Uncategorized

The title insurance industry began its recovery last year from its massive skid at the end of the refinance boom. Companies generated $16.2 billion in title insurance premiums in 2024, a 7% annual increase, the American Land Title Association reported Thursday. The positive momentum follows year-over-year premiums written declining 31% in 2023 and 16% in 2022. The industry underwrote $26.2 billion in title insurance in 2021. The business is highly correlated to mortgage origination volume, which grew to approximately $1.7 trillion last year after bottoming out in 2023, according to the Mortgage Bankers Association. Title insurers also paid over $676 million in claims last year, a 6% climb from 2023 and the highest mark in recent years."Despite ongoing challenges from limited housing inventory and elevated mortgage rates, title professionals remain steadfast in their role — protecting property rights and serving their communities," said ALTA CEO Diane Tomb in a press release. Why were title insurers doing better in 2024?Most of the sector's top companies recorded greater profits in 2024, with firms enjoying increased volume from a mortgage rate respite last summer. Industry giants were also profitable to begin 2025, although executives warned of looming tariff-driven uncertainty.The country's most populous states, the priciest places to purchase a home, made up the remaining top 5 largest states by title insurance volume: Florida, California, New York and Pennsylvania. Including Texas, the top 5 states by title insurance volume accounted for 45% of all activity, according to ALTA's figures. First American was the largest player in the industry with a 22.2% market share. Like other firms among the top 10 underwriters, its market share was largely unchanged from 2023. Old Republic fell to the third spot on the ranking, with a market share of 14.3%, down from 15.2% last year.The industry faces some threats, chiefly Fannie Mae's title insurance waiver pilot program. The pilot has received backlash from numerous angles, although new Fannie Mae chairman and Federal Housing Finance Agency Director Bill Pulte has yet to discuss its future. A Texas regulator in February also ordered a 10% decrease in title insurance premiums in the state effective this July. Nationwide, title insurers wrote the most premiums in the Lone Star State, with $2.37 billion or 4.7% of total volume.

While the 30-year fixed rate mortgage remained under 7% for the 17th consecutive week according to Freddie Mac's calculations, it increased 5 basis points as the bond markets remain volatile over the U.S. economy.This and other measurements moved in the same direction with the yield on the 10-year Treasury, which rose 25 basis points between May 7 and May 14.In fact, two of the trackers National Mortgage News looked at are showing rates above 7%.How mortgage rates moved this weekThe 30-year FRM averaged 6.81% as of May 15, up from last week's 6.76%, the Freddie Mac Primary Mortgage Market Survey said. A year ago at this time, it was at 7.02%.Meanwhile, the 15-year FRM had a smaller jump, just 3 basis points to 5.92%, versus 5.89% last week. For the same week in 2024, it averaged 6.28%.The 10-year Treasury was down 5 basis points as of 11 a.m. on Thursday morning, likely because of the Producer Price Index report, to 4.48% from 4.53% at its close on Wednesday.But from its close of 4.28% on May 7, the yield steadily climbed over the week, with some trackers going back over the 7% level for the 30-year FRM. How inflation data affected bond yieldsThe good news that the PPI dropped 0.5% in April from March and gained 2.4% annually followed Tuesday's Consumer Price Index report, which was also perceived as positive regarding inflation, rising 0.2% from the previous month and 2.3% over April 2024.The early take from these reports is that the tariffs are not inflationary right now."While an encouraging CPI report for the Federal Reserve, policymakers are likely to wait for additional clarity on the evolving tariff landscape before making decisions on future rate cuts, especially with the labor market holding steady," Sam Williamson, an economist with First American Financial, said in a Tuesday statement.Even with the CPI news, the bond market is in charge, as the core numbers were sticky and this kept yields elevated, said Nigel Green, CEO of financial advisory the deVere Group."With 10-year Treasury yields hovering near 4.5%, financial conditions are already tightening," Green said in a Tuesday statement. "Add aggressive tariffs into that mix and you risk tipping the economy into deeper volatility."The Federal Open Market Committee is expected to remain cautious as a result of the CPI news, Samir Dedhia, CEO of One Real Mortgage, added on Tuesday."Markets are now pricing in fewer rate cuts for 2025, which means mortgage rates will likely stay in the 6.5% to 7% range for now," Dedhia said. "Affordability challenges persist, especially as housing costs remain stubbornly high."Other mortgage trackers rise above 7%Lender Price data as posted on the National Mortgage News website put the 30-year FRM at 7.015% at that time.Zillow's rate tracker was up 2 basis points on the day, to 7.07% from 7.05% at the end of Wednesday. This compared with the previous week's average of 6.96%.As of Wednesday, data from Optimal Blue had the conforming 30-year fixed at 6.885%, as the rate rose steadily from 6.76% on May 7.The Mortgage Bankers Association's Weekly Application Survey released on Wednesday, reported the 30-year conforming FRM averaging 6.86% for the period ended May 9, up 2 basis points from the prior week.Rising inventories have supported a boost in homebuyer demand in recent weeks, with purchase applications up 2% last week and an impressive 18% compared to last year," Bob Broeksmit, president and CEO, said in a Thursday morning comment on the survey. "MBA expects activity to pick up even more if mortgage rates move further below 7%."The MBA's own April forecast expected the 30-year to average 7% for the current quarter.Right now, many observers are expecting rates to end the year in the mid-6% area, including Fitch Ratings, who is looking at 6.5%."Mortgage rates look prepared to stay sticky in the 6.75%-7.0% area with the 10-year now approaching 4.5%, and expectations for rate cuts through year-end getting trimmed slightly," BTIG analyst Eric Hagen wrote in his May 13 Mortgage Finance Roundup."Macro uncertainty and growing calls for recession put a direct spotlight on the path for home prices, especially if mortgage rates move higher," Hagen wrote. Homes.com just reported four consecutive months of diminishing annual home price increases.

As federal budget negotiations intensify, some policymakers have floated deep cuts to the Housing Choice Voucher Program, better known as Section 8. For those in favor of reducing funding for the program, it's simply a line item to trim. But for those of us in housing finance, it's a structural pillar. Gutting this program would do more than displace tenants — it would destabilize landlords' balance sheets, spike mortgage delinquencies, and inject new risk into an already fragile housing market. Let's connect the dots. The First Domino: DisplacementRoughly 2.3 million households rely on Section 8 vouchers to make rent. Without them, many would immediately be priced out of their homes. Those households wouldn't just double up—they'd fall into homelessness at a time when shelters and support systems are already overwhelmed. Even renters who manage to find new housing would likely face increased cost burdens, redirecting limited income away from essentials like food, transportation, and health care. This isn't theoretical. It's the housing affordability crisis, accelerated. RELATED READING: Judge says HUD can't impose Trump agenda on grants, for nowThe Second Domino: Landlord solvencySection 8 isn't just a lifeline for renters — it's a stabilizer for landlords. For small- and mid-sized property owners, especially those concentrated in low-income markets, voucher payments offer reliable, timely cash flow. The government typically covers 70% of a tenant's rent, with the renter responsible for the balance. When that subsidy disappears, landlords lose the bulk of their income overnight. Evictions rise. Arrears pile up. Units go vacant. And all the while, operating costs — taxes, insurance, maintenance — persist. For many owners, especially those with thin margins, this isn't sustainable. The next stop? Mortgage distress. The Third Domino: Mortgage market falloutThis is where the crisis spreads beyond rental housing and into the mortgage market. Landlords unable to service their debt obligations will default. Those defaults — concentrated in multifamily portfolios with exposure to affordable housing — will push up delinquency rates and lead to a surge in foreclosures. It's not hard to imagine what follows: distressed asset sales, declining neighborhood property values, and increased credit risk for lenders. And for the Federal Housing Administration, which insures many of these loans, the financial pressure could be acute. A flood of claims would strain reserves and reduce the agency's capacity to insure new loans. This isn't just a landlord problem — it's a liquidity and capital adequacy problem for lenders and investors alike. The Final Domino: Market instabilityWe've seen how destabilization at the lower end of the market can ripple upward. If Section 8 funding is gutted, entire housing submarkets could seize up — especially in regions where affordable rental units represent a significant share of the housing stock. Higher vacancies, lower property values, and fewer qualified borrowers would drag on the housing economy. This is not hyperbole. It's a realistic chain reaction. Housing policy is financial policyThose of us in mortgage finance often think in terms of risk modeling, interest rates, and macroeconomic trends. But we can't lose sight of how deeply tied this industry is to housing policy. Programs like Section 8 aren't just safety nets — they are market stabilizers, investor protections, and tools for liquidity preservation.Cutting Section 8 funding is more than a policy shift. It's a trigger point with real risk exposure for servicers, lenders, insurers, and GSEs. We'd be wise to keep that at the forefront of our minds as we shape the future of the housing ecosystem.

Today we’ll take a look at the top mortgage lenders in Texas based on their annual production last year, including both retail and wholesale loan volume.They say everything is bigger in Texas, and that’s true when it comes to their mortgage lending volume relative to 49 other states.Only California is bigger when the subject is doling out home loans. And they even double New York’s output.The Lone Star State accounted for about nine percent of national home loan volume, originating roughly $147 billion in 2024.Let’s find out who the top lenders were in the state in a few different categories.Top Mortgage Lenders in Texas (Overall)RankingCompany Name2024 Loan Volume1.UWM$12.6 billion2.Rocket Mortgage$7.0 billion3.DHI Mortgage$5.7 billion4.Chase$3.9 billion5.Lennar Mortgage$3.7 billion6.CMG Mortgage$3.3 billion7.loanDepot$2.7 billion8.Fairway Independent$2.6 billion9.PrimeLending$2.4 billion10.CrossCountry$2.2 billionYep, United Wholesale Mortgage (UWM) did it again, topping the overall rankings in Texas with $12.6 billion in home loan volume in 2024, per HMDA data from Richey May.They were also number one overall, and in the states of California and Florida, so it’s no surprise they took Texas too.The Pontiac, Michigan-based lender led the way in many states nationwide so this came as no real surprise.Coming in second was former #1 Rocket Mortgage with a much smaller tally, just $7.0 billion funded.In third was DHI Mortgage, which is the in-house lender for D.R. Horton. This is interesting because builders have never been top mortgage lenders until recently.Basically, their ability to offer massive mortgage rate buydowns makes them near-impossible to compete with.JP Morgan Chase was fourth with $3.9 billion, representing the strongest showing for a depository bank.I say that because nonbank mortgage lenders are all the rage these days, with brick-and-mortar banks often taking a back seat.In fifth was another home builder’s mortgage lender, Lennar Mortgage, with $3.7 billion funded. Pretty uncommon to see two builders make the top-10.But it’s a sign of the times, especially in Texas where new construction homes are abundant.Others in the top-10 included CMG Mortgage, loanDepot, Fairway Independent Mortgage, PrimeLending, and CrossCountry Mortgage.Top Mortgage Lenders in Texas (for Home Purchases)RankingCompany Name2024 Loan Volume1.UWM$9.1 billion2.DHI Mortgage$5.7 billion3.Rocket Mortgage$4.1 billion4.Lennar Mortgage$3.7 billion5.Chase$3.2 billion6.CMG Mortgage$3.0 billion7.Fairway Independent$2.4 billion8.loanDepot$2.3 billion9.PrimeLending$2.2 billion10.CrossCountry$1.9 billionNow let’s turn our attention to home purchase lending, which grabbed an 83% market share last year in Texas as refinances dropped off due to higher mortgage rates.Purchase loans quickly became the focus for pretty much all mortgage lenders once rates began to rise from their record lows in 2022.Simply put, 6%+ mortgage rates mean it’s a lot more difficult to drum up refinance business. Thus, lenders are concentrating on home buyers.In 2024, lenders in Texas had about an 83%/17% purchase to refi share, which is quite massive.UWM held the top spot last year with $9.1 billion in home purchase loans in the state, beating out D.R. Horton’s in-house lender.Rocket lost out to one builder, but beat another, Lennar Mortgage, and Chase came in fifth.bank Wells Fargo with $6.6 billion.Not far behind was CMG Mortgage, followed by Fairway Independent Mortgage, loanDepot, PrimeLending, and CrossCountry.The list featured the same exact lenders as the top overall (in slightly different order), which is no surprise given purchase lending dominated last year.Top Mortgage Lenders in Texas (for Mortgage Refinances)RankingCompany Name2024 Loan Volume1.UWM$3.5 billion2.Rocket Mortgage$2.7 billion3.Pennymac$625 million4.Freedom Mortgage$615 million5.Chase$558 million6.Mr. Cooper$470 million7.loanDepot$414 million8.Village Capital$384 million9.Newrez$349 million10.Randolph Brooks$307 millionFinally, we’ve got mortgage refinances, which are reserved for existing homeowners.Borrowers take out these types of loans for either a lower rate (rate and term refinance) or to tap equity (cash out refinance).UWM was again #1, no real surprise, followed by Rocket Mortgage, also not a surprise. Though usually Rocket comes in first here.Nobody else was even close, with third place Pennymac only able to muster $625 million and Freedom Mortgage doing a similar $615 million.It then dropped off even more with Chase, loan servicer Mr. Cooper (soon to be owned by Rocket), loanDepot the next in line.Others in the top-10 included Village Capital (a government streamline refi specialist), Newrez, and credit union Randolph Brooks.Top Mortgage Lenders in AustinRankingCompany Name2024 Loan Volume1.UWM$1.4 billion2.CMG Mortgage$769 million3.Rocket Mortgage$601 million4.DHI Mortgage$588 million5.Lennar Mortgage$545 million6.Chase$523 million7.ClosingMark$467 million8.First United Bank$415 million9.loanDepot$412 million10.Fairway Independent$393 millionTop Mortgage Lenders in DallasRankingCompany Name2024 Loan Volume1.UWM$3.5 billion2.Rocket Mortgage$1.8 billion3.DHI Mortgage$1.6 billion4.Chase$1.1 billion5.Lennar Mortgage$954 million6.PrimeLending$792 million7.CrossCountry$734 million8.loanDepot$721 million9.Supreme Lending$675 million10.Provident Funding$633 millionTop Mortgage Lenders in Fort WorthRankingCompany Name2024 Loan Volume1.UWM$1.2 billion2.Rocket Mortgage$749 million3.DHI Mortgage$663 million4.Service First$330 million5.Chase$326 million6.Guild Mortgage$292 million7.Fairway Independent$275 million8.CrossCountry$273 million9.loanDepot$248 million10.Supreme Lending$233 millionTop Mortgage Lenders in HoustonRankingCompany Name2024 Loan Volume1.UWM$3.5 billion2.Rocket Mortgage$1.8 billion3.DHI Mortgage$1.1 billion4.Chase$1.1 billion5.Lennar Mortgage$916 million6.loanDepot$799 million7.CMG Mortgage$774 million8.Cadence Bank$632 million9.Benchmark$469 million10.Fairway Independent$448 millionTop Mortgage Lenders in San AntonioRankingCompany Name2024 Loan Volume1.Lennar Mortgage$971 million2.UWM$904 million3.DHI Mortgage$816 million4.Rocket Mortgage$561 million5.KBHS Home Loans$340 million6.loanDepot$323 million7.Randolph Brooks$314 million8.Pulte Mortgage$296 million9.Veterans United$294 million10.Chase$256 millionGo Big or Go Home in Texas?Every time I write about the largest mortgage lenders in a certain state, I do my best to separate size from quality.Or at least point out that they are two unique things, despite “top” and “biggest” being used interchangeably.For some, top means best quality, while biggest means, well, biggest.Of course, these two things can go hand in hand, so it’s not always easy to differentiate.If you look at the lists above, only a handful of the mortgage companies mentioned are headquartered in Texas.I believe only Nationstar (Mr. Cooper), D.R. Horton’s DHI Mortgage, Benchmark, Randolph Brooks, Service First, Supreme Lending and PrimeLending are Texas-based companies.The rest are national mortgage lenders that simply do a lot of business in the state of Texas.So if you prefer a homegrown lender, you may want to look elsewhere, such as a local bank, credit union, or mortgage broker.But you might have a wonderful mortgage experience working with one of the biggest mortgage lenders in Texas too.Regardless, the important thing is to gather multiple quotes to ensure you don’t miss out on a better deal elsewhere.This is especially true in today’s mortgage market, where rates can vary widely from one lender to the next.(photo: Marcin Wichary) Before creating this site, I worked as an account executive for a wholesale mortgage lender in Los Angeles. My hands-on experience in the early 2000s inspired me to begin writing about mortgages 19 years ago to help prospective (and existing) home buyers better navigate the home loan process. Follow me on X for hot takes.Latest posts by Colin Robertson (see all)

Federal Reserve Board Communication practices have taken center stage in the Federal Reserve's ongoing review of its monetary policy framework. In a Thursday morning speech, Fed Chair Jerome Powell said communication practices — particularly during times of heightened uncertainty — have been focal points during both internal and external discussions in recent months related to the five-year policy review.Powell, speaking at a Federal Reserve Board research conference in Washington, said both financial market participants and academics generally approve of how the Fed conveys policy decisions and explains forecasts, but "there is always room for improvement." "A critical question is how to foster a broader understanding of the uncertainty that the economy generally faces," he said. "In periods with larger, more frequent, or more disparate shocks, effective communication requires that we convey the uncertainty that surrounds our understanding of the economy and the outlook."Powell said the Federal Open Market Committee would consider ways to improve on this front before finalizing its new policy framework this summer.Along with communications, Powell said the review has also focused on the two most controversial elements of the Fed's last framework review: its interpretation of labor market dynamics and its focus on average inflation over an extended period.Launched in 2019 and completed in 2020, the prior review largely focused on how monetary policy should adapt to a sustained zero-interest rate environment. The Fed's benchmark interest rate, the federal funds rate, had been at or near its lower bound for a decade and, Powell said, the belief was that it would remain in the range for the foreseeable future. With rates so low, Powell said the committee was concerned that the Fed would have little ability to help boost the economy during a future downturn and that any moves to raise rates in response to inflation would crush already tepid job growth. In response to this, the Fed adjusted its focus on the labor market away from "deviations" from maximum employment and toward "shortfalls." Some have interpreted this change as the Fed prioritizing employment — or even certain job categories — over price stability, but Powell said the true purpose was to ensure that "apparent labor market tightness would not, in isolation, be enough to trigger a policy response."The last review also yielded the flexible average inflation target, or FAIT, approach, which would have enabled the Fed to allow inflation to run above its 2% target after a period of sub-2% growth, so long as the average remained 2%. Some academics and observers say this shift led the Fed to delay responding to pandemic-induced inflation in 2021, but Powell pushed back against that notion."The idea of an intentional, moderate overshoot proved irrelevant to our policy discussions and has remained so through today. There was nothing intentional or moderate about the inflation that arrived a few months after we announced our changes to the consensus statement," Powell said. "I acknowledged as much publicly in 2021.  We fell back on the rest of the framework, which called for traditional inflation targeting."In recent months, Powell and other Fed officials have acknowledged that the last review was too backward-looking and too focused on responding to the specific conditions of its day. Some have called for a simpler, more timeless approach this time around.Still, Powell said much of the framework, including the Fed's commitment to keep inflation at or below 2%, will remain unchanged. But, he added, recent developments could call for modifications to ensure the framework is resilient to a potentially more unpredictable economic landscape."Higher real rates may also reflect the possibility that inflation could be more volatile going forward than in the inter-crisis period of the 2010s," he said. "We may be entering a period of more frequent, and potentially more persistent, supply shocks—a difficult challenge for the economy and for central banks."

Enjoy complimentary access to top ideas and insights — selected by our editors. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau's headquarters located in Washington D.C.Frank Gargano The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has been in a freefall since former Director Rohit Chopra was ousted in February, kickstarting a game of musical chairs at the top of the agency and beginning the current campaign to defang the regulator. More change is on the horizon, for the better and the worse.President Donald Trump has remained unabashedly honest while in office that his mission is to dismantle the CFPB, which he said "was set up to destroy people" and was used by its architect Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., "as her personal agency to go around and destroy people." That campaign seems to have made significant progress since the beginning of the year, as Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Office of Management and Budget head Russell Vought have overseen massive on again, off again layoffs and the rollback of many Biden-era policies.This month alone, the bureau has unwound enforcement and supervision of the small business loan data rule named after section 1071 of the Dodd-Frank Act, overturned the rule that would have capped overdraft fees at $5 and rescinded roughly 70 guidance documents as per the new deregulatory attitude."Our policy has changed," Vought wrote in the document outlining the changes on May 9. "Historically, the bureau has released guidance without adequate regard for whether it would increase or decrease compliance burdens and costs."Enforcement has all but ceased at the bureau as well, as the CFPB dismisses cases against Reliant Holdings, Comerica Bank and others.Read more: Trump's CFPB has dropped half of all pending litigationBelow is a timeline of CFPB events that have happened since Trump returned to the White House.

The volatile mortgage rate environment in the fourth quarter last year did not impact the quality of closed applications, with critical defects falling to their second lowest level on record, Aces Quality Management found."Lenders made meaningful progress in loan quality in 2024, closing the year with one of the lowest quarterly critical defect rates we've ever observed," said Aces Executive Vice President Nick Volpe, in a press release. "However, continued volatility across the legal/regulatory/ compliance and insurance categories, as well as within the income/employment eligibility subcategory, highlights the importance of ongoing diligence in quality control efforts."What happened with defect ratesFor the quarter, the critical defect rate was 1.16%, compared with 1.51% for the third quarter and 1.53% for the period ended Dec. 31, 2023. During last year's second quarter, the defect rate peaked at 1.81% and at the time Aces was concerned it could go back above 2%.The full year defect rate was 1.52%, compared with 1.68% in 2023 as the fourth quarter decline balanced out that spike. During September, the 30-year fixed went from 6.35% at the start of the month to 6.08% by the end, according to the Freddie Mac Primary Mortgage Market Survey.But from the end of the third quarter through Nov. 21, the rate rose to 6.84%, before dropping back to 6.6% three weeks later. It ended the year at 6.91%.The number of defects typically increases when rates do, as lenders want to generate volume and thus might overlook some items. Alternatively, defects can increase in times of rising volume as the crush on underwriters impacts their ability to deeply examine files.Verifications not the top finding in 4QHowever, for the first time in three years, income/employment related findings were not the leading cause of defects, Aces said.Rather it was overtaken by legal/compliance/regulatory and tied with asset-related errors. Aces uses the Fannie Mae defect taxonomy in categorizing data; just because an application has a defect, it does not mean it is fraudulent, but it does have red flags.The legal category has been the leading finding before, most notably between the third quarter of 2015 and second quarter of 2016, when lenders were implementing the TILA/RESPA Integrated Disclosures.Meanwhile, income and employment has been a leading category since 2019, which Aces attributed to increased complexity in underwriting and verifications as a result of the Covid pandemic.Legal and compliance critical defects were found in 22.58% of files Aces reviewed, followed by income/employment and assets in 16.13% each.In the third quarter, 25% of files had income or employment critical defects, with assets second at 16.67%. For that quarter, legal/regulatory/compliance ranked 6th at 6.82%.For the full year, income and employment verification defects were found in 27.64% of reviews, with assets at 23.19%.Why insurance defects are cropping upWhen it comes to insurance-related defects, Aces continued a theme from the third quarter regarding availability and affordability for homebuyers, especially in California, Texas and Florida. The pressures of rising premiums or coverage denials were "directly impacting loan qualification and contributing to an ongoing rise in insurance-related defects," the report said.Historically, insurance has a less than 1% share of defects. But this spiked to 8.11% in the first quarter last year. It has since backed down but remains at levels above the norm, at 3.23% for the fourth quarter."Rising costs and coverage gaps have begun to impact loan qualification and closings, with borrowers' debt-to-income ratios occasionally exceeding allowable thresholds once updated insurance premiums are factored in," Aces said. "These disruptions can lead to delayed or failed closings, placing additional pressure on both originators and borrowers."Defects by mortgage purpose and productWhile refinance transactions made up about 13.7% of fourth quarter reviews, these accounted for 17.2% of files with defects. For purchase, it was 86.3% and 82.2% respectively.By product type, conventional loans were over 66% of reviews with a 64.5% share of defect findings. Federal Housing Administration mortgages were 21.4% of reviews and 25.8% of defects. Veterans Affairs had the best performance relative to their share, at 10.4% of applications but 6.5% of found problems.

Why are mortgage rates approaching 7% again if inflation is cooling and the trade war has softened?You would think interest rates would be coming down thanks to both falling prices and reduced tension with trade partners like China.Instead, the 10-year bond yield keeps rising, and at last glance was above 4.50% today.Combine that with a spread of around 250 basis points (bps) and home buyers are looking at a 7% 30-year fixed mortgage rate.Clearly this is unwelcome news if you’re in the market to buy a home. But why is it happening this time?Bonds Like Economic Weakness but Not UncertaintyIf I were to guess, I would say it boils down to ongoing uncertainty and defensiveness.For one, there is no actual trade deal as of yet.  All there is a temporary 90-day agreement to hold off on larger tariffs between the two superpowers.So there’s a thought that this is merely a delay, and three months from now will be back in the same boat.In addition, there are the unforeseen consequences of the past couple months of tariff talk and back-and-forth on trade deals that have yet to show up in the data.There’s a decent possibility that could muddle the inflation data and other key economic reports released in coming months.And it might not present itself until June, July, August, etc.That makes it difficult for the federal reserve to move forward with important monetary policy changes if they don’t know what that’ll look like.As such, you might see bonds continue to sell off or at least not see much in the way of gains. That pushes up their yields and leads to higher mortgage rates too.Of course, traders seem to be happy to buy into the stock market at the same time, despite all this uncertainty.They appear optimistic that the trade tensions have come off the boil, and will likely look a lot less damaging in the near future.Mortgage Rates Are Hurting Whether Trade Talks Improve or WorsenBut bonds (and by extension mortgage rates) are hurting both ways, whether the trade war is worsening or improving.Trade impasse? Mortgage rates up. Trade deal? Mortgage rates up!Meanwhile, stocks seem to be reacting relatively normally. They go up when trade tensions ease, and go down when trade tensions worsen.Bond yields seem to just keep going up regardless. And that is bad news for anyone looking to buy a home or refinance an existing mortgage.One silver lining is mortgage rate spreads have improved lately despite the uptick in bond yields.But that doesn’t mean we won’t see 7% mortgage rates again during the key spring home buying season. Per MND, they’re literally knocking at the door (6.99% today).7% Mortgage Rates Are More Than PsychologicalAt first, I thought it was psychological, seeing a mortgage rate that starts with a seven as opposed to a six.The more I dug into it, the more I realized the reason it’s a seven and not a six is what’s giving people hesitation.If you look at the difference in monthly payment for a 7% rate versus say a 6.75% rate, it’s pretty negligible.But if you look at why the rates are different, why they went back up to 7%, you realize it’s this increased uncertainty.If you’re a prospective home buyer, the last thing you want is increased doubt and/or volatility in the markets.So really it goes beyond just that quarter of a percentage point.It’s about where the economy is headed and how comfortable the consumer is stepping into one of the largest decisions of their life.If consumer confidence is low due to uncertainty in the economy, job market, etc., that alone can be a deal breaker.So perhaps pay less attention to the difference in mortgage rate and more to the difference in sentiment. Before creating this site, I worked as an account executive for a wholesale mortgage lender in Los Angeles. My hands-on experience in the early 2000s inspired me to begin writing about mortgages 19 years ago to help prospective (and existing) home buyers better navigate the home loan process. Follow me on X for hot takes.Latest posts by Colin Robertson (see all)

The average home in more than half of the nation's metro areas was overvalued by more than 10% during the fourth quarter of 2024, the latest Sustainable Home Price Trends report from Fitch Ratings declared.Nationwide, prices were 11% above where they should be, a reduction from 11.1% in the third quarter. But 85% of the nation's markets are overvalued to some extent; this is unchanged from the third quarter.To help make its determination, Fitch used data from the S&P Cotality (the former Corelogic) Case-Shiller Index, which went to 2.9% annual price growth in February from 3.3% in January.What's shifting the housing market"This ongoing cooling trend reflects reduced homebuying demand, driven by high housing costs and widespread economic uncertainty," the Fitch report from Sean Park, Iris Xie and Mia Ren said. "Additionally, potential inflation from tariffs and concerns about job security and personal finances have dampened buyer enthusiasm."The first and third most-overvalued areas are in upstate New York, the Buffalo/Niagara Falls area and Rochester, sandwiching McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, Texas.Prices rose year-over-year through December by 6.8% in the Northeast, followed by the Midwest at 5.3%, West, 3.8%, and South, 3.2%.However, home prices went negative in a number of markets, led by Cape Coral/Fort Myers, Florida, down 5.3%. Lake Charles, Louisiana, was down 4.8% year-over-year and Punta Gorda, Florida, 4.4% lower.Annual price growth keeps moderatingA separate report from Homes.com found home prices increased 1.3% annually in April, the fourth consecutive month of lessening gains. The median home price of $385,000 is $5,000 above where it was in April 2024.This compared with annual gains of 3.9% in January, 2.7% for February and 2.2% during March. Still prices have risen for 22 consecutive months."Moderating price pressures is a welcome relief for potential homebuyers," said Erika Ludvigsen, national director of residential analytics at Costar/Homes.com (Costar is the parent company of Homes.com)."Meanwhile, the inventory of homes for sale has increased," Ludvigsen said in a press release. "Higher inventories combined with a slight moderation in price pressures bring good news for homebuyers, especially in several key metros in the Sun Belt region."Home prices fell year-over-year in April in 10 markets the Homes.com report tracked, led by Ohio cities Columbus and Cincinnati, down 4.6% and 4.5% respectively. Five other markets had no change.No Fed short-term rate cuts until 4Q25The Fitch report noted that while the spring home purchase season is seeing an increase in inventory, it has not led to stronger home sales so far, a result of ongoing political and financial uncertainty."While many buyers have adjusted to mortgage rates above 6%, affordability remains a challenge," the report said. "Current trends suggest that buyers are still hesitant, weighing higher borrowing costs against an unpredictable political and economic environment."Looking forward, Fitch reiterated its prior outlook on home price growth for it to slow to between 3% and 4% this year from 4% for 2024.It also repeated it does not expect the Federal Open Market Committee to cut short-term rates again until the fourth quarter. This is in line with the sentiments expressed by most economists surveyed in May by Wolters Kluwer, who believe the Fed will wait until after the July meeting to act (the next FOMC meeting after that is Sept. 16 and 17).Meanwhile, the 30-year fixed rate mortgage will end the year around 6.5%. The Mortgage Bankers Association's April forecast has the 30-year at 6.7% in the fourth quarter, up from its March prediction of 6.5%."Although mortgage rates have remained relatively steady, affordability remains a major concern, as real wage growth continues to stagnate, and inflation expectations rise," Fitch said.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) headquarters in Washington, D.C., US, on Sunday, May 22, 2022. The Federal Reserve raised interest rates by 50 basis points earlier this month and the chairman indicated it was on track to make similar-sized moves at its meetings in June and July. Photographer: Joshua Roberts/BloombergJoshua Roberts/Bloomberg The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has withdrawn a proposed rule aimed at protecting consumers from having their personal and financial information sold by data brokers. The CFPB withdrew the proposed rule, which was proposed in December under former CFPB Director Rohit Chopra, in a notice scheduled to appear in the Federal Register Thursday. The notice said that the proposed rule is being withdrawn "in light of updates to Bureau policies," noting that "although the proposed rule intended to implement portions of the [Fair Credit Reporting Act], in many respects it did so in a manner not aligned with the Bureau's current interpretation of the FCRA, which it is in the process of revising, and its changed policy objectives."The rule sought to limit data brokers from selling personal financial information on consumers such as Social Security numbers and phone numbers. Data brokers profit by selling data. The Consumer Data Industry Association, which represents consumer reporting agencies, told the CFPB in April that the proposed rule was arbitrary and capricious, in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act. Dan Smith, president and CEO of the CDIA, detailed in the letter how the proposed rule would substantially interfere with law enforcement and antifraud activities. He said the CFPB under Chopra sought to rewrite and expand the Fair Credit Reporting Act, which he said the CFPB "cannot do.""The Supreme Court has been clear that an agency's ability to craft new legal requirements out of whole cloth is severely limited," Smith wrote. Many companies rely on so-called "credit header data," the identifying information typically found at the beginning of a credit report, for identity verification and fraud prevention. Credit header data includes a consumer's name, address, Social Security number, and other personal details. The CFPB's proposed rule, "Protecting Americans From Harmful Data Broker Practices" would have amended Regulation V, which implements the FCRA. Third-party data brokers objected to the rule, arguing that they are not currently covered by the FCRAThe rule would have classified data brokers as credit reporting agencies under the FCRA. It would have required that data brokers obtain express, informed consent from consumers before selling their personal information. And it would have limited the use of consumer information for secondary uses such as targeted advertising or cross-selling. It also would have given consumers rights to access and correct information held by data brokers. Smith said the CFPB's proposed rule "might sweep into its ambit any number of services that Congress never contemplated as consumer reporting agencies, such as court researchers, loan origination platforms, and government database providers."The FCRA prohibits the sale of data for advertising, training and artificial intelligence. It also strictly limits the use of credit report data from being sold for any reason other than what Congress has specified as having a "permissible purpose," such as credit underwriting. It also requires that companies provide accurate information to credit bureaus and maintain safeguards against misuse.Some of the largest technology company CEOs — from Meta's Mark Zuckerberg to Apple's Tim Cook, Tesla's Elon Musk to Google's Sundar Pichai — donated to President Trump's reelection campaign hoping to gain some business benefits.The CFPB under Chopra had sought to regulate Big Tech firms that collect vast troves of sensitive data, including individualized data about a consumer's finances, which increasingly are being bought and sold by data brokers without consumers' knowledge or consent. The goal of the proposal was to protect the most vulnerable consumers such as seniors and military servicemembers from being targeted by scammers and identity thieves. Data brokers were concerned that the rule would have set limits on data use that would impact companies that have anti-fraud tools.