Loan Servicing Statistics 2024 – Everything You Need to Know

by

Are you looking to add Loan Servicing to your arsenal of tools? Maybe for your business or personal use only, whatever it is – it’s always a good idea to know more about the most important Loan Servicing statistics of 2024.

My team and I scanned the entire web and collected all the most useful Loan Servicing stats on this page. You don’t need to check any other resource on the web for any Loan Servicing statistics. All are here only 🙂

How much of an impact will Loan Servicing have on your day-to-day? or the day-to-day of your business? Should you invest in Loan Servicing? We will answer all your Loan Servicing related questions here.

Please read the page carefully and don’t miss any word. 🙂

Best Loan Servicing Statistics

☰ Use “CTRL+F” to quickly find statistics. There are total 672 Loan Servicing Statistics on this page 🙂

Loan Servicing Market Statistics

  • Through the first 9 months of 2018 home builders have been one of the weakest performing categories across the domestic stock market, which has offset a massive 76% total return they achieved in 2017. [0]
  • The next table shows what percent of dollar value of the nonconventional market various government backed loan programs have represented since 2004. [0]
  • The global real estate market accounts for about 60% of all mainstream assets was worth $280.6 trillion at the end of 2017. [0]
  • Residential property represents $220.6 trillion of that market according to a study done by Savills World Research. [0]
  • First Time Buyers – The number of first time buyers entering the housing market fell to its lowest percentage since 1981. [0]
  • In 2014, first time buyers comprised 33% of the US housing market, a drop of five points from the previous year. [0]
  • The market size of the Check Cashing & Payday Loan Services industry is expected to increase 5.1% in 2024. [1]
  • The market size of the Check Cashing & Payday Loan Services industry in the US has grown 2.5% per year on average between 2017 and 2024. [1]
  • When looking at mortgage market shares in 2020, FHA loans made up 17% of the home purchases compared to 18.3% in 2014 – for refinancing, that figure is 6.9% compared to 7.9% in 2014. [2]
  • FHA/VA mortgage loans make up about 20% of the market. [2]

Loan Servicing Latest Statistics

  • Growth slowed while several million federal loans were in 0% interest deferment though the nationwide total student loan debt increased at an average monthly rate of $56 million in 2021. [3]
  • Total $1,320,248,140,000 Yearover. [3]
  • 2012 Total $1,054,565,110,000 Yearover. [3]
  • Between the second and third financial quarter of 2020, the CARES Act offered student loan debt relief that affected an estimated 35 million borrowers. [3]
  • Federal student loan interest is 0.0% for most federal loans until after August 31, 2024. [3]
  • Between 2020’s 2ndand 3rdfinancial quarters, the amount of student loan debt in repayment decreased 82% while student debt in forbearance increased 375%. [3]
  • Between the 3rdand 4thfinancial quarters, student loans in forbearance declined 0.44%. [3]
  • Also during that period, the number of loans in repayment grew 33.3%. [3]
  • The number of loans in default also declined by 1.79%. [3]
  • 56.65% of all debt from federal student loans remains in forbearance until September 2021. [3]
  • 22.2 million or 48.8% of borrowers have loans in forbearance. [3]
  • 400,000 or 0.88% of federal student loan borrowers have loans currently in repayment, which is a 97.8% decrease from the 2ndfinancial quarter when 40.1% of borrowers had loans in repayment. [3]
  • 8% of the student loan debt balance belongs to students who are still in school. [3]
  • 2.81% of the total federal student loan debt is in a grace period. [3]
  • 7.8% of federal debt is in defaulted loans. [3]
  • Compared to 2020, rate at which the total national student loan debt balance increased was 52.6% slower in 2021. [3]
  • The federal student loan debt balance alone increased 2.9% in 2021. [3]
  • The nationwide total student loan debt balance increased 8.28% in 2020. [3]
  • The average student loan debt, meanwhile, increased 4.5%. [3]
  • In May of 2020, 9% of borrowers who attended public institutions were behind on their student loan payments. [3]
  • 7% of borrowers who attended private, nonprofit institutionts and 24% of borrowers who attended private, for profit schools were behind on their loan payments. [3]
  • By July, 11.2% of adults with student loan debt reported they were unable to make at least one student loan payment that yearto. [3]
  • In early 2020, 75.3% of private student loans were in repayment while 20% were in deferment. [3]
  • In 2020, private student loan debt increased by $16.8 billion or 14%. [3]
  • 15% of all American adults report they have outstanding undergraduate student debt; 7% report outstanding postgraduate student loans. [3]
  • Nationwide, 43% of college attendees report they incurred some type of educational debt. [3]
  • Among today’s college students, 65% graduate with student debt. [3]
  • Between 39% and 50% of indebted student borrowers have loans from both undergraduate and postgraduate education. [3]
  • Among adults with student loan debt, 93% report borrowing to pay for their own education while 81% report borrowing to pay for a child’s or grandchild’s education. [3]
  • The student loan debt growth rate outpaces the rise in tuition costs by 353.8%. [3]
  • 23.6% is the annual growth rate of the total student loan debt balance, or 513% faster than the growth rate of the nation’s gross domestic product (3.85%). [3]
  • 94.8% of people with student loan debt borrowed for an undergraduate education. [3]
  • 44.2% of people with student loan debt borrowed for a postgraduate education. [3]
  • While 30% of undergraduates borrow money from the federal government, the total amount they borrow accounts for 92.6% of student loan debt. [3]
  • 52.8% of federal student loan debt is in Stafford Loans. [3]
  • 18.6% of federal debt is in subsidized Stafford loans; 34.2% is in unsubsidized Stafford loans. [3]
  • 35.5% of federal student loan debt is in direct consolidated loans. [3]
  • 6.4% of student loan debt is from Parent PLUS loans, borrowed by parents on behalf of their children. [3]
  • 5% of student loan debt is from Grad PLUS loans going to graduate or professional students. [3]
  • 0.4% of student loan debt is from Perkins loans. [3]
  • The federal government loans an annual total of $45.3 billion to 44.4% of all postsecondary students. [3]
  • Private loan borrowing constitutes 8.4% of the outstanding student loan debt. [3]
  • 88.5% of that balance is for undergraduate loans while 11.5% is for graduate student loans. [3]
  • 13% of students use student loans from a private source, such as a bank or credit union. [3]
  • 95% of borrowers with outstanding debt related to their own education owe a balance on a student loan. [3]
  • 23% of borrowers with outstanding educational debt have a credit card balance. [3]
  • 4% of indebted borrowers used a home equity loan; 11% used some other type of loan. [3]
  • 11% of indebted borrowers who borrowed to fund a child or grandchild’s education used home equity loans. [3]
  • 49.2% of student aid recipients are financially independent. [3]
  • 14% of student financial aid recipients live in school owned housing while 24.4% live with their parents. [3]
  • 15% of student financial aid recipients are married. [3]
  • 3.3 million, or 15.1% of student borrowers under 40 years old are behind on their student loan payments. [3]
  • 338,608, or 17% of student borrowers under 25 years old are behind on their student loan payments. [3]
  • 56.5% of student financial aid recipients are female. [3]
  • 58% of all student loan debt belongs to women. [3]
  • 16% of women have undergraduate student loan debt. [3]
  • 8% of women have postgraduate student debt. [3]
  • Black college students are the most likely to use federal loans, with 49.4% borrowing, while Asian students are the least likely to receive federal loans at 62%. [3]
  • 30% of black college graduates with student loans default in the first 12 years of repayment. [3]
  • White students are the most likely to receive private loans, with 7.1% borrowing privately; American Indian and Alaska Native students are least likely to borrow privately at 2.6%. [3]
  • Four years after graduation, 48% of Black students owe an average of 12.5% more than they borrowed. [3]
  • White and Caucasian borrowers owe 54% of the national student loan debt balance. [3]
  • Borrowers over the age of 60 increase student debt among their age group by 50% every 5 years. [3]
  • 35year olds have the highest average outstanding student loan debt at $42,600 per borrower, with an end balance 287% of the value of their original loan. [3]
  • 77.2% of aid recipients are under 30 years old; 37.8% of recipients are enrolled full. [3]
  • 17.7% of people with a student loan balance are under the age of 25. [3]
  • 68.6% of indebted student borrowers are between 25 and 50 years old. [3]
  • 34% of adults aged 18 to 29 years have student loan debt, making them more than twice as likely as adults in any other age group to have student debt. [3]
  • Among borrowers under 40 years of age, Black borrowers are the second most likely to be current with their student loan payments, at a rate of 63%. [3]
  • The same demographic group is the most likely to be behind on student loan payments, at a rate of 26%. [3]
  • Graduate students borrow 37% of federal student loan dollars. [3]
  • 60% of undergraduate certificate recipients owe an average of $16,940 each in federal loans. [3]
  • 42% of associate’s degree recipients owe an average of $21,890 each in federal loans. [3]
  • 63% of bachelor’s degree holders owe an average of $31,790 in federal loans. [3]
  • 54% of master’s degree holders owe an average of $70,070 in federal loans. [3]
  • 45% of doctoral degree recipients owe an average of $118,360. [3]
  • 71% of professional degree holders owe an average of $199,540. [3]
  • In 2009, 27.15% of private loans were not school. [3]
  • By 2019, 0.06% of private loans were not school. [3]
  • 52% of students who had taken on student loan debt did not feel it was worth it. [3]
  • Student loan payments have an annual growth rate of 6.6%. [3]
  • 53% of millennials have not bought a home because student loan debt either disqualified them or made it impossible to afford a mortgage. [3]
  • In 2018, 30% of college students lived at or below the poverty line. [3]
  • 14% are single parents and 56% of them devote over 30 hours/week caring for children. [3]
  • 88% of single parents in college have incomes at or below 200% of the poverty line. [3]
  • 0.7% of eligible borrowers will eventually benefit from student loan forgiveness. [3]
  • 6.7% of eligible student borrowers apply for loan forgiveness. [3]
  • A little over 1% of applications for Public Service Loan Forgiveness have been approved since the program’s inception. [3]
  • In the program’s first year, 0.032% of applications were approved. [3]
  • In 2015, less than 6% of eligible borrowers of FFELP loans were enrolled in income driven repayment plans compared to nearly 30% of borrowers with loans made directly by the Department of Education. [3]
  • More than 20% of FFELP borrowers were delinquent or in forbearance. [3]
  • Federal student loan servicer Navient received 43% of federal servicer complaints. [3]
  • American Education Services and Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency received 24% of complaints. [3]
  • 10% of complaints were about Nelnet, 4% about Great Lakes, and 2% were regarding servicer Heartland Payment. [3]
  • 13,900 complaints were in regard to federal student loans, with the biggest percentage of complaints related to dealing with the lender or servicer. [3]
  • 6,700 complaints in regard to private loans, with the biggest percentage of complaints related to dealing with the lender or servicer. [3]
  • $36,510 Student Loan Delinquency Rate 11.1% Direct Loans — Cumulative In Default $122.2 billion. [4]
  • Number of applications denied 263,118 % of applications denied due to payments that don’t qualify 56%. [4]
  • 26% Borrowers who have received student loan forgiveness. [4]
  • California, Florida, Texas and New York represent nearly 30% of all U.S. student loan borrowers. [4]
  • Nearly seven in 10 seniors (65%). [4]
  • Almost half (47%). [4]
  • 17.7% of student loan borrower are under the age of 25. [4]
  • 68.6% of student loan borrowers are between 25 and 50 years old. [4]
  • As a matter of fact, Fannie Mae predicted 2020 would be a record year for residential mortgage originations across the United States. [0]
  • According to the Federal Reserve, outstanding mortgage debt for single family residences declined significantly from 2011 to 2012, but has been growing in fits and starts since 2013. [0]
  • Increased rates caused the total residential mortgage production volume to fall nearly 7% between 2017 and 2018. [0]
  • The MBA estimated $1.64 trillion in production in 2018, while production stood at $1.76 trillion in 2017. [0]
  • This fee was implemented to help protect the GSEs from an estimated $6 billion in COVID. [0]
  • With that trend and guidance in place, many mortgage industry veterans predicted mortgage rate would rise in 2019. [0]
  • Freddie Mac Actual PMMS 30 Year Rates 3.94% Mortgage Banker’s Association. [0]
  • Realtor.com Danielle Hale 5.3% Moody’s Analytics Mark Zandi 5.0%. [0]
  • Wells Fargo Sam Bullard 4.9% Carrington Mortgage Rick Sharga 5.25% CoreLogic Frank Nothaft 5.25% National Association of Home Builders 4.81%. [0]
  • 5.8% MBA Fannie Mae Freddie Mac NAR NAHB CoreLogic. [0]
  • The NAHB saw 30 year fixed rates rising to 5.08% in 2020, when they anticipated ARMs to jump from 2019 estimates of 4.46% to 4.63%. [0]
  • The average rate predicted for 2019 was 5.13% while the actual average rate throughout the year was 3.94%. [0]
  • In the second quarter of 2020 the United States economy contracted at a record annualized rate of 31.4%. [0]
  • As the global economy crashed the Federal Reserve’s FOMC cut interest rates twice, announced they would conduct unlimited quantitative easing, and gave forward guidance suggesting they were unlikely to lift rates through 2024. [0]
  • On the week of November 5th, the average 30year fixed rate fell to 2.78%. [0]
  • Fannie Mae chief economist Doug Duncan believes the 30 year fixed rate will be 2.8% through 2021 and reach 2.9% in 2024. [0]
  • Mike Fratantoni believes the 30 year fixed rate will reach 3.3% in 2021 and 3.6% in 2024. [0]
  • Freddie Mac and the National Association of Homebuilders expect mortgage rates to be 3% in 2021, while the National Association of Realtors thinks it will reach 3.2% and Wells Fargo thinks rates will be 2.89%. [0]
  • Real estate appreciation in the United States during 2018 and 2019 ran at 5.1% and 4.2%. [0]
  • In 2020 Fannie Mae anticipates home prices to increase 5.5% and increase a further 2.6% in 2024. [0]
  • Housing debt totals $9.81 trillion, or 70.78% of the total. [0]
  • According to HMDA, first mortgages represented 85.44% of originated home loans & 95.05% of all new mortgage debt originated in 2018. [0]
  • Secondary mortgages represented 14.56% of new loans & 4.95% of new mortgage debt. [0]
  • Conventional First 4,963,197 75.26% of first 1,524,366,245,000 80.5% of first. [0]
  • First 970,901 14.72% of first 206,447,255,000 10.9% of first USDA. [0]
  • 103,808 1.57% of first 15,177,360,000 0.8% of first. [0]
  • First 556,414 8.44% of first 147,733,570,000 7.8% of first. [0]
  • Total First 6,594,320 85.44% of total 1,893,724,430,000 95.05% of total. [0]
  • Conventional Second 1,119,755 99.67% of second 98,428,855,000 4.95% of second. [0]
  • FHA Second 3,468 0.31% of second 165,760,000 0.17% of second USDA Second 42 0% of second 2,520,000 0% of second. [0]
  • VA Second 200 0.02% of second 15,350,000 0.02% of second Total Second 1,123,465 14.56% of total 98,612,485,000 4.95% of total Total First & Second 7,717,785. [0]
  • The following data from the Federal Reserve shows how mortgage debt has grown over time In recent years total mortgage debt has been growing at a rate of roughly 3.5% to 3.7% annually. [0]
  • The biggest pullback from the 2008 to 2009 global recession was in Q4 of 2010 with mortgage debt falling by 4.21%. [0]
  • Date Total YoY △ % △ 1 4 Family Multifamily Commercial Farm 1945 Q4 $35,853 $18,706 $4,922 $7,465. [0]
  • $4,760 1946 Q4 $42,032 $6,179 17.234% $23,100 $5,270 $8,765 $4,897 1947. [0]
  • Q4 $49,198 $7,166 17.049% $28,267 $5,787. [0]
  • $10,080 $5,064 1948 Q4 $56,568 $7,370 14.980% $33,422 $6,662 $11,196 $5,288 1949 Q4 $62,679 $6,111 10.803% $37,406 $7,829 $11,865 $5,579 1950 Q4 $73,108 $10,429 16.639% $45,250 $9,301 $12,486 $6,071 1951 Q4. [0]
  • $82,573 $9,465 12.947% $51,792 $10,642 $13,488 $6,651 1952 Q1 $84,413. [0]
  • 1954 Q4 $113,580 $12,220 12.056% $75,356 $12,665 $17,313 $8,246 1955 Q1 $117,256 $13,935 13.487% $78,237 $12,782 $17,765 $8,472 1955 Q2 $121,656 $15,290 14.375% $81,697 $12,989 $18,263 $8,707 1955 Q3. [0]
  • $125,896 $16,139 14.704% $85,032 $13,179 $18,819 $8,866 1955 Q4 $129,823 $16,243 14.301% $87,936 $13,490 $19,375 $9,022 1956 Q1 $133,258 $16,002 13.647% $90,356 $13,657 $19,954 $9,291 1956 Q2 $137,325 $15,669 12.880% $93,327 $13,827 $20,582. [0]
  • $9,589 1956 Q3 $141,104 $15,208 12.080% $96,174 $13,972 $21,199 $9,759 1956 Q4 $144,447 $14,624 11.265% $98,745 $14,064 $21,803 $9,835 1957 Q1 $147,290 $14,032 10.530% $100,851 $14,085 $22,321 $10,033 1957 Q2 $150,246 $12,921 9.409%. [0]
  • $103,039 $14,182 $22,794 $10,231 1957 Q3 $153,602 $12,498 8.857% $105,397 $14,379. [0]
  • $23,478 $10,348 1957 Q4 $156,641 $12,194 8.442% $107,374 $14,611 $24,259 $10,397 1958 Q1 $159,336 $12,046 8.178% $108,975. [0]
  • 8.428% $111,142 $15,517 $25,496 $10,754 1958 Q3 $167,216 $13,614 8.863% $114,035 $16,020 $26,204 $10,957 1958 Q4 $172,073 $15,432 9.852% $117,177 $16,565 $27,222 $11,109 1959 Q1. [0]
  • $119,935 $17,132 $27,761 $11,357 1959 Q2 $181,322 $18,413 11.303% $123,346 $17,679 $28,553 $11,744 1959 Q3 $186,450 $19,234. [0]
  • $208,409 $17,281 9.042% $141,378 $20,786 $33,407 $12,838 1961 Q1 $212,253 $17,304 8.876% $143,645 $21,424 $34,121 $13,063 1961 Q2. [0]
  • $35,173 $13,437 1961 Q3 $222,791 $18,688 9.156% $150,179 $22,790 $36,085 $13,737 1961 Q4 $228,969 $20,560 9.865% $154,027 $23,622 $37,403 $13,917 1962 Q1 $233,302 $21,049 9.917% $156,488 $24,218 $38,374 $14,222. [0]
  • 1962 Q2 $239,432 $22,276 10.258% $160,237 $24,937 $39,584 $14,674 1962 Q3 $245,791 $23,000 10.324% $164,345. [0]
  • $25,769 $40,733 $14,944 1962 Q4 $252,438 $23,469 10.250% $168,307 $26,732 $42,206 $15,193 1963 Q1. [0]
  • $292,203 $27,557 10.413% $193,368 $32,095 $48,672 $18,068 1964 Q3 $299,773 $27,709 10.185% $198,076 $33,313 $49,848 $18,536 1964 Q4 $307,034 $27,778 9.947% $202,335 $34,578 $51,179 $18,942 1965 Q1 $312,731 $27,854 9.778% $205,891 $35,384. [0]
  • $320,010 $27,807 9.516% $210,329 $36,300 $53,197 $20,184 1965 Q3 $327,395 $27,622 9.214% $215,042 $37,243 $54,413 $20,697 1965 Q4 $334,510 $27,476 8.949% $219,449 $38,213 $55,661 $21,187 1966. [0]
  • $388,021 $26,159 7.229% $249,378 $45,477 $67,543 $25,623 1968 Q2 $395,418 $27,971 7.612% $253,675 $46,242 $69,114 $26,387 1968 Q3 $403,087 $28,322 7.557% $258,183. [0]
  • $47,141 $70,927 $26,836 1968 Q4 $411,381 $29,326 7.676% $262,934 $48,251 $73,019 $27,177 1969 Q1 $416,067 $28,046 7.228% $264,857 $49,196 $74,367 $27,647 1969 Q2. [0]
  • $269,738 $50,352 $75,792 $28,342 1969 Q3 $432,047 $28,960 7.185% $274,512 $51,512 $77,271 $28,752 1969 Q4 $439,911 $28,530 6.935% $278,689 $53,176 $79,051 $28,995 1970 Q1 $442,980 $26,913 6.468% $280,971 $53,467. [0]
  • $78,950 $29,592 1970 Q2 $450,595 $26,371 6.216% $284,366 $55,054 $81,253 $29,922 1970 Q3 $460,315 $28,268 6.543% $288,349 $57,668 $84,057 $30,241 1970 Q4 $469,364 $29,453 6.695% $292,240 $60,129 $86,503 $30,492 1971 Q1 $477,184 $34,204 7.721% $296,349. [0]
  • $62,312 $87,700 $30,823 1971 Q2 $490,134 $39,539 8.775%. [0]
  • $303,206 $65,052 $90,090 $31,786 1971 Q3 $504,220 $43,905 9.538% $311,379. [0]
  • $67,399 $93,327 $32,115 1971 Q4 $517,869 $48,505 10.334%. [0]
  • $91,127 $129,035 $38,952 1973 Q4 $666,543 $76,757 13.014% $399,840 $93,191 $133,706 $39,806 1974 Q1 $681,413 $76,122 12.576% $407,909 $95,355 $137,455 $40,694 1974 Q2 $700,754 $72,804 11.594% $418,838 $97,221 $142,377 $42,318 1974 Q3. [0]
  • $716,574 $67,566 10.411% $428,859 $98,933 $145,045 $43,737 1974 Q4 $728,426 $61,883 9.284% $435,176 $100,049 $148,279. [0]
  • $44,922 1975 Q1 $737,733 $56,320 8.265% $439,951. [0]
  • $100,586 $150,411 $46,785 1975 Q2 $753,522 $52,768 7.530% $450,826 $100,735 $153,431 $48,530 1975 Q3 $769,738 $53,164 7.419% $462,776 $100,820 $157,058 $49,084 1975 Q4 $785,568 $57,142 7.845% $474,003. [0]
  • $100,693 $161,019 $49,853 1976 Q1 $802,392 $64,659 8.765% $486,205 $102,169 $163,221. [0]
  • $50,797 1976 Q2 $823,307 $69,785 9.261%. [0]
  • $501,045 $103,607 $166,345 $52,310 1976 Q3 $847,760 $78,022 10.136% $518,784 $104,909 $170,146 $53,921 1976. [0]
  • Q4 $870,518 $84,950 10.814% $535,022 $105,895 $174,189 $55,412 1977. [0]
  • Q1 $892,257 $89,865 11.200% $550,282 $107,142 $177,453 $57,380 1977 Q2. [0]
  • $926,270 $102,963 12.506% $575,838 $109,746 $180,348 $60,338 1977 Q3 $963,193 $115,433 13.616% $603,197 $111,835 $185,795 $62,366 1977 Q4 $999,213 $128,695 14.784% $627,724 $114,279 $193,261 $63,949 1978 Q1. [0]
  • $1,026,813 $134,556 15.080% $646,079 $116,827 $197,958 $65,949 1978 Q2 $1,066,897 $140,627 15.182% $674,540 $120,272 $203,343 $68,742 1978 Q3. [0]
  • $1,109,961 $146,768 15.238% $707,359 $122,681 $208,876 $71,045 1978 Q4 $1,150,674 $151,461 15.158% $738,254 $125,152 $214,511 $72,757 1979 Q1 $1,186,117 $159,304 15.514% $762,873 $127,635 $219,175 $76,434 1979. [0]
  • $129,903 $225,711 $80,935 1979 Q3 $1,278,932 $168,971 15.223% $828,850 $132,396 $233,353 $84,333 1979 Q4 $1,317,030 $166,356 14.457% $855,779 $135,048 $239,448 $86,755 1980 Q1 $1,357,614 $171,497 14.459% $886,093 $137,027. [0]
  • $243,912 $90,582 1980 Q2 $1,383,696 $152,278 12.366% $902,289 $138,408 $248,864 $94,135 1980 Q3 $1,421,427 $142,495 11.142% $931,530 $140,218 $253,808 $95,871 1980 Q4 $1,457,828 $140,798 10.691% $957,912 $142,526 $259,903 $97,487 1981 Q1 $1,484,685. [0]
  • $267,511 $100,097 1981 Q2 $1,523,566 $139,870 10.108% $996,937 $144,952. [0]
  • $278,496 $103,181 1981 Q3 $1,555,141 $133,714 9.407% $1,014,571 $146,039 $288,922 $105,609 1981 Q4 $1,579,504 $121,676 8.346% $1,030,213 $142,377 $299,685 $107,229 1982 Q1 $1,600,795 $116,110. [0]
  • 7.821% $1,041,585 $143,640 $306,619 $108,951 1982 Q2 $1,625,667 $102,101 6.701%. [0]
  • $1,055,044 $144,694 $315,647 $110,282 1982 Q3 $1,635,406 $80,265 5.161% $1,055,314 $144,215 $324,780. [0]
  • $111,097 1982 Q4 $1,661,290 $81,786 5.178% $1,070,187 $146,112 $333,680 $111,311 1983 Q1 $1,692,029 $91,234 5.699% $1,087,139 $147,020 $346,330. [0]
  • $111,540 1983 Q2 $1,739,644 $113,977 7.011% $1,116,296. [0]
  • $150,761 $360,215 $112,372 1983 Q3 $1,796,351 $160,945 9.841% $1,153,484 $155,784 $373,975 $113,108 1983 Q4 $1,850,645 $189,355 11.398% $1,186,271 $161,229 $389,424 $113,721 1984 Q1 $1,904,844 $212,815 12.578% $1,216,062. [0]
  • 13.306% $1,428,061 $189,290 $505,953 $111,579 1985 Q3 $2,303,008 $268,281 13.185% $1,477,181 $194,964 $522,126. [0]
  • $108,737 1985 Q4 $2,368,542 $276,551 13.220% $1,526,876 $205,915 $541,661 $94,090 1986. [0]
  • Q1 $2,416,495 $248,247 11.449% $1,557,666 $212,974 $554,231 $91,624 1986 Q2 $2,492,143. [0]
  • 13.551% $1,843,953 $250,241 $655,668 $79,983 1987 Q3 $2,899,473 $321,375 12.466% $1,898,660 $254,693 $668,224 $77,896 1987 Q4 $2,954,269 $298,688 11.248% $1,928,457 $258,355 $691,647 $75,810 1988 Q1 $3,023,464 $285,829 10.441% $1,974,919 $268,334 $705,639. [0]
  • $74,572 1988 Q2 $3,111,962 $282,117 9.969% $2,044,958 $265,969. [0]
  • $727,702 $73,333 1988 Q3 $3,185,620 $286,147 9.869% $2,105,915 $269,276 $738,348 $72,081 1988 Q4 $3,271,905. [0]
  • $317,636 10.752% $2,162,789 $274,544 $763,743 $70,829 1989 Q1 $3,327,062 $303,598 10.041% $2,196,931 $279,826. [0]
  • $779,985 $70,320 1989 Q2 $3,396,811 $284,849 9.153% $2,255,378 $284,991 $786,638 $69,804 1989 Q3 $3,472,866 $287,246 9.017% $2,321,631 $285,815 $796,137 $69,283 1989 Q4 $3,523,554 $251,649 7.691% $2,369,557 $287,001 $798,235 $68,761 1990. [0]
  • Q1 $3,617,613 $290,551 8.733% $2,450,148 $290,563 $808,419 $68,483 1990 Q2 $3,682,117 $285,306 8.399% $2,517,151 $284,579 $812,186 $68,202 1990 Q3 $3,737,912 $265,046 7.632% $2,567,225 $286,904. [0]
  • $815,867 $67,917 1990 Q4 $3,779,452 $255,898 7.262% $2,606,804 $287,424 $817,591 $67,633 1991 Q1 $3,823,204 $205,591 5.683% $2,641,560 $288,957 $825,099 $67,588. [0]
  • 1991 Q2 $3,887,653 $205,536 5.582% $2,700,538 $290,203. [0]
  • $829,370 $67,542 1991 Q3 $3,890,397 $152,485 4.079%. [0]
  • $2,722,798 $282,656 $817,447 $67,496 1991 Q4 $3,930,682 $151,230 4.001% $2,774,705 $284,108 $804,420 $67,450 1992 Q1 $3,961,054 $137,850 3.606% $2,814,343 $283,928 $795,227 $67,557. [0]
  • 1992 Q2 $3,983,064 $95,411 2.454% $2,845,786 $280,081 $789,534 $67,663 1992 Q3 $4,021,258 $130,861 3.364% $2,899,090 $276,591 $777,806 $67,771 1992 Q4 $4,040,811 $110,129 2.802% $2,942,068 $270,935 $759,930 $67,879 1993 Q1 $4,041,824 $80,770 2.039%. [0]
  • $2,952,182 $268,838 $752,788 $68,016 1993 Q2 $4,084,335 $101,271 2.543% $3,006,466 $266,012 $743,703 $68,154 1993 Q3 $4,129,839 $108,581 2.700% $3,058,883 $264,738 $737,926 $68,293 1993 Q4 $4,171,503. [0]
  • $130,692 3.234% $3,101,120 $267,771 $734,180 $68,433 1994 Q1. [0]
  • $724,531 $70,358 1995 Q2 $4,423,916 $180,453 4.252% $3,356,631 $269,694 $726,781 $70,810 1995 Q3 $4,484,773 $190,277 4.431% $3,413,402 $270,827 $729,279 $71,266 1995 Q4 $4,522,066 $185,809 4.285% $3,446,414 $274,392 $729,537 $71,723 1996. [0]
  • Q1 $4,593,483 $224,385 5.136% $3,508,980 $275,280 $736,829 $72,394 1996. [0]
  • Q2 $4,666,334 $242,418 5.480% $3,568,551 $278,508. [0]
  • $746,210 $73,065 1996 Q3 $4,734,740 $249,967 5.574% $3,633,468 $280,946 $746,582 $73,744 1996. [0]
  • Q4 $4,802,807 $280,741 6.208% $3,682,765 $286,723 $758,897 $74,422. [0]
  • Q1 $4,857,205 $263,722 5.741% $3,728,459 $287,035 $766,280 $75,431 1997. [0]
  • $267,190 5.726% $3,783,051 $291,076 $782,946 $76,451 1997 Q3 $5,045,994 $311,254 6.574% $3,875,717 $293,294 $799,501 $77,482 1997 Q4 $5,115,947 $313,140 6.520% $3,917,554 $298,750 $821,129 $78,514 1998 Q1 $5,205,292 $348,087 7.166% $3,986,110 $305,369 $834,168. [0]
  • $350,702 $957,316 $85,136 1999 Q3 $6,068,601 $622,336 11.427% $4,606,366. [0]
  • $361,316 $1,014,748 $86,171 1999 Q4 $6,209,573 $606,365 10.822% $4,701,179 $375,156 $1,046,032 $87,206 2000. [0]
  • Q1 $6,313,670 $584,953 10.211% $4,772,403 $381,966. [0]
  • $6,475,757 $608,251 10.366% $4,896,598 $390,385 $1,102,802 $85,972 2000 Q3 $6,626,320 $557,719 9.190% $5,020,704 $395,707 $1,124,561 $85,348 2000 Q4 $6,766,632 $557,059 8.971% $5,124,971. [0]
  • $404,487 $1,152,450 $84,724 2001 Q1 $6,850,414 $536,744 8.501% $5,221,818 $409,263 $1,133,668 $85,665 2001. [0]
  • $5,393,894 $420,602 $1,155,978 $86,617 2001 Q3 $7,264,412 $638,092 9.630% $5,553,552 $429,993 $1,193,288 $87,579 2001 Q4 $7,450,103 $683,471. [0]
  • 10.101% $5,678,030 $446,092 $1,237,440 $88,541 2002. [0]
  • $452,285 $1,251,580 $90,238 2002 Q2 $7,847,327 $790,236 11.198% $6,013,375. [0]
  • 11.405% $6,222,401 $469,748 $1,307,081 $93,688 2002 Q4 $8,358,739 $908,636 12.196% $6,434,374 $486,343 $1,342,599 $95,423 2003 Q1 $8,560,075 $940,493 12.343% $6,605,236 $496,998. [0]
  • $1,365,435 $92,406 2003 Q2 $8,849,379 $1,002,052 12.769% $6,847,172 $514,553 $1,398,299 $89,355 2003. [0]
  • $10,311,404 $1,181,023 12.935% $8,024,521 $601,402 $1,592,962 $92,519 2004 Q4 $10,646,694 $1,281,878 13.688% $8,292,061 $609,346 $1,649,634 $95,653 2005. [0]
  • Q1 $10,940,720 $1,310,509 13.608% $8,537,015 $619,197. [0]
  • $1,686,607 $97,901 2005 Q2 $11,337,595 $1,359,409 13.624% $8,848,576 $638,215. [0]
  • $1,750,631 $100,173 2005 Q3 $11,732,853 $1,421,449 13.785% $9,166,673 $654,907 $1,808,802 $102,471 2005. [0]
  • Q4 $12,112,861 $1,466,167 13.771% $9,448,506 $674,332 $1,885,255 $104,768 2006 Q1 $12,513,782 $1,573,062 14.378% $9,772,780 $683,309 $1,952,116 $105,577 2006 Q2 $12,916,224 $1,578,629 13.924% $10,103,493 $692,151 $2,014,185 $106,395 2006. [0]
  • Q3 $13,259,400 $1,526,547 13.011% $10,363,701 $702,145 $2,086,333 $107,221 2006 Q4 $13,525,555 $1,412,694 11.663% $10,530,774 $717,514. [0]
  • $2,169,219 $108,048 2007 Q1 $13,807,652 $1,293,870 10.340% $10,748,884 $736,476. [0]
  • $14,103,997 $1,187,773 9.196% $10,954,663 $749,600 $2,289,388 $110,346 2007 Q3. [0]
  • $2,375,248 $111,514 2007 Q4 $14,609,661 $1,084,106 8.015% $11,252,311 $810,551 $2,434,117 $112,682 2008 Q1 $14,742,876. [0]
  • $935,224 6.773% $11,322,911 $824,063 $2,477,754 $118,148 2008 Q2 $14,773,014 $669,017. [0]
  • 4.743% $11,295,115 $837,273 $2,517,012 $123,614 2008 Q3. [0]
  • $14,757,243 $351,699 2.441% $11,251,838 $847,510 $2,528,754 $129,141 2008 Q4 $14,690,016 $80,355 0.550% $11,150,916 $852,932 $2,551,468 $134,700 2009 Q1 $14,679,117. [0]
  • 0.948% $11,096,591 $863,784 $2,532,360 $140,304 2009 Q3. [0]
  • 1.493% $11,018,655 $866,893 $2,508,277 $143,152 2009 Q4. [0]
  • $387,320 2.639% $10,830,417 $859,393 $2,453,990 $147,997 2010. [0]
  • $14,174,786 $458,253 3.132% $10,762,904 $854,317 $2,407,548 $150,017 2010. [0]
  • $13,802,969 $488,828 3.420% $10,459,335 $859,023 $2,327,281 $157,330 2011 Q2. [0]
  • $13,703,125 $471,661 3.327% $10,390,906 $856,003 $2,295,620 $160,596 2011 Q3 $13,621,319. [0]
  • % $10,333,165 $856,583 $2,267,673 $163,898 2011 Q4. [0]
  • $325,069 2.340% $10,281,318 $863,322 $2,255,932 $167,200 2012. [0]
  • 2.288% $10,216,122 $865,358 $2,236,968 $168,742 2012. [0]
  • 1.886% $10,105,203 $881,048 $2,206,327 $171,842 2012. [0]
  • 1.446% $9,999,863 $900,410 $2,215,516 $176,310 2013. [0]
  • 0.886% $9,965,129 $910,134 $2,237,508 $179,252 2013 Q3 $13,335,599. [0]
  • 0.216% $9,975,128 $924,973 $2,253,272 $182,226 2013. [0]
  • Q4 $13,344,539 $13,271 0.100% $9,959,628 $940,948 $2,258,763 $185,200. [0]
  • Q1 $13,335,357 $43,258 0.325% $9,923,862 $953,488 $2,269,947 $188,060. [0]
  • $9,914,037 $966,929 $2,290,760 $190,952 2014 Q3 $13,412,399 $76,800 0.576% $9,924,413 $981,541 $2,312,569. [0]
  • Q4 $13,883,332 $396,516 2.940% $10,076,373 $1,118,826 $2,479,333 $208,800 2016 Q1 $13,931,273 $419,916 3.108% $10,076,117 $1,144,936 $2,497,143 $213,077. [0]
  • 2016 Q2 $14,047,243 $423,371 3.108% $10,137,065 $1,170,496 $2,522,328 $217,353 2016. [0]
  • Q3 $14,211,202 $483,354 3.521% $10,220,804 $1,203,059 $2,565,662. [0]
  • $10,277,103 $1,236,309 $2,592,454 $226,000 2017 Q1 $14,431,193 $499,920 3.588%. [0]
  • $10,334,768 $1,262,264 $2,605,646 $228,515 2017 Q2 $14,575,689 $528,446 3.762% $10,411,764 $1,287,971. [0]
  • $2,644,896 $231,058 2017 Q3 $14,710,944 $499,742 3.517% $10,500,589 $1,312,423 $2,664,303 $233,629 2017. [0]
  • Q4 $14,892,013 $560,147 3.908% $10,581,506 $1,358,641 $2,715,666 $236,200 2018. [0]
  • $10,621,062 $1,380,837 $2,739,840 $238,542 2018 Q2 $15,144,799 $569,110 3.905%. [0]
  • $10,705,639 $1,408,572 $2,789,677 $240,911 2018 Q3 $15,292,261 $581,317 3.952% $10,806,843 $1,445,653 $2,796,460 $243,305. [0]
  • $261,482 2019 Q4 $16,008,389 $579,286 3.755% $11,157,551 $1,617,673 $2,966,365. [0]
  • $266,800 2020 Q1 $16,138,986 $619,219 3.990% $11,219,387 $1,637,375 $3,011,744. [0]
  • $270,480 2020 Q2 $16,284,118 $629,715 4.023% $11,303,843 $1,671,826 $3,034,289 $274,160. [0]
  • Asian 4.8% 5.0% 4.5% 4.5% 4.9% 5.3% 5.5% 5.2% 5.3% 5.7% 5.4% 5.3% 5.5% 5.8%. [0]
  • Borrower race and ethnicity Black or African American 7.1% 7.7% 8.7% 7.6% 6.3% 5.7% 6.0% 5.5% 5.1% 4.8% 5.2% 5.5% 6.0% 6.4%. [0]
  • Hispanic white 7.6% 10.5% 11.7% 9.0% 7.9% 8.0% 8.1% 8.3% 7.7% 7.3% 7.9% 8.3% 8.8% 8.8%. [0]
  • Borrower race and ethnicity Non Hispanic white 57.1% 61.7% 61.2% 65.4% 67.5% 67.9% 67.6% 68.7% 70.0% 70.2% 69.1% 68.1% 66.4% 64.9%. [0]
  • Borrower race and ethnicity Other minority 1.4% 1.3% 1.1% 1.0% 0.9% 0.9% 0.9% 0.8% 0.8% 0.7% 0.8% 0.8% 0.8% 0.9%. [0]
  • Joint 2.3% 2.3% 2.3% 2.5% 2.8% 2.8% 2.7% 2.8% 2.9% 3.1% 3.4% 3.5% 3.6% 3.7% Borrower race and ethnicity. [0]
  • Missing 19.8% 11.5% 10.5% 10.1% 9.6% 9.3% 9.1% 8.6% 8.2% 8.2% 8.3% 8.5% 8.9% 9.6%. [0]
  • Low or moderate 27.7% 24.6% 23.6% 24.6% 28.0% 36.6% 35.4% 34.4% 33.3% 28.5% 27.0% 27.9% 26.2% 26.3%. [0]
  • Middle 26.9% 25.7% 24.7% 25.1% 27.0% 26.6% 25.6% 25.2% 25.1% 25.2% 25.6% 26.1% 26.4% 26.7%. [0]
  • High 41.4% 45.5% 46.7% 46.9% 42.9% 34.6% 37.3% 38.8% 40.0% 44.7% 46.1% 44.9% 46.4% 46.0%. [0]
  • Income not used or not applicable 4.0% 4.2% 5.0% 3.4% 2.1% 2.2% 1.7% 1.6% 1.5% 1.6% 1.3% 1.1% 1.0% 1.0%. [0]
  • Neighborhood income Low or moderate 14.5% 15.1% 15.7% 14.4% 13.2% 12.6% 12.1% 11.0% 12.8% 12.7% 13.3% 13.5% 14.1% 16.1%. [0]
  • Middle 48.7% 49.2% 49.5% 49.6% 49.8% 50.2% 49.5% 49.4% 43.6% 43.7% 44.6% 45.2% 45.8% 44.2%. [0]
  • High 35.8% 34.7% 33.7% 35.1% 35.9% 35.8% 37.7% 39.1% 43.2% 43.2% 41.8% 41.0% 40.0% 39.6%. [0]
  • Asian 2.9% 1.8% 2.1% 2.6% 13.4% 26.1% 26.6% 25.8% 21.9% 16.1% 14.7% 16.6% 15.6% 13.4%. [0]
  • Borrower race and ethnicity Black or African American 21.7% 14.3% 13.6% 21.7% 64.1% 82.0% 82.9% 80.3% 77.2% 70.8% 68.0% 70.2% 68.5% 64.9% Borrower race and ethnicity. [0]
  • Hispanic white 13.7% 7.5% 7.0% 12.4% 51.4% 75.4% 77.0% 74.1% 70.7% 63.1% 59.6% 62.7% 59.8% 55.5%. [0]
  • Borrower race and ethnicity Non Hispanic white 11.1% 8.9% 9.5% 11.5% 35.4% 52.0% 50.3% 47.4% 42.2% 35.5% 33.4% 36.0% 35.2% 33.1%. [0]
  • Borrower race and ethnicity Other minority 14.0% 9.3% 9.4% 14.8% 48.4% 67.6% 68.8% 65.9% 62.2% 55.5% 54.0% 55.3% 54.2% 52.1%. [0]
  • Joint 16.9% 12.8% 14.4% 17.2% 46.4% 59.4% 56.3% 53.6% 48.9% 42.1% 41.3% 43.8% 43.1% 40.8% Borrower race and ethnicity. [0]
  • Missing 11.3% 5.1% 5.7% 8.8% 32.7% 50.6% 49.4% 45.9% 39.4% 31.9% 32.2% 34.9% 34.7% 31.9%. [0]
  • Borrower income Low or moderate 20.3% 15.2% 14.9% 16.0% 46.1% 65.3% 66.6% 64.5% 59.7% 52.5% 50.3% 53.4% 51.7% 47.4%. [0]
  • Middle 14.3% 11.0% 12.6% 16.7% 46.1% 60.4% 59.3% 57.0% 51.5% 45.6% 44.8% 47.7% 47.6% 45.0%. [0]
  • High 5.3% 3.9% 4.9% 7.5% 26.7% 38.5% 37.2% 34.4% 29.5% 25.1% 24.2% 26.3% 26.7% 25.2%. [0]
  • Neighborhood income Low or moderate 15.8% 9.7% 9.6% 13.8% 45.4% 64.3% 65.0% 61.2% 57.9% 49.9% 48.1% 50.4% 48.8% 46.2%. [0]
  • Middle 14.1% 10.2% 10.8% 14.2% 42.7% 59.8% 59.4% 56.9% 52.1% 44.7% 43.1% 45.6% 44.6% 41.7%. [0]
  • High 7.1% 5.4% 6.1% 7.6% 27.4% 43.4% 42.0% 39.5% 34.6% 28.2% 26.1% 29.0% 28.4% 26.2% Memo All borrowers 11.9% 8.5% 9.0% 11.8% 37.6% 54.4% 53.4% 50.5% 45.2% 38.2% 36.6% 39.4% 38.7% 36.3%. [0]
  • Asian 1.2% 0.7% 0.6% 1.0% 4.6% 5.7% 4.7% 4.3% 5.9% 6.7% 6.8% 9.8% 8.3% 10.3%. [0]
  • Borrower race and ethnicity Non Hispanic white 4.0% 2.4% 2.6% 4.9% 15.9% 16.8% 13.6% 12.2% 14.2% 14.8% 16.3% 21.0% 21.7% 22.4%. [0]
  • Borrower race and ethnicity Other minority 5.5% 3.4% 2.4% 4.9% 20.0% 28.3% 23.3% 21.9% 25.5% 24.9% 25.0% 32.6% 36.7% 34.0% Borrower race and ethnicity. [0]
  • Joint 7.5% 3.7% 3.4% 6.2% 19.5% 21.1% 16.6% 16.3% 20.1% 20.5% 25.5% 28.0% 29.3% 29.5%. [0]
  • Missing 4.2% 1.9% 1.7% 4.1% 18.7% 19.0% 12.5% 13.6% 16.5% 16.7% 21.5% 25.5% 27.7% 27.7%. [0]
  • Low or moderate 2.3% 1.6% 2.9% 5.7% 18.3% 16.6% 14.1% 11.5% 9.3% 9.3% 13.0% 16.5% 18.4% 23.5%. [0]
  • Middle 1.7% 1.3% 2.7% 6.2% 19.6% 13.2% 12.3% 10.9% 8.9% 9.5% 13.2% 14.8% 15.3% 21.3%. [0]
  • High 0.8% 0.6% 1.1% 2.7% 10.6% 7.2% 6.8% 6.3% 5.5% 6.1% 8.8% 9.2% 9.2% 14.2%. [0]
  • Neighborhood income Low or moderate 5.9% 3.2% 2.9% 6.3% 24.6% 31.2% 23.1% 19.7% 22.2% 22.1% 22.4% 29.5% 30.4% 30.4% Neighborhood income. [0]
  • Middle 5.2% 3.0% 2.9% 5.8% 20.2% 22.3% 17.5% 16.1% 18.4% 19.0% 20.9% 26.8% 28.2% 27.8%. [0]
  • Neighborhood income High 2.9% 1.7% 1.6% 3.0% 11.3% 12.1% 10.0% 9.3% 11.7% 12.4% 14.5% 18.5% 19.0% 19.4%. [0]
  • Memo All borrowers 4.6% 2.6% 2.5% 5.0% 17.6% 18.7% 14.4% 13.3% 15.6% 16.4% 18.4% 23.5% 24.3% 24.9%. [0]
  • Jan 2004 74.4% 23.0% 2.5% 69.5% 30.2% 0.2% Feb 2004 73.9% 23.6% 2.5% 64.1% 35.7% 0.2% Mar 2004 74.3% 23.2% 2.5% 65.6% 34.2% 0.2% Apr 2004 73.8% 23.2% 2.9% 62.2% 37.5% 0.3%. [0]
  • May 2004 72.6% 24.5% 2.9% 63.0% 36.8% 0.2% June 2004 71.8% 25.3% 2.9% 65.5% 34.1% 0.4% July 2004 70.9% 26.2% 2.9% 68.6% 31.0% 0.4% Aug 2004 71.0% 26.0% 3.1% 74.4% 25.3% 0.4% Sept 2004 71.0% 26.0% 3.0% 76.6% 23.1% 0.3%. [0]
  • Oct 2004 70.7% 26.5% 2.9% 76.8% 22.8% 0.4% Nov 2004 70.7% 26.5% 2.8% 73.4% 26.4% 0.2% Dec 2004 69.1% 27.8% 3.1% 73.5% 26.2% 0.3% Jan 2005 67.6% 29.1% 3.3% 71.7% 28.0% 0.3% Feb 2005 66.7% 30.3% 3.0% 75.3% 24.4% 0.3% Mar 2005 66.4% 30.3% 3.3% 72.4% 27.3% 0.3%. [0]
  • Apr 2005 65.5% 30.9% 3.6% 76.7% 23.0% 0.3%. [0]
  • May 2005 64.6% 31.9% 3.5% 80.3% 19.5% 0.2% June 2005 63.2% 33.1% 3.7% 78.0% 21.7% 0.3% July 2005 62.5% 34.0% 3.5% 73.7% 25.9% 0.4% Aug 2005 62.0% 34.5% 3.5% 72.8% 26.8% 0.4% Sept 2005 61.5% 34.6% 3.9% 74.0% 25.5% 0.4%. [0]
  • Oct 2005 62.0% 34.7% 3.4% 75.7% 23.8% 0.5%. [0]
  • Nov 2005 61.2% 34.9% 3.9% 76.8% 22.6% 0.6%. [0]
  • Dec 2005 61.0% 35.5% 3.5% 79.4% 20.2% 0.3% Jan 2006 60.9% 35.5% 3.6% 84.9% 14.9% 0.3% Feb 2006 62.4% 34.5% 3.1% 84.9% 14.7% 0.5% Mar 2006 62.6% 34.2% 3.2% 85.9% 13.6% 0.4%. [0]
  • Dec 2006 56.6% 39.7% 3.7% 84.4% 15.1% 0.5% Jan 2007 55.2% 40.1% 4.6% 83.4% 16.1% 0.4% Feb 2007 56.8% 38.7% 4.5% 85.1% 14.3% 0.5% Mar 2007. [0]
  • 58.3% 36.9% 4.8% 86.3% 13.1% 0.5%. [0]
  • Apr 2007 58.4% 36.3% 5.3% 86.4% 13.3% 0.3%. [0]
  • May 2007 58.7% 36.1% 5.1% 88.7% 11.1% 0.2% June 2007 58.4% 36.6% 5.0% 90.5% 9.3% 0.3% July 2007 59.7% 35.0% 5.2% 93.5% 6.4% 0.1% Aug 2007 61.0% 34.0% 5.0% 93.8% 6.0% 0.2% Sept 2007 63.4% 31.5% 5.0% 93.7% 6.3% 0.1% Oct 2007 64.7% 30.0% 5.3% 92.9% 6.9% 0.1%. [0]
  • Nov 2007 64.8% 30.3% 4.9% 91.7% 8.2% 0.1% Dec 2007 65.4% 30.0% 4.5% 90.2% 9.7% 0.1% Jan 2008 66.9% 28.3% 4.8% 88.9% 11.0% 0.1% Feb 2008 69.9% 25.6% 4.6% 84.8% 15.0% 0.2% Mar 2008 72.8% 23.1% 4.1% 87.2% 12.5% 0.3%. [0]
  • Apr 2008 76.6% 19.6% 3.9% 89.7% 10.1% 0.2% May 2008 78.2% 18.2% 3.6% 91.7% 8.2% 0.1% June 2008. [0]
  • 78.2% 18.2% 3.5% 93.4% 6.5% 0.1% July 2008 78.9% 17.6% 3.5% 94.5% 5.4% 0.1% Aug 2008 80.0% 16.4% 3.6% 95.4% 4.6% 0.1% Sept 2008 83.2% 13.7% 3.2% 95.1% 4.8% 0.1%. [0]
  • Oct 2008 78.9% 16.8% 4.3% 93.2% 6.7% 0.1%. [0]
  • Nov 2008 78.2% 17.2% 4.6% 94.0% 5.9% 0.1% Dec 2008 78.3% 17.3% 4.4% 89.9% 9.9% 0.2% Jan 2009 76.7% 18.4% 4.8% 82.0% 17.7% 0.3% Feb 2009 75.7% 19.4% 4.9% 80.1% 19.5% 0.4% Mar 2009 76.9% 18.3% 4.8% 81.7% 18.0% 0.3%. [0]
  • Apr 2009 77.0% 17.6% 5.5% 81.9% 17.8% 0.3%. [0]
  • Apr 2010 76.5% 15.5% 8.1% 81.2% 18.4% 0.4%. [0]
  • Apr 2011 72.0% 20.4% 7.6% 75.0% 24.6% 0.4%. [0]
  • Dec 2011 67.0% 24.9% 8.1% 51.0% 48.5% 0.6% Jan 2012 68.3% 23.0% 8.7% 53.6% 46.0% 0.5%. [0]
  • 68.1% 23.5% 8.4% 56.4% 43.1% 0.5% Mar 2012 68.9% 22.8% 8.2% 58.6% 40.8% 0.6%. [0]
  • Apr 2012 68.7% 23.0% 8.4% 59.3% 40.0% 0.6%. [0]
  • Nov 2012 64.5% 26.6% 8.9% 57.6% 41.5% 1.0%. [0]
  • Dec 2012 64.0% 26.8% 9.2% 57.5% 41.5% 1.1% Jan 2013 63.5% 25.8% 10.7% 58.0% 41.0% 1.0%. [0]
  • Feb 2013 63.2% 26.9% 9.9% 57.9% 41.1% 1.0% Mar 2013 63.1% 27.1% 9.8% 57.8% 41.2% 1.0%. [0]
  • Apr 2013 63.2% 27.2% 9.6% 60.6% 38.4% 1.0%. [0]
  • May 2013 61.4% 29.5% 9.1% 54.2% 44.7% 1.1% June 2013 59.5% 31.6% 8.9% 49.8% 49.1% 1.1%. [0]
  • July 2013 58.1% 32.2% 9.7% 50.2% 48.9% 1.0%. [0]
  • Aug 2013 56.9% 32.7% 10.4% 54.8% 44.3% 0.9% Sept 2013 57.1% 32.0% 11.0% 58.7% 40.6% 0.7%. [0]
  • Oct 2013 60.9% 33.6% 5.6% 55.8% 43.8% 0.4%. [0]
  • Nov 2013 57.3% 32.0% 10.7% 51.1% 48.1% 0.7%. [0]
  • Dec 2013 56.9% 33.0% 10.2% 49.3% 49.9% 0.8%. [0]
  • Jan 2014 56.2% 32.1% 11.7% 51.1% 48.3% 0.6%. [0]
  • 56.1% 34.3% 9.7% 49.0% 50.3% 0.6% Mar 2014 56.0% 34.3% 9.8% 46.2% 53.2% 0.6%. [0]
  • Apr 2014 56.7% 33.6% 9.7% 47.7% 51.7% 0.6%. [0]
  • 55.6% 35.0% 9.3% 45.6% 54.1% 0.3% June 2014 54.4% 36.7% 8.9% 40.1% 59.5% 0.4%. [0]
  • July 2014 54.5% 36.5% 9.0% 39.0% 60.6% 0.4%. [0]
  • Aug 2014 53.9% 36.6% 9.5% 38.0% 61.7% 0.3% Sept 2014 53.6% 36.2% 10.2% 37.2% 62.4% 0.4%. [0]
  • Oct 2014 54.3% 35.8% 9.9% 35.3% 64.3% 0.4% Nov 2014 53.5% 35.6% 10.9% 28.2% 71.5% 0.3%. [0]
  • Dec 2014 54.1% 37.8% 8.1% 29.4% 70.3% 0.3% Jan 2015 52.3% 37.6% 10.1% 24.1% 75.6% 0.3%. [0]
  • Feb 2015 57.6% 34.4% 8.0% 53.8% 46.0% 0.2% Mar 2015 60.7% 32.4% 6.9% 62.3% 37.5% 0.2%. [0]
  • Apr 2015 62.6% 31.0% 6.3% 61.1% 38.6% 0.3%. [0]
  • Jan 2016 62.0% 31.8% 6.2% 49.9% 49.9% 0.1%. [0]
  • Feb 2016 62.3% 32.1% 5.5% 47.5% 52.3% 0.2% Mar 2016 62.5% 32.2% 5.3% 42.0% 57.8% 0.2%. [0]
  • Apr 2016 62.8% 31.6% 5.6% 42.3% 57.5% 0.2%. [0]
  • May 2016 61.3% 33.1% 5.6% 43.4% 56.4% 0.2% June 2016 60.9% 33.7% 5.5% 44.8% 55.1% 0.2% July 2016 60.9% 33.5% 5.6% 42.6% 57.3% 0.2% Aug 2016 60.8% 33.5% 5.7% 40.9% 59.0% 0.1% Sept 2016 61.1% 33.3% 5.6% 40.4% 59.5% 0.1%. [0]
  • Oct 2016 61.0% 32.7% 6.3% 41.3% 58.3% 0.3%. [0]
  • Nov 2016 60.3% 33.4% 6.3% 41.8% 57.6% 0.6%. [0]
  • Dec 2016 60.5% 33.1% 6.4% 43.7% 55.5% 0.8% Jan 2017 59.8% 33.4% 6.8% 48.7% 50.5% 0.8%. [0]
  • Feb 2017 60.0% 34.2% 5.8% 54.8% 44.5% 0.7% Mar 2017 61.2% 33.0% 5.8% 52.9% 46.4% 0.7%. [0]
  • Apr 2017 61.0% 33.2% 5.8% 50.1% 49.2% 0.7%. [0]
  • May 2017 59.4% 34.9% 5.8% 48.2% 51.3% 0.5% June 2017 58.3% 36.0% 5.7% 47.1% 52.4% 0.5% July 2017 58.2% 35.8% 6.0% 44.3% 55.2% 0.5% Aug 2017. [0]
  • 58.4% 35.3% 6.3% 45.2% 54.2% 0.6% Sept 2017 57.7% 35.9% 6.4% 44.1% 55.3% 0.5% Oct 2017 57.8% 36.0% 6.2% 43.9% 55.6% 0.5% Nov 2017 57.2% 36.4% 6.3% 44.1% 55.4% 0.5% Dec 2017 57.1% 36.8% 6.1% 44.0% 55.6% 0.4%. [0]
  • Asian 3.5% 2.9% 3.0% 3.1% 3.1% 4.1% 5.2% 5.4% 5.5% 4.7% 4.3% 5.0% 5.5% 4.0%. [0]
  • Borrower race and ethnicity Black or African American 7.4% 8.3% 9.6% 8.4% 6.0% 3.5% 2.9% 3.1% 3.3% 4.4% 5.4% 5.0% 5.0% 6.0%. [0]
  • Hispanic white 6.2% 8.6% 10.1% 8.7% 5.3% 3.2% 3.0% 3.3% 3.9% 5.0% 6.2% 6.3% 6.2% 6.8%. [0]
  • Borrower race and ethnicity Non Hispanic white 57.2% 60.9% 59.6% 62.7% 70.7% 74.6% 74.3% 73.5% 72.5% 70.5% 67.8% 67.2% 65.2% 63.3%. [0]
  • Borrower race and ethnicity Other minority 1.4% 1.4% 1.3% 1.1% 0.8% 0.6% 0.5% 0.6% 0.6% 0.7% 0.9% 0.8% 0.9% 1.0%. [0]
  • Joint 2.1% 2.1% 1.9% 2.0% 2.2% 2.6% 2.7% 2.8% 3.1% 3.1% 3.2% 3.3% 3.4% 3.3%. [0]
  • Missing 22.1% 15.7% 14.6% 14.1% 11.9% 11.4% 11.4% 11.3% 11.1% 11.6% 12.2% 12.4% 13.8% 15.7%. [0]
  • Low or moderate 26.2% 25.5% 24.7% 23.3% 23.4% 19.6% 18.9% 19.2% 19.6% 21.1% 22.1% 19.0% 16.9% 22.9%. [0]
  • Middle 26.3% 26.8% 26.1% 25.5% 25.4% 22.4% 22.5% 21.3% 21.8% 21.7% 21.9% 21.0% 20.3% 23.3%. [0]
  • High 38.8% 40.8% 43.7% 46.0% 44.6% 45.6% 49.5% 48.1% 47.6% 46.3% 44.9% 45.2% 47.5% 44.0%. [0]
  • Income not used or not applicable 8.7% 6.9% 5.5% 5.2% 6.6% 12.4% 9.1% 11.4% 10.9% 11.0% 11.1% 14.8% 15.3% 9.7%. [0]
  • Neighborhood income Low or moderate 15.3% 16.5% 17.9% 16.1% 11.9% 7.8% 7.2% 7.4% 10.1% 12.1% 13.3% 12.3% 12.0% 15.5%. [0]
  • Middle 50.0% 51.3% 52.0% 52.2% 51.9% 47.5% 46.1% 46.1% 41.9% 43.7% 45.3% 43.8% 43.4% 44.6%. [0]
  • High 33.9% 31.6% 29.4% 31.0% 35.2% 43.5% 46.0% 46.0% 47.6% 43.9% 41.3% 43.7% 44.4% 39.7%. [0]
  • Conventional jumbo loans 11.2% 12.7% 9.4% 6.8% 2.3% 1.3% 1.7% 2.2% 3.0% 4.0% 4.8% 5.3% 5.2% 5.5%. [0]
  • Conventional jumbo loans 29.4% 32.5% 26.8% 21.8% 10.1% 6.2% 7.5% 9.5% 12.0% 14.6% 16.5% 17.3% 16.9% 17.6%. [0]
  • From 1931 to 1935 in the Great Depression the foreclosure rate exceeded 1%. [0]
  • In the decade following the Great Recession about 5.8% of homes were foreclosed upon. [0]
  • Prior to the crisis period about 1,000,000 homes were foreclosed upon each year according to the Mortgage Bankers Association. [0]
  • The IMF estimated the GDP of the world at $86.927 trillion in 2018, or $134.981 trillion on a purchasing power parity basis. [0]
  • After the Great Recession many United States homeowners were in negative equity, with 26% of mortgaged properties having negative equity in the third quarter of 2009. [0]
  • As of the end of the second quarter of 2018 only 2.2 million homes, or 4.3% of mortgaged properties remained in negative equity. [0]
  • CoreLogic estimated that in the second quarter of 2018 U.S. homeowners saw an average increase of equity of $16,200 for the past 12 months, while key states like California increased by as much as $48,000. [0]
  • Over the past 12 months homeowners saw an average equity increase of 12.3%, for a total increase of $980.9 billion. [0]
  • The 63% of homes across the United States with active mortgages now have around $8.956 trillion in equity. [0]
  • The other 37% of homes are owned outright. [0]
  • As of 2013, and the latest US census, mortgage and home secured debt stood at just over 8.5 trillion dollars ; a 12% drop from peak levels recorded in the last quarter of 2008. [0]
  • Households were spending 13.22% of personal disposable income on debt service payments in Q4 of 2007. [0]
  • This has fallen to 9.84% at the end of Q2 2018 aided in part by lower interest rates in response to the 2008 2009 crisis and debt levels which fell relative to GDP. [0]
  • In early 2008 household debt to GDP reached 99.19% & had fallen to 80.1% by the end of 2016. [0]
  • Looking specifically at mortgage debt, in Q4 of 2007 homeowners were paying 7.22% of personal disposable income on mortgage debt service payments. [0]
  • That number had fallen to 4.24% by the end of Q2 in 2018. [0]
  • As of the end of 2018 Q2 mortgage debt & home equity debt comprised 71% of total household debt Here is an HTML table which contains the data in the above graph. [0]
  • Hispanic white 18.3% 21.1% 25.1% 29.5% 28.3% 22.2% 21.8% 21.1% 20.2% 20.5% 18.4% 16.2% 15.0% 13.5% Conventional and nonconventional Non Hispanic white 11.1% 12.2% 12.9% 13.3% 14.0% 12.8% 13.0% 13.1% 12.5% 12.0% 11.1% 10.0% 9.5% 8.8%. [0]
  • Conventional and nonconventional Other minority 19.4% 20.8% 24.0% 26.7% 25.5% 21.2% 22.0% 20.9% 20.8% 21.2% 19.0% 17.2% 16.6% 14.8%. [0]
  • only All applicants 14.6% 16.3% 18.5% 19.0% 18.3% 15.8% 15.2% 15.1% 13.6% 12.9% 11.9% 10.8% 10.2% 9.6%. [0]
  • Conventional only Asian 13.7% 16.0% 17.1% 17.5% 19.1% 15.8% 14.9% 15.5% 14.4% 14.2% 13.3% 11.9% 10.9% 10.1% Conventional only Black or African American 25.0% 27.8% 31.9% 35.7% 37.6% 35.8% 33.7% 33.2% 32.0% 28.5% 25.1% 23.3% 22.0% 19.3%. [0]
  • Conventional only Hispanic white 18.6% 21.4% 25.7% 30.5% 32.5% 26.9% 24.9% 24.2% 22.4% 21.5% 18.9% 17.2% 15.4% 13.5%. [0]
  • Conventional only Non Hispanic white 11.2% 12.3% 13.2% 13.3% 14.1% 13.3% 12.9% 12.7% 11.6% 10.8% 9.9% 9.1% 8.5% 7.9%. [0]
  • Conventional only Other minority 19.7% 21.2% 24.8% 27.8% 29.0% 25.9% 28.1% 24.6% 23.6% 22.5% 20.2% 18.2% 16.8% 14.9%. [0]
  • Loan type & borrower race & ethnicity 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Conventional and nonconventional All applicants 29.5% 32.6% 35.4% 39.6% 37.7% 24.0% 23.3% 23.8% 19.9% 23.3% 31.0% 27.2% 29.9% 26.4%. [0]
  • Asian 18.8% 23.5% 27.5% 32.6% 32.5% 21.4% 19.5% 20.1% 17.3% 21.0% 28.1% 23.8% 25.1% 24.8%. [0]
  • Non Hispanic white 24.1% 26.9% 30.1% 33.7% 32.2% 20.7% 20.6% 21.3% 17.8% 20.5% 27.5% 24.1% 26.9% 22.9%. [0]
  • Conventional and nonconventional Other minority 33.7% 35.5% 40.6% 52.0% 57.4% 37.3% 35.4% 34.4% 30.0% 32.1% 41.6% 40.1% 44.2% 37.2% Conventional only. [0]
  • All applicants 30.1% 32.9% 35.6% 39.9% 37.0% 22.1% 21.2% 22.3% 19.4% 22.5% 29.6% 26.4% 28.8% 24.0%. [0]
  • Asian 18.8% 23.5% 27.5% 32.5% 31.5% 20.2% 18.5% 19.4% 17.0% 20.5% 27.2% 23.2% 23.7% 23.5%. [0]
  • Conventional only Black or African American 41.7% 43.0% 44.7% 53.3% 60.9% 48.6% 41.4% 40.6% 34.8% 36.0% 47.0% 47.7% 52.3% 39.3%. [0]
  • Conventional only Hispanic white 29.3% 30.2% 33.3% 43.2% 50.2% 38.9% 33.6% 33.5% 28.9% 30.6% 37.3% 34.8% 35.2% 30.0% Conventional only Non Hispanic white 24.6% 27.1% 30.4% 33.9% 31.5% 19.1% 18.9% 20.1% 17.4% 19.9% 26.2% 23.2% 25.7% 20.7%. [0]
  • Nonconventional only Other minority 15.2% 25.8% 22.2% 34.8% 45.4% 34.1% 37.0% 34.4% 26.6% 30.6% 43.8% 37.6% 41.2% 41.7% Institution Size & Loan Purpose. [0]
  • 3,710 7,339 Approval rate 73.5% 63.2% 62.4% 72.4% 57.5% 60.9% Rejection rate 26.5% 36.8% 37.6% 27.6% 42.5% 39.1% Purchases 13. [0]
  • Sold 76.2% 69.3% 44.9% 94.7% 97.8% 85.2% Number of refinance loans 86 612 209 53 1,210 2,170 Refinance loans. [0]
  • Conventional 86.3% 92.1% 94.8% 87.0% 61.9% 75.1% Refinance loans Higher priced share of conventional loans 9.9% 1.7% 3.0% 0.8% 1.6% 2.1%. [0]
  • Refinance loans LMI borrower 22.9% 21.7% 25.1% 23.6% 23.1% 22.9%. [0]
  • Refinance loans LMI neighborhood 11.8% 13.3% 16.0% 12.6% 17.0% 15.5%. [0]
  • Refinance loans Non Hispanic white 83.9% 69.5% 67.9% 70.7% 57.5% 63.3%. [0]
  • Minority borrower 7.8% 17.1% 16.4% 13.4% 19.3% 17.8%. [0]
  • Sold 63.0% 66.5% 32.2% 94.0% 97.9% 80.9%. [0]
  • 15.58% Credit application incomplete 179,330 12.70%. [0]
  • Insufficient cash 37,848 2.68%. [0]
  • All applicants 22.8% 3.6% 17.0% 14.4% 6.8% 5.8% 10.2% 0.3% 8.9% 27.9% Conventional and nonconventional Asian 28.5% 4.5% 9.6% 11.7% 9.0% 10.3% 11.6% 0.3% 9.9% 25.7%. [0]
  • Conventional and nonconventional Black or African American 25.1% 3.1% 22.7% 10.7% 7.4% 4.7% 6.9% 0.3% 9.3% 30.1% Conventional and nonconventional. [0]
  • Hispanic white 24.3% 4.1% 14.9% 12.0% 6.8% 7.1% 7.3% 0.3% 10.3% 32.3%. [0]
  • Conventional and nonconventional Non Hispanic white 21.6% 3.6% 16.8% 15.5% 6.5% 5.4% 10.0% 0.3% 8.6% 28.5% Conventional and nonconventional Other minority 23.9% 3.9% 18.9% 12.2% 7.5% 5.4% 8.4% 0.4% 9.5% 29.3%. [0]
  • Conventional only All applicants 24.6% 3.2% 16.8% 16.9% 7.6% 6.4% 11.2% 0.4% 8.9% 23.2%. [0]
  • Asian 29.0% 4.3% 9.4% 12.3% 9.6% 10.7% 11.9% 0.3% 10.0% 23.9%. [0]
  • Conventional only Black or African American 27.2% 2.7% 26.2% 14.4% 8.3% 4.6% 6.9% 0.6% 10.4% 22.2%. [0]
  • Conventional only Hispanic white 26.4% 3.3% 16.0% 15.0% 8.1% 7.3% 7.3% 0.5% 11.3% 26.7%. [0]
  • Conventional only Non Hispanic white 23.6% 3.2% 16.8% 17.8% 7.2% 6.0% 10.9% 0.4% 8.3% 24.1%. [0]
  • Conventional only Other minority 26.5% 3.8% 21.7% 12.8% 8.4% 6.0% 7.9% 0.7% 10.3% 24.1% Nonconventional only All applicants 20.5% 4.1% 17.2% 11.3% 5.9% 5.1% 9.0% 0.1% 8.9% 33.9%. [0]
  • Nonconventional only Asian 26.0% 5.4% 10.7% 9.0% 6.3% 8.7% 10.2% 0.1% 9.6% 33.5%. [0]
  • Nonconventional only Black or African American 23.8% 3.4% 20.6% 8.6% 6.9% 4.8% 6.9% 0.1% 8.6% 34.8%. [0]
  • Nonconventional only Hispanic white 22.6% 4.7% 14.0% 9.5% 5.8% 6.9% 7.4% 0.1% 9.5% 37.0%. [0]
  • Nonconventional only Non Hispanic white 18.6% 4.3% 16.8% 12.2% 5.5% 4.6% 8.8% 0.2% 9.1% 34.9% Nonconventional only. [0]
  • Other minority 21.5% 3.9% 16.3% 11.5% 6.6% 4.8% 8.8% 0.1% 8.8% 34.2% Refinances Loan type and borrower race and ethnicity Debtto. [0]
  • Conventional and nonconventional Non Hispanic white 17.5% 1.0% 18.4% 13.5% 2.7% 2.7% 12.1% 0.1% 8.1% 35.6% Conventional and nonconventional Other minority 16.1% 0.8% 19.4% 9.3% 2.7% 2.4% 10.0% 0.0% 9.0% 42.6%. [0]
  • Conventional only All applicants 22.2% 1.1% 20.7% 13.7% 3.1% 3.3% 13.8% 0.1% 9.0% 27.6%. [0]
  • Conventional only Asian 30.0% 1.4% 16.2% 9.9% 4.3% 5.3% 11.8% 0.1% 9.4% 28.6%. [0]
  • Conventional only Black or African American 19.6% 0.6% 27.3% 12.1% 3.1% 2.1% 8.9% 0.1% 10.2% 32.3%. [0]
  • Conventional only Hispanic white 28.0% 1.2% 25.1% 9.8% 3.9% 4.3% 8.5% 0.1% 11.1% 27.4%. [0]
  • Conventional only Non Hispanic white 21.8% 1.1% 20.6% 14.6% 3.0% 3.3% 12.2% 0.1% 8.9% 28.5%. [0]
  • Conventional only Other minority 21.9% 1.0% 23.9% 10.4% 3.3% 3.1% 10.3% 0.0% 11.0% 31.4%. [0]
  • only All applicants 9.7% 0.7% 14.7% 12.5% 2.3% 1.6% 13.6% 0.0% 6.7% 45.7% Nonconventional only Asian 13.7% 0.8% 14.4% 7.6% 1.9% 2.5% 11.8% 0.0% 7.9% 49.9%. [0]
  • Nonconventional only Black or African American 8.9% 0.4% 16.7% 10.0% 2.9% 1.3% 9.2% 0.0% 6.7% 51.8%. [0]
  • Nonconventional only Hispanic white 12.0% 1.0% 16.8% 7.9% 2.9% 2.6% 10.9% 0.1% 8.6% 47.6%. [0]
  • Nonconventional only Non Hispanic white 8.5% 0.7% 14.0% 11.4% 2.1% 1.5% 11.9% 0.0% 6.4% 50.2%. [0]
  • only Other minority 8.1% 0.4% 13.2% 7.8% 1.9% 1.4% 9.7% 0.0% 6.3% 58.0%. [0]
  • Between 2004 & 2017 22.41% of preapproval requests were rejected while 77.59% were approved. [0]
  • About 17.86% of prospective homebuyers who were preapproved did not purchase a home using the preapproved loan. [0]
  • Roughly 19.53% of homebuyers sought preapproval before applying for a loan. [0]
  • Home buyers who have scores as low as 580 may qualify for FHA loans with a 3.5% down payment. [0]
  • Credit scores as low as 500 can qualify for some FHA loans if they put 10% down. [0]
  • A credit score difference of 100 points can lead to a quarter percent different interest rate. [0]
  • Meaning if your credit score improved 100 points you would be likely to get a discount on the loan APR of 0.25%. [0]
  • Sold Quicken Loans Independent mortgage company 105 64.9% 0.6% 28.3% 17.4% 48.7% 11.8% 99.9%. [0]
  • Wells Fargo Bank, NA Large bank 136 90.3% 3.1% 16.2% 12.1% 64.2% 21.9% 73.3%. [0]
  • JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA Large bank 56 96.8% 0.6% 13.5% 10.8% 59.5% 26.0% 60.5% loanDepot.com, LLC Independent mortgage company 40 57.1% 4.7% 19.6% 16.6% 52.4% 29.9% 99.1% Caliber Home Loans,. [0]
  • Inc. Independent mortgage company 78 57.1% 7.7% 29.0% 19.0% 58.9% 26.9% 99.7% Bank of America, NA Large bank 45 93.9% 0.2% 13.3% 11.1% 54.6% 30.1% 31.3% United Shore Financial Service Independent mortgage company 56 81.8% 2.1% 26.8% 17.8% 59.9% 30.5% 99.8%. [0]
  • US Bank, NA Large bank 35 85.3% 0.7% 25.1% 13.9% 72.0% 15.3% 76.1%. [0]
  • Fairway Independent Mort Corp Independent mortgage company 67 56.5% 5.5% 30.4% 17.7% 72.1% 19.7% 99.9% Flagstar Bank, FSB Large bank 46 55.7% 2.8% 25.0% 15.7% 62.8% 27.7% 95.4% Freedom Mortgage Corporation Independent mortgage company. [0]
  • 61.6% 17.6% 92.1% USAA Federal Savings Bank Large bank 44 34.5% 0.3% 15.3% 12.5% 65.8% 15.6% 99.6%. [0]
  • PrimeLending Affiliated mortgage company 45 60.5% 5.6% 29.1% 16.2% 68.6% 18.6% 98.8% Guaranteed Rate,. [0]
  • Inc. Independent mortgage company 39 75.9% 2.0% 21.7% 15.6% 69.2% 18.1% 100.0%. [0]
  • 1,124 63.8% 3.5% 24.0% 16.0% 61.1% 22.7% 89.1%. [0]
  • All institutions … 3,594 63.7% 4.2% 26.3% 16.1% 64.9% 21.9% 85.2%. [0]
  • Sold Quicken Loans Independent mortgage company 269 70.7% 0.1% 27.9% 16.2% 41.8% 9.4% 99.9%. [0]
  • Wells Fargo Bank, NA Large bank 101 93.7% 1.8% 22.2% 14.5% 64.6% 21.3% 87.5%. [0]
  • JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA Large bank 72 94.4% 0.9% 22.3% 13.4% 65.5% 21.8% 76.4% loanDepot.com, LLC Independent mortgage company 83 51.9% 3.4% 27.3% 17.1% 63.1% 18.2% 99.1% Caliber Home Loans,. [0]
  • Fairway Independent Mort Corp Independent mortgage company 9 81.1% 0.9% 23.4% 15.0% 77.2% 14.9% 99.9% Flagstar Bank, FSB Large bank 29 72.0% 0.9% 18.4% 14.2% 63.7% 23.8% 94.2% Freedom Mortgage Corporation Independent mortgage company. [0]
  • 55 76.7% 2.2% 17.2% 19.9% 60.2% 24.1% 99.9% USAA Federal Savings Bank Large bank 11 39.9% 0.2% 11.0% 12.8% 63.1% 17.8% 99.8%. [0]
  • PrimeLending Affiliated mortgage company 7 87.5% 2.0% 20.3% 13.3% 72.2% 16.1% 99.6% Guaranteed Rate,. [0]
  • Inc. Independent mortgage company 13 90.7% 0.5% 15.9% 12.2% 72.5% 13.5% 100.0%. [0]
  • Top 25 institutions … 977 73.8% 1.1% 23.3% 16.0% 57.5% 18.3% 90.0%. [0]
  • All institutions … 2,170 75.1% 2.1% 22.9% 15.5% 63.3% 17.8% 80.9%. [0]
  • From 2010 to 2013 the number of families with home secured debt fell from 47.0% to 42.9%. [0]
  • Again, according to the latest census numbers, the conditional median value of home secured debt for families in the United States fell by 2% from $117,500 in 2010 to $115,000 in 2013. [0]
  • The conditional mean value of homesecured debt during the same period fell from $165,400 to $156,700, showing a 5% drop in the average home secured debt being held by families in the US. [0]
  • Indeed, by 2008 the number of home loans determined to be ‘seriously delinquent’ or in default rose to 4.5%, nearly double the levels seen in 2002. [0]
  • To put that in perspective, that’s an increase of 79% over the first quarter of 2007. [0]
  • Mortgage loans that originated in the early to mid 2000’s still account for the largest percentage of delinquencies, though they only make up roughly 38% of all outstanding home loans. [0]
  • In fact, the number of mortgages written post 2009 now account for nearly 62% of all active loans , yet they only make up 15% of those classified as seriously delinquent. [0]
  • The median sales price for homes in the Empire state have risen by more than 24% over the last year, reaching a statewide average of $317,191. [0]
  • Home prices have risen by 3.75% over the last year, reaching a median of $360,000. [0]
  • The median sales price for homes in the Aloha State have risen by 2.38% over the last year, clocking in at $430,000. [0]
  • The trend is predicted to continue, with prices rising by up to 5.25% over the next few years. [0]
  • Home values in the Hoosier State have risen by only 1.8% in the last year, with median home prices hovering at around $112,000. [0]
  • Kentucky – Home values in Kentucky have risen by 1.0% over the last year, but are predicted to rise by another 3.0% over the next year or more. [0]
  • Housing costs in Mississippi are expected to rebound more slowly than other parts of the country, with an annual increase of 1.5% to 1.8%. [0]
  • The statistical make up of home buyers has remained unchanged over the last few years, with 65% being married couples, 16% single women, 9% single men, and 8% unmarried couples. [0]
  • Financing Profiles – 88% of all buyers financed their purchase, with younger buyers more likely to rely on financing than consumers aged 64 or older. [0]
  • 93% of first time buyers opted for a fixed rate mortgage, with 35% financing their purchase with an FHA backed mortgage. [0]
  • first time buyers was 6% of the total cost of their home, while the average down payment for repeat buyers was 13%. [0]
  • Housing Profiles – 79% of buyers purchased a detached single family home, while 16% bought a townhouse or condo. [0]
  • On November 30, 2021 the Federal Housing Finance Agency raised the 2024 conforming loan limit on single family homes from $548,250 to $647,200 an increase of $98,950 or 18.05%. [0]
  • Student loan borrowers in the United States owe a collective nearly $1.75 trillion in federal and private student loan debt as of April 2024, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. [5]
  • Sixty two percent of the class of 2019 graduated with student debt, according to the most recent data available from The Institute for College Access & Success, a nonprofit organization that works to improve higher education access and affordability. [5]
  • The average U.S. household with student debt owes $57,520, according to NerdWallet’s 2020 household debt study. [5]
  • that’s one in 8 Americans (12.9%). [5]
  • Those ages 25to 34 are the most likely to hold student loan debt, but the greatest amount is owed by those 35 to 49 — more than $600 billion, federal data shows. [5]
  • Among all borrowers, women typically borrow more for college compared with men , according to 2020 data by the American Association of University Women. [5]
  • Most student loans — about 92%, according to a July 2021 report by MeasureOne, an academic data firm — are owned by the U.S. Department of Education. [5]
  • Private student loans make up 7.89% of the total outstanding U.S. student loans, according to MeasureOne. [5]
  • A 2021 high school graduate could expect to borrow $38,147 for their bachelor’s degree, according to a May 2021 NerdWallet analysis of National Center for Education Statistics data. [5]
  • Around 45% of high school graduates are expected to enroll in college, NerdWallet found. [5]
  • Among those students, around 45% are expected to take on student debt over an average five years to attain a bachelor’s degree. [5]
  • Percentage of outstanding private loan balance in deferment 17.49%. [5]
  • Percentage of outstanding private loan balance in forbearance 2.44%. [5]
  • Percentage of private loans in repayment that are 90+ days past due 0.94%. [5]
  • Applications approved for federal student loan forgiveness Public Service Loan Forgiveness 14,566 approved among 756,617 total applications — 1.9% approval. [5]
  • Borrower defense to repayment 115,955 approved among 423,191 applications — 27% approval. [5]
  • Total default rate 9.7% Federal income driven repayment plans cap monthly payments at 10% to 20% of discretionary income and forgive the balance remaining after 20 or 25 years, depending on the plan. [5]
  • High school graduates who complete the FAFSA are 84% more likely to immediately enroll in postsecondary education, according to the National College Access Network. [5]
  • Percentage of 2021 high school graduates who completed the FAFSA 56.9% Percentage of 2018 high school graduates who did not complete the FAFSA 37%. [5]
  • $19.1bn Check Cashing & Payday Loan Services in the US Market Size in 2024 5.1% Check Cashing & Payday Loan Services in the US Market Size Growth in 2024 2.5% Check Cashing & Payday Loan Services in the US Annualized Market Size Growth 2017–2024. [1]
  • Similarly, 7.0% of urban consumers have used a payday loan, compared with only 6.0% in rural areas. [1]
  • The median wage is the 50th percentile wage estimate 50 percent of workers earn less than the median and 50 percent of workers earn more than the median. [6]
  • The value is less than .005 percent of industry employment. [6]
  • Among the class of 2020, 55% of bachelor’s degree recipients took out student loans, graduating with an average of $28,400 in federal and private debt. [7]
  • And 14% of parents with students in the class of 2019 — the latest data available — took out an average of $37,200 in federal parent PLUS loans. [7]
  • 11.1% of student loans were 90 days or more delinquent or were in default before the coronavirus pandemic. [7]
  • 55% of bachelor’s degree recipients graduating from four year public and private nonprofit colleges in 2020 had student loan debt. [7]
  • 66% of graduates from public colleges had loans , according to 2016 data from an April 2019 report — the latest available. [7]
  • 68% of graduates from private, nonprofit colleges had loans in 2016. [7]
  • 83% of graduates from for profit colleges had loans in 2016. [7]
  • Students and parents borrowed an estimated $95.9 billion in the 20202021 academic year, and 13% of that were private and other non. [7]
  • 48% of borrowers who attended for profit colleges default within 12 years, compared with 12% of public college attendees and 14% of nonprofit college attendees. [7]
  • Private student loan debt volume hit an estimated $12 billion in the 2020. [7]
  • 90% of undergraduate and 63% of graduate private loans were cosigned by someone else during the 2020. [7]
  • More than half of undergraduates (53%). [7]
  • 16% of student loans for the class of 2019 were private. [7]
  • Interest rates for cosigned private loans averaged 10.20% in 2019. [7]
  • Borrowers who don’t complete their degrees are more likely to default.1. [8]
  • 43% Percentage of college attendees taking on debt for college education. [8]
  • Roughly 43% of all Americans who went to college took on some form of debt to do so. [8]
  • Student loans were by far the most common borrowing options (95% of those who hold education debt took out student loans). [8]
  • However, 26% of people used other forms of borrowing, including credit cards (21%), home equity lines of credit (4%), and other types of credit (12%). [8]
  • Eighteen percent of adults who took out student loans were behind on their payments, according to the latest figures available from the Federal Reserve, and about 5% of all student loan debt was at least 90 days delinquent default. [8]
  • About 31% of people who took out student loans but never completed an associate or bachelor’s degree are behind on their payments. [8]
  • Of the former college students with less than $15,000 of outstanding debt, 21% are delinquent. [8]
  • However, only 17% of adults with $15,000 or more in loans are behind on payments.1 Pros and Cons of Debt Cancellation. [8]
  • Outright debt cancellation would boost real gross domestic product by $86 billion to $108 billion per year, according to one study from Bard College’s Levy Economics Institute.14. [8]
  • As of 2021, about 43% of all American college attendees were saddled with student debt. [8]
  • By the end of March 2021, the estimated value of outstanding loans is £141 billion. [8]
  • The government predicts only 25% of borrowers will repay them in full.17. [8]
  • That puts the average monthly payment nearly 55% higher than it was a decade ago. [9]
  • If the typical $227 monthly bill student loan borrowers received in 2005 had kept pace with consumer prices, the cost would only have risen by 22.9% to $279. [9]
  • Currently, 52% of direct federal loan debt is in repayment. [9]
  • About 8% is in default because the borrower hasn’t made a payment in nine months or longer. [9]
  • The remaining 40% is “on hold” for a variety of reasons 13% is held by students who are still in school 11% is in forbearance. [9]
  • 5% is in a grace period. [9]
  • That was 15.6% of the median household income of and manageable for many families without going into debt. [9]
  • The most recent figures from the U.S. Census Bureau estimated there are 171.3 million adults in America between the ages of 20 and 59. [9]
  • That means paying off student loans is a common challenge for 26% of younger adults under age 60. [9]
  • It’s also equal to an 18% down payment on a $205,000 house – which was the median home value in the U.S. in November 2017. [9]
  • In a recent Nitro survey, 41 percent of people with student loans said they wouldn’t be able to afford a surprise bill of $400. [9]
  • At the third quarter of 2018, 11.5% of student loans were more than 90 days past due. [9]
  • In contrast, the credit card delinquency rate stood at 7.9% and the auto loan delinquency rate at 4.3%. [9]
  • Home equity line of credit and mortgage delinquency rates were even lower, at 1.2% and 1.1%, respectively. [9]
  • The remaining 19% is owed to private banks. [9]
  • The largest of these is FedLoan Servicing , which controls 31% of the total. [9]
  • The others are Great Lakes Higher Education Corporation Navient with 21%, and Nelnet with 17%. [9]
  • The nonprofit servicers have the lowest rate of loans in repayment (49%) and the lowest rate of loans in forbearance (4%). [9]
  • AES PHEAA 67% repayment, 13% forbearance Great Lakes 60% repayment, 11% forbearance Nelnet 61% repayment, 8% forbearance Navient 65% repayment, 12% forbearance. [9]
  • Among all Americans aged 25 and older , 58.9% have spent at least some time in college, and about 32.5% have earned a bachelor’s degree or higher. [9]
  • Among people aged 65 and older – part of the baby boomer and silent generations – 50% have spent some time in college, and 27% have a bachelor’s degree or higher. [9]
  • Among those aged 25 to 34 – who would be considered millennials – 65% have spent some time in college, and 36% have a bachelor’s degree or higher. [9]
  • The states with the most bachelor’s degree recipients age 25 or older are Massachusetts (41.2%), Maryland (38.4%), Colorado (38.7%), and Connecticut (38.0%). [9]
  • The states with the fewest bachelor’s degree holders are West Virginia (19.6%), Mississippi (21.0%), Arkansas (21.5%), and Kentucky (22.7%). [9]
  • Of the 1.84 million students enrolled in public or private notfor profit graduate programs in fall 2016, 57.4% were registered full time. [9]
  • Although law and medicine draw many young people to graduate school , aspiring doctors make up just 5% of grad students and potential lawyers another 4%. [9]
  • Among master’s programs, the most sought after degrees are science (18%), education (16%), and business administration (11%). [9]
  • About a quarter of graduate students are aiming for a doctorate, with 23% trying to earn a Ph.D. [9]
  • To date, it’s only available at about 4% of American companies, but the number has been growing. [9]
  • 43% of the holdings were invested in the United States and 15% in the United Kingdom. [10]
  • The top reported first step in a home buyer’s process waslooking online for properties for sale (43%), followed by contacting a real estate agent (18%). [2]
  • 61% of buyers ages 31 – 40 hadone or more children under the age of 18 residing in the home. [2]
  • In September 2021, there were646,053 active home listings, down 28%when compared to active listings in September 2020. [2]
  • The metro areas with the highest gains in house prices wereBoise, Idaho at 28%andAustin, Texas at 23%. [2]
  • The highest reported reason for purchasing a home was the desire to be a homeowner, reported by 27% of all buyers. [2]
  • When looking at home prices and income, 82% of homes are affordable for the median owner, while only 42% of rentals are affordable to the median renter. [2]
  • First time buyers made up 31% of all home buyers in 2021. [2]
  • 31% of all home buyers felt they made no compromises in the home they purchased. [2]
  • When looking at prior living arrangements, 37% of buyers rented an apartment or house before purchasing. [2]
  • As home buyers, single womenoutnumbered single men 18% to 9%, respectively, in 2021. [2]
  • 18% of all home buyers were single women, 9% were single men, 62% were married couples and 9% were unmarried couples. [2]
  • Home buyers who have children under the age of 18 living at home accounted for 33% of all buyers. [2]
  • When looking at buyers 31 – 40 years old, 61% reported having at least one child under 18 living in the home. [2]
  • In Q1 2020, the homeownership rate was highest in the Midwest (69.2%), followed by the South (67.6%), the Northeast (62.4%) and the West (60.1%). [2]
  • In Q1 2020, the homeownership rate was highest for those age 65 years and over (78.7%) and lowest for those under 35 (37.3%). [2]
  • The homeownership rates for households with incomegreater than or equal tothe median family income were 9% Q2 2021. [2]
  • Home sale prices in September 2021 were up 8% when compared to sale prices in September 2020. [2]
  • The median purchase price when evaluated as a percent of the asking price was between 95% and 99% across all buyers. [2]
  • In September 2021, the number of active listings were down 28% when compared to active listings in September 2020. [2]
  • 20% of buyers reported that there were no difficult steps. [2]
  • The top reported first step in a home buyer’s process was looking online for properties for sale, reported at 43%, followed by contacting a real estate agent at 18%. [2]
  • 51% of all buyers found their home through the internet and 28% used a real estate agent. [2]
  • A majority (56%). [2]
  • 97% of buyers reported using an online website for information regarding their home search and 87% reported using a real estate agent. [2]
  • When looking at the timing of a home purchase, 15% of buyers felt that they did not have much choice and had to purchase when they did, and 2% wished they had waited. [2]
  • 80% of all homes bought in 2021 were detached single. [2]
  • Carpeting is less popular among all three generations, with only 20% of millennials, 21% of Gen X and 21% of boomers saying that carpeting would make them more likely to purchase a home. [2]
  • Respondents ages 55 – 64 were the most likely (11%). [2]
  • New home purchases made up a 15% share and previously owned homes made up 85%. [2]
  • Roughly 7 in 10 millennials (70%) and Gen Xers (71%). [2]
  • Boomers agree but at a lower rate (63%). [2]
  • Americans agree that they value the location of their home over the size, with all generations in agreement boomers (79%), Gen Xers (79%) and millennials (81%). [2]
  • The metro areas with the highest gains in house prices were Boise, Idaho at 28% and Austin, Texas at 23%. [2]
  • Nearly 3 out of 4 boomers (72%), Gen Xers (73%) and millennials (73%). [2]
  • Vacancy rates in top choice urban neighborhoods sat at 9.6% in the first quarter of 2021. [2]
  • Senior related housing was purchased at a share of 9% by buyers ages 56 – 65, 18% by buyers ages 66 – 74 and 27% by buyers ages 75 – 95. [2]
  • would never move (34%). [2]
  • The top reason reported for purchasing a new home was to avoid renovations or issues with plumbing or electricity – this was listed by 44% of all buyers and 61% of those 30 and younger. [2]
  • Millennials made up the largest share of home buyers at 37% in 2020. [2]
  • 51% of all buyers found the home they bought on the internet. [2]
  • In 2020, millennials were also more likely to believe that they will live in their dream home at some point in their life. [2]
  • Other age groups were not as hopeful Millennials 81% Gen Xers 75% Boomers 67%. [2]
  • 58% of people under the age of 30 rented before purchasing a home. [2]
  • For those ages 31 – 40, 50% rented before purchasing in 2020. [2]
  • Of buyers ages 22 – 29, 44% reported that commuting costs were very important. [2]
  • About 61% of people between the ages of 22 and 30 reported they purchased a new home to avoid renovations or plumbing/electricity issues. [2]
  • 7% of all buyers have previously sold a property under foreclosure or short sale. [2]
  • A majority (54%) of millennials say living close to bars and nightlife is important; those numbers drop slightly for Gen Xers (46%) and boomers (34%). [2]
  • The most important environmentally friendly home feature for 32% of all home buyers was heating and cooling costs. [2]
  • See a couple of highlights from the following mortgage statistics The total number of closed end mortgage originations increased from 8.3 million to 13.6 million – anincrease of 65.2%. [2]
  • Paying down debt is the #1 reasonsome Americans struggle to afford their first home, cited by 26% of home buyers. [2]
  • The number of closed end originations in 2020 increased by 65.2%, from 8.3 million in 2019 to 13.6 million in 2020. [2]
  • Over a 5 year period, the total yearly mortgage origination volume showed growth of 32% from April 2014 to April 2019 , a 3% growth was observed from April 2018. [2]
  • In 2020, approximately 7.3% of home purchase loans went to Black borrowers, up from 6.8% in 2018. [2]
  • 69.1% went to non Hispanic white borrowers, down slightly from 62%. [2]
  • An increase in the share of refinance loans by Asian borrowers for firstline, onetofourfamily, owneroccupied and site built properties jumped from 5.5% in 2019 to 6.7% in 2020. [2]
  • In Q2 of 2021, the average 30year fixedrate was 3% compared to 3.23% during the same time in 2020 – average 15year fixed rate interest is down from 2.7% to 2.3%, respectively. [2]
  • 30 year mortgage rates remain low, averaging 2.84% in August 2021. [2]
  • See annual average 30 year mortgage rates over the past 20 years 2002. [2]
  • 6.54% 2012 3.66% 2003 5.83% 2013 3.98% 2004 5.84% 2014 4.17% 2005 5.87% 2015 3.85% 2006 6.41% 2016 3.65% 2007 6.34% 2017. [2]
  • 3.99% 2008 6.03% 2018 4.54% 2009 5.04% 2019 3.94% 2010 4.69% 2020. [2]
  • 3.11% 2011 4.45% 2021 2.92% 2002 6.54% 2012. [2]
  • 5.87% 2015 3.85% 2006 6.41% 2016. [2]
  • The average annual 30 year mortgage rate for 2020 was 3.11%. [2]
  • See annual average 15 year mortgage rates over the past 20 years. [2]
  • 4.00% 2009 4.57% 2019 3.39% 2010 4.10% 2020. [2]
  • The average annual 15 year mortgage rate for 2020 was 2.61%. [2]
  • The denial rate for refinance loans decreased between 2019 and 2020 by 13.2%, compared with a 22.2% decrease for home purchase loans. [2]
  • For those with a credit score under 600, their share of the total new mortgages was only 0.1% in September 2020. [2]
  • The average loantovalue ratio was 68.1% in September 2020 for non. [2]
  • According to consumer credit reports, mortgage balances increased by $282 billion in the second quarter of 2021. [2]
  • Among those who have purchased a home, 26% cite this as the main reason they struggled to afford their first home, while just 6% say spending on luxury items, 5% say dining out at restaurants and 5% say travel. [2]
  • According toHUD’s quarterly report, delinquency rates for Q2 2021 are as follows. [2]
  • past due 4% Seriously delinquent 4%. [2]
  • In Q2 2021, 0.5% of current mortgage balances were 90+ days past due. [2]
  • Which Age Group Buys The Most Houses?Millennials were the largest home buying age group in 2021 – they made up 37% of the total home buyers. [2]
  • Percentage Of Home Buyers Start Their Search Online?43. [2]
  • % of home buyers started their search online in 2021 and 51% of all buyers found their home through the internet, though it wasn’t necessarily their first step. [2]
  • Many Mortgage Originations Are There In A Year?The number of closed end originations in 2020 was 13.6 million, an increase of 65.2% from 8.3 million in 2018. [2]
  • 67.8% of all Loan Servicing Specialists are women, while32.2%aremen. [11]
  • The most common ethnicity of Loan Servicing Specialists is White (67.8%), followed by Hispanic or Latino (15.4%) and Black or African American (7.2%). [11]
  • In 2021, women earned 82% of what men earned. [11]
  • The top 10% of highest paid Loan Servicing Specialists earn as much as $202,000 or more. [11]
  • Among Loan Servicing Specialists, 67.8% of them are women compared to 32.2% which are men. [11]
  • Job Title Male Female Loan Secretary 4% 96% Dental Receptionist 5% 95% Receptionist Secretary 6% 94% Loan Servicing Specialist 32% 68% Lead Ramp Agent 86% 14% Courtesy Associate 88% 12% Technical Service Advisor 89% 11%. [11]
  • The most common ethnicity among Loan Servicing Specialists is White, which makes up 67.8% of all Loan Servicing Specialists. [11]
  • Comparatively, there are 15.4% of the Hispanic or Latino ethnicity and 7.2% of the Black or African American ethnicity. [11]
  • White, 67.8% Hispanic or Latino, 15.4% Black or African American, 7.2% Asian, 6.9% Unknown, 2.2% American Indian and Alaska Native, 0.5% Loan Servicing Specialist Race Percentages. [11]
  • Using the Census Bureau data, we found out how the percentage of each ethnic category trended between 2010 2019 among Loan Servicing Specialists. [11]
  • Interestingly enough, the average age of Loan Servicing Specialists is 40+ years old, which represents 59% of the population. [11]
  • Loan Servicing Specialist Years Percentages The most common degree for Loan Servicing Specialists is Bachelor’s Degree 55% of Loan Servicing Specialists earn that degree. [11]
  • A close second is Associate Degree with 23% and rounding it off is High School Diploma with 12%. [11]
  • Bachelors, 55% Associate, 23% High School Diploma, 12% Masters, 4% Other Degrees, 6% Loan Servicing Specialist Degree Percentages Loan Servicing Specialist Wage Gap By Education. [11]
  • < 50 employees 50 100 employees 100 500 employees 500 1,000 employees 1,000 10,000 employees > 10,000 Company Size Percentages Employees with the Loan Servicing Specialist job title have their preferences when it comes to working for a company. [11]
  • By looking over 8,161 Loan Servicing Specialists resumes, we figured out that the average Loan Servicing Specialist enjoys staying at their job for 1 2 years for a percentage of 37%. [11]
  • Job Title LGBT Job Openings People Greeter 5.55% 53,483 Patient Relations Coordinator 7.22% 77,032. [11]
  • Loan Servicing Specialist 9.31% Survey Coordinator 9.66% 25,411 Eligibility Worker 10.94% 34,513 Library Specialist 12.26% 14,324 Profession Percentages of LGBT Job Openings. [11]
  • The most common foreign language among Loan Servicing Specialists is Spanish at 63.4%. [11]
  • The secondmost popular foreign language spoken is Hmong at 5.4% and French is the third most popular at 4.9%. [11]
  • Spanish, 63.4% Hmong, 5.4% French, 4.9% Chinese, 2.9% Japanese, 2.9%. [11]

I know you want to use Loan Servicing Software, thus we made this list of best Loan Servicing Software. We also wrote about how to learn Loan Servicing Software and how to install Loan Servicing Software. Recently we wrote how to uninstall Loan Servicing Software for newbie users. Don’t forgot to check latest Loan Servicing statistics of 2024.

Reference

  1. mortgagecalculator – https://www.mortgagecalculator.org/helpful-advice/mortgage-statistics.php.
  2. ibisworld – https://www.ibisworld.com/industry-statistics/market-size/check-cashing-payday-loan-services-united-states/.
  3. rocketmortgage – https://www.rocketmortgage.com/learn/home-buying-statistics.
  4. educationdata – https://educationdata.org/student-loan-debt-statistics.
  5. forbes – https://www.forbes.com/sites/zackfriedman/2021/02/20/student-loan-debt-statistics-in-2021-a-record-17-trillion/.
  6. nerdwallet – https://www.nerdwallet.com/article/loans/student-loans/student-loan-debt.
  7. bls – https://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes132072.htm.
  8. studentloanhero – https://studentloanhero.com/student-loan-debt-statistics/.
  9. investopedia – https://www.investopedia.com/student-loan-debt-2019-statistics-and-outlook-4772007.
  10. nitrocollege – https://www.nitrocollege.com/research/average-student-loan-debt.
  11. europa – https://www.ecb.europa.eu/stats/html/index.en.html.
  12. zippia – https://www.zippia.com/loan-servicing-specialist-jobs/demographics/.

How Useful is Loan Servicing

At its core, loan servicing involves the administration of loan agreements between borrowers and lenders. This includes collecting monthly payments, maintaining borrower accounts, and handling various aspects of loan management such as escrow, insurance, and taxes. In essence, loan servicing serves as the intermediary between borrowers and lenders, ensuring that loan terms are followed and that payments are made on time.

One of the key benefits of loan servicing is its role in helping borrowers stay on track with their loan obligations. By managing monthly payments and providing support to borrowers in case of financial hardship or other challenges, loan servicers play a crucial role in protecting both the interests of lenders and helping borrowers avoid default. This can be particularly beneficial for those who may be struggling to stay on top of their loan payments, as servicers can work with them to find solutions and maintain the integrity of the loan agreement.

Furthermore, loan servicing helps lenders streamline their operations and focus on their core business activities. By outsourcing the administrative tasks associated with loan management to a servicing company, lenders can save time and resources that would otherwise be spent on handling tedious paperwork and day-to-day account management. This can result in improved efficiency, reduced costs, and ultimately better results for lenders in terms of loan performance and profitability.

Additionally, loan servicing plays a crucial role in maintaining regulatory compliance and ensuring that all loan terms are adhered to. Servicers are responsible for staying up-to-date with relevant laws and regulations governing the financial industry, including consumer protection measures and rules for fair lending practices. By working with a reputable servicing company, lenders can ensure that their loan portfolios are managed in compliance with all applicable regulations, reducing the risk of legal issues and penalties.

In conclusion, loan servicing is an essential function within the financial industry that benefits both borrowers and lenders alike. By providing support to borrowers, streamlining operations for lenders, and maintaining compliance with regulatory requirements, loan servicing plays a crucial role in ensuring the smooth operation of the lending process. Whether for mortgage loans, student loans, or other types of consumer credit, loan servicing is a vital tool that helps keep the wheels of the financial industry turning and ensures the efficient management of loans for all parties involved.

In Conclusion

Be it Loan Servicing benefits statistics, Loan Servicing usage statistics, Loan Servicing productivity statistics, Loan Servicing adoption statistics, Loan Servicing roi statistics, Loan Servicing market statistics, statistics on use of Loan Servicing, Loan Servicing analytics statistics, statistics of companies that use Loan Servicing, statistics small businesses using Loan Servicing, top Loan Servicing systems usa statistics, Loan Servicing software market statistics, statistics dissatisfied with Loan Servicing, statistics of businesses using Loan Servicing, Loan Servicing key statistics, Loan Servicing systems statistics, nonprofit Loan Servicing statistics, Loan Servicing failure statistics, top Loan Servicing statistics, best Loan Servicing statistics, Loan Servicing statistics small business, Loan Servicing statistics 2024, Loan Servicing statistics 2021, Loan Servicing statistics 2024 you will find all from this page. 🙂

We tried our best to provide all the Loan Servicing statistics on this page. Please comment below and share your opinion if we missed any Loan Servicing statistics.




Leave a Comment