not least in the context of the defaults in Puerto Rico. The rating agency went so far as to say: “One remarkable development in the past year is the number of court rulings that will have bearing on future municipal bankruptcies.” It further noted that while pledge still matters, it might not shield against loss in either default or bankruptcy—especially when the payment of pensions is involved. (Muni investors will certainly have to bear this in mind going forward.)
Ongoing Stabilization in Muni Bonds
The report also notes, for the second year running, that nearly a decade after the Great Recession (2007-2009), the credit quality of the municipal bond sector is now stable. It has been aided in part by growth and economic recovery in many regions of the U.S. For the third year running, in 2018, muni bond rating upgrades outweighed downgrades (480 vs. 392), but there were fewer rating changes than in prior years.
In contrast with the trend of growing positive drift in 2017 (positive since late-2015), ratings drift,1 at 0.003% per credit, was nearly flat in 2018. The trend had been generally negative since mid-2008, and reached a low of -0.083 notches per credit in 2012. In addition, volatility, at 0.09 vs. 0.11 notches per credit in 2017, dropped 23% in 2018. The report added that the municipal sector overall is highly rated, with approximately 92% of all the municipal credits Moody’s rates falling into the A category or higher as of the end of 2018. Further, at the end of 2018, the median rating for U.S. municipal credits was Aa3. This stood in stark contrast to the median rating for global corporates, which was Baa3.
As we concluded in our review last year, although it is still a struggle to obtain the same amount of timely disclosure from issuers of municipal bonds as one sees in other asset classes, the pure empirical evidence suggests that muni bonds continue to offer a fiscally sound vehicle for deriving an income stream free from federal, and in some cases, state taxes.
If one looks at defaults alone over the past 48 years, according to Moody’s report, across all sectors there have been only 113 defaults in the total amount of a little over $72 billion. Of this figure, Jefferson County, Alabama and the city of Detroit, Michigan accounted for approximately $11 billion and Puerto Rico some $55.5 billion (combined $66.5 billion). There are more than 50,000 different state and local governments and other issuing authorities.
There are, however, as always, caveats. As Moody’s states in the report’s Introduction: “The once-comfortable aphorism that ‘munis don't default’ is no longer credible: rating volatility, rating transition rates and cumulative default rates (CDR) have all increased since 2009.” The sector does face challenges. These include, among others, democratic shifts (populations both aging and relocating—affecting tax receipts), “substantial increases in pension and retirement health care leverage” and “the associated but new exposure to equity markets.”
Moody’s goes on to describe the sector’s exposure to the equity markets as “unprecedented” and requiring attention. For state and local governments, this exposure has been gained through their pension fund trusts. The concern for Moody’s is not only their resulting exposure to “financial market volatility in general,” but also the size of this exposure, which is both significant and “a feature never before seen in the U.S. public sector.”
Despite this, we still believe that municipal bonds remain important to the core strategy of constructing an individual portfolio.
Learn more about VanEck’s suite of municipal bond ETFs.
Source: US Municipal Bond Defaults and Recoveries, 1970-2018.
1Rating drift measures the net average number of notches a credit will change over the study period. It is defined as the average upgraded notches per issuer minus the average downgraded notches per issuer.
IMPORTANT MUNI NATION® DISCLOSURE
This content is published in the United States for residents of specified countries. Investors are subject to securities and tax regulations within their applicable jurisdictions that are not addressed on this content. Nothing in this content should be considered a solicitation to buy or an offer to sell shares of any investment in any jurisdiction where the offer or solicitation would be unlawful under the securities laws of such jurisdiction, nor is it intended as investment, tax, financial, or legal advice. Investors should seek such professional advice for their particular situation and jurisdiction.
VanEck does not provide tax, legal or accounting advice. Investors should discuss their individual circumstances with appropriate professionals before making any decisions. This information should not be construed as sales or marketing material or an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of any financial instrument, product or service.
Please note this represents the views of the author and these views may change at any time and from time to time. MUNI NATION is not intended to be a forecast of future events, a guarantee of future results or investment advice. Current market conditions may not continue. Non-VanEck proprietary information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but not guaranteed. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form, or referred to in any other publication, without express written permission of VanEck. MUNI NATION is a trademark of Van Eck Associates Corporation.
Municipal bonds are subject to risks related to litigation, legislation, political change, conditions in underlying sectors or in local business communities and economies, bankruptcy or other changes in the issuer’s financial condition, and/or the discontinuance of taxes supporting the project or assets or the inability to collect revenues for the project or from the assets. Bonds and bond funds will decrease in value as interest rates rise. Additional risks include credit, interest rate, call, reinvestment, tax, market and lease obligation risk. High-yield municipal bonds are subject to greater risk of loss of income and principal than higher-rated securities, and are likely to be more sensitive to adverse economic changes or individual municipal developments than those of higher-rated securities. Municipal bonds may be less liquid than taxable bonds.
The income generated from some types of municipal bonds may be subject to state and local taxes as well as to federal taxes on capital gains and may also be subject to alternative minimum tax.
Diversification does not assure a profit or protect against loss.
Investing involves substantial risk and high volatility, including possible loss of principal. Bonds and bond funds will decrease in value as interest rates rise. An investor should consider the investment objective, risks, charges and expenses of a fund carefully before investing. To obtain a prospectus and summary prospectus, which contain this and other information, call 800.826.2333 or visit vaneck.com. Please read the prospectus and summary prospectus carefully before investing.
Authored byMichael Cohick
Senior ETF Product Manager