Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 127

Mortgage funds: if only we had a trendier name, like P2P

When was the last time you saw a positive story about a mortgage fund in the financial press?

The only time a mortgage fund or its operator is mentioned in the press these days is to chronicle what went wrong in the wake of the GFC, detail the mismanagement that took place and update the public on the progress of the multitude of court cases being brought about by ASIC and others.

There is no denying that, post-GFC, some operators of mortgage funds have been shown to be foolish or greedy at best and, at worst, criminal. However, the GFC brought into focus a lack of corporate governance, excessively risky management decision-making and misleading marketing practices across a whole range of industries and asset classes.

Post-GFC, almost every other asset class has been allowed to reform itself and prove to the investing public that it has changed and is worthy of a second chance. Mortgage funds do not appear to have been afforded this same opportunity. Instead they seem to have been consigned to a purgatory of mistrust.

Contrast this situation with the burgeoning crowdfunding and P2P (peer-to-peer) lending industries. In the many newspaper columns dedicated to these industries, the coverage is almost universally positive. There are few questions being asked about whether these platforms are actually offering an acceptable risk-adjusted return to the investor. Interest in digital methods of raising capital seems to have reached the point where the mode of capital raising is of more interest than the investment itself.

Sometimes I joke that if I operated my fund through a fancy online presence and called myself a P2P lender, I would be hailed as one of the ‘entrepreneurs’, the ‘innovators’ seeking to ‘disrupt’ the banking industry, a modern day Robin Hood hell bent on ‘democratising’ property-related financing and bringing it to the masses. Instead, as my business only has a modest online presence and our fund is called a ‘mortgage fund’, it is largely disregarded. Am I the only one that sees this contradiction?

This article seeks to dispel the idea that all mortgage funds are bad news. Choosing to disregard all debt-based investments because of the historical bad behaviour of a few is throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

A common misconception about debt

People seem to find it difficult to differentiate between the risks of taking on too much debt as a borrower and making an investment that is backed by a debt.

Many people would have little hesitation in investing in either a commercial property syndication leveraged at 60% or buying a residential investment property leveraged at 70%. These investments would probably be considered relatively conservative. However, if the opportunity is presented to invest in a loan that is secured by a first registered mortgage over that same commercial property leveraged at 60% (or the residential property at 70%), many of those investors would consider it a very risky proposition. This attitude fails to appreciate that the debt position secured by a first registered mortgage within the capital stack is the lowest risk – it is actually the equity component that provides the debt investors with their first loss buffer.

For example, consider a residential investment property purchased for $800,000 using 70% leverage:

Now consider the position if the value of the investment property falls by 15%:

As you can see from this simple scenario, if you are an investor in the equity component of the capital stack you have lost 50% of your equity. However, if you are an investor in the debt component then 100% of your investment is preserved and there is further buffer to protect your investment from any further deterioration in the underlying asset value.

Not all mortgage funds are created equally

Although they are often thrown in the same bucket, there are actually three quite distinct structures that fall within the ‘mortgage fund’ moniker: debenture issuers, pooled mortgage funds and contributory mortgage funds. For example, a contributory mortgage fund gives the investor control over which mortgage funding opportunities they invest their money in. These different structures may bring about different investment experiences and outcomes.

The GFC highlighted the frailty of some debenture structures as well as the misleading claims used to promote pooled funds. Neither of these structures were able to deliver on the promises of their pre-GFC marketing flyers. In contrast, contributory mortgage funds emerged from the GFC relatively unscathed.

Moving forward, I believe contributory mortgage funds will become the preeminent structure within the mortgage fund industry, pooled mortgage funds will continue to have their place but will be accompanied by more modest claims as to their liquidity whilst debenture structures are unlikely to remain viable.

Changes in the banking landscape has created opportunities

The Australian banking landscape has undergone enormous change since the onset of the GFC. Consolidations have occurred within Australian banks, global banks have withdrawn or moved toward niche markets, and new macro prudential controls continue to be introduced.

These factors in combination have led to a situation where banks are highly selective in terms of the type of lending that they do, and have tended to favour residential home loans at the expense of commercial loans. Accordingly, well credentialed borrowers who would previously have been able to access bank finance are now turning to private finance or are unable to have their funding needs met at all.

This shift in the banking landscape has created a fertile environment for the mortgage fund industry and the providers of private finance.

Conclusion

Whilst P2P lenders may promise returns of 8 to 10% per annum, which sounds attractive as a headline, these loans are typically unsecured. By contrast, many mortgage funds also offer returns of 8 to 10% per annum but secured against a first registered mortgage over real property.

 

Lachlan Perks is the Co-Founder and Director of Keystone Capital, manager of a contributory mortgage fund designed for wholesale clients. Lachlan is also the Managing Director of property funds management business, PPI Funds Management.

This article does not constitute formal advice and contains general information only. It does not consider the individual needs of any investor.

 

RELATED ARTICLES

Is a debt bonfire building?

Defaulting into a world without growth

Financial leverage in real estate: friend or foe?

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Australian house prices close in on world record

Sydney is set to become the world’s most expensive city for housing over the next 12 months, a new report shows. Our other major cities aren’t far behind unless there are major changes to improve housing affordability.

The case for the $3 million super tax

The Government's proposed tax has copped a lot of flack though I think it's a reasonable approach to improve the long-term sustainability of superannuation and the retirement income system. Here’s why.

The revolt against Baby Boomer wealth

The $3m super tax could be put down to the Government needing money and the wealthy being easy targets. It’s deeper than that though and this looks at the factors behind the policy and why more taxes on the wealthy are coming.

Meg on SMSFs: Withdrawing assets ahead of the $3m super tax

The super tax has caused an almighty scuffle, but for SMSFs impacted by the proposed tax, a big question remains: what should they do now? Here are ideas for those wanting to withdraw money from their SMSF.

Tariffs are a smokescreen to Trump's real endgame

Behind market volatility and tariff threats lies a deeper strategy. Trump’s real goal isn’t trade reform but managing America's massive debts, preserving bond market confidence, and preparing for potential QE.

The super tax and the defined benefits scandal

Australia's superannuation inequities date back to poor decisions made by Parliament two decades ago. If super for the wealthy needs resetting, so too does the defined benefits schemes for our public servants.

Latest Updates

Are franking credits hurting Australia’s economy?

Business investment and per capita GDP have languished over the past decade and the Labor Government is conducting inquiries to find out why. Franking credits should be part of the debate about our stalling economy.

Superannuation

7 examples of how the new super tax will be calculated

You've no doubt heard about Division 296. These case studies show what people at various levels above the $3 million threshold might need to pay the ATO, with examples ranging from under $500 to more than $35,000.

Have Apple and Google reached the beginning of the end?

It might be hard to imagine a world where Apple and Google aren’t dominant, but disruption often starts with tiny cracks. AI's emergence into the mainstream might have set the stage for a new generation of leaders.

Superannuation

Did retirees lose out when they accepted defined benefit schemes?

Defined benefit pensions were designed to offer security in retirement. But new tax policies and arbitrary limits now erode their value - especially for Australians who contributed their own savings to these plans.

Property

Why Australia's agricultural land boom has stalled

Farmland prices have flatlined, bringing one of the most dramatic rural property cycles in Australian history to an end. The market for agricultural land now seems to be entering a new and more nuanced phase.

Property

The retail property niche offering income and growth

Neighbourhood shopping centres have fought off one perceived threat after another. What's more, they continue to offer secure income from blue-chip firms and other tenants linked mostly to essential spending.

ASX plans to attract more IPOs don’t go far enough

High-profile Australian stock market listings, like Guzman Y Gomez's IPO in 2024, are rare. ASIC aims to streamline the IPO process to boost listings, but faces barriers like share structures and governance.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2025 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.