Guild Holdings Co., the parent company of Guild Mortgage, sustained a $66.9 million loss in the third quarter of 2024 after delivering a profit of $37 million in the prior quarter. Meanwhile, its origination volume increased to $6.9 billion, up 6% from the second quarter and 49% higher than the same period in 2023.This led its originations segment to “profitable” results, according to CEO Terry Schmidt.Net revenue dropped from $285.7 million in Q2 2024 to $159.3 million in Q3. The net loss attributable to Guild was $66.9 million, while adjusted net income was $31.7 million, according to an 8-K filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Adjusted EBITDA for the quarter stood at $46.4 million.Schmidt said in a statement that despite the loss, the company’s trajectory continues to reflect “positive momentum” based on investments it has made in prior acquisitions.Schmidt added that a “clear differentiator” the company has is “the realization of the growth platform” stemming from its acquisitions, which included Academy Mortgage at the beginning of the year. She added that originations are expected to grow regardless of the interest rate environment.“Our focus on achieving profitable, long-term market share gains, along with our balanced business model of originations and servicing, positions us for success throughout macroeconomic environments,” Schmidt said. “We are confident in our platform, products and people, and anticipate seeing enhanced production from our expanded origination network over time, while we will remain disciplined in order to deliver long-term value to our shareholders.”Amber Kramer, the company’s chief financial officer, went deeper into the company’s financial results on an earnings call Wednesday. The company’s servicing portfolio grew to $91.4 billion in unpaid principal balance (UPB), but it recorded a net loss of $74.6 million that is attributed to “the downward valuation adjustment of MSRs of $124 million reflecting the interest rate decline,” Kramer said said.The servicing portfolio’s UPB was up 3% compared to the $89.1 billion total at the end of June.“Our servicing portfolio continues to be a valuable source for ongoing cash flow, future opportunities for loan recapture, and it reinforces our customers-for-life strategy,” Kramer said. “Furthermore, our business model — which combines the originations in the servicing segments — provides for a natural hedge over time, as rate declines should translate into higher originations, both purchase and refinances.”The company’s cash and cash equivalents position was $106.2 million at the end of September, up $3.8 million quarter over quarter.In after-hours trading on Wednesday, Guild’s share price was down to $12.99 after peaking at $14.37 earlier in the day.

Fair Isaac Corp. (FICO), the company that retains the rights to the market’s widely adopted consumer credit-risk assessment methodology, announced on Wednesday that it has increased its wholesale royalty from $3.50 to $4.95 per score for mortgage originations. The mortgage industry is now bracing for additional hikes from the credit reporting bureaus and other companies downstream of FICO.“At this new per-score royalty, the amount collected by FICO will remain a small percentage of the cost of the tri-merge credit report and score bundle (on average approximately 15% of the $80 to well over $100 tri-merge bundle cost), which is itself an exceedingly small share of overall mortgage closing costs,” Jim Wehmann, FICO executive vice president, wrote in a blog post.Wehmann added that, after the change, “FICO’s share will remain only approximately two-tenths of one percent” of the total average closing costs of $6,000.In the blog post, Wehmann claimed there was “misinformation” across the Internet regarding the fee hikes, which some mortgage pros called “price gouging” and “junk fees.”“At $4.95 per score, the royalty collected by FICO for mortgage is entirely fair and reasonable, particularly considering the significant benefits it brings to the industry,” he said, adding that the new royalty is only the fourth royalty change in the mortgage industry in 30 years.“Importantly, after our upcoming royalty change, all amounts above $4.95 per score are collected and retained by the credit bureaus or their tri-merge resellers—not FICO. This means, after this change, any price increase greater than $1.45 per score is solely due to prices set by others who sell and distribute the scores.”Mortgage industry executives told HousingWire they expect the credit reporting bureaus and aggregators to pass on the FICO cost increases and pad their own fees on top. Those companies are threatened by revenue from trigger leads to drying up with new legislation.How we got hereAnalysts and mortgage executives expected an increase from FICO after the election. But the bets were at a higher level, at $5. However, the credit bureaus—TransUnion, Experian, and Equifax—were notified about the changes on Oct. 30, when they started communicating with some clients, FICO said. It’s the third straight year of increases in FICO scores, which has received criticism from the industry. The royalties rose to $0.50 to $0.60 per FICO score in 2018. In 2023, a tier-based structure of $0.60 to $2.75 per score was implemented, which increased prices for some lenders by up to 400%.After complaints from lenders, FICO returned to a fixed royalty of $3.50 per FICO score in 2024. But it collected the same per-score price for soft pulls and hard pulls.These moves come as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac move away from the current Classic FICO credit score model. They will require lenders to use two credit scores generated by the FICO Score 10 T and the VantageScore 4.0 models, which are considered more inclusive than their predecessors.Reaction from the mortgage industryThe mortgage industry quickly responded with frustration at the news of a 41% increase from the prior year.Taylor Stork, the president of Community Home Lenders of America, said his organization, which represents small lenders, “remains concerned by FICO’s unnecessary and unwarranted price increases, combined with the bureaus’ mark-ups, that will no doubt be passed onto the borrower.”“Unfortunately, we’re likely in the early innings of the increase process,” said Greg Sher, the Managing Director of NFM Lending and a vocal critic of the fee hikes. “Until production picks up significantly, FICO is going to be counting on the mortgage industry to keep them profitable because they can. Who is going to stop them?”In a statement, Mortgage Bankers Association President and CEO Bob Broeksmit said the industry has voiced frustration with the “lack of transparency” behind the ongoing price hikes for tri-merge credit reports and other credit reporting products.“While FICO and the credit reporting agencies are private companies free to set their prices as they wish, raising prices once again would hurt consumers at a time of continued affordability challenges,” he continued. “Lenders are required to obtain FICO scores and three credit reports to make most loans to prospective homebuyers and homeowners looking to refinance. Charging more every year for a long-established product underlines the lack of competition in this space.”

Donald Trump has won the 2024 presidential election and will become the 47th President of the United States. But what could a change in administration mean for the real estate industry that is keeping a close eye on Nov. 26, when the National Association of Realtors’ (NAR) commission lawsuit settlement agreement is slated for a final approval hearing?“I don’t think it is going to change the settlement at all,” said Chuck Cain, an attorney and the president of Alliance Solutions. “The Sitzer/Burnett lawsuit was filed during the Trump administration and it has been disclosed by the plaintiffs’ counsel that the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice helped and participated in the plaintiffs’ case as far as evidentiary provisions, and that was the Trump DOJ and Trump FTC.”Marx Sterbcow, the managing attorney of Sterbcow Law Group, is also confident that the settlement will be approved.“That settlement is going through,” Sterbcow said. “That is a private civil action that these companies, plaintiffs and trade associations entered into independently, so it will have no impact, whatsoever.”In addition to what lawyers think, Judge Stephen Bough’s track record on the commission lawsuits also indicate that the settlement’s track to final approval is already clear.In the past six months, Bough has granted final approval to the settlements reached by Anywhere ($83.5 million), RE/MAX ($55 million) and Keller Williams ($70 million) in the Sitzer/Burnett suit. He also approved settlements in the combined Gibson/Umpa suit for Compass ($57.5 million), The Real Brokerage ($9.25 million), At World Properties ($6.5 million), Douglas Elliman ($7.75 million, but may pay up to an additional $10 million), Redfin ($9.25 million), Engel & Völkers ($6.9 million), Realty ONE Group ($5 million), HomeSmart Holdings ($4.7 million) and United Real Estate ($3.75 million).In his approval order for the Gibson suit, Bough addressed many of the objections filed against the settlement, which mirror those filed against the NAR settlement. In addressing objections about the effectiveness of the class notification, Bough noted that the settlement administrator was able to reach more than 97% of identified Gibson class members and that so far, more than 463,000 claims had been made. Additionally, Bough highlighted that only eight objections were filed and only 46 class members chose to opt out of the settlement class.Both the Gibson and NAR settlements have also received criticism for being nationwide settlements, when the claims involved originated in Missouri.“A nationwide settlement was a necessary condition of obtaining any settlement for the benefit of the class, a nationwide settlement will conserve judicial and private resources, and Class members were fully apprised of the settlement class definition through the notice process,” Bough wrote.Bough also addressed the inclusion of all MLSs in the deal, regardless of their affiliation with NAR. He called the choice “both justified and necessary to achieve any settlement for the Settlement Class. Moreover, the only way that the Settlements were possible was if they provided for a nationwide recovery and release.”Objectors to the settlements have also taken issue with the small amount of monetary damages awarded to individual home sellers who are part of the class — especially after the plaintiffs’ attorneys take their 33% cut of the settlement pot. In response, Bough noted that no settlement amount would have provided class members with the full extent of damages they claim.“The applicable standard is whether the settlements are fair, reasonable, and adequate — not whether they provide complete relief to all Class members,” he wrote. “The Settlements provide a significant financial recovery to the Settlement Class in light of the strengths and weaknesses of the case and the risks and costs of continued litigation, including appeal, and the Settling Defendants’ financial resources.”And Bough highlighted the business practice changes outlined in the settlements, noting that these also had to be considered as part of the reparations being made to the settlement class.Notably, Bough addressed the objections raised by James Mullis, who is a plaintiff in the Batton homebuyer commission lawsuits. The judge wrote that the claim that Mullis bought a home after selling a home, making him potentially part of two separate classes, is not unique.“[E]very class member sold a home during the class period, and most also bought homes,” Bough wrote. “After all, few people sell a home without first buying it. And most home sellers then buy a different home with the proceeds because they need somewhere to live. “Thus, most Class members had possible claims both as home sellers and home buyers. Yet Settling Defendants quite reasonably balked at paying large amounts in settlement only to have the same people they just paid sue them again for the same alleged antitrust conspiracy.”Bough noted that class members had the ability to opt out of the settlement, writing that the homebuyer plaintiffs should not be able to sue the defendants “twice for the same wrong.”While the Mullis and Batton plaintiffs have claimed that the settlement prevents them from pursuing their own litigation, Bough wrote that the “sole limitation imposed is that people who accept settlement benefits here cannot turn around and pursue a second recovery for the same conduct. This is not a case where anyone is releasing claims without compensation.”Although Bough’s rulings should give the real estate industry some confidence heading into Nov. 26, real estate and legal experts don’t believe it is completely out of the woods yet, even with a new administration coming into office.Given the industry’s current focus on NAR’s Clear Cooperation Policy and the still ongoing practice of cooperative compensation — despite the DOJ’s strong stance against it — experts believe future legal battles under the second Trump administration could focus on these issues.“I fully expect the FTC and the DOJ to change, and I think they are going to be more focused on consumer harm,” Sterbcow said. “Where they may be forced to intervene is post-NAR settlement in creating some normalcy for the entire industry if NAR doesn’t. And I don’t think many of the big brokerages have much trust left in NAR. “The first place will probably be in addressing cooperative compensation and then Clear Cooperation, because if that is handled poorly, it could lead to fair housing issues.”While Cain shares a similar view to Sterbcow, he believes much of it will be tied to who is named as the next attorney general.“We’ll have to see how vigorous this Department of Justice is, and a lot of that will have to do with who the new attorney general is and what their priorities are. And I don’t know that this will be a priority, but I don’t necessarily know if they will call off the dogs either,” Cain said.Steve Murray, the co-founder of RealTrends Consulting, has a different take.“Might the election head off the DOJ and their ’huff and puff and I’ll blow your house down if you don’t do what we tell you to do’ attitude? Yes, but the industry leadership needs to be stockpiling some cash right now so that when the DOJ comes back, which they will, they will be prepared to have a fight,” Murray said.Some believe the second Trump administration will be more pro-business and lighter on enforcement. But Jeff Erlich, the former deputy enforcement director for the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB), noted earlier this week that “in 2020, the last full year of the previous Trump Administration, the Bureau brought 48 enforcement actions; so far this year, it has brought only 21.”“If history is any guide, a second Trump Administration might not be as friendly to the industry as many expect,” Ehrlich wrote in an email to HousingWire.So, while NAR’s settlement may get the go-ahead from Bough, that doesn’t mean the real estate industry’s war with the DOJ has ended.

Jim Cory, managing director of reverse mortgages at Guild Mortgage, has been in the industry for the better part of three decades. He is a longtime member of the National Reverse Mortgage Lenders Association (NRMLA), and he was recently elected as its co-chair alongside Mike Kent of PHH Mortgage Corp.Cory first joined the association in 1998 and previously served the board as vice chair. He holds the association’s Certified Reverse Mortgage Professional (CRMP) designation, and he has worked in leadership positions in several reverse mortgage companies during his career.HousingWire’s Reverse Mortgage Daily (RMD) sat down with Cory to get a better idea of his outlook for the new position and the industry as a whole heading into 2025.Chris Clow/RMD: You’ve been involved with the association for a long time, and now you are in this key leadership position as an industry representative. Was this a no-brainer for you? It’s a volunteer job, of course, but there are a lot of responsibilities that go into it.Jim Cory, reverse mortgage managing director at Guild Mortgage." data-image-caption="Jim Cory" data-medium-file="https://img.chime.me/image/fs/chimeblog/20241107/16/original_17d41f24-75ae-41d3-aab8-d1bc93733d3e.png?w=300" data-large-file="https://img.chime.me/image/fs/chimeblog/20241107/16/original_17d41f24-75ae-41d3-aab8-d1bc93733d3e.png?w=300" tabindex="0" role="button" src="https://img.chime.me/image/fs/chimeblog/20241107/16/original_17d41f24-75ae-41d3-aab8-d1bc93733d3e.png?w=300" alt="Jim Cory, reverse mortgage managing director at Guild Mortgage." class="wp-image-480410" style="width:200px" srcset="https://img.chime.me/image/fs/chimeblog/20241107/16/original_17d41f24-75ae-41d3-aab8-d1bc93733d3e.png 300w, https://img.chime.me/image/fs/chimeblog/20241107/16/original_17d41f24-75ae-41d3-aab8-d1bc93733d3e.png?resize=150,150 150w" sizes="(max-width: 300px) 100vw, 300px" />Jim CoryJim Cory: Taking on a role like this is not a no-brainer, and I don’t want it to be. It is a volunteer organization, and taking on a co-chair position means an awful lot more responsibility and more time that I’m going to have to put into the association. So, it’s not something I could do without talking to key people at my company and back at home. There are much greater responsibilities.And it’s made much easier, I have to say, serving as co-chair with Mike Kent. That makes it much easier. He’s a great guy. I consider him a friend and somebody I can really learn from. He’s fantastic.Clow: What does it mean for you, as a longtime industry and association member, to reach this position?Cory: First of all, it’s a huge honor. I’ve been in the reverse mortgage industry for 27 years. I’ve been a board member since 2010 and I’ve been vice chair for the last several years. There have been times that NRMLA has elevated vice chairs into the co-chair role, and times that we haven’t. I think we’re doing a better job of now grooming the folks that are vice chairs to be the next chairs. I think I was kind of the first one in a while that we did that on.Clow: What’s the division of labor like between you and Kent? He’s been co-chair now for the past several years, and he previously worked with Scott Norman in that role. When it comes to comparing notes to determine what to do, how does that look?Cory: We’re still finding that out, first of all, but my mission is this outreach program. A lot of my energies are going to be spent toward that. Because Scott stepped down a few months ago out of sequence with the NRMLA board and NRMLA officers, Mike has been the sole chair for the last several months, and he’s done a fantastic job.I’m going to spend most of my energies on this new mission of inter-industry outreach with the forward side, while Mike is doing a great job of tending to all of the other work streams that NRMLA has got right now. That’s not to say I won’t be involved. But I think if you were going to look at what sections people are going to lead, that would be it.Clow: You have clearly already started that outreach work, but is some of it kind of preliminary? Do you feel like you’re going to hit the ground running at the beginning of next year, or do you think you’re already “off to the races?”Cory: Yes (laughs). I look at things as a long-term effort, so we’re off to the races. Are you going to see anything immediately, like, within the next two months? I don’t know. We’ll definitely be doing things, but we will, for sure, on our side, be aiming to move the needle of the industry as we reach out to more folks.So, we are off to the races and are actually actively building a team. We can’t do these things alone, so I’m building a team right now to work on it, and we’ve got a lot of excitement and a lot of great ideas.

There is likely to be a “modest” amount of excess home supply driven by demographic changes as older homeowners move out of their homes or die. But the aging U.S. population is not expected to be an outright source of change to home-price projections over the next 10 years, according to a newly updated report on homes owned by baby boomers.“First, based purely on changing demographics, over the next decade there was projected to be a modest amount of excess supply of homes for sale as older homeowners age and die — around a quarter million units annually,” according to the report published by the Mortgage Bankers Association (MBA). “Second, housing supply and demand shifts from changing demographics are slow moving and highly predictable, which suggests that there would not be measurable effects on house price growth from population aging and mortality.”The report projects that over the next decade, there will be a “negative excess supply of homes for sale,” which will fuel a demographic mismatch between supply and demand during that time. Much of this is driven by the fact that baby boomers, as previously documented, are not selling their homes at the same levels as previous generations.“Since 2015, there has been a sizable increase in the homeownership rate among those 70 and older,” the report said. “This, combined with a larger base of older Americans from the aging of the baby boomers, has led to a greater number of existing homes held onto longer. “In contrast, pre-2015 homeownership patterns would have predicted that these homes would have been sold. So, older Americans are holding onto their homes longer, and there are more of them.”This could serve to raise existing home supply in future years, but demand will continue to outpace supply in the here and now.“The findings highlight the varying patterns for older Americans as shifting demographics, the pandemic, and overall buyer attitudes have impacted buying and selling decisions,” said Edward Seiler, executive director for the Research Institute for Housing America and associate vice president of housing economics for the MBA.“It is evident that older households are aging in place, leading to updated predictions that show that there will be no excess supply of homes to the markets from older Americans moving or dying over the next decade.”The report also projects that there will be “over 8 million homes supplied by older Americans as they age and die,” which will rise to roughly 9 million over the next decade. Of that total, “approximately 1 million will be due to the death of older Americans.”

Mortgage professionals can expect a transformed regulatory environment for the financial sector as Donald Trump returns to the White House in January. This includes an increased likelihood of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac being released from conservatorship along with immediate shifts in agency leadership, analysts said. “Trump win is a regulatory game changer that likely includes more free markets, less harsh oversight (aid capital, costs, fees) and reduces regulatory risks,” a team of Wells Fargo analysts covering large banks wrote in a report on Wednesday morning. Under President Joe Biden, the Federal Reserve attempted to implement the Basel III Endgame rules, which were set to increase capital requirements for large banks, including a boost to their residential mortgage portfolios compared to international standards. The rule is under revision after a strong market reaction.“A new era after 15 years of harsher regulation should aid capital (likely no increase with Basel III), bureaucracy, costs, and fees,” Wells Fargo analysts wrote. They added that regulatory risk is likely to decline under Trump amid more predictable approaches, costs and benefits analyses, and a pro-business attitude. Trump’s return is also expected to usher in a leadership overhaul across regulatory agencies, including those directly affecting the mortgage space, such as the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). “Election could have a significant impact on the regulation of the financial sector, with a Trump administration likely to yield a deregulatory boost,” wrote analysts at Keefe, Bruyette & Woods (KBW) in a report on Wednesday morning. “A Trump administration could yield significant regulatory leadership change, with as many as eight regulatory agencies experiencing day-1 leadership changes.”At the CFPB, the KBW analysts see a possibility of Rohit Chopra being replaced by an acting director soon after Trump’s inauguration. In the long term, potential replacements could be former CFPB deputy director Brian Johnson or Todd Zywicki, the former chair of the CFPB Task Force on Federal Consumer Financial Law. The timing for this change is in question since the Senate will focus initially on key cabinet members.During Chopra’s term, the CFPB had a challenge to its funding mechanism rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court, which gave him more confidence in pursuing the bureau’s crusade against junk fees, appraisal bias and fair lending violations — all controversial topics in the industry. “In governing, policy is personnel and who is appointed will largely determine what gets done in the housing space,” wrote David M. Dworkin, president and CEO of the National Housing Conference.Under the Biden administration, Dworkin said that the National Economic Council, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the FHFA have had “impactful and effective housing leaders.” But “regulatory policy has too often been more problematic.”“We need regulators who are guard dogs, not lap dogs or attack dogs,” Dworkin wrote. “Overzealous regulation, like a recent decision by the Department of Justice and the CFPB to sue Rocket Mortgage in an appraisal bias case involving a single loan, despite the fact that mortgage lenders are not allowed to question an appraisal report when underwriting a mortgage, is only the most recent example.”The agencies, including the CFPB, expect more scrutiny in 2025 and beyond. In June, the Supreme Court overturned the 1984 Chevron precedent, meaning that courts can rely on their interpretation of ambiguous laws while reducing the power of federal agencies to interpret the laws they administer. At the FHFA, analysts at KBW expect Sandra Thompson to also be replaced on day one of the Trump administration. Jonathan McKernan, a board member of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC), is cited as a potential long-term replacement. The new FHFA commissioner, however, would likely be confirmed in the second half of 2025. “McKernan leadership would probably work on ending GSE’s conservatorship,” the KBW analysts wrote, adding they expect a positive impact from reduced regulation and a shorter application process for mergers and acquisitions.The increasing likelihood that the government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) will be released from conservatorship under the Trump administration made their stocks jump on Wednesday. Fannie Mae was trading at $1.92, up 38%, while Freddie Mac was up 38% to $1.66.The GSEs delivered $7 billion of combined net income in the third quarter of 2024. Fannie’s total net worth reached $90 billion and Freddie’s reached $56 billion. “In a Trump victory, we still see better near-term upside for the preferred stock, which have collectively built $25 billion of capital from retained earnings over the last year,” BTIG analysts Eric Hagen and Jake Katsikas wrote in a report. According to them, credit risk transfer may proliferate in a Trump administration, given the “potential read-thru it creates for accelerating a release from conservatorship, although it could depend on the leadership development at the Treasury and the FHFA.” Pilot programs, mainly regarding a title insurance alternative and closed-end second loans, are also at risk under the Trump administration. Former FHFA Director Mark Calabria recently criticized an extension of appraisal waiver methods for higher loan-to-value (LTV) purchase loans, calling the decision “truly dumb & irresponsible ” in a social media post.Looking to the Federal Reserve, KBW analysts forecast possible replacements for Jerome Powell and Vice Chair Michael Barr when their terms end in 2026. Potential successors are Christopher Waller, a member of the Fed Board of Governors; Kevin Warsh, a former member; and David Malpass, a former president of the World Bank Group. “The new leadership would likely continue Powell’s policies but may be under pressure from Trump to lower interest rates,” the KBW analysts said. “Financials likely to gradually benefit starting in 2026, in areas such as Basel III being watered down and potentially less restrictive monetary policy.” 

Fathom Holdings, the parent company to Fathom Realty, announced a new promotion in its executive leadership team. On Wednesday, the firm hired former senior vice president of finance Joanne Zach as chief financial officer.After starting with Fathom in 2021, the new CFO worked directly alongside CEO Marco Fregenal for three years, collaborating on strategic planning and key financial decisions. According to firm, Zach gained valuable insight from Fregenal on Fathom’s finance strategy while forming key relationships across the company. Fregenal spoke highly of Zach, praising her efficiency and strong drive for growth. “Over the past three years, Joanne has consistently demonstrated the strategic acumen and commitment that Fathom’s growth demands,” Fregenal said in a statement. “Her ability to drive financial efficiency and continuous improvement is a testament to her leadership. As Fathom advances in an evolving market, I am confident that Joanne will continue to strengthen our financial framework for long-term success.”Joanne Zach“I am honored and dedicated to take on this new role at Fathom,” Zach said. “Working with Marco and the talented Fathom team, I look forward to building on the strong foundation we’ve created together. I am excited to further enhance our financial strategies and leverage our technology to drive Fathom’s growth, innovation, and value creation for our clients, agents, partners, employees, and shareholders.”Zach joins Fathom’s corporate governance team with more than 25 years of finance experience in the public and private sectors — ranging from life sciences to manufacturing. She started her career as an auditor at Arthur Andersen, followed by several finance leadership roles, including the CFO position at financial advisory firm Rankin McKenzie, according to her LinkedIn profile.Fathom has made several moves to expand its footprint and performance heading into 2025. On Monday, it acquired Scottsdale, Arizona-based My Home Group, adding 2,200-plus agents to its ranks. Fathom said it will discuss the details of the acquisition in an earnings call on Thursday. The move could be a reaction to the increased activity in Arizona’s real estate market due to a growing presence from California migrants looking to save on housing costs.In August, Fathom introduced two new commission payment plans, Fathom Max and Fathom Share, to complement the company’s existing Fathom One plan. A month later, the firm settled antitrust claims related to the Sitzer/Burnett suit for $2.95 million.According to data from Real Trends Verified, North Carolina-based Fathom Realty is closing in on 11,800 total agents, with 145 sales offices and roughly $1.12 million in average yearly sales volume per agent.

A lot has been said during this election cycle about housing affordability as a potential difference-maker, with both major party presidential candidates giving more attention to housing issues than in other recent campaigns. But now that the results have largely been tabulated, voters appeared to back more basic economic concerns rather than issues related to housing. Comparatively speaking, housing was a more prominent issue at the national level among Democratic candidates than it was among Republicans.With the return of Donald Trump to the White House in January, the former president and now president-elect appeared to effectively tap into general discontent among the broader electorate over two key issues: immigration and the economy.Recent Redfin survey data showed that 29% of self-identified Trump voters indicated that housing affordability influenced their pick on Tuesday. But based on exit polls conducted by NBC News and consortium of 10 news organizations across 10 key states, the condition of the economy was a clear motivator for those who identified as Trump voters.A combined 67% of poll respondents who were asked about the condition of the economy said it was either “not so good” or “poor,” with clear majorities coming down on Trump’s side. Nearly 70% of Republicans characterized the condition of the economy this way, and Trump has for years railed against high levels of inflation under the Biden administration as a key issue in connecting to voters.Forty-five percent of voters polled said that the financial condition of their family was worse today than it was at this point in 2020. Among this group, 80% identified themselves as Trump voters.Exit polls conducted by the The Washington Post also showed that Trump voters were clearly motivated by the state of the economy, with 79% of his supporters saying it was their top issue headed into the election. Among all voters, 31% said the economy was their primary issue, with only the “state of democracy” outpacing the economy as a key motivator at 35% of the total electorate.In what could be a telling sign of its overall lack of prominence as a subset of economic issues, housing was not broken out in the exit polls from these mainstream media outlets.But supply and affordability will need to be addressed by the Trump administration in the next four years, and some housing organizations — including the Community Home Lenders of America (CHLA) — have expressed readiness to work with elected officials to address these challenges.Over the next couple of months, Trump will need to make key decisions about the posture of housing policy in his White House. This will include selecting leaders for the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), Ginnie Mae and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).As noted in prior HousingWire reporting and a recent look at potential policy stances by Politico, Trump has spoken about easing regulations on homebuilders in an effort to boost supply. The 2024 Republican platform also mentioned the selling of federal lands to allow for more homes to be constructed. The Biden administration previously proposed a plan that included selling federal lands, but it remains unclear how states with large swaths of federal land — like Utah — could be impacted by such a move. The plan may also merit more or less consideration under the new White House.

loanDepot achieved profitability in the third quarter of 2024, ending an 11-quarter streak of financial losses. Cost reductions and revenue growth drove this turnaround amid lower interest rates, which boosted refinancing activity.As a result, loanDepot is retiring its Vision 2025 strategic plan, which began in July 2022 to help the company reduce its non-volume expenses by more than $730 million.Vision 2025 will be replaced by a program called Project North Star that is focused on the homeownership journey. It has an emphasis on first-time homebuyers; purchase loans through an expanded geographic footprint and partnerships; servicing portfolio scale and retention; operating leverage quality to drive down turn times; and recruiting, developing and retaining the best talent available. “The launch of Project North Star builds on the strategic pillars of Vision 2025, including our focus on durable revenue growth, positive operating leverage, productivity, and investments in platforms and solutions that support our customer’s homeownership journey,” loanDepot president and CEO Frank Martell said in a statement. On Tuesday, California-based loanDepot reported a non-GAAP adjusted net income of $7 million for Q3 2024, compared to a $15.9 million loss in Q2 2024 and a $29.2 million loss in Q3 2023. By GAAP accounting standards, the net income in Q3 2024 was $2.6 million. Chief financial officer David Hayes said in a statement that in the third quarter, there was a “modest improvement in the mortgage market, coupled with the company’s positive operating leverage,” which fueled the return to profitability. “As we look toward 2025, we anticipate continued market challenges, but we believe that the implementation of Project North Star will allow us to capture the benefit of higher market volumes while we continue to capitalize on our ongoing investments in operational efficiency to achieve sustainable profitability in a wide variety of operating environments,” Hayes said.As an example of initiatives included in the new plan, the lender announced this week a joint venture agreement with Smith Douglas Homes, a top 50 homebuilder with a solid book of business in Southern states. During an earnings call, executives told analysts that loanDepot is seeking more JVs with builders, real estate brokerages and retail lenders across the country. According to filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), loanDepot’s expenses in the third quarter were $311 million, down 9% quarter over quarter and up 1.9% year over year. The increase was primarily due to higher commissions, direct origination expenses, and marketing and overtime, reflecting the increase in volume. Costs may increase as the company continues to add loan officers and operations team members. The company expects vendor costs to rise in 2025, just as they did in 2023 and 2024.Meanwhile, the company’s total revenues reached $314.6 million in Q3 2024, an increase of more than 18% on both a quarterly and yearly basis. Operational bizloanDepot returned to profitability while increasing its mortgage production and volume. Origination volume was $6.7 billion from July to September, at the high end of investor guidance and up from $6 billion in the prior quarter. Its pull-through gain-on-sale margin was 3.29% in Q3 2024, compared to 3.22% in Q2 2024. In August, loanDepot added a first-lien home equity line of credit (HELOC) to its product suite, enabling homeowners without a mortgage to borrow from their home equity. In September, it hired military advocate Bryan Bergjans to boost its lending capacity in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) space.  Purchase loans comprised 66% of loanDepot’s total volume in Q3 2024, down from 71% in the same period in 2023. Meanwhile, the company’s organic refinance consumer-direct recapture rate was 71%, up from 69% a year ago.Regarding loanDepot’s servicing portfolio, the unpaid principal balance (UPB) increased to $114.9 billion on Sept. 30, compared to $114.3 billion on June 30. Servicing fee income decreased to $124 million in Q3 2024, compared to $125 million in the previous quarter.  Company executives project a fourth-quarter 2024 origination volume of $6 billion to $8 billion. The pull-through gain-on-sale margin is expected to be between 2.85% and 3.05%. loanDepot ended the quarter with $480 million in cash. Looking forward at the Mortgage Bankers Association’s expectation of $2.3 trillion in industrywide origination volume for 2025, Martell said, “We feel pretty good about our chances of making money,” adding that “it’s a fluid situation with rates.”After the earnings release, loanDepot stock was trading at $2.35, up 9.3% in after-market hours.

The role of the real estate agent has been under the microscope of late as a result of class-action litigation over agent commissions, but the feedback agents want most about their practices comes from two sources — home buyers and sellers.A new report from the National Association of Realtors (NAR) surveyed buyers and sellers on what they want from their real estate agents. And for all talk about getting a good deal on a purchase or sale, people still just want to find the right home and have a smooth process.This was unambiguous among homebuyers. When asked what they want their real estate agent to help with, the most common response was “finding the right home,” cited by 49% of buyers.This concern even outweighed factors related to money. It might be surprising to learn that only 11% said that help with price negotiations is the No. 1 need, while only 14% said they wanted help in negotiating the terms of the sale.Responses from home sellers suggest they’re more concerned about monetary issues than buyers, but they still have practical matters that take priority. Help with marketing their home was the top response from sellers at 22%, while pricing the home competitively was a close second at 20%. Help negotiating with buyers registered at just 13%. Logistics such as selling the home on the right timeline (18%) and preparing the house for sale (15%) also registered frequently among sellers.The survey also shed light on the different methods by which agents are marketing homes for sale. The hotly debated Clear Cooperation Policy (CCP) — a NAR rule that requires Realtors to post a home on a NAR-affiliated multiple listing service (MLS) within a day of signing a listing agreement — is likely playing a role in the responses.In response to a “select all that apply” question about marketing methods, 86% of sellers said their agent posted the listing on an MLS, by far the highest option. More antiquated methods like yard signs (61%), open houses (58%) and direct mail (8%) showed up in the survey as well.

In efforts to escape “sky-high real estate prices” and rising costs of living, California residents are favoring Arizona as a top relocation destination behind only Texas.That’s according to a report released Monday by StorageCafe, a national marketplace for storage space and an affiliate of real estate data provider Yardi. The report reviewed U.S. Census Bureau county-to-county migration data between 2013 and 2022 to identify the most popular and profitable moving routes from California to Arizona. The census report collected data from 3.5 million addresses nationwide, including an unspecified number from counties in California and Arizona. StorageCafe’s analysis ranked the 50 most popular moving routes based on “individual move-ins,” referring to one relocation event where an individual household from California establishes a new residence in Arizona. StorageCafe also considered numerical and percentage differences in home and rent prices across counties in both states, homeownership or rental status, per capita income and generational demographics.The report found that more than 630,000 California residents relocated to Arizona over the past decade — an average of 173 new residents per day. Among the top 50 moving routes, 36% of migrating California residents purchased homes during their first year in Arizona. According to StorageCafe, almost all top-ranked routes offered significant savings on home and rental prices, with the highest amount reaching nearly $1 million. Additionally, the report noted that “homes in Arizona cost less than half of what they do in California ($321K vs. $659K), giving people a much better chance at homeownership. The same trend applies to rent, with Arizona apartments being 30% cheaper than in California.”The No. 1 route between the states — and the route for five of the 10 most popular routes —was from Los Angeles County to Maricopa County. Encompassing the Phoenix metro area, Maricopa County experienced almost 8,700 move-ins from Los Angeles alone in 2022, with 43% of newcomers choosing homeownership.Other common starting points for Californians moving to Maricopa County were San Diego County (5,173 movers), Orange County (4,021), Riverside County (3,302) and San Bernardino County (2,649). About 34,000 California migrants relocated to Phoenix in 2022, with technology job opportunities heavily influencing the trend.“[Phoenix] has always been a darling of tech companies, due to its top-notch universities and strong aerospace industry. Naturally, there’s a busy scene of home-grown tech companies, as well as California transplants. In the past few years, companies like Unical Aviation, Sendoso, and HomeLight moved their corporate headquarters from California to Maricopa County,” the report noted. “This trend is further boosting the local tech sector and contributing to the creation of thousands of attractive jobs.”StorageCafe highlights tech and health care as two key drivers behind a consistent number of young professionals moving to the Grand Canyon State. According to census data, millennials (26%) led the migration charge among age groups, followed by Generation Z (20%). Baby boomers (18%), Generation X (14%) and Silent Generation (4%) movers followed as they sought better retirement options.

In a recent episode of its “New Home Insights Podcast,” Dean Wehrli, principal at John Burns Research & Consulting, chats with David Howard, CEO of the National Rental Home Council (NRHC). They discuss how national, state and local housing policies impact the rental market, and they also explore housing policies proposed ahead of the presidential election.Wehrli: You started with the NRHC after the single-family rental and build-to-rent (BTR) markets grew. But it’s become massively bigger since that time too, hasn’t it?Howard: There’s always kind of been a gray area, and that’s really where single-family rental housing has lived. The business of single-family rental housing has been around for decades, but over the past 10 to 12 years, that market has started to take shape as a separate and distinct asset class within the housing ecosystem.Wehrli: There’s some national legislation that could impact larger entities that have become somewhat important in single-family rentals. Can you give us some background and your take?Howard: Housing has come to the forefront of many policy conversations in Washington, D.C., especially after COVID. We’ve seen some federal legislation addressing concerns policymakers have. It’s very appropriate for policymakers here to examine issues of housing supply, affordability and accessibility.Wehrli: Can you explore the two major presidential candidates and their proposed policies that would impact the rental market?Howard: The vice president [Kamala Harris] has spoken eloquently about the need to build more housing and incentivize new construction. The former president [Donald Trump] has also discussed opening up federal lands for new housing development. Success for either candidate would depend on how effectively they can incentivize new housing development.Wehrli: What’s going on in the states that you would look at as an existential threat?Howard: It’s challenging for state policymakers to enact legislation directly impacting housing on the ground, as housing is largely a local matter. The real action is at the regional level, where zoning and approvals happen. But we are seeing some state-level legislation in places like California, Colorado and Minnesota that restricts rental property construction.Wehrli: Can we talk about the legislation that threatens BTR?Howard: In certain Georgia counties, some single-family homes are set aside for rent through specific legislation, though that approach hasn’t spread widely. Many policymakers simply don’t understand BTR and its benefits.Wehrli: Now, let’s talk a little bit about rent control. Do you see a slippery slope for any kind of rent control?Howard: There’s substantial research showing that rent control acts as a disincentive for new development and ongoing investment in housing. This can, over time, create a greater supply shortage.Wehrli: One of the problems with supply in the multifamily world is capital, particularly affordable capital. Are you tracking that?Howard: Yes, access to capital has become more challenging. The cost of capital is now much higher, making it harder for developers to finance new housing. That’s a big part of why single-family rental homes are sometimes more economical to build than multifamily properties.

Onity Group, the recently rebranded parent company of top-10 lender Liberty Reverse Mortgage, posted improved earnings results in the third quarter of the year — with particular attention given to the profitability of its forward and reverse mortgage servicing segments.Onity CEO Glen Messina led the Tuesday morning earnings call by saying that the company recorded its “highest adjusted pretax income and return on equity in the last three years,” which came in at $35 million. Its net income for the quarter was $21 million. It originated $8.5 billion in loans from July through September, up 23% quarter over quarter. Reverse mortgage highlightsOnity chief financial officer Sean O’Neill highlighted the reverse servicing segment’s overall contribution to the company’s profitability.“This quarter’s performance was supported by strong profitability in the reverse business, benefiting from a successful asset management transaction with improvement both quarter over quarter and year over year,” he said.Part of the contribution came from a previously announced acquisition of assets from Mortgage Assets Management LLC, a subsidiary of investment funds managed by Waterfall Asset Management.“The Waterfall reverse asset transaction closed last week,” O’Neill said. “It increases our equity through preferred equity issuance, provides additional liquidity and includes about $55 million of reverse assets which are accretive to our earnings per share.”The company also continues to “capitalize on market cycle opportunities,” he said, which includes its reverse mortgage activity.This is “demonstrated by our selective MSR (mortgage servicing rights) sales above book value this year, all three of which were replenished in the same period by strong originations volume,” he said, “as well as the opportunistic reverse asset transactions we have engaged in since early 2023, two of which were the reverse transaction in September and the Waterfall transaction, both of which helped our successful debt restructuring and provided accretion to net income.”Impact on balance sheetThe company gained $10 million in adjusted reverse servicing pre-tax income. It also added $46 million in liquidity via its reverse mortgage servicing operation.Overall reverse mortgage origination volume also increased quarter over quarter, from $184 million in Q2 to $197 million in Q3.“Reverse [pre-tax income] improved over last quarter to break even driven by improved margin and volume in the reverse correspondent subchannel,” the company reported.As it has in prior quarters, the company emphasized that its full reverse mortgage pipeline as an “integrated reverse originator, servicer and subservicer” is contributing to its overall profitability. Onity has logged $722 million in reverse mortgage originations over the past 12 months, and it maintains a reverse servicing and subservicing portfolio of $22 billion, or roughly 7% of its total book.According to Home Equity Conversion Mortgage (HECM) endorsement data compiled by Reverse Market Insight (RMI), Liberty/Onity is the fourth-largest reverse mortgage lender in the country as measured by endorsements.It endorsed 1,138 HECM loans during the 12 months ending Oct. 31, narrowly staying above Fairway Independent Mortgage Corp. in the top reverse originator rankings maintained by RMI.

The removal of offers of buyer broker compensation from most MLSs across the country — as mandated by the National Association of Realtors’ (NAR) commission lawsuit settlement agreement — was a massive change for real estate agents and brokers. But they aren’t the only housing professionals impacted by these changes.Real estate appraisers also rely on MLS data, including information about buyer broker compensation and seller concessions, in order to accurately appraise properties for homebuyers and lenders. But with the terms of the NAR settlement now in effect, much of that data is no longer available via the MLS.“We’ve taken a step back with data transparency since the NAR lawsuit,” said Ryan Lundquist, a Sacramento, California-based appraiser. “Agent compensation has historically been separated from the concessions field in MLS, but after the NAR lawsuit, the concessions amount field was also removed. “In practical terms, this means appraisers need to reach out to agents to find out if there were any concessions, as opposed to that information being readily available in MLS.”The lack of concession and commission information on the MLS is an inconvenience for appraisers, forcing them to call the agents involved in a comparable transaction. But appraisers say that even prior to the Aug. 17 changes, many considered it best practice to contact an agent and verify this information.“If an appraiser believes a home will make a good comparable, they need to understand all the terms around the sale of the property, so it has always been important to make contact with the real estate agents involved to understand if there were any seller concessions or any terms the appraiser should know about before using the property as a comparable,” said Shawn Telford, the chief appraiser at CoreLogic.Going forward, Telford is expecting even more variation in seller concessions and agent compensation due to the terms of the NAR settlement. To him, this makes phone calls with agents not only a best practice but an absolute imperative.Generally speaking, appraisers say agents are good about taking calls and supplying them with accurate information. But with fewer home sales occurring, Lundquist said he sometimes has to use comps that are much older — and sometimes the agents don’t recall the exact details of a transaction.“Locally, sales volume is down by about 35%, and that effectively means I have 35% fewer comps to choose from,” Lundquist said. “So, the older sales are really going to matter ahead. I certainly don’t want to inflate any value in light of having less access to concessions information and not hearing back from some agents.”Despite having to make more phone calls, appraisers say they have not experienced a massive impact from the settlement-driven business practice changes.“Researching the data, gathering the data and verifying the data have always been an important part of what the appraisers do,” Telford said. “So, whatever has happened with the changes in how real estate agents operate hasn’t really changed the responsibility to the appraiser to understand the terms of the sale.”Kenon Chen, the executive vice president of strategy and growth at Clear Capital, shares a similar view.“We are not really seeing anything needing to be handled differently,” Chen said. “There are some specific markets where concessions are becoming more common or more of a challenge, but we haven’t really seen any impacts yet. But it is still early days.”As he looks ahead, Lundquist is nervous that the future may not be so straightforward. He believes there are a few things appraisers should be keeping a close eye on. This includes identifying any differences between homes where the seller pays for the buyer’s agent’s compensation, versus the ones where the buyer pays out of pocket.“We have to know why some properties could potentially be closing at different price levels, and figure out where market value is in the midst of that,” he said. ”So far, it seems like business as usual in so many transactions, but we have to really critique the comps ahead to understand how the commission — or lack thereof — is affecting the final price.“My observation is this idea has almost seemed offensive to some who work in real estate, but I don’t know how we don’t ask this question if we are serious about accurate valuations. The reality is when laws or practices change, sometimes the questions we ask also change.”

It’s a big week for the U.S. economy as the 2024 election takes place and monetary policymakers are meeting to decide what to do next about interest rates.For mortgage professionals who’ve been dealing with uncertainty of late, more clarity could soon emerge. Mortgage rates have been rising quickly in recent weeks, dashing hopes for growth across the purchase and refinance lending channels.According to HousingWire’s Mortgage Rates Center, the average 30-year conforming rate stood at 6.88% on Tuesday. This figure has jumped 16 basis points (bps) over the past week, 26 bps in the past two weeks and 57 bps since Sept. 18, when the Federal Reserve cut benchmark rates by half a percentage point.The average 15-year conforming rate, meanwhile, grew to 6.55% on Tuesday — up an eye-popping 27 bps in one week. Conditions aren’t expected to improve in the short term, according to HousingWire Lead Analyst Logan Mohtashami.“Mortgage rates are heading higher unless the spreads are fantastic today,” he wrote Tuesday. “The election data will create some wild swings, but the ISM (Institute for Supply Management) service report was a big beat of estimates, which made yields higher this morning after the report was released.”Some help is expected Thursday in the form of another Fed rate cut. According to the CME Group’s FedWatch tool, about 95% of interest rate traders believe the federal funds rate will be lowered by 25 bps. And there is a 77% chance of another 25-bps cut in December, which would bring the overnight rate to a range of 4.25% to 4.5%.“Assuming a 25-basis point cut in November, the September FOMC projections imply one additional quarter-point cut in December,” Sam Williamson, senior economist at First American, said in a statement. “However, additional upside surprises on inflation or employment data could influence the Fed to consider taking the December cut off the table. In contrast, accelerated economic weakness or a rapid slowdown in inflation could prompt the Fed to take a more dovish approach to policy normalization.”While Tuesday is Election Day, the results of the presidential race between Kamala Harris and Donald Trump may not be known immediately. The contest is expected to be extremely close and is likely to be decided by a handful of battleground states, including Arizona, Georgia, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.The presidential race, along with control of the House of Representatives and the Senate, could also factor into interest rate movements in the short term.Survey data released Tuesday by Redfin found that 38% of early voters factored housing affordability into their choice between Harris and Trump. About one-third of respondents believe that rates will decline during a Trump presidency, compared to one-quarter who think the same under Harris. And more respondents believe rates will rise under Harris (32%) versus Trump (28%).ICE Mortgage Technology reported this week that lower interest rates during the third quarter led to higher levels of home equity lending. Home equity withdrawals across both second-lien mortgages and cash-out refinances reached a two-year high mark in Q3 2024.But even with a collective $48 billion in originations for these two categories from July through September, ICE reported that U.S. homeowners are touching only 0.42% of their tappable equity — the amount they can borrower against while keeping a 20% equity stake in the home.The 10-year average extraction rate is 0.92%. Second mortgages are 26% below their historic utilization rate, while cash-out refis are 69% below normal.ICE noted that “elevated interest rates have been a deterrent to homeowner equity utilization in recent quarters, as 30-year mortgage rates climbed at times into the high 7% range, curtailing cash-out refinance activity, and the average introductory rate on second lien home equity lines of credit (HELOCs) rose above 9.5%.”If Fed policymakers continue on their rate-cutting path, however, this could make home equity loan products “more affordable and more attractive,” ICE concluded.“Since the Fed began its latest cycle of rate hikes, the monthly payment needed to withdraw $50K via a HELOC more than doubled, from as low as $167 per month back in March 2022 to $413 in January of this year,” Andy Walden, the company’s vice president of research and analysis, said in a statement.

Credit rating agency Fitch announced this week that its long-term issuer default rating for Finance of America was downgraded to “restricted default” status following its recently publicized debt exchange plan. The rating was then upgraded to “CCC” following the completion of the exchange agreement.Fitch explained its rationale for the whipsaw of ratings by characterizing FOA’s move as a “distressed debt exchange.” Fitch said the exchange “imposes a material reduction in terms compared with the existing contractual terms and is being done to avoid an otherwise likely eventual default.”The reduction in terms are “reflected in the extension of the original maturity of the unsecured debt via the exchange into new notes, and the elimination of substantially all restrictive covenants and events of default on the remaining unsecured notes,” the agency said.Without the exchange agreement, the company would be hampered by “weak operating performance, limited liquidity and [a] highly encumbered balance sheet” that would make it unable to meet the 2025 maturity date of its original agreement. But the exchange agreement, recently amended and claiming a high level of participation, changes the equation, according to Fitch.“The subsequent upgrade of the ratings reflects FOA’s improved financial and operating flexibility following the debt exchange as refinancing risk has been reduced and near-term liquidity needs are limited given the extension of debt maturities to 2026,” Fitch said. “FOA’s ratings remain supported by its established market position within the reverse mortgage sector and experienced senior management team.”But FOA, the reverse mortgage industry’s leading lender, still maintains a “weak liquidity profile” that constrains its ratings, Fitch added. The agency projects that FOA’s earnings will be improved by a stronger interest rate environment.“Fitch believes FOA’s profitability should benefit from a reduction in interest rates, as this will likely drive higher mortgage origination volumes and improve the valuation of the company’s residual investments in its securitizations,” according to its announcement.Additionally, its transition to a “monoline reverse mortgage lender” after closing down its forward mortgage arm will also prove beneficial. Fitch said the transition has had a positive impact on FOA’s operating costs.An FOA spokesperson told HousingWire’s Reverse Mortgage Daily (RMD) that it anticipated these actions from Fitch. FOA is set to announce its third-quarter earnings on Wednesday.“‘The Fitch rating change was expected and, consistent with similar debt exchanges in the market rated by Fitch, FOA’s debt rating has been upgraded to where it was prior to the announcement of the debt exchange support agreement in June 2024,” the spokesperson said.In June, FOA announced the debt exchange agreement that involves new, secured debt that will come due beyond the original 2025 maturity date. It amended that agreement in September by exchanging the current, unsecured notes (due in 2025 with an interest rate of 7.875%) for one of two new bond options. The first offers the same interest rate and is due in 2026 (with a company option to extend into 2027), while the second has a 10% interest rate and comes due in 2029.The news from Fitch follows an announcement from Morningstar DBRS, which affirmed FOA’s previously obtained “good” reverse mortgage originator ranking.

The COVID-19 pandemic impacted the housing market like no event since the 2008 financial crisis, but some of the trends induced by the pandemic are starting to reverse. That’s evident in the annual profile of home buyers and sellers from the National Association of Realtors (NAR), which provides data on dozens of real estate trends.When the pandemic began in the spring of 2020, wealthy residents of urban centers like New York City and San Francisco packed their bags for rural areas and small towns to escape strict lockdowns and find more space for things like home offices. This gave rise to the narrative that city dwellers wouldn’t return and urban centers were dying.Turns out, they weren’t. Between 2017 and 2021, rural areas and small towns had remarkably consistent shares of the home purchase market at about 13% and 22%, respectively. But in 2022, the share of homes bought in rural areas (19%) and small towns (29%) jumped considerably.These purchases came primarily at the expense of the suburbs, where the share of home purchases dropped from a consistent 50% level prior to the pandemic to 39% in 2022. Urban areas also took a hit, falling from 13% to 10%.But in 2024, this trend has largely reversed. The share of home purchases in the suburbs has moved up to 45% while the 16% share in urban centers has actually moved ahead of where it was pre-pandemic.Conversely, the share of purchases in rural areas (14%) and small towns (23%) have largely returned to their pre-pandemic levels.When bad things happen in New York, pundits often say it’s the end of the city. But a lot of the post-pandemic migration among New Yorkers was intracity, meaning that falling rent and home prices in Manhattan were the result of people moving to Brooklyn.While New York is operating much as it was before the pandemic, San Francisco has taken longer to recover because the population is heavily concentrated among tech workers. These companies have been more likely to adopt permanent work-from-home policies.But many major tech companies are now calling workers back to the office, which has led to improved office market conditions in both New York and the Bay Area. Other data in NAR’s report also reflects a return to density. Prior to the pandemic, the median distance that homebuyers migrated from their old house to their new house was consistent at 15 miles. That number popped up to 50 miles in 2022 but has since fallen back to 20 miles. The age of homes purchased is also telling. Between 2009 and 2021, the typical home purchased was built in the early 1990s. In 2022 and 2023, however, the typical home purchased was built in the mid-1980s. This is largely due to a delay in homebuilding caused by supply-line disruptions and shortages of construction materials. Appliances were hard to come by for builders as delays in computer chip deliveries ran rampant and lumber shortages caused prices to skyrocket.Homebuilders are starting to catch up. Today, the typical purchase is for a home built in 1994, or roughly where it was pre-pandemic.

Among voters who cast their ballots by Nov. 1, 38% said that the issue of housing affordability impacted their choice in the presidential contest, according to new survey data released this week by Redfin.The survey was conducted by Ipsos within an extremely narrow time frame of 24 hours on Oct. 31 and Nov. 1. The respondent pool was a nationally representative sample of 1,002 U.S. adults ages 18 and older. Both major party candidates, Kamala Harris and Donald Trump, have discussed their housing plans with varying levels of detail during the election cycle. But the survey results suggest that at least on the core issue of affordability, one candidate has the edge.“Kamala Harris voters were much more likely than Donald Trump voters to say housing affordability factored into their decision: 43% of respondents who already voted for Harris say affordability impacted their pick, compared to 29% of respondents who already voted for Trump,” according to Redfin. Generally, people who have already voted — regardless of their choice of candidate — “were less likely to factor housing affordability into their presidential decision than most other issues we asked about,” the survey explained. “Eleven of the 14 issues listed in the survey were more likely than housing affordability to impact votes.”Voter perceptions of how mortgage rates would be impacted by the election were also tabulated. Roughly one-third of respondents believe that rates will fall under a Trump presidency, compared to about one-quarter of those who think the same under a Harris administration. A larger share of respondents also believe rates will rise under Harris (32%) versus Trump (28%).The campaigns’ general focus on other, more widely discussed national issues like the economy or reproductive rights seemed to hold more sway over voters, the survey results noted.The leading concerns for early voters were the economy (63%), inflation (59%) and protections for democracy (56%).Other leading issues included immigration (55%), health care (52%), crime and safety (47%), abortion access (45%), U.S. involvement in foreign conflicts (41%) freedom of speech (41%), gun violence (40%) and the standing of the U.S. in the global community (38%).Issues suggested to have less of an impact on candidate choice than housing affordability include climate change (36%) and gender-affirming care access (19%).Still, the noise surrounding a national election is often distracting, and housing affordability could play a larger role in local elections, according to the survey results.“Two in five (40%) U.S. residents who have already voted say housing affordability factored into their pick for local races,” Redfin explained. “Crime and safety was the most important consideration, with 50% of early voters saying it impacted their decision on who to vote for. It’s followed by the economy (46%) and inflation (41%), then housing affordability.”Issues regarding housing affordability and facilitating new construction are largely made at the local level. These include policies that impact rental costs and zoning requirements that dictate where and when certain types of homes can be built.

When it comes to what a possible Kamala Harris or Donald Trump victory in the presidential election means for the future of antitrust enforcement in the real estate space, lawyer and industry analyst Rob Hahn may have said it best.“Nobody knows anything,” Hahn wrote in the Nov. 1 edition of his Notorious ROB email newsletter. “Neither Trump nor Harris have made antitrust a big issue in their campaigns. None of the people running have any kind of a real background in antitrust, and only Trump has any kind of a track record.”Although the war between the Department of Justice (DOJ) and the National Association of Realtors (NAR) has been going on for decades, the most recent round of battles began under the Trump administration in 2018. That’s when Congressmen Tom Marino (R-Pa.) and David Cicilline (D-R.I.) sent a letter to the DOJ and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) asking them to “examine competition-related issues in the real estate brokerage industry.” The investigation eventually led to a lawsuit, which was settled in 2020. But NAR did not finalize the settlement until after Joe Biden took office in 2021. And under the Biden administration, the DOJ decided to withdraw from the settlement, leading to the most recent round of lawsuits and appeals.Additionally, an article published by the New York Law Journal found that the FTC’s and DOJ’s antitrust divisions have roughly doubled the average number of complaints seeking to enjoin transactions filed each year under Biden, compared to filings with the agency under the Trump administration.Trump’s track record shows that he has generally been more pro-business than other administrations. This has led to speculation that under a second Trump term, many of the real estate industry’s antitrust concerns would go away, while a Harris presidency would result in a continuation of the status quo. But industry analysts and attorneys are not so sure.While the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) does not deal with antitrust issues, former CFPB deputy enforcement director Jeff Ehrlich believes that, generally speaking, a second Trump administration will be more aggressive in enforcement than many expect.“In 2020, the last full year of the previous Trump Administration, the Bureau brought 48 enforcement actions; so far this year, it has brought only 21,” Ehrlich wrote in an email. He went on to note that during the Trump administration, the bureau “brought some pretty aggressive cases, including in the housing space.“ It filed suit against nonbank lender Townstone Financial for alleged violations of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) through discrimination against prospective borrowers. It also settled a mortgage servicing case against Mr. Cooper for $73 million in redress and a $1.5 million penalty. ”If history is any guide, a second Trump Administration might not be as friendly to the industry as many expect,” Erlich wrote.For Hahn, it was Trump’s selection of Sen. JD Vance as his running mate which has made things a bit murkier.Vance has voiced his support for FTC Chair Lina Khan, stating at a policy conference in February that he looks “at Lina Kahn as one of the few people in the Biden administration that I actually think is doing a pretty good job and that sort of sets me apart from most of my Republican colleagues.”Vance added that one of the things he most appreciates about Khan’s approach is that “she recognized there has to be sort of a broader understanding of how we think about competition in the marketplace.”And Hahn isn’t the only who believes Vance’s selection has thrown off expectations. The New York Law Journal wrote that “Vance has seemingly positioned himself to play a significant role in antitrust enforcement and to pick up where Trump’s previous administration left off.”“At a minimum, a second Trump presidency would likely continue the pro-enforcement stance from his first four years. If Trump entrusts Vance with significant control over competition policy, their administration may look surprisingly similar to the current, potentially including the appointment of someone with a similar populist agenda to Khan to the helm of the FTC,” the article states.Marx Sterbcow, the managing attorney at Sterbcow Law Group, also doesn’t buy into the narrative that a Trump victory would mean a “return to normal” for the real estate industry.“In the past, when the Trump administration entered into the settlement with NAR, things had kind of cooled down,” Sterbcow said. “You didn’t have things like active antitrust litigation going on, or the jury verdict in Missouri, so there was a lot more normalcy in the industry and everything for the most part was very stable and static. “Obviously, that has changed dramatically. The industry right now is fakakta because you effectively have a hodgepodge of confusion for consumers across the United States, and it is only facilitating a lot more antitrust issues for companies and consumers.”While Sterbcow acknowledges Trump’s pro-business track record, he does not believe a second Trump administration will stand by if consumers are blatantly being harmed or taken advantage of.“It is not like consumer protection is going to go away,” Sterbcow said. “We saw in the previous Trump administration where they went after things that harm consumers. I think in the case of the commission rules, they will let it play out and allow market forces to take control, which could create another set of issues.”Sterbcow is anticipating that the industry will undergo further significant changes in the next 24 months. But he also feels that if these changes are making things worse for consumers, the DOJ’s antitrust division will take further action.Hahn shares a similar view, supported by what he feels is Trump’s focus on decreasing the cost of living, which he believes will translate into a focus on housing. Hahn said if the Trump administration homes in on housing, antitrust pressure on the industry could continue if things like agent commissions are perceived as inflated or a potential roadblock to homeownership.In the same way industry experts believe a second Trump administration won’t be completely lax on enforcement and antitrust regulations, they are also skeptical that a Harris presidency would mean a continuation of the path set forward by the Biden administration. Fueling some of this skepticism is that the vice president’s stance on antitrust is unclear.Harris has previously announced her intentions, if elected, to pass a federal ban on price gouging. She has aims to take on Big Pharma and corporate landlords, which some believe are indications that she well may continue the Biden administration’s antitrust agenda. Some have noted that a Harris victory may wipe the slate clean when it comes to antitrust, but there does not appear to be any evidence to suggest she will completely change course from what the Biden administration has pursued.Sterbcow, for one, not only sees a continuation but a ramping up of antitrust enforcement.“I think there could be a lot more,” Sterbcow said. “I think you’ll see a lot more fair lending and fair housing enforcement, especially on the price of real estate commissions, and that is something no one in the industry wants because we have no data on how things will play out with the current policy changes in place.”

Elevated mortgage rates, sky-high home prices, tight credit and stagnant wages have all contributed to homebuyers getting older. Newly released data from the annual profile of home buyers and sellers by the National Association of Realtors (NAR) shows just how dramatically this trend has manifested since the financial crisis of 2008.The median age of homebuyers has hit a new all-time high, with first-time buyers at 38 years old and repeat buyers at a whopping 61 years old. Together, the median age of all homebuyers sits at 56.“The U.S. housing market is split into two groups: first-time buyers struggling to enter the market and current homeowners buying with cash,” Jessica Lautz, NAR’s deputy chief economist and vice president of research, said in a statement accompanying the report.“First-time buyers face high home prices, high mortgage interest rates and limited inventory, making them a decade older with significantly higher incomes than previous generations of buyers. Meanwhile, current homeowners can more easily make housing trades using built-up housing equity for cash purchases or large down payments on dream homes.”The trendline is startling. In 2002 — around the same time that the underlying causes of the 2008 financial crisis took root — there was significantly less separation in median age between first-time buyers (31) and repeat buyers (41).While the median age of buyers gradually increased over the course of two decades, the COVID-19 pandemic sped it up. Since 2020, the median age of buyers rose by 11 years, including a spike of 5 years among repeat buyers, who now make up 76% of the market — also an all-time high.The data is part of NAR’s sprawling annual report that includes a wealth of data on buyers, sellers and real estate agents across a wide range of demographics.While single women have bought a higher percentage of homes than single men since NAR began tracking the data in 1981, that gap has widened in the past two years. The share of homes bought by single women jumped from 17% to 20% and the share bought by single men fell from 10% to 6%.This movement is more dramatic among first-time buyers, with the share of homes bought by single women rising from 19% in 2022 to 24% now, while the share bought by single men dropped from 18% to 12%.Homebuyers are increasingly childless. In 2012, 59% of homebuyers had no children under the age of 18. That number now sits at 73%. The median income of homebuyers has also shot up, with first-time buyers earning a median of $97,000 while repeat buyers are making $114,300.