What The Big Short teaches you about the downside of leverage

Matthew Partridge looks at what 2015 film The Big Short can teach investors about the pros and cons of leverage.

905_MW_P32_Bottom

(Image credit: © Paramount Pictures)

The Big Short is a 2015 film based on the non-fiction book of the same name by Michael Lewis. It looks at the US housing-market bubble (and subsequent financial crisis) through the prism of three groups of investors: Michael Burry, Front Point Partners and Brownfield Capital. Each of them decides to short the housing market by buying CDOs (insurance on the risk of bunches of mortgages defaulting). It performed solidly at the box office, making $133m, and was nominated for five Academy Awards (including Best Picture), winning one (Best Adapted Screenplay).

The key moment

To investigate what is really happening with the mortgage market Mark Baum (Steve Carell), the head of Front Point Partners, decides to go on a road trip to Florida, the epicentre of the boom. He speaks to several investors, including an exotic dancer, who have taken out mortgages on multiple properties that they cannot afford, in the hope that prices will keep going up, enabling them to sell at a large profit. Towards the end of the film we see some of these characters desperately searching for work.

Lesson for investors

Although leverage can magnify your gains if things go well, it does the same to your losses if the market turns down. Indeed, even if the price of the assets you are investing in rises, you may end up losing money if the price gain is less than the cost of borrowing money. The film shows that the problem was exacerbated by people taking out "teaser" loans where the interest rate charged would dramatically increase after a few years. While the idea was that people would avoid these higher rates by refinancing, this turned out to be impossible during the panic.

Subscribe to MoneyWeek

Subscribe to MoneyWeek today and get your first six magazine issues absolutely FREE

Get 6 issues free
https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/mw70aro6gl1676370748.jpg

Sign up to Money Morning

Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter

Don't miss the latest investment and personal finances news, market analysis, plus money-saving tips with our free twice-daily newsletter

Sign up

Other financial wisdom

Many people who gambled on the US housing market lost everything, and millions ended up in negative equity. However, as most US mortgages were only secured against the property (unlike in Britain), underwater homeowners often could (and did) wipe the slate clean by walking away; banks couldn't pursue them. That tended to prompt the banks to sell the property to recoup some money, pushing prices down further.

Dr Matthew Partridge

Matthew graduated from the University of Durham in 2004; he then gained an MSc, followed by a PhD at the London School of Economics.

He has previously written for a wide range of publications, including the Guardian and the Economist, and also helped to run a newsletter on terrorism. He has spent time at Lehman Brothers, Citigroup and the consultancy Lombard Street Research.

Matthew is the author of Superinvestors: Lessons from the greatest investors in history, published by Harriman House, which has been translated into several languages. His second book, Investing Explained: The Accessible Guide to Building an Investment Portfolio, is published by Kogan Page.

As senior writer, he writes the shares and politics & economics pages, as well as weekly Blowing It and Great Frauds in History columns He also writes a fortnightly reviews page and trading tips, as well as regular cover stories and multi-page investment focus features.

Follow Matthew on Twitter: @DrMatthewPartri