Added on September 29, 2016
The Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) today announced the availability of data on mortgage lending transactions at 6,913 U.S. financial institutions covered by the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA). Covered institutions include banks, savings associations, credit unions, and mortgage companies. The HMDA data made available today cover 2015 lending activity and include:
The data released today also include disclosure statements for each financial institution, aggregate data for each MSA, nationwide summary statistics regarding lending patterns, and Loan/Application Registers (LARs) for each financial institution (LARs are modified to protect borrower privacy). The FFIEC prepares and distributes this information on behalf of its member agencies.
The 2015 HMDA data use the census tract delineations, population, and housing characteristic data from the 2010 Census and the combined 2006–2010 American Community Surveys, as has been the case since 2012, when these delineations and data were first used. In addition, the data reflect metropolitan statistical area (MSA) definitions released by the Office of Management and Budget in 2013 that became effective for HMDA purposes in 2014.
Caution should be used when comparing HMDA data across multiple years for specific geographic areas due to the changes in MSA and census tract boundaries and updates to the population and housing characteristics of census tracts.
The HMDA data are the most comprehensive publicly available information on mortgage market activity. Among other uses, the data help the public determine how financial institutions are serving the housing needs of their local communities, and facilitate fair lending and compliance examinations. When examiners evaluate an institution's fair lending risk, they analyze HMDA data in conjunction with other information and risk factors, in accordance with the Interagency Fair Lending Examination Procedures available at http://www.ffiec.gov/PDF/fairlend.pdf.
The current HMDA data alone cannot be used to determine whether a lender is complying with fair lending laws. The data do not include many potential determinants of loan application and pricing decisions, such as the applicant's credit history, debt-to-income ratio, the loan-to-value ratio, and other considerations. Therefore, when examiners conduct fair lending examinations, including ones involving loan pricing, they analyze additional information before reaching a determination about an institution's compliance with fair lending laws.
For 2015, the number of reporting institutions declined about 2.5 percent from the previous year to 6,913. While there were some new reporters in 2015, this number was more than offset by the number of institutions that reported in 2014 but did not do so in 2015. In most cases, this is because of mergers and acquisitions.
The 2015 data include information on 12.1 million home loan applications, of which 7.4 million resulted in loan originations, and 2.1 million in purchased loans, for a total of 14.2 million actions. The data also include information on approximately 531,000 requests for preapprovals for home purchase loans.1.
The total number of originated loans of all types and purposes increased by 1.4 million between 2014 and 2015, or 22 percent. Refinance originations increased by 36 percent, and home purchase lending increased by 13 percent.2
From 2014 to 2015, the share of 1–4 family home purchase loans made to low- and moderate-income borrowers (those with income of less than 80 percent of area median income) rose slightly from approximately 26 percent in 2014 to roughly 27 percent in 2015, while the share of refinance loans to low- and moderate-income borrowers decreased from 24 percent to 22 percent.3
In terms of borrower race and ethnicity, the share of home purchase loans for 1–4 family properties made to black borrowers rose from 4.9 percent to nearly 5.2 percent, the share made to Hispanic-white borrowers rose from 7.5 percent to 7.9 percent, and those made to Asian borrowers declined slightly from 5.7 percent to 5.5 percent. The share of refinance loans made to black borrowers decreased from 5.2 percent to 4.9 percent, the share made to Hispanic-white borrowers rose slightly from 6.0 percent to 6.1 percent, and those made to Asian borrowers rose from 4.5 percent to 5.1 percent.
In 2015, black and Hispanic-white applicants experienced higher denial rates for conventional home purchase loans than non-Hispanic white applicants. The denial rate for Asian applicants is more comparable to the denial rate for non-Hispanic white applicants. These relationships are similar to those found in earlier years and do not take into account potential differences in risk characteristics across demographic groups.
In 2015, the FHA-insured share of first-lien home purchase loans for 1–4 family, site-built owner-occupied properties increased to 25 percent from 21 percent in 2014, reversing a downward trend in the FHA's market share since 2009. The VA-guaranteed share of such loans remained at approximately 10 percent in 2015. The overall government-backed share of such purchase loans, including FHA, VA, RHS and FSA loans, was 39 percent in 2015, increasing from 37 percent in 2014, but down from 54 percent in 2009. One reason for the rise in the FHA's market share may have been that the FHA significantly reduced its annual mortgage insurance premiums by 0.5 percentage points in January 2015 for loans with terms greater than 15 years.
The FHA-insured share of first-lien refinance mortgages for 1–4 family, site-built owner-occupied properties also increased in 2015, to about 14 percent from 9 percent in 2014, while the VA-guaranteed share of such refinance loans decreased by approximately 1 percentage point to 9 percent.
The 2015 HMDA data also include information on loan pricing for loans classified as "higher-priced." Higher-priced loans are defined as loans with annual percentage rates (APRs) that exceed the average prime offer rates (APORs) by at least 1.5 percentage points for first-lien loans and at least 3.5 percentage points for subordinate lien loans.4 The data on the incidence of higher-priced lending shows that nearly 6 percent of first-lien loans originated in 2015 have APRs that exceed the loan price reporting thresholds, down from nearly 8 percent in 2014.
About 22 percent of the FHA's first-lien home purchase loans had APRs above the reporting threshold for higher-priced loans, significantly down from 45 percent in 2014.5 As discussed earlier, the FHA lowered its annual mortgage insurance premiums in 2015, which had a direct effect on the APRs of FHA loans, because the APR includes the cost of mortgage insurance.
As noted above, the HMDA data identify loans that are covered by HOEPA. Under HOEPA, certain types of mortgage loans that have interest rates or total points and fees above specified levels are subject to certain requirements, such as additional disclosures to consumers, and are also subject to various restrictions on loan terms. For 2015, 1,249 loan originations covered by HOEPA were reported: 494 home purchase loans; 186 home improvement loans; and 569 refinance loans.
Financial institution disclosure statements, individual institutions' LAR data, and MSA and nationwide aggregate reports are available at http://www.ffiec.gov/hmda. The FFIEC now offers these reports in Excel format for both current and historical data. Refer to the HMDA data products at http://www.ffiec.gov/hmda/hmdaproducts.htm for descriptions and formats. HMDA data tools also are available at http://www.consumerfinance.gov/hmda. More information about HMDA data reporting requirements is available on the FFIEC website at http://www.ffiec.gov/hmda/faq.htm.
Financial institutions are required to make their disclosure statements available at their home offices. For other MSAs in which financial institutions have offices, an institution must either make the disclosure statement available at one branch within each MSA or provide a copy upon receiving a written request. Questions about a HMDA report for a specific institution should be directed to the institution's supervisory agency at the following phone numbers: