Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:lol racists trying to explain this away.
SMFH
Cool now show how that credit score differential justifies the differential in approval rates based on risk to the lender.
WE’LL WAIT lol.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How is a conclusion that only includes one single data point valid? What about down payments--yes, privileged white people are much more likely to have down payments given to them--debt, and most of all, credit score? Such a flawed and biased story.
Well the story focused on a black man who was rejected for a loan with 700+ FICO, 20% down payment, $100K income, and SFH owner occupied use. That’s a slam dunk underwriting approval.
And how much was he asking for?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How is a conclusion that only includes one single data point valid? What about down payments--yes, privileged white people are much more likely to have down payments given to them--debt, and most of all, credit score? Such a flawed and biased story.
Well the story focused on a black man who was rejected for a loan with 700+ FICO, 20% down payment, $100K income, and SFH owner occupied use. That’s a slam dunk underwriting approval.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:lol racists trying to explain this away.
SMFH
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How is a conclusion that only includes one single data point valid? What about down payments--yes, privileged white people are much more likely to have down payments given to them--debt, and most of all, credit score? Such a flawed and biased story.
Well the story focused on a black man who was rejected for a loan with 700+ FICO, 20% down payment, $100K income, and SFH owner occupied use. That’s a slam dunk underwriting approval.
It’s not a slam dunk if debt to income is high, which they mentioned, and you left out…
A White guy with a 700 score, 20% down, and a $100k job can’t qualify for a $800k house, so there are more factors
I can’t get worked up about this until I know what price range the homes and then exactly how many mortgages were applied for in the group with income $140k and over to get a more clear picture.
is the $140k salary a one off and previous years were lower - so they average the salary over a few years?
were the applicants approved on a subsequent application for a home at a lower price point?
Anonymous wrote:lol racists trying to explain this away.
SMFH

Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yep:
https://www.investopedia.com/average-credit-scores-by-race-5214521
Explains everything except Asian. Asians with a military connection have lower than average credit scores?
CNN used HMDA data, which does not provide credit scores. So they can’t control for that.
HOWEVER. CNN writes “…most of the Navy Federal applications that were denied are listed as being rejected for reasons other than “credit history.””
So they were not being rejected due to their credit history, which would flow thru to credit scoring.
And yes, Asians with military connection are likely more working class, shorter family history in the U.S., etc than NavyFed members who are white.
It would be interesting to know if NavyFed members who are white are actually military. I bet majority are family of military who inherited rights to NavyFed account and pretty far removed from military service. Whereas most black/Asian/Hispanic NavyFed members are actually direct military (either themselves or a parent). White NavyFed members are probably more likely to be college educated, white collar, and probably two-generations removed from military service.
The fact that CNN doesn’t mention what those “reasons other than credit history” are is a curious and in my mind quite telling omission. If those reasons supported the implied narrative of racial discrimination, I’m sure they would have been mentioned.
“Other than credit history” is the field that NavyFed selected when filing their HMDA disclosures. If they rejected a borrower based on credit history, they would’ve selected that. So there’s nothing else for CNN to report because there’s no other data available to CNN for them to drill into. NavyFed selected “other than credit history.”
That’s interesting — so that’s a check-the-box field, not a selection from a list of reasons?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:How is a conclusion that only includes one single data point valid? What about down payments--yes, privileged white people are much more likely to have down payments given to them--debt, and most of all, credit score? Such a flawed and biased story.
Well the story focused on a black man who was rejected for a loan with 700+ FICO, 20% down payment, $100K income, and SFH owner occupied use. That’s a slam dunk underwriting approval.
It’s not a slam dunk if debt to income is high, which they mentioned, and you left out…
A White guy with a 700 score, 20% down, and a $100k job can’t qualify for a $800k house, so there are more factors
Anonymous wrote:How is a conclusion that only includes one single data point valid? What about down payments--yes, privileged white people are much more likely to have down payments given to them--debt, and most of all, credit score? Such a flawed and biased story.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:lol to people who are shocked there is systemic racism in housing.
Did you just wake from a coma?
The military as an institution is a lot blacker than the public at-large. You’d think NavyFed would have better systems in place to prevent this sort of discrimination.
I expect podunk rural ag bank in Nebraska to be pretty racist. But not NavyFed. They need to clean house.
Anonymous wrote:One thing to note:
CNN’s analysis is for conventional mortgages. These are mortgages with standardized terms and the lowest interest rates.
They may have been rejecting them for conventional products in order to steer them to higher priced non-conventional products like ARMs.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Yep:
https://www.investopedia.com/average-credit-scores-by-race-5214521
Explains everything except Asian. Asians with a military connection have lower than average credit scores?
CNN used HMDA data, which does not provide credit scores. So they can’t control for that.
HOWEVER. CNN writes “…most of the Navy Federal applications that were denied are listed as being rejected for reasons other than “credit history.””
So they were not being rejected due to their credit history, which would flow thru to credit scoring.
And yes, Asians with military connection are likely more working class, shorter family history in the U.S., etc than NavyFed members who are white.
It would be interesting to know if NavyFed members who are white are actually military. I bet majority are family of military who inherited rights to NavyFed account and pretty far removed from military service. Whereas most black/Asian/Hispanic NavyFed members are actually direct military (either themselves or a parent). White NavyFed members are probably more likely to be college educated, white collar, and probably two-generations removed from military service.