Personal Loans Against Canadian Real Estate Hits A Record Rate of Growth

Personal Loans Against Canadian Real Estate Hits A Record Rate of Growth

Canadian real estate leverage has been an increasing concern, and it it’s growing. Filings from Office of the Superintendent of Financial Institutions (OSFI), the federal regulator for banks, show that loans secured by real estate showed huge growth in September. In fact, these loans are now at a record high, and are printing record growth.

Total Loans Secured By Real Estate Now Over $279 Billion

The total of loans secured against residential real estate for business and non business purposes is booming in 2017. Analysis of OSFI data shows $279.64 billion in loans in September, up $25.4 billion from the same month last year. That’s 9.92% growth, which is just off the peak of 12.10% established in June 2017. This year is the first year to see growth above 5%, in the 5 years of filings OSFI provided. The huge growth represents a significant increase, but some of these loans are being used for productive purposes.  Let’s break it down.

Over 51% Growth For Business Loans Against Residential Real Estate

When people say “good debt,” this is the kind of debt they are typically referring to – borrowing for business. In September, banks held $31.68 billion of loans for business purposes, secured by residential real estate. That’s a massive 51.58% growth from the year before, which is just off peak growth established earlier this year. While the growth is huge, it is just a fraction of the total debt here.

Source: OSFI, Better Dwelling.

Over $248 Billion of Personal Loans Secured By Residential Real Estate

Personal loans secured by real estate are experiencing record growth. These are the loans that we have no idea what they did with the money. These can be anything from renovation financing, to buying second homes, or even possibly using home equity to buy bitcoin – no one’s quite sure. At the end of September, banks held $248.95 billion in personal loans secured by residential real estate, a 6.91% increase from last year. This is the highest annual growth observed in the OSFI filings.

Source: OSFI, Better Dwelling.

OSFI filings only include federally regulated banks, so credit unions and private lenders aren’t included in these numbers. This means there’s likely even more debt secured against real estate. This leverage is relatively harmless when things are good, but has the potential to be an issue in the event of a home price correction. Especially if that correction means a recession.

Like this post? Like us on Facebook for the next one in your feed.



We encourage you to have a civil discussion. Note that reads "civil," which means don't act like jerks to each other. Still unclear? No name-calling, racism, or hate speech. Seriously, you're adults – act like it.

Any comments that violates these simple rules, will be removed promptly – along with your full comment history. Oh yeah, you'll also lose further commenting privileges. So if your comments disappear, it's not because the illuminati is screening you because they hate the truth, it's because you violated our simple rules.

  • bluetheimpala 7 years ago

    Question: Is there any historical data, maybe not for Canada but older economies like US or UK or Holland, that can shed light on what may happen if housing prices drop but there is a lot of underlying debt against said housing? Has this ever happened before?

    Home prices fluctuating is normal and most people just weather the storm, stay put and then sell later if at all…i.e. I am a middle class person and my retirement is tied to my house because I got fleeced in the last bad recession. I took some change out to help the kiddies if there is looming price depression won’t everyone have a collective freakout and accelerate a drop in housing prices? Thoughts?

    • Trader Jim 7 years ago

      Typically leverage capitulates movements, so the drop would be further down than it would naturally be. Expected, since market prices regress to the mean, and never actually sit on the mean. The longer it takes new buyers to capitalize however, may delay a recovery.

      Housing in a big city isn’t usually a balance sheet loss, but an economic loss carried over time. If your house is the same price 10 years down the line, you could have rented and banked the difference. Then bought it with your fresh gains.

      • Tommy 7 years ago

        Could, should, would. Those that argue for renting and banking the difference, then buying when the market is down is just a convoluted way of trying to time the market, and that’s not possible to do. If your house is the same price 10 years from now, that’s unfortunate, however you only have 15 years of mortgage payments left while the newcomer is paying exactly what you did 10 years ago but has 25 years of payments to look forward to. In the interim, you’ve enjoyed 10 years in a home of your own, customizing and living on your own terms, while the renter has been dealing with cockroaches, mice, rats, bedbugs, noisy stinky apartment dwellers, landlords that don’t fix anything, and drafty windows.

        • Brian 7 years ago

          As well, renter will be paying more monthly every year the rent increases. The buyer could be paying the same or less than previously for mortgage interest when the mortgage is renewed which maintains the same monthly cost or lowers it.

          • Real Bear 6 years ago

            of course! rent increases!

            but, no property tax increases… also no utilities increases… also no repair costs

            but yeah! rent increases of 2%! Look out!

        • Real Bear 6 years ago

          or, they could rent from a professional property management company… or in a brand-new luxury condo…

          but yeah – roaches, mice, rats and bedbugs — there’s NEVER a mouse in a house – they have too much respect for an owner versus a lowly renter.

  • Lessdenadalla 7 years ago

    Read what happened in US back in 2008 ….

    • bluetheimpala 7 years ago

      No, not the same. The issue in the US was related to sub-prime borrowers; the dregs (yes I’m a prick) who shouldn’t have been able to get a mortgage at all. The primary mortgage,not secondary debt, was the fatal flaw. This is much worse. There are many people with great credit and a ‘path to retirement’ who thought helping out their children/grandchildren was a good idea and if they can’t get out it will have huge ramifications.

  • M. 7 years ago

    Suprime in the us is the same as insured mortgage here,they wouldn’t get a mortgage otherwise, not much of a difference except I don’t consider ,teachers, police,ext. dregs just a little to desperate.

  • Forget Subprime Canadian Real Estate Buyers, Investors Crashed The US Market | Better Dwelling 7 years ago

    […] mortgages have a home-equity line of credit attached. Canada’s federally regulated banks now hold $248.95 billion in loans secured with residential property, a jump of 6.91% from last year. Most interesting, Toronto, Montreal, and Vancouver are seeing tens […]

Comments are closed.