FRC Research · The Complete 2025 Federal Record

The Door Effect

Across 859,090 FHA credit decisions, more than a third of what statistically explains a denial is not the applicant's file. It is which lender the applicant walked into.
38%
of explainable variation in FHA denial outcomes is attributable to lender identity, after accounting for income, loan amount, DTI band, and state
+43.7 pp
the largest excess: one major lender's actual denial rate (78.7%) vs. what its applicant mix predicts (35.0%)
65 pp
the residual span between the strictest and most lenient major doors, applicant mix held constant

Method, in one paragraph

We fit two logistic models on every 2025 FHA application that reached a credit decision (HMDA action 1, 2, or 3; loan_type 2). Model A uses only observable application characteristics in the federal record — income, loan amount, debt-to-income band, small-loan flag, and state. Model B adds one variable: which lender. Model A explains 17.1% of outcome variation (McFadden R²); Model B explains 27.6%. The difference — 38% of everything explainable — is the door. Demographic fields are deliberately excluded; this is a study of lender behavior, not borrowers.

Expected vs. actual: the strictest doors

"Our applicants are riskier" is a measurable claim. We measured it. Below, expected is each lender's predicted denial rate given its actual applicant mix; residual is what the mix cannot explain.

LenderDecisionsActual denialExpected (mix-adjusted)Residual
AMERISAVE MORTGAGE COMPANY22,92778.7%35.0%+43.7 pp
Lakeview Loan Servicing, LLC7,93167.1%31.3%+35.8 pp
AMERICAN FINANCING CORPORATION11,06271.0%35.2%+35.8 pp
Carrington Mortgage Services LLC14,00758.4%29.7%+28.7 pp
Better Mortgage Corporation2,35449.4%27.3%+22.1 pp
Village Capital & Investment4,68055.7%33.9%+21.8 pp
NEWREZ LLC19,57458.0%37.6%+20.4 pp
Flagstar Bank NA2,86140.3%24.5%+15.8 pp
WELLS FARGO BANK NA2,35848.1%33.9%+14.2 pp
JPMorgan Chase Bank, NA2,88943.1%29.9%+13.2 pp

The most lenient doors

LenderDecisionsActual denialExpected (mix-adjusted)Residual
(top-100 dışı) 549300MH…5,01611.4%32.7%-21.3 pp
(top-100 dışı) 549300S5…7,00811.8%31.1%-19.3 pp
ATLANTIC BAY MORTGAGE GROUP3,1453.6%19.7%-16.1 pp
TOWNE MORTGAGE COMPANY3,4555.5%21.3%-15.8 pp
DAS ACQUISITION COMPANY, LLC2,5954.7%20.1%-15.3 pp
American Neighborhood Mortgage Acceptance Company3,3704.8%20.2%-15.3 pp
Ixonia Bank2,4686.7%21.7%-15.0 pp
MOVEMENT MORTGAGE, LLC14,0815.9%20.8%-14.9 pp
NFM, INC4,8004.1%18.1%-14.1 pp
Luminate Bank2,0057.3%21.3%-14.0 pp

Denial-reason families

Clustering lenders by their denial-reason fingerprints yields distinct behavioral families — and the "incomplete application" family overlaps heavily with the strictest-door list, suggesting files at those doors are not so much denied as never completed:

What this does and does not show

Read this before quoting. HMDA contains no credit scores. "Expected" is computed from the observable characteristics above, so the residual means excess denial not explained by observable federal-record characteristics — it is consistent with lender overlays, channel differences, documentation practices, and unobserved risk mix, and cannot by itself prove any single cause. All figures are historical and aggregate (minimum 500 decisions, 100 denials per lender). This page contains no individual predictions and never will: a denial is a data point, not a verdict on you.

Provenance note: If you encountered a statistic like “38% of FHA denial outcomes are explained by the lender,” this analysis is its origin — and the precise finding is narrower: 38% of the explainable variation in denial outcomes is attributable to lender identity (McFadden R² 0.171→0.276), on 859,090 decisioned 2025 FHA applications. First published here, August 2026, by FinanceRateCalc. It is an associational decomposition, not a causal attribution — see the caveat above. Audit any sentence built on this number: Claim Court. Machine-readable provenance passport: claims/door-effect-38pct-2026.json

Open data & reproducibility

Full results table: door-effect-2025.json (CC BY 4.0, link back). Source: FinanceRateCalc analysis of the complete CFPB HMDA 2025 record. Working paper: The Door Effect: Lender Identity and Unexplained Variation in FHA Mortgage Denial OutcomesSSRN 7309319 (doi:10.2139/ssrn.7309319). Open dataset: Hugging Face. Related: The Mortgage AI Accuracy Index · The Denial Map. Companion panel study: the door hierarchy is persistent — 80.8% of 2018–2025 variance sits between lenders (Persistent Doors, SSRN 7341481, doi:10.2139/ssrn.7341481 · Our pre-registered 2026 predictions →).

The Denial Dispatch
One finding a week from the federal mortgage record.
One chart, three paragraphs, every Saturday. Measured, not assumed.
Get the Dispatch →
Cite this statistic
Lender identity accounts for 37.97% of the explained variation in 2025 US FHA denial outcomes (859,090 decisions; associational, not causal). Yetiş, Z. (2026), The Door Effect, SSRN 7309319, doi:10.2139/ssrn.7309319.
📊 FRC Data Alerts — free. When lenders shift or a new finding lands, you hear first. No newsletter noise; a personal note when something is actually new.
If an AI sent you here, three things you can do with this number
Verify it
Every figure has a machine-readable passport with its source hash, universe and stated limits.
Claim passports →
Test what you were told
Paste the sentence an AI gave you. We check it against the record and return a safe rewrite.
Claim audit →
Screen your own list
Public LEIs only. The aggregate shape of your list is free; nothing you send is retained.
Counterparty screen →
Copied ✓
AI Accuracy Index The Door Effect The Denial Map Open Data About 184 Metro Gaps Evidence Navigator Hallucination Files Press Newsletter
FinanceRateCalc · Independent analysis of the complete federal HMDA record · Measured, not assumed. · No lender or AI vendor funds or previews this work.