A bank has nothing to hedge against when it commits to thirty years
En Argentina, el gobierno ha recortado agresivamente las tasas de interés hipotecarias con la esperanza de reactivar el acceso a la vivienda, pero el crédito permanece estancado. La razón no reside en el costo del dinero, sino en su ausencia: los salarios reales volvieron a caer en marzo, y ninguna tasa más baja puede compensar el hecho de que las familias simplemente no ganan lo suficiente. Detrás de los números alentadores se esconde una verdad más antigua: la estabilidad económica sostenida no se decreta con instrumentos financieros, sino que se construye con tiempo y confianza.
- Las tasas hipotecarias cayeron a la mitad en los principales bancos desde noviembre, pero el mercado no respondió: el crédito hipotecario sigue paralizado.
- Los salarios reales volvieron a retroceder en marzo de 2025, aplastando la demanda antes de que los recortes de tasas pudieran siquiera rozarla.
- Banco Nación concentra el 80% de los préstamos hipotecarios, no por liderazgo sino por default: los bancos privados no pueden asumir el riesgo de prestar a 30 años en una economía impredecible.
- El índice UVA-dólar está en su nivel histórico más alto, convirtiendo cada decisión de endeudarse en una apuesta sobre la inflación, el tipo de cambio y el propio salario futuro.
- El Fondo de Garantía de Sustentabilidad y las inyecciones de liquidez del gobierno son señalados como posibles catalizadores, pero su impacto real sigue siendo más promesa que certeza.
El gobierno argentino ha recortado las tasas hipotecarias con determinación: en ICBC bajaron del 11% al 6,9%; en BBVA, del 10,9% al 7,5%; en Macro, del 15% al 8,5%. Banco Nación mantiene su tasa en un 6% sobre la inflación. En papel, el crédito debería fluir. En la práctica, el mercado hipotecario está quieto.
El problema no es el precio del dinero. Es que los salarios reales volvieron a caer en marzo y llevan meses esencialmente estancados desde una base ya históricamente baja. Una cuota más barata no ayuda a quien no puede pagarla. El propio ministerio de Trabajo lo confirmó: la capacidad de endeudamiento de las familias no mejoró.
Del lado bancario, el panorama es de restricción estructural. Banco Nación origina cerca del 80% de todos los créditos hipotecarios, no por vocación sino por necesidad. Los bancos privados enfrentan un problema de fondo: sus depósitos son pequeños, de corto plazo, y no pueden financiar cómodamente préstamos a treinta años. Galicia y Santander, que tenían presencia relevante el año pasado, se retiraron cuando la volatilidad cambiaria empujó sus tasas al 15%; aunque las bajaron al 9,5%, no recuperaron participación de mercado.
El economista Andrés Salinas señala que las condiciones mejoraron levemente en los últimos tres meses, pero advierte que las tasas no volverán a los mínimos de fines de 2024. La razón es simple: un banco no tiene cómo cubrirse al comprometer dinero por treinta años en una economía donde la inflación y el tipo de cambio siguen siendo impredecibles. Prestar a largo plazo es, en esencia, adivinar.
Para quien evalúa tomar un crédito hoy, la decisión va mucho más allá de la tasa. La relación entre la UVA y el dólar está en su nivel más alto registrado. Endeudarse en pesos para comprar una propiedad valuada en dólares implica apostar a que el salario acompañará la inflación y a que la moneda no se deteriorará más. En Argentina, esas no son apuestas sencillas. Economistas como Federico González Rouco coinciden en que lo que el mercado hipotecario realmente necesita no es liquidez adicional, sino estabilidad sostenida. Sin ella, ningún recorte de tasas alcanzará para reconstruir la confianza.
The Argentine government has been cutting interest rates aggressively, hoping to unlock credit and get people buying homes again. The numbers look good on paper: mortgage rates have fallen sharply since November. At ICBC, they dropped from 11 percent to 6.9 percent. BBVA went from 10.9 percent to 7.5 percent. Credicoop from 12.5 percent to 8 percent. Macro from 15 percent to 8.5 percent. Even Banco Nación, which has long offered the cheapest terms, is holding steady at 6 percent above inflation. Yet despite this relief, mortgage lending has stalled. The problem is not the price of money. It is the money people have.
Real wages in Argentina fell again in March. This is not a one-month blip. Salaries have been essentially flat since early 2025, and that baseline was already historically low. The government's own labor ministry confirmed it. When families are not earning more, cheaper credit does not matter much. A lower interest rate on a thirty-year loan means nothing if you cannot afford the monthly payment. This wage stagnation is the weight pressing down on demand, heavier than any rate cut can lift.
The banking side tells a different story, one of constraint rather than reluctance. Banco Nación now originates roughly 80 percent of all mortgage loans. BBVA has emerged as a distant second, capturing 15 percent of new mortgages in April. Galicia and Santander, which were significant players last year, retreated when currency volatility pushed their rates to 15 percent; they have since lowered them to 9.5 percent, but their market share has not recovered. The concentration in Banco Nación reflects not confidence but necessity. Private banks face a structural problem: they cannot easily match long-term lending with their funding sources. Argentine deposits are small relative to other countries and tend to be short-term. A bank cannot comfortably lend money for thirty years when its customers might withdraw their savings next month. This mismatch constrains supply.
Economist Andrés Salinas, who tracks these rates closely, noted that conditions deteriorated steadily from the moment mortgage credit resumed until about three months ago. Since then, the trajectory has improved slightly. But he does not expect rates to return to the 4.5 percent levels seen at Banco Nación in late 2024 and early 2025. The reason is fundamental: banks struggle to price the risk. As Salinas explained, a bank has nothing to hedge against when it commits to a thirty-year loan in an economy where inflation and currency movements remain unpredictable. The bank is essentially guessing.
Government efforts to inject liquidity into the system could help. More cash in the banking sector means more capacity to lend at lower rates. But even that has limits. Federico González Rouco, an economist at Empiria, and others in the field agree that what Argentina really needs is sustained economic stability. Without it, no amount of rate cuts or liquidity will revive a durable mortgage market. The Sustainability Guarantee Fund, a government mechanism, has been mentioned as potentially crucial to stimulating both construction and mortgage lending, but its role remains largely theoretical.
For someone considering a mortgage today, the decision hinges on personal circumstances and future expectations. The relationship between the UVA—the inflation-indexed unit used in mortgages—and the dollar is at its highest level on record. This matters because when you borrow pesos to buy a home priced in dollars, those pesos are converted to UVAs and adjusted for inflation. If inflation accelerates or the peso weakens further, your real debt burden rises. The choice to borrow is not simply about whether rates are low. It is about whether you believe your salary will keep pace, whether you have assets to fall back on, and whether you trust the currency to hold its value. In Argentina today, those are not easy bets to make.
Citações Notáveis
From the moment mortgage credit resumed until three months ago, conditions deteriorated steadily, but rates are unlikely to return to the 4.5% levels seen in late 2024.— Andrés Salinas, economist
What Argentina needs for a long-term mortgage market is sustained economic stability.— Andrés Salinas, economist
A Conversa do Hearth Outra perspectiva sobre a história
Why haven't lower rates brought more borrowers into the market?
Because people cannot afford the payments. Real wages fell in March and have been stagnant since early 2025. A cheaper loan does not help if your income is not growing.
But rates have dropped significantly—from 15 percent down to 6 or 7 percent. That is a huge difference.
It is, on paper. But the monthly payment depends on both the rate and your salary. If your salary is flat, even a lower rate does not change the fundamental math of whether you can carry a thirty-year mortgage.
What about the banks? Are they willing to lend?
They want to, but they face their own constraint. They fund short-term deposits but are being asked to make thirty-year loans. In an unstable economy, that is a dangerous mismatch. They cannot easily price that risk.
So Banco Nación dominates because it has no choice?
Partly. Banco Nación can absorb risk that private banks cannot. But even Nación's dominance—80 percent of the market—shows how concentrated lending has become. BBVA is trying to grow, but it is far behind.
What would actually unlock the market?
Sustained economic stability. Not one quarter of stability, but years of it. That would let banks price long-term loans rationally and let workers believe their salaries will keep pace. Without that, rate cuts alone cannot do the job.
Is the government's liquidity injection enough?
It helps, but it is not the answer. More money in the system lets banks lend more, but it does not solve the wage problem or the currency uncertainty. Those are structural.