comprehensive report: examining the lending practices …econsult corporation maria frizelle roberts...
TRANSCRIPT
COMPREHENSIVE REPORT:
Calendar Year 2009Office of the City Treasurer1401 JFK Boulevard, Room 640Philadelphia, PA 19102
Examining the Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia
SUBMITTED BY:
Stephen P. MullinSenior Vice Presidentand PrincipalEconsult Corporation
Maria Frizelle RobertsPresident/CEOMFR Consultants, Inc. February 2011
Table of Contents
ExecutiveSummary 4
1.0 Background 19
2.0 StatisticalAnalysisofResidentialMortgageLendingPracticesinPhiladelphia 47
3.0 PrimeandSubprimeHomeLendinginPhiladelphia 57
4.0 PhiladelphiaComparedtoOtherAreas 83
5.0 HomeLendingtoNon-Owner-OccupiedBorrowersinPhiladelphia 99
6.0 CityDepositoriesandHomeLending 107
7.0 SmallBusinessLending 127
8.0 RankingsofDepositories–SmallBusinessLending 135
9.0 BankBranchAnalysis 141
10.0 NeighborhoodAnalysis 147
Appendix1–RegressionTables 157
Appendix2–Tables 175
Appendix3–Maps 271
Appendix4–Methodology 289
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 20094.
Executive Summary EconsultCorporationandMFRConsultants,Inc.(“theEconsultteam”)arepleasedtopresentthisanalysisofthehomelendingperformance,smallbusinesslendingperformance,andbankbranchingpatternsofthe13authorizeddepositoriesoftheCityofPhiladelphiain2009(seeTableES.1).SuchareportispertheCity’sResolutionNo.051161,whichisarequestbyCityCouncilfortheOfficeoftheCityTreasurertocommissionanannualreportoflendingactivityanddisparitiesbyCitydepositories.
Table ES.1: City of Philadelphia 2009 Authorized Depositories at a Glance
TOTALASSETS TOTALEMPLOyEES PHILADELPHIAOFFICES
MOSTRECENTCRARATINg(yEAR)
ADvANCEBANk $76M 39 1 OuTSTANDINg(2008)
BANkOFAMERICA $2,223B 311INPHILA 19 OuTSTANDINg(2008)
CITIBANk $1,857B 175INPHILA 7 OuTSTANDINg(2006)
CITIZENSBANk $148B 1.2kINPHILA 60 OuTSTANDINg(2009)
CITyNATIONALBANk $466M 103 1 OuTSTANDINg(N/A)
BANkOFNEWyORkMELLON $212B 42k 5 OuTSTANDINg(2009)
M&TBANk $69M 63INPHILA 7 OuTSTANDINg(2007)
PNCBANk $269B 2.5kINPHILA 39 OuTSTANDINg(2006)
REPuBLICFIRSTBANk $1B 134 6 SATISFACTORy(2008)
SOvEREIgNBANk $75M 9k 14 OuTSTANDINg(2008)
TDBANk $565B 737INPHILA 20 OuTSTANDINg(2008)
uNITEDBANk $68M 30 3 OuTSTANDINg(2006)
WELLSFARgOBANk $1,244B 2.8kINPHILA 42 OuTSTANDINg(2008)
TheCityiscommittedtoensuringthattheinstitutionsselectedasauthorizeddepositoriesofCityfundsprovidefinancialproductsandservicesinafairandunbiasedmannertothecitizensofPhiladelphia,andthisreportisanimportantresourceinthateffort.Specifically,thisreportprovidesrankingsoftheauthorizeddepositoriesinkeyfairlendingcategories,aswellasacompositerankingofthedepositoriesacrossallcategories,basedonourstatisticalanalysisoftheirhomelendingperformanceinthesevariouscategories.TogethertherankingswillprovidetheCitywithguidanceontheperformanceofthesebanks.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 20095.
Executive Summary
ES.1 Background
Theaforementionedordinanceisbestunderstoodwithintheoverallfederal,state,andlocallegislativecontextinwhichbanksoperateandthatprovidespolicymakerswithtoolsandinfor-mationtoprovideoversightandaccountabilityintheareaoffairlending.Thisisparticularlythecase,giventherecessionthatcommencedinDecember2007,whichincludedsignificantdistressinthefinancialandhousingmarkets,andwhichresultedinunprecedentedinterventionbythefederalgovernment,aswellaslegislaturesatalllevelsdebatingpolicymodificationstobetterregulatelendingpractices.
» Inresponsetothefinancialcrisisof2008,theFederalgovernmentenactedseveralnewpoliciestohelpmediatethestrugglingrealestatemarketandprotectborrowers:theAmericanRecoveryandReinvestmentActof2009,theHelpingFamiliesSaveTheirHomesActof2009,andtheFraudEnforcementandRecoveryAct.
» TheCommonwealthofPennsylvaniahasalsoenactedseverallawstoensurefairlendingpractices,includingthePennsylvaniaLoanInterestandProtectionLaw,theSecondaryMortgageLoanActof1980,andmultiplemortgage-lendinglicensingreformsin2008.
» Locally,theCityofPhiladelphiahasestablisheditsownlegislationinanefforttocombatunfairlendingpractices,includingResolutionNo.051161,Chapter9-2400(“ProhibitionagainstPredatoryLending”),andseveralanti-predatorylendinghotlines.
ES.2 Philadelphia Home Lending and Discrimination
Lendingtransactionsandresidentialdatawasexaminedtodetermineifdiscriminatorypracticesmightexist,andifthesubsetofPhiladelphiadepositoriesdiffersfromtheentiresampleoflenders.Inotherwords,doesthedataindicatepracticesofracialorethnicdiscriminationbyalllendersand/orbyCitydepositories?We,thus,consider1)denialratesbyloantype,and2)less-favorablelendingterms(e.g.subprimeversusprimeloans).
Theregressionanalysiscontrolledforfactorsthatwerelikelytoinfluencelendingdecisions,butwasconstrainedbythelackofpotentiallyexplanatorydatasuchasborrowers’creditscore,wealth,andexistingdebtload.Still,theexistinginformationindicatesthefollowingstatisticallysignificantresults:
» Controllingforotheravailabledemographiccharacteristics,amongtheuniverseofalllenders,AfricanAmericansandHispanicsweremorelikelytobedeniedahomepurchase,homerefinance,andhomeimprovementloan,aswellastobeofferedasubprimeloan,ascomparedtonon-HispanicWhites.
» WithinCitydepositories,AfricanAmericansexperiencedlessdiscriminationforhomepurchaseloans,homerefinanceloans,andhomeimprovementloans,butweremorelikelytoreceiveasubprimeloan,ascomparedtothesampleofalllenders.
» Red-liningdidnotappeartobetakingplaceeitheramongtheuniverseofalllendersoramongCitydepositories.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 20096.
Executive Summary
ES.3 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
All Loans (see Table ES.2)
» Primeloansmadeup94percentofloansmade,withsubprimeloanscomprisingtheremaining6percentin2009.In2006,64percentofloanswereprimeand36percentweresubprime.
» Theoverallnumberofloanshaddecreasedsteadilyfrom2006through2008,yetincreasedfromtheprioryearin2009,toabout26,000.
» Theoveralldenialrate(25percent)decreasedforthefirsttimesince2006,afterincreasingineachofthethreepriorstudyyears.
» From2006to2009,primeloansforAfrican-Americanborrowersdecreasedby25percent,whilesubprimeloansdecreasedby89percent.
» Allincomecategoriessawadecreaseinthenumberofsubprimeloansgrantedfrom2008to2009,withthemiddleincomegroupseeingthegreatestdecline,at66percent.
» Thenumberofloansmadetohomesincensustractswithlessthan50percentminorityresidents(non-minoritytracts)increasedby27percent,whileloansmadetohomesincensustractswithmorethan50percentminorityresidents(minoritytracts)decreasedby15percent.
» In2009,moreloansweremadeinupperincomeandmiddleincome(MuI)tracts(51percent)thaninlowincomeandmoderateincome(LMI)tracts(49percent).TheLMI/MuIsplitwas63/37in2006.
Table ES.2: All Loan Applications and Originations in Philadelphia
yEAR APPLICATIONS DENIALS DENIALRATE LOANSORIgINATED
PRIMELOANS
SuBPRIMELOANS
TOTALLOANAMOuNT
2009 50,114 12,440 24.8% 26,159 24,490 1,669 $4.54B
2008 53,913 18,147 33.7% 23,633 19,638 3,995 $3.72B
2008-2009DIFFERENCE -7% -31% -26% +11% +25% -58% +22%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 20097.
Executive Summary
By Loan Type
» In2009,therewereabout14,500applicationsforhomepurchaseloans,a13percentdecreasefrom2008.From2006to2009,thetotalnumberofhomepurchaseloansdecreasedby42percent(seeTableES.3).
» In2009,therewereabout33,000applicationsforhomerefinanceloans,anincreaseof2percentfrom2008.Thenumberofprimehomerefinanceloansincreasedby56percentfrom2008to2009andby39percentfrom2006to2009.Thenumberofsubprimehomerefinanceloansdeclinedby62percentfrom2008to2009andby91percentfrom2006to2009(seeTableES.4).From2007to2008,homeimprovementloanapplicationsdecreasedby39percent,andloansoriginateddecreasedby47percent(primeloansby49percentandsubprimeloansby39percent)(seeFigureES.5).
» In2009,therewereabout5,600applicationsforhomeimprovementloans,a42percentdeclinefromtheyearbefore.From2006to2009,thenumberofprimehomeimprovementloansdecreasedby75percent,whilethenumberofsubprimehomeimprovementloansdecreasedby76percent(seeTableES.5).
Table ES.3: Home Purchase Loan Applications and Originations in Philadelphia
APPLICATIONS DENIALS DENIALRATE LOANS PRIMELOANS SuBPRIMELOANS
2009 14,479 2,077 14.3% 9,976 9,356 620
2008 16,620 2,639 15.9% 10,729 9,462 1,267
2008-2009DIFFERENCE -13% -21% -10% -7% -1% -51%
Table ES.4: Home Refinance Loan Applications and Originations in Philadelphia
APPLICATIONS DENIALS DENIALRATE LOANS PRIMELOANS SuBPRIMELOANS
2009 33,030 9,008 27.3% 15,395 14,569 826
2008 32,489 12,841 39.5% 11,568 9,370 2,198
2008-2009DIFFERENCE +2% -30% -31% +33% +56% -62%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 20098.
Executive Summary
Table ES.5: Home Improvement Loan Applications and Originations in Philadelphia
APPLICATIONS DENIALS DENIALRATE LOANS PRIMELOANS SuBPRIMELOANS
2009 5,635 3,060 54.3% 1,728 1,435 293
2008 9,638 5,171 53.7% 3,043 2,354 689
2008-2009DIFFERENCE -42% -41% +1% -43% -39% -58%
ES.4 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas
Philadelphia vs. Suburbs
LendingtoPhiladelphiaresidentswascomparedtolendingtoresidentsoftheCity’sfoursuburbancounties(seeTableES.6):
» DenialrateswerehigherintheCityversusthesuburbsforeachracialcategory,aconsistentfindingwithprioryearstudies.
» Inthesuburbs,thehighertheincomegroup,thehighertheproportionofallloansandprimeloans.ThiswasunliketheCitypattern,wherethemoderate-incomegroupconsistentlyreceivedboththemostloansandthemostprimeloans.
» In2009,suburbanborrowersinminoritytractswere4.1timesmorelikelytogetsubprimeloansthanborrowersinnon-minoritytracts,comparedto2.5timesintheCity.In2008,thesuburbanratiowas4.6andtheCityratiowas2.4.
» OfallloanstosuburbanLMItracts,8percentweresubprime,comparedto3percentofloansforMuItracts.
Table ES.6: 2009 Home Lending Activity – Philadelphia Suburbs
BORROWERRACE PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS DENIALRATE
WHITE 91% 87% 88% 14%
AFRICAN-AMERICAN 3% 8% 7% 29%
ASIAN 5% 2% 3% 15%
HISPANIC 2% 2% 2% 20%
BORROWERINCOME PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS DENIALRATE
LMI(<80%MSAINCOME) 22% 40% 39% 22%
MuI(>80%MSAINCOME) 78% 60% 62% 13%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 20099.
Executive Summary
TRACTMINORITy
LEvELPERCENTOFPRIME
LOANSPERCENTOF
SuBPRIMELOANSPERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS DENIALRATE
0-49%MINORITy 99% 97% 97% 15%
50-100%MINORITy 1% 3% 3% 34%
TRACTINCOMELEvEL PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS DENIALRATE
LMI(<80%MSA)INCOME 3% 9% 6% 26%
MuI(>80%MSAINCOME) 97% 92% 94% 15%
BORROWERgENDER PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS DENIALRATE
MALE 22% 22% 18% 18%
FEMALE 17% 24% 29% 18%
JOINT 61% 54% 57% 13%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200910.
Executive Summary
Philadelphia vs. Comparison Cities
Between2006and2009,lendingdecreasedinallfourcities,particularlyinDetroit(whichsawa93percentdeclineduringthattimeperiod)andparticularlyforsubprimeloans(whichsawdeclinesfrom75percentto98percent,dependingonthecity)(seeTableES.7).
» Philadelphiahadthegreatestdisparityinsubprimelending,withLMIborrowers2.4timesaslikelytoreceiveasubprimeloancomparedtoanMuIborrower.
» Inallfourcities,borrowersinminoritytractsreceivedprimeloansatasmallerproportionthantheirshareofhouseholds.
» ThecitywiththehighestdenialrateforborrowersinLMItractsin2009wasDetroit,where56percentreceiveddenials.Pittsburghfollowedwith32percent,thenPhiladelphiawith30percentandBaltimorewith26percent.
» IneverycityexceptPhiladelphia,femaleapplicantshadthehighestdenialratesofanygroup.InPhiladelphia,thedenialratesformaleandfemaleapplicantswereaboutthesame.
Table ES.7: 2008 Home Lending Activity – Philadelphia vs. Comparison Cities
2009 PRIMELOANS SuBPRIMELOANS TOTALLOANS
PHILADELPHIA 24,490 1,699 26,159
BALTIMORE 8,985 592 9,577
DETROIT 1,038 273 1,311
PITTSBuRgH 4,265 402 4,667
2006-2009DIFFERENCE PRIMELOANS SuBPRIMELOANS TOTALLOANS
PHILADELPHIA -3% -88% -33%
BALTIMORE -62% -95% -72%
DETROIT -80% -98% -93%
PITTSBuRgH +20% -75% -10%
ES.5 Home Lending to Non-Owner-Occupied Borrowers
In2009,8percentofallloansweremadetonon-occupantinvestors,adecreasefrom15percentin2008.Thenumberofnon-owner-occupiedloansdecreasedby46percentfrom2008to2009.Subprimeloanscomprised8percentofallnon-owner-occupiedloans(adecreasefrom23percentin2008).
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200911.
Executive Summary
» Asin2007and2008,Asianborrowersreceivedmorethanthreetimestheshareofnon-occupantloansthantheirpercentageofCityhouseholdsin2009.
» ThedisparitybetweentheshareofprimeloansandtheshareofhouseholdswaslowerforMuIowner-occupiedborrowers(0.8)thanfornon-occupantMuIinvestors(2.4).
» Minoritycensustractsreceived46percentofprimeloans(adecreasefrom51percentin2008)and62percentofsubprimeloans(adecreasefrom70percentin2008).
» From2006to2009,subprimeloanstoallgroupsdecreased.BorrowersinLMItractssawadecreaseof96percent,andborrowersinMuItractssawadecreaseof94percent.
» Maleandfemaleinvestorsbothreceivedprimeloans91percentofthetime.Thisisincomparisontothelikelinessof2008,whichwas71percentformalesand68percentforfemales.
ES.6 City Depositories and Home Lending
Citydepositoriesinaggregatereceivedabout17,000loanapplicationsandoriginatedabout8,000primeloansand640subprimeloanstotaling$1.5billionin2009.Thus,these13depositoriestogetherrepresentedaboutathirdofallapplications,loans,andloanamountswithintheCity(seeTableES.8).ThetotalamountoflendingatallinstitutionsintheCitywas$4.5billion,upfrom$3.7billionthepreviousyear.
Table ES.8: Loan Applications and Originations for the 13 City Depositories
APPLICATIONS PRIMELOANS SuBPRIMELOANS TOTALLOANAMOuNT
2009-DEPOSITORIES 16,994 7,990 640 $1.5B
2009–ALLBANkS 50,114 24,490 1,669 $4.5B
2008-DEPOSITORIES 16,836 6,166 1,245 $1.0B
2008–ALLBANkS 53,913 19,638 3,995 $3.7B
2009PROPORTIONOFDEPOSITORIESTOALLBANkS
34% 33% 38% 33%
2008PROPORTIONOFDEPOSITORIESTOALLBANkS
31% 31% 31% 27%
Inaggregate,CitydepositoriesmadealargerpercentageofloansthanalllenderstoAfrican-Americanborrowersandtoborrowersinminoritytracts.Thiswastrueofhomepurchaseloans,homerefinanceloans,andhomeimprovementloans(seeTableES.9).
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200912.
Executive Summary
Table ES.9: Selected 2009 Home Lending Results for City Depositories
HOMEPuRCHASELOANS
PERCENTOFLOANSTOAFRICANAMERICANS
PERCENTOFLOANSTOHISPANICS
PERCENTOFLOANSINMINORITyTRACTS
PERCENTOFLOANSTOLMIBORROWERS
PERCENTOFLOANSINLMI
TRACTS
ALLDEPOSITORIES 24% 7% 36% 64% 59%
ALLLENDERS 18% 9% 31% 61% 56%
HOMEREFINANCELOANS
PERCENTOFLOANSTOAFRICANAMERICANS
PERCENTOFLOANSTOHISPANICS
PERCENTOFLOANSINMINORITyTRACTS
PERCENTOFLOANSTOLMIBORROWERS
PERCENTOFLOANSIN
LMITRACTS
ALLDEPOSITORIES 14% 3% 26% 33% 40%
ALLLENDERS 12% 3% 25% 36% 42%
HOMEIMPROvEMENTLOANS
PERCENTOFLOANSTOAFRICANAMERICANS
PERCENTOFLOANSTOHISPANICS
PERCENTOFLOANSINMINORITyTRACTS
PERCENTOFLOANSTOLMIBORROWERS
PERCENTOFLOANSIN
LMITRACTS
ALLDEPOSITORIES 22% 5% 8% 49% 50%
ALLLENDERS 20% 4% 6% 57% 56%
Thirteenfactorswerecombinedtocreateacompositescoreforprimehomepurchaselendingperformanceforeachdepository.Foreachfactor,adepositoryreceivedascoreaccordingtohowdifferentitwasfromtheaveragelenderinPhiladelphia.Ifthedepositorywasbetterthanaverage,thescoreispositive;ifitwasbelowaverage,thescoreisnegative.OnlylendersinPhiladelphiathatoriginated25loansormorein2009wereincludedinthecalculations.
In2009,WellsFargorankedfirst,followedbyBancoSantander,whichrankedfirstin2008.Noneofthedepositoriesmeasuredhadnegativecompositescores,suggestingthatallperformedbetterthantheaveragehomemortgagelenderintheCityin2009(seeTableES.10).
Table ES.10: 2009 Ranking of City Depositories – Home Purchase Lending
2009RANkINg CITyDEPOSITORy 2009COMPOSITESCORE 2008RANkINg
1 WELLSFARgO(WACHOvIA) 28.30 5
2 BANCOSANTANDER(SOvEREIgNBANCORP,INC.) 19.81 1
3 BANkOFAMERICA 11.75 2
4 CITIZENSFINANCIALgROuP,INC. 9.88 3
5 PNCFINANCIALSERvICESgROuP 2.84 6
6 TDBANkNORTH 2.53 4
7 M&TBANk 0.23 N/A
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200913.
Executive Summary
ES.7 Small Business Lending in Philadelphia
» About12,400loanswithanaggregatevalueofabout$580millionweremadetosmallbusinessesinPhiladelphiaduring2009.About3,900ofthoseloansweremadetosmallbusinesseswithannualrevenuesoflessthan$1million.Allofthesetotalsweredownfrom2006,2007,and2008totals(seeTableES.11).
» FiftypercentofloansmadetosmallbusinessesinPhiladelphiaweremadetothoselocatedinlowandmoderateincomeareas.
» Fifty-fourpercentofloansmadetobusinesseswithlessthan$1millioninrevenueweremadetothosebusinesseslocatedinlowandmoderateincomeareas.
» In2009,29percentofallsmallbusinessloansintheCitywereinminorityareas,comparedto1.4percentforthesuburbancounties.
Table ES.11: Small Business Lending Activity in Philadelphia
TOTALDOLLARSLOANEDTOSMALLBuSINESSESIN
PHILADELPHIA($M)
TOTALSMALLBuSINESSLOANSINPHILADELPHIA
TOTALLOANSTOSMALLBuSINESSESINPHILADELPHIA
WITHANNuALREvENuESOFLESSTHAN$1MILLION
2009 $581 12,365 3,870
2008 $802 28,533 8,216
2008-2009DIFFERENCE -28% -57% -53%
ES.8 Ranking of Depositories - Small Business Lending
SmallbusinesslendinginallcategoriesamongtheCitydepositoriesrepresentedover40per-centofthetotalsmallbusinesslendingreportedinPhiladelphia.Therewerefivefactors,equal-lyweighted,consideredintherankingofthebanks.Thesefivefactorswereselectedbecausetheyshowperformanceinrelationtotheentirecityandamongthedepositoriesonkeylendingpracticesaffectinglow-andmoderate-incomeandminoritybusinesses.
» Marketshareofloanstosmallbusinesses
» Marketshareofloanstothesmallestofsmallbusinesses
» Lendingtosmallbusinesseslocatedinlowandmoderateincomeareas
» Rankingamongdepositoriesforsmallbusinesslendingtothesmallestbusinesses
» Rankingamongdepositoriesforsmallbusinesslendinginlowandmoderateincomeareas
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200914.
Executive Summary
In2009,PNCrankedfirst,comparedtosecondin2008.Thehighestrankedfrom2008and2007,Citigrouprankedsecondin2009.WellsFargoadvancedfromsixthplacetothird(seeTableES.12).
Table ES.12: 2009 Ranking of City Depositories in Small Business Lending
INSTITuTION 2009RANkINg 2008RANkINg 2007RANkINg 2006RANkINg
PNCBANk 1 2 2 1
CITIgROuP 2 1 1 N/A
WELLSFARgO 3 6 T4 3
BANkOFAMERICA 4 3 3 5
CITIZENS 5 T4 7 2
SOvEREIgNBANk 6 T4 T4 N/A
TDBANk 7 7 N/A N/A
M&TBANk 8 N/A N/A N/A
REPuBLICFIRSTBANk 9 8 6 N/A
BANkOFNEWyORk/MELLON 10 9 9 6
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200915.
Executive Summary
ES.9 Bank Branch Analysis
Therewere338bankbranchesinPhiladelphiain2009,downfrom354in2008.232branches,oraround69percent,wereownedbyCitydepositories(seeTableES.13).
» Over26percentofthedepositorybrancheswerelocatedinminorityareasin2009,upfrom25percentin2008andhigherthanthecitywideratioof23percentofallbranchesinareasthatweremorethan50percentminority.Sevenofthe13Citydepositoriessurpassedthecitywidebenchmark.
» 58percentofCitydepositorieshadbranchesinLMIareasin2009,comparedto57percentofallbankbranchesCitywide.Eightofthe13Citydepositoriessurpassedthecitywidebenchmark.
Table ES.13: Number of Branches in Philadelphia
BANkS 2009BRANCHES %OFALL2009BRANCHES 2008BRANCHES %OFALL2008
CITyBRANCHES
ALLDEPOSITORIES 232 69% 236 66%
NON-DEPOSITORIES 106 31% 119 34%
ES.10 Neighborhood Analysis
Weexaminedhomeandbusinesslendingpracticesinnineneighborhoodsthatcontaincensustractsclassifiedasminorityandlowtomoderateincomeandthatarelocatedinareaswherecommunitydevelopmentcorporationsandempowermentzoneshavebeenestablished(seeTableES.14).
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200916.
Executive Summary
Table ES.14: 200 Home and Small Business Lending Activity – Selected Philadelphia Neighborhoods
ORgANIZATION LOCATIONMAJORETHNICgROuP
2000 MEDIANINCOMEASA%OFREgIONALMEDIANINCOME
#LOANS
%LOANSTHATWERE
SuBPRIME
NuMBEROFSMALLBuSINESSLOANS
%OFLOANSTOSMALLBuSINESSES
WITHANNuALREvENuES<$1
MILLION
APM NPHILA HISP 36% 2 50% 4 25%
HACE N5THST HISP 24% 70 41% 57 30%
AWF NPHILA AFRAM 46% 60 27% 83 37%
OARC WOAkLN AFRAM 76% 576 12% 116 35%
PROJECTHOME SPRgRDN AFRAM 34% 51 18% 26 31%
PEC WPHILA AFRAM 36% 51 14% 30 35%
AMERICANSTEZ kENSINgTON HISP 36% 113 16% 39 36%
NORTHCENTRALEZ NPHILA AFRAM 33% 51 22% 16 25%
WESTPHILAEZ WPHILA AFRAM 41% 17 24% 11 33%
1.0 Background
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200920.
1.0 Background Inthissection,legislationrelevanttofairlendingpracticeonafederal,state,andlocallevelareoutlined.ThisisfollowedbyabriefdescriptionoftheCity’selevenAuthorizedDepositorieswhichsummarizestheirreinvestmentgoalsandoutlinestheircurrentorganizationalsizeandstructure.Alsooutlinedattheendofthissectionisanoverviewofthecurrentmortgageforeclosurecrisis.
1.1 Legislative and Institutional Context
Overthepastfortyyears,legislationhasbeenenactedatthefederal,state,andlocallevelstoregulatethebankingindustryandprotectindividualsfromunfairlendingpractices.In2007,dueinlargeparttounsustainablelendingpractices,theuSbegantofeeltheimpactofapronouncedglobalrecessionasrealestateandcorporatesharevaluesdwindled.By2008,thefinancialmarketandcreditcrisisworsened,promptingCongressandtheFederalTreasurytoimplementanumberofprogramsandtoprovideadditionalmoniestobanks,majorcompaniesandlenderstohelpstabilizetheeconomy.ThecombinationofadecreaseinconsumercreditoptionsandtheweakeconomicclimatecausedmanyAmericanstodefaultonawidevarietyoffinancialproductsincludingmortgages,someofwhomwerealreadyburdenedwithsub-primefinancialinstruments.In2009,thenewadministrationinWashingtonmadeanumberofstridesinimplementinglegislationtohelpprotectconsumersandtogivethemsupportagainstsubprimemortgagelendingpractices.Asaresult,legislaturesonalllevelsrespondedwithproposalsforstrong,newlawsandpolicymodificationstobetterregulatethenation’slendingpractices.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200921.
1.0 Background
1.1.1 Federal
CreatedbytheFederalReserveBoard,theHomeMortgageDisclosureAct(HMDA)wasenactedbyCongressin1975andimplementednationwide.Itmandatesthatallfinancialinstitutionsannuallydiscloseloandataonhomepurchases,homepurchasepre-approvals,homeimprovement,andrefinanceapplications.Thefinancialinstitutionsdirectedtoparticipateincludesavingsassociations,creditunions,andothermortgagelendinginstitutions.
Inshort,theHMDAwasinstitutedforthefollowingreasons:
» Tohelpdetermineiffinancialinstitutionsareservingthehousingneedsoftheircommunities;
» Toassistpublicofficialsindistributingpublicsectorinvestments,soastoattractprivateinvestmenttoareasofgreatestneed;and
» Toidentifypotentialdiscriminatorylendingpatterns.
ThedataannuallyreportedinresponsetoHMDAenablespublicagenciestothoroughlyanalyzetheperformanceandpracticeofthedepositories,inparticular,evaluatingthefinancialinstitutionsbasedupontheirobservedlendingpracticesandpatterns.
TheFairHousingAct,partoftheTitlevIIIoftheCivilRightsActof1968,expandeduponpreviouslegislationbyprohibitingdiscriminationonthebasisofrace,color,nationalorigin,religion,sex,familialstatusorhandicap(disability)whenperformingthefollowing:
» Approvingamortgageloan;
» Providinginformationregardingloans;
» Providingtermsorconditionsonaloan,suchasinterestrates,points,orfees;
» Appraisingproperty;or
» Purchasingaloanorsettingtermsorconditionsforpurchasingaloan.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200922.
In1977,CongressenactedtheCommunityReinvestmentAct(CRA)toencouragedepositoryinstitutionstohelpmeetthecreditneedsofthecommunitiesinwhichtheyoperatewithoutoverlookingmoderate-tolow-incomeneighborhoods.Throughfederalsupervision,theCRAdiscouragesredliningandencouragescommunityreinvestment.Eachbank,lendingorsavingsinstitutionisoverseenbyoneoffourfederaloversightbodies–theOfficeoftheComptrolleroftheCurrency(OCC),BoardofgovernorsoftheFederalReserveSystem(FRB),OfficeofThriftSupervision(OTS),ortheFederalDepositInsuranceCorporation(FDIC).TheinformationcollectedintheirreviewisusedtoassignCRAratings,whicharetakenintoconsiderationwhenapprovinganinstitution’sapplicationfornewdepositfacilities,includingmergersandacquisitions.
Therehavebeenthreemajorfederallawspassedtoprotectconsumersagainstpredatorylending.ThesearetheTruthinLendingAct(TILA)(1968),theRealEstateSettlementProceduresAct(RESPA)(1974),andHOEPA,theHomeOwnershipandEquityProtectionAct(HOEPA)(1994).
» TILArequirescompaniestomakedisclosuresoncreditratesandtermsanditregulatescertainaspectsofcreditcardandhighratecredit.
» RESPAsetstherequirementsforprovidinggFEandHuD-1settlementcostsbylendersandregulatesescrowfunds.
» HOEPArequirescompaniestomakeloantermsdisclosuresincasesofhighandextremelyhighrates.Thislawalsoaddressesprepaymentpenalties,balloonpayments,negativeamortizationandtheborrower’spaymentability.
OnJuly30,2008,theHousingandEconomicRecoveryActof2008wasinstated.ThisActwasspecificallydesignedtoaddressthesubprimehousingcrisis.Makinganumberofchangestothefederalhousingpolicy,theAct:1
» Establishesasingleregulator—theFederalHousingFinanceAgency(FHFA)—forgovernment-sponsoredenterprises(gSEs)involvedinthehomemortgagemarket.ThegSEsthatareregulatedbyFHFAincludetheFederalNationalMortgageAssociation(FannieMae),theFederalHomeLoanMortgageCorporation(FreddieMac),andtheFederalHomeLoanBanks(FHLBs).
» RequiresFannieMaeandFreddieMactoannuallypayamountsequalto4.2basispointsoneachdollarofunpaidprincipalbalancesofeachenterprise’stotalnewbusinesspurchases.TheseassessmentswillbeginduringFiscalyear2009andwillbedepositedintonewfederalfunds.
» Authorizes—fromOctober1,2008,throughSeptember30,2011—anewmortgageguaranteeprogramundertheFederalHousingAdministration(FHA)thatallowscertainat-riskborrowerstorefinancetheirmortgagesafterthemortgageholder(lenderorservicer)agreestoawrite-downoftheexistingloan(thatis,areductionintheamountofloanprincipal).
1.0 Background
1. unitedStates.Cong.Senate.SenateCommitteeonBanking,Housing,andurbanAffairs. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE: Federal Housing Finance Regulatory Reform Act of 2008. Comp. Chad Chirico, Mark Booth, Elizabeth Cove, and Paige Piper/Bach. By Peter Fontaine and G. Thomas Woodward. 110 Cong. S. Rept. Print.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200923.
» RequiresloanoriginatorstoparticipateinaNationwideMortgageLicensingSystemandRegistry(NMLSR)thatisadministeredbyeitheranonfederalentityortheDepartmentofHousingandurbanDevelopment(HuD)incoordinationwiththefederalbankingregulatoryagencies.
» AuthorizestheappropriationofsuchsumsasarenecessaryfortheTreasuryDepartment’sOfficeofFinancialEducationtoprovidegrantstostateandlocalgovernments,Indiantribes,andotherentitiestosupportfinancialeducationandcounselingservices.
SomeoftheprovisionsofthislawweremodifiedbytheAmericanRecoveryandReinvestmentActof2009,whichwassignedintolawonFebruary17,2009.
In2009,CongresscontinuedtoimplementnewlawsincludingTheHelpingFamiliesSaveTheirHomesActandtheFraudEnforcementandRecoveryAct,whichwerebothinstitutedonMay 20,2009.
TheHelpingFamiliesSaveTheirHomesActassistshomeownersbyincreasingtheflowofcreditandstrengtheningtheuShousingsector.TheFraudEnforcementandRecoveryActprovidesthefederalgovernmentwithnewtoolsandresourcestopreventlendingfraudfromcompanies.
TheHelpingFamiliesSaveTheirHomesActof2009authorized:
» Theextensionofatemporaryincreaseindepositinsurance
» TheincreaseofborrowingauthorityfortheFederalDepositInsurance Corporation(FDIC)to$100billion
» TheincreaseofborrowingauthorityfortheNationalCreditunionAdministration (NCuA)to$6billion
» Theestablishmentofprotectionsforrenterslivinginforeclosedhomes
» Theestablishmentoftherightofahomeownertoknowwhoownstheirmortgage
» IncreasedaidtohomelessAmericans
TheFraudEnforcementandRecoveryActauthorized:
» Coveringprivatemortgagebrokersandothercompanies
» ExpandingtheDepartmentofJustice’sauthoritytoprosecutemortgage fraudinvolvingprivatemortgageinstitutions
» Changingthedefinitionof“financialinstitution”toincludeprivatemortgage brokersandothernon-banklenders
» Prohibitingmanipulationofthemortgagelendingbusiness
1.0 Background
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200924.
» ProtectingTARPandtheRecoveryAct
» Coveringcommodityfuturesandoptionsinanti-fraudstatutes
» BroadeningtheFalseClaimsAct
» Expandingthegovernment’sabilitytoprosecutethosewhoengage infraudulentschemes
» Strengtheningthefederalgovernment’sfullregulatoryandenforcement capacity(FBI,uSAttorney’sOffices,HuD,SEC,uSPostalInspectionService)
OnMay7,2009,theuSHouseofRepresentativespassedtheMortgageReformand Anti-PredatoryLendingAct(HR1728)whichamendedtheTruthinLendingActforconsumermortgagepracticesandprovidedcertainminimumstandardsforconsumermortgageloans. Thebill,however,wasneverpassedbytheSenate.OnDecember2,2009,Dodd-FrankWallStreetReformandConsumerProtectionActincorporatedmuchoftheMortgageReformandAnti-PredatoryLendingActunderitsTitleXIvProvisionandwassubsequentlysignedintolaw.
1.0 Background
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200925.
1.0 Background
1.1.2 State
Inadditiontofederalmandates,theCommonwealthofPennsylvania’sgeneralAssemblyenactedseveralimportantlawsthatfurtherensurefairlendingpracticesinfinancialinstitutions.ThePennsylvaniaLoanInterestandProtectionLaw,enactedin1974,requiresthatlendersclearlyexplainthetermsandconditionsofanyvariableloansofferedandprovidefixed-ratealternatives.Additionally,theSecondaryMortgageLoanActof1980andtheMortgageBankersandBrokersandConsumerEquityProtectionActof1989wereaddedtoregulatethelicensingofmortgagebrokersandoutlinerulesofconduct.Finally,theCreditServicesActwasestablishedin1992toregulatethecreditserviceindustry.
In2003,duetoconcernoverrisingforeclosurerates,thePennsylvaniaHouseofRepresentativesrequestedthattheCommonwealthinitiateastudytoreviewresidentiallendingpracticesandidentifythoseconsideredharmfultoconsumers.Thisinformationwasconsolidatedintoareportentitled,“LosingtheAmericanDream:AReportonResidentialMortgageForeclosuresandAbusiveLendingPractices”andwaspresentedtothegeneralAssembly.Inresponse,theCommonwealthreleased“PennsylvaniaMortgageLendingReformRecommendations”in2007.
In2008,theCommonwealthenactedfivenewbillsrelatingtothemortgageindustry.ThischangeinlegislationwasusedtooverhaultheCommonwealth’slongstandinglicensingpracticesforfirstandsecondmortgagelending,makesubstantialrevisionstotheCommonwealth’susurylaw,andimplementchangestotheCommonwealth’spre-foreclosurenoticerequirements.Thesebillsinclude2:
» Bill2179(p/n4020)orAct2008-56-repealsmuchoftheCommonwealth’sMortgageBankersandBrokersandConsumerEquityProtectionActandallofPennsylvania’sSecondaryMortgageLoanAct.ItreplacesthemwithoneconsolidatedMortgageLoanIndustryLicensingandConsumerProtectionLaw.
» Bill483(p/n2163)orAct2008-57-changestheCommonwealth’sgeneralusurylaw(formallytitledthe“LoanInterestandProtectionLaw”andpopularlyknownas“Act6”).Thisincludesincreasingcoverageforresidentialmortgageloans,broadeningexceptionforbusinessloans,andincreasingenforcementauthority.
2. “Chapter 9-2400.” The Philadelphia Code, entitled “Prohibition Against. 16 Nov. 2000. Web. 04 Nov. 2009.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200926.
» Bill484(p/n2251)orAct2008-58-allowstheCommonwealth’sDepartmentofBankingtorequirelicenseestouseanationalelectroniclicensingsystemandpayassociatedlicensingprocessingfees.
» Bill485(p/n2252)orAct2008-59-amendedtheCommonwealth’sRealEstateAppraisersCertificationActtoexpandandchangethecompositionoftheStateBoardofCertifiedRealEstateAppraisersandestablishanewlicensecategoryfor“appraisertrainees.”EffectiveSept.5,2008,Bill485requiressuchtraineestooperateunderthesupervisionofeitheraCertifiedResidentialAppraiseroraCertifiedgeneralAppraiser.Theamendmentincreasesthecivilpenaltyfrom$1,000to$10,000thattheBoardmayimposeforviolationsoftheAct.ItalsoaddsthePennsylvaniaAttorneygeneralandthePennsylvaniaSecretaryofBanking,ortheirrespectivedesignees,totheStateBoardofCertifiedRealEstateAppraisers.
» Bill486(p/n1752)orAct2008-60-requiresthehousingfinanceagencytomaintainalistofapprovedconsumercreditcounselingagenciesandtopublishthatlistonitswebsite.
In2009,theCommonwealthenactedseveralnewkeybills.
Act31of2009(PAHouseBill1654)wassignedintolaw8/5/09.ItamendsPA’sexistingmortgagelicensinglaw7Pa.C.S.Chapter61titledtheMortgageLicensingActandwasdonetocomplywiththefederalSecureandFairEnforcementforMortgageLicensingActof2008(the“SAFEAct”),12u.S.C.§5101etseq.Someofthefeaturesinclude:
» AllemployeeswhoworkformortgagecompaniestobelicensedbythePennsylvaniaDepartmentofBanking.CompaniesandtheiremployeesmustalsoregisteronthenewNationwideMortgageLicensingSystem(NMLS),aweb-basedsystemusedbystateregulatorstomonitortheindustry.
» Mortgagecompaniesmustbeginusinganewdisclosureformthatclearlystateswhetheraloanhasanyofthefollowingfeatures:adjustableinterestrate,prepaymentpenalty,balloonpayment,negativeamortization,andwhetherthemonthlypaymentincludespropertytaxesandhazardinsurance.
» Mortgagecompaniesmustobtainproofofincome,fixedexpensesandotherrelevantinformationinordertoevaluateaborrower’sabilitytorepayanofferedloan.Thisrequirementseekstorestrictlow-andno-documentationmortgagesinwhichapplicantsdonothavetoprovidesuchinformation.
OnJune27,2009thePennsylvaniaDepartmentofBankingamendeditsMortgageLoanBusinessPractices--StatementofPolicy39Pa.B.3172undertheauthority7Pa.C.S.§6138(a)(4)(MortgageAct).Thestatementofpolicywasinitiatedtoprovideguidancetolicenseesundersection310(a)oftheMortgageBankersandBrokersandConsumerEquityProtectionAct(MBBCEPA)(63P.S.§456.310(a)).
1.0 Background
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200927.
1.1.3 Local
IntheCityofPhiladelphia,lawmakershavecontinuedtoestablishandenforcerulesandregulationsaboveandbeyondthoseissuedbythestateorfederalgovernment.Intermsoffairlendingpractices,thisincludestheResolutionNo.051161,whichwasarequestbyCityCouncilfortheOfficeoftheCityTreasurertocommissionanannualreportoflendingdisparitiesbyCitydepositories.Thismandatesthatthedepositoriesannuallysubmitacomprehensiveanalysisoftheirhomelending,smallbusinesslendingandbranchingpatterns,aswellasthemeasurementofcommunityreinvestmentandfairlendingperformance.
In2000,theCityalsoenactedChapter9-2400ofthePhiladelphiaCode,“ProhibitionAgainstPredatoryLending.”Thischapterprohibitsallfinancialinstitutionsandtheiraffiliatesfrommaking,issuingorarranginganysubprimeorhigh-costloan,orassistingothersindoingso,inanymannerwhichhasbeendeterminedtobeabusive,unscrupulousandmisleading.ItalsoestablishedaPredatoryLendingReviewCommitteewhichhasbeentaskedwithreviewingandinvestigatinganyallegedpredatoryloans.Thiscommitteealsoadministerspenaltiesforbusinessentitiesthatdonotcomplyandprovidesassistancetotheaggrievedparties.3
Overtheyears,theCityhasemployedanumberofapproachestocombatpredatorylending.TheCityofPhiladelphiaOfficeofHousingandCommunityDevelopmenthasbeeninvolvedwithimplementingitsAnti-PredatoryLendingInitiative,whichoffersConsumerEducationandOutreach,LegalAssistance,AlternativeLoanProducts,andResearchtohomeowners.In2004,MayorStreetandPennsylvaniaSecretaryofBankingWilliamSchenckjoinedofficialsfromCitizensBankandFreddieMacinunveilingacomprehensiveconsumerawarenesscampaigntoalertborrowersinNorthPhiladelphiaandothertargetneighborhoodsaboutthedangersofpredatorylending.Theprogramoffersfinancialliteracy,creditcounselingandconsumereducationworkshops,andencouragesborrowerstocalltheCity’s“Don’tBorrowTrouble” anti-predatorylendinghotline.
.
1.0 Background
3. “Chapter 9-2400.” The Philadelphia Code, entitled “Prohibition Against. 16 Nov. 2000. Web. 04 Nov. 2009.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200928.
Otherinitiativesinclude:
» “SaveyourHomePhilly”hotlineprovidesfreecounselingassistanceforhomeownersbehindonmortgagepaymentsorfacingforeclosure.Homeownerscancall215-334-HOME(4663)
» CityofPhiladelphia/PhiladelphiaLegalAssistancePredatoryLendingHotline(forPhiladelphiaresidents)takescallsfromhomeownerswhowantmoreinformationaboutloans,homeequityormortgageloansorpeoplewhothinktheymaybevictimsofpredatorylending.Homeownerscancall215-523-9520
» ThePhiladelphiaRegionalOfficeoftheuSDepartmentofHousingandurbanDevelopmentprovidescounselorsthroughHuD’sHousingCounselingProgramforhelpwithforeclosureandlendingissues.Homeownerscancall888-466-3487ordirectlyto theHuDRegionIIIOffice,PhiladelphiaRegionalOffice,TheWanamakerBuilding, 100PennSquare,East,Philadelphia,PA,19107-3380(215)656-0500
» ThePennsylvaniaHousingFinanceAgencyalsoprovidescounselingtohomeowners attheirtollfreenumber:800-342-2397.
ItshouldbenotedthatCitydepositoriesmakeuparelativelysmallfractionofhomepurchase,refinance,andhomeimprovementlendingactivitywithintheCity.ThereareseveralotherentitiestoconsiderwhenevaluatingPhiladelphia’sfairlendingpracticeincludingnon-Citydepositorybanks,aswellasnon-bankmortgagelenders.However,Citydepositoriesrepresentimportantandwell-recognizedfinancialinstitutionswithintheCity,andtheCityholdssomenegotiatingleverageoverthem.Thus,theyrepresentanimportantsubsetoflendingandfinancialservicesactivitythattheCityevaluatesforequitablelendingandbranchlocationpractices.
1.2 Depository Descriptions
ThefollowingsectionprovidesabriefoverviewofeachoftheelevenauthorizeddepositoriesintheCityofPhiladelphia.Thedescriptionincludessize,organizationalstructure,geographicfootprint,andrelatedfeatures.TheprimarysourcematerialsusedtocompletethedescriptionswereCommunityReinvestmentAct(CRA)reportingavailablefromtheFederalDepositInsuranceCorporation(FDIC)andtheinteragencyinformationavailablefromtheFederalFinancialInstitutionsExaminationCouncil(FFIEC).Alternativesourceswereusedtosupplementthedescriptiveinformation,includingtheAuthorizedDepositoryComplianceAnnualRequestforInformationCalendaryear2008andannualcompanyreports.
1.0 Background
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200929.
1.2.1 Advance Bank
AdvanceBankdidnotsubmitaresponsetotheAnnualRequestforCommunityReinvestmentgoalstotheCityofPhiladelphiafor2009.Therefore,thefollowinginformationcouldnotbeupdated,andisrepeatedfromthe2008study.
TotalAssets:$76,011,000(asof12/31/08) Employees:39 OfficesinPhiladelphia:1 CommunityReinvestmentActrating:Outstanding(asof2008) Structure:PartoftheAdvanceBankCorporation
AdvanceBankisaminoritycontrolledandoperatedfederally-charteredmutualsavingsbankheadquarteredinBaltimore,Maryland.AdvanceBankmergedwithBereanBankinPhiladelphiain2003andnowprovidesbankingservicestotheresidentsofBaltimoreandPhiladelphia.AllbankbranchesinPhiladelphiaandBaltimorearelocatedinlow-tomoderate-incomeareas.Thebankoriginatesalimitednumberofconsumerloans.
InPhiladelphia,AdvanceBankoperatesonefull-servicebranchoffice,whichhasawalk-upAutomatedTellerMachine(ATM).Itsfocushasbeentoprovideservices,bothdepositoryandloan,tounderservedcommunities,aswellasthegeneralpopulation.AdvanceBankparticipatesintheEmergingContractor’sProgramandisamemberofvariouscommunitydevelopmentorganizationsintheCityofPhiladelphia,suchasgreaterPhiladelphiaurbanAffairsCoalition’sCommunityDevelopmentCommitteeandtheAfricanAmericanChamberofCommerce.
AdvanceBankdoesnotconductbusinessinNorthernIreland,isincompliancewithfederallawsregardingpredatorylending,andisnotknowntohavebenefitedfromslaveryorslaveholderinsurancepolicies.
1.2.2 Bank of America
TotalAssets:$2,223,299,000,000(asof12/31/09)4
Employees:4,567withinPA/311withinPhiladelphia5
OfficesinPhiladelphia:196
CommunityReinvestmentActrating:Outstanding(asof12/31/2008) Structure:SubsidiaryoftheBankofAmericaCorporation
BankofAmerica,N.A.isapubliclytradedcompanyheadquarteredinCharlotte,NorthCarolina.BankofAmericaisasubsidiaryofBankofAmericaCorporation,withpreviousownershipheldbyNationsBankCorporation.Thebankisafull-service,interstatebankthatoperatesthroughouttheunitedStatesand44foreigncountries.BankofAmericaacquiredaretailbankingcenterfootprintinPhiladelphiain2004throughtheacquisitionofFleetBank.
1.0 Background
4. BOA 2009 Financial Statement.5.City of Philadelphia Office of the City Treasurer Authorized Depository COMPLIANCE: Philadelphia City Code CHAPTER 19-200. CITY FUNDS--DEPOSITS, INVESTMENTS, DISBURSEMENTS R.F.I. Questionnaire Annual Request for Information Calendar Year 2009 for Bank of America, pg. 7. 6. Ibid pg 6.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200930.
BankofAmericacertifiesthatitabidesbytheMacBridePrinciplesanddoesnotengageindiscriminatorypracticesonthebasisofrace,color,creed,religionorsexualorientation.TheinstitutionalsocertifiesthatitdoesnotengageinpredatorylendingpracticesasprescribedbytheComptrolleroftheunitedStatesandisnotknowntohavebenefitedfromslaveryorslaveholderinsurancepolicies.
Thefollowingchartindicatesthenumberofsmallbusinessloans,homemortgages,homeimprovementloans,andcommunitydevelopmentinvestmentsthatBankofAmericamadewithinlowandmoderate-incomeneighborhoodswithintheCityofPhiladelphiafor2009.
TyPE 2009gOALS 2009RESuLTS
SMALLBuSINESSLOANS 620 209
HOMEMORTgAgES 560 1188
HOMEIMPROvEMENTLOANS 35 38
COMMuNITyDEvELOPMENTINvESTMENTS 5 7
TheonlycategoryinwhichBankofAmericadidnotmeetitsstatedgoalwasSmallBusinessLoans;allothergoalsweremetorexceededfor2009.BecauseoftheeconomicchallengesfacingtheuSin2009,BankofAmericaadjusteditsinvestmentgoalsdownward,yetwasstillunabletomeetitsSmallBusinessLoangoalsfortheyear.
BankofAmericaearnedsixconsecutive“Outstanding”CRAratings.ItreceivedaCRAPerformanceEvaluationPublicDisclosureinAprilof2008fortheCRAexaminationperiodof2004through2006.TheratingisOutstandingoverallandforeachofthethreecomponents:Lending,InvestmentsandServices.ThePennsylvaniastateratingwasalsoOutstanding.In2009theinstitutionhad5CommunityDevelopmentLoans/Investmentsandinvestedapproximately$19millioninhighimpactprojects.
1.2.3 Bank of New York Mellon, N.A.
TotalAssets:$212,224,000,000(asof12/31/09)7
Employees:42,2008
OfficesinPhiladelphia:5 CommunityReinvestmentActrating:Satisfactory(asof2009) Structure:SubsidiaryoftheBankofNewyorkMellon
1.0 Background
7. BNY Mellon 2009 Annual Report.8. 2009 Report Highlight,www.bnymellon.com.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200931.
BankofNewyorkMellon,NAdidnotsubmitaresponsetotheAnnualRequestforCommunityReinvestmentgoalstotheCityofPhiladelphiafor2009.
Priorto2006,MellonBank,N.A.wasawhollyownedsubsidiaryofMellonFinancialCorporation(MFC),headquarteredinPittsburgh,PA.In2006,MFCannounceditsplannedmergerwithBankofNewyork,andinJulyof2007thecompletedmergercreatedthebanknowknownasBankofNewyorkMellonFinancialCorporation(NyMFC).NyMFCheadquartersnowresideinNewyork,Newyorkandcurrentlyfocusesonassetmanagementandsecuritiesserviceshelpingclientstosucceedinaconstantlychangingglobalenvironment.
TheBankofNewyorkMelloncertifiesthatitmakesalllawfuleffortstoimplementthefairemploymentpracticesembodiedintheMacBridePrinciples,rejectsanypolicyoractivitythatpromotespredatorylendingpractices,anddoesnotparticipateinsubprimelending.MellonBankstatesthatthereisnoindicationthatanyMellonBankpredecessorshadanyinvolvementintheslavetrade,directownershipofslaves,oreverofferedloanssecuredthroughslaves.
TheBankofNewyorkMellon,N.A.CommunityReinvestmentActReport2009(www.bnymellon.com.)doesnotofferinformationforthePhiladelphiaareaonly.TheassessmentisforNy-Ny-CT-PAMSAareascombined
1.2.4 Citibank
TotalAssets:$1,856,646,000,000(asof12/31/09)9 Employees:105withinPhiladelphia10
OfficesinPhiladelphia:711
CommunityReinvestmentActrating:Outstanding(asof2006) Structure:SubsidiaryofCitigroupIncorporated
Citibank,N.A.iscurrentlythelargestbankintheunitedStateswithheadquartersresidinginLasvegas,Nevada.Itisanarmofthelargerparentcompany,Citigroup,whichisthelargestfinancialserviceorganizationintheworldlocatedinmorethan100countries.In2007,CitibankopeneditsfirstbranchinPhiladelphiaaswellasseveralATMs.Citibankprovidesseveralfinancialproductstoitscustomersincludingbanking,insurance,creditcards,andinvestmentassistance.
CitibankcertifiesthatitmakesalllawfuleffortstoimplementthefairemploymentpracticesembodiedintheMacBridePrinciples,doesnotoriginateHOEPAloans,negativeamortizationloans,non-traditionalmortgageproductssuchasinterestonlyandpaymentoptionARMSinthenon-primechannel,andequitylendingasallloansmustmeetanabilitytopaytest.Itrejectsanypolicyoractivitythatpromotespredatorylendingpractices,anddoesnotparticipateinsubprimelending.CitiBankalsocertifiesthatitfoundnorecordsthatitoranyofitsPredecessorBusinessEntitieshadanyparticipationorinvestmentsin,orderivedprofitsfrom,SlaveryorSlaveholderInsurancePoliciesduringtheSlaveryEra.
1.0 Background
9. Citibank 2009 Annual Report.10. City of Philadelphia Office of the City Treasurer Authorized Depository COMPLIANCE: Philadelphia City Code CHAPTER 19-200. CITY FUNDS--DEPOSITS, INVESTMENTS, DISBURSEMENTS R.F.I. Questionnaire Annual Request for Information Calendar Year 2009 for Citibank, pg. 7.11. Ibid pg. 7.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200932.
Thefollowingchartindicatesthenumberofsmallbusinessloans,homemortgages,homeimprovementloans,andcommunitydevelopmentinvestmentsthatCitibankmadewithinlowandmoderate-incomeneighborhoodswithintheCityofPhiladelphiafor2009.
TyPE 2009gOALS 2009RESuLTS
SMALLBuSINESSLOANS gOALSAREESTABLISHEDAgAINSTPEER100%
572TOTALINg$5,192M
HOMEMORTgAgES gOALSAREESTABLISHEDAgAINSTPEER100%
413TOTALINg$62,336M
HOMEIMPROvEMENTLOANS gOALSAREESTABLISHEDAgAINSTPEER100%
34TOTALINg$2,270M
COMMuNITyDEvELOPMENTINvESTMENTS $1.8M $1.2M
CitibankhasmadeanumberofgrantstotheHomeownershipCounselingAssociationoftheDelawarevalley($70,000)andPhiladelphiavIP($50,000)toensurePhiladelphia’spositionasanationalmodelintheforeclosurepreventioneffort.
OtheraspectsofCiti’scommunitydevelopmentactivitiesinPhiladelphiainclude:
» AnnualCitiDialoguesdedicatedtointensiveinformationgatheringoncommunityneeds
» AnnualNon-ProfitDaysdedicatedtonon-profitcapacitybuilding
» Serviceonnumerousboards,includinggPuAC,thePhiladelphiaDevelopmentPartnership,WORC,theCCCSAdvisoryBoard
1.2.5 Citizens Bank of Pennsylvania
TotalAssets:$147,681,000,000(asof12/31/09)12
Employees:4,285withinPA/1,197withinPhiladelphia13 OfficesinPhiladelphia:6014
CommunityReinvestmentActrating:Outstanding(asof9/1/2009)15
Structure:SubsidiaryoftheRoyalBankofScotlandgroup,PLC
CitizensBankofPennsylvania(CBPA)isafull–servicefinancialinstitutionservingPennsylvaniaandNewJersey.Thebank’sprimarymarketfocusisprovidingcredit,depositaccount,andservicestoindividualsandsmallbusinesses.CBPAisasubsidiaryoftheCitizensFinancialgroup,Inc.(CFg),aholdingcompanybasedinProvidence,R.I.,andisoneofthenation’s20largestcommercecompanies.CFgownsfiveotherindependentlystate-charteredoperatingbanksundertheCitizensnameandapproximately702ATMsthroughoutthePhiladelphiaarea,includingwalk–upandsupermarketbranches.
1.0 Background
12. Citizens Bank 2009 Annual Report.13. City of Philadelphia Office of the City Treasurer Authorized Depository COMPLIANCE: Philadelphia City Code CHAPTER 19-200. CITY FUNDS--DEPOSITS, INVESTMENTS, DISBURSEMENTS R.F.I. Questionnaire Annual Request for Information Calendar Year 2009 for Citizens Bank, pg. 6.14. Ibid pg 6.15. http://www2.fdic.gov/crapes/.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200933.
CitizensBankofPennsylvaniacertifiesthatitconductsnobusinesswithNorthernIreland,isinfederalcompliancewithlawsregardingpredatorylending,andisnotknowntohavebenefitedfromslaveryorslaveholderinsurancepolicies.
Thefollowingchartindicatesthenumberofsmallbusinessloans,homemortgages,homeimprovementloans,andcommunitydevelopmentinvestmentsthatCitizensBankofPennsylvaniamadewithinlowandmoderate-incomeneighborhoodswithintheCityofPhiladelphiafor2009.
TyPE 2009gOALS 2009RESuLTS
SMALLBuSINESSLOANS 150 337
HOMEMORTgAgES 250 501
HOMEIMPROvEMENTLOANS 700 784
COMMuNITyDEvELOPMENTINvESTMENTS 7 1
CitizensBankwasabletomeetorexceedalloftheircommunityreinvestmentgoalsfor2009.Therewasanexecutivedecisiontoplaceamoratoriumonallrealestatelending,includingCRA/communitydevelopmentlending.Creditdecisionswerefocusedonaccommodatingexistingcustomersandportfoliomanagement.
CitizensBankinstitutedanumberofkeycommunityinitiativesforPhiladelphia’slowandmoderateincomeneighborhoods,suchastheEconomicEmpowermentInitiative,theLucienE.BlackwellConstructionTradesApprenticeProgram,gPuACHousingForeclosurePreventionInitiative,theuniversityCityNeighborhoodImprovementProgramandthePhiladelphiaBusinessBuilderLoanProgram.
2009COMMuNITyDEvELOPMENTINvESTMENTS
COMPREHENSIvESERvICEPROgRAM $250,000
BuSINESSPRIvILEgETAXCREDITS $100,000
COMMuNITyDEvELOPMENTPROgRAMSuPPORT $333,340
FOuNDATIONSuPPORT $645,667
TOTALCDINvESTMENTS $1,329,007
1.0 Background
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200934.
1.0 Background
1.2.6 City National Bank
TotalAssets:$466,339,000(asof12/31/09)16
Employees:10317
OfficesinPhiladelphia:118
CommunityReinvestmentActrating:Outstanding(asofmostrecentexam) Structure:SubsidiaryofCityNationalBancsharesCorporation
CityNationalBankdidnotsubmitaresponsetotheAnnualRequestforCommunityReinvestmentgoalstotheCityofPhiladelphiafor2009.
CityNationalBankisasubsidiaryofCityNationalBancsharesCorporationwhichhas10locationsinunderservedminorityandlow-tomiddle-incomeurbanneighborhoodsinNewJerseyandNewyork.Thebankoffersstandarddepositproductsandservicesincludingcheckingandsavingsaccounts,IRAs,moneymarketaccounts,andCDs.CNB’sloanportfolioisdominatedbycommercialrealestateloans,butitalsooffersresidentialmortgages,constructionloans,businessloans,andconsumerloans.Thebankownsa35%stakeinaleasingcompanyandhasasmallinvestmentanorganizationthatprovidesmicroloansinHaiti.TheBankalsoacquiredabranchofficeinPhiladelphia,PAfromanotherfinancialinstitutioninMarch2007.CNBwasfoundedin1973.
CityNationalBankhasbeenawardedan“Outstanding”rating,thehighestratingpossible,bytheOfficeoftheComptrolleroftheCurrency(OCC)foritscommitmenttotheletterandspiritoftheCommunityReinvestmentAct(CRA).Byawardingthisrating,theOCCacknowledgedthatCityNationalBankiscontinuingtomeetthecreditneedsofallitssegmentsofitscommunities.Bycomparison,lessthan10%ofallfinancialinstitutionsintheunitedStatesreceivedan“Outstanding”CRAratingfromtheOCC.
1.2.7 M&T Bank
TotalAssets:$68,880,000,000(asof12/31/09)19 Employees:475withinPA/63withinPhiladelphia20 OfficesinPhiladelphia:721 CommunityReinvestmentActrating:Outstanding(asof2007) Structure:SubsidiaryofM&TBankCorporation
HeadquarteredinBuffalo,Ny,M&TBankprovidescommercialandretailbankingservicestoindividuals,corporationsandotherbusinesses,andinstitutions.Itoffersbusinessloansandleases;businesscreditcards;depositproducts,includingsavingsdeposits,timedeposits,NOWaccounts,andnoninterest-bearingdeposits;andfinancialservices,suchascashmanagement,payrollanddirectdeposit,merchantcreditcard,andlettersofcredit.Thecompanyalsoprovidesresidentialrealestateloans;multifamilycommercialrealestateloans;commercialrealestateloans;residentialmortgageloans;investmentandtradingsecurities;short-termand
16. http://www.faqs.org/sec-filings/100518/CITY-NATIONAL-BANCSHARES-CORP_10-K/.17. Ibid.18. Ibid.19. M&T 2009 Annual Report.20. City of Philadelphia Office of the City Treasurer Authorized Depository COMPLIANCE: Philadelphia City Code CHAPTER 19-200. CITY FUNDS--DEPOSITS, INVESTMENTS, DISBURSEMENTS R.F.I. Questionnaire Annual Request for Information Calendar Year 2009 for M&T Bank, pg. 6.21. Ibid, pg 6.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200935.
long-termborrowedfunds;brokeredcertificatesofdepositandinterestrateswapagreementsrelatedthereto;andoffshorebranchdeposits.Inaddition,itoffersforeignexchangeservices.Further,thecompanyprovidesconsumerloans,andcommercialloansandleases;creditlife,andaccidentandhealthreinsurance;andbrokerage,investmentadvisory,andinsuranceagencyservices.
Thefollowingchartindicatesthenumberofsmallbusinessloans,homemortgages,homeimprovementloans,andcommunitydevelopmentinvestmentsthatM&TBankmadewithinlowandmoderate-incomeneighborhoodswithintheCityofPhiladelphiafor2009.
TyPE 2009gOALS 2009RESuLTS
SMALLBuSINESSLOANS N/A 24
HOMEMORTgAgES-PuRCHASE N/A 34
HOMEMORTgAgES-REFINANCE N/A 16
HOMEIMPROvEMENTLOANS N/A 8
COMMuNITyDEvELOPMENTINvESTMENTS N/A 4
M&TBankpartneredwiththeFederalHomeLoanBankofNewyorkAffordableHousingProgramtoprovidegapfundingfortwoprojectsintheCityofPhiladelphia.Oneprojectnetteda$300,000affordablehousinggranttoCitizensActingTogetherCanHelp,Inc.tohelpfinanceconstructioncostsforPatriotHouse,whichwillcreate15unitsofsupportiverentalhousingforchronicallyhomelessveteranswithmentalhealthorsubstanceabuseissues.Inaddition,a$200,000affordablehousinggranttoFriendsRehabilitationtohelpfinanceconstructioncostsfortheStrawberryMansionHomeownershipDevelopmentproject,whichwillcreate26homesformoderate-income,first-timehomebuyerswasalsogranted.
M&TBankpartnerswithcommunityinstitutionstoincreaseeconomicopportunities,includinghomeownershipforlowtomoderateincome(LMI)individualsandcommunities.M&TBankalsooffersaCRAhomemortgageproduct,whichismarketedandonlyavailabletoLMIcommunitiesandbuyersfeaturingalowdownpaymentandthepossibilitytofinanceclosingcosts.
1.2.8 PNC Bank
TotalAssets:$268,863,000,000(asof12/31/09)22 Employees:16,565withinPA/2,475withinPhiladelphia23 OfficesinPhiladelphia:3924
CommunityReinvestmentActrating:Outstanding(asof2006) Structure:SubsidiaryofPNCFinancialServicesgroup
1.0 Background
22. PNC Bank 2009 Annual Report.23. City of Philadelphia Office of the City Treasurer Authorized Depository COMPLIANCE: Philadelphia City Code CHAPTER 19-200. CITY FUNDS--DEPOSITS, INVESTMENTS, DISBURSEMENTS R.F.I. Questionnaire Annual Request for Information Calendar Year 2009 for PNC Bank, pg. 10.24. Ibid pg. 9.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200936.
1.0 Background
PNCBankistheflagshipsubsidiaryofthePNCFinancialServicesgroup,Inc.(PNCFinancial)headquarteredinPittsburgh,Pa.Throughaseriesofmergersandacquisitions,PNChasgrownfromaregionalbanktoanationalleaderinfinancialservices.PNCisaninterstatebankoperatinginDelaware,theDistrictofColumbia,Florida,virginia,Indiana,kentucky,NewJersey,Ohio,Maryland,andPennsylvania.PNChasover1,140domesticbranches,11foreignbranches,and3,600ATMmachines.
PNCBankutilizestheNorthernIrelandServiceprovidedbyRiskMetricsgroupasanintegralcomponentofacomplianceprogramestablishedinconnectionwiththeMacBridePrinciples.TheCommonwealthofPennsylvaniahasindicatedthatthisserviceisaneffectivemeansbywhichtohelpensurecompliancewithitsAct44.PNCBankalsocertifiesthatithasuncoverednoinstancesofthesaleofinsurancepoliciesrelatingtoslaves;ownershipofslavesbyanyofthepredecessorinstitutions;saleorpurchaseofslavestosatisfydebtcollection;ortheacceptanceofslavesascollateral.
Thefollowingchartindicatesthenumberofsmallbusinessloans,homemortgages,homeimprovementloans,andcommunitydevelopmentinvestmentsthatPNCBankmadewithinlowandmoderate-incomeneighborhoodswithintheCityofPhiladelphiafor2009.
TyPE 2009gOALS 2009RESuLTS
SMALLBuSINESSLOANS 500uNITS 915
HOMEMORTgAgES 85uNITS 236
HOMEIMPROvEMENTLOANS 200uNITS 139
COMMuNITyDEvELOPMENTINvESTMENTS $2M $10M
TheonlycategoryinwhichPNCBankdidnotmeetitsstatedgoalwasforHomeImprovementloanoriginationvolumeinLMIcensustractsintheCityofPhiladelphia.ThisisaresultofeconomicandotherfactorsbeyondourcontrolwhichisindicatedbythefactthatthevolumeofoverallloanapplicationsintheCityofPhiladelphiadeclinedroughly30%.Allothergoalsweremetorexceededfor2009.
PNCcertifiesthatitdoesnotofferloanproductsthatcanbedescribedaspredatoryorhighcostandprovidesapplicantswithinformationnecessaryforapplicantstoprotectthemselvesagainstpredatorylendingpractices,includingalllegally-requiredloandisclosures.PNCalsomakesavailableawidevarietyoffinancialeducationandrelatedtoolsforconsumerstobetterunderstandtheiroptionswhenitcomestofinancialproducts.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200937.
PNCdidnotofferloanproductswhichhavebeenlinkedtopredatorylendingorthefinancialcrisis,suchassubprime,highcost,option-ARM,orAlt-Aloans.OnDecember31,2008,PNCacquiredNationalCityCorporation,whichhadalargerpresenceinthenationalmortgagemarket.Sincethen,PNChasworkedtointegratethoseoperationssothattheyconformtoPNC’sstandards,creditandriskmanagementpolicies,andapprovedproductset.Changesweremadetothemortgagecompany’soperationsandleadership,includingchangingthenametoPNCMortgage.In2009,thebusinessoriginatedapproximately$19.2billionoffirstmortgages.Prudentlyunderwrittenfixedratemortgagesnowaccountforapproximately95percentofthecompany’snewfirstmortgageoriginations.
PNCMortgageparticipatesinu.S.sponsoredprogramstohelpeligible,responsibleborrowersremainintheirhomes.TheseprogramsincludetheHomeAffordableModificationProgram(HAMP)andtheHomeAffordableRefinanceProgram(HARP).PNCalsoparticipatesintheHopeNowprogram,analliancebetweencounselors,banks,mortgagecompaniesandinvestorstocreateandcoordinateaunifiedplanthatkeepsdistressedhomeownersintheirhomes.
1.2.9 Republic First Bank
TotalAssets:$1,008,642,000(asof12/31/09)25
Employees:134withinPA/134withinPhiladelphia26
OfficesinPhiladelphia:627
CommunityReinvestmentActrating:Outstanding(asof2008) Structure:SubsidiaryoftheRepublicFirstBankCorporation
Locallyownedandoperated,RepublicFirstBankhasitscorporateheadquartersin Philadelphia.RepublicFirstBankisafull-service,state-charteredbankdedicatedtoserving theneedsofindividuals,businessesandfamiliesthroughoutthegreaterPhiladelphiaarea.Thebank’sprimarymissionistoservesmallandmediumsizedbusinessesthatareunderservedasaresultofmergersandacquisitions.
RepublicFirstBankcertifiesthatitisincompliancewiththeMacBridePrinciples,makesits CRAPublicFileavailabletoCityresidentswhoareconcernedaboutpredatorylendingpractices,andfoundnoevidenceofprofitsfromslaveryand/orslaveryinsurancepoliciesduringtheslaveryera.
RepublicFirstBankreportedthatitdoesnotsetseparatereinvestmentgoalsfortheCityofPhiladelphia.Rather,theyareincludedinthebank’sgoalsfortheoverallassessmentarea.
1.0 Background
25. Republic First 2009 10K Report <>http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/financials/secfilings.asp?ticker=FRBK:US26. City of Philadelphia Office of the City Treasurer Authorized Depository COMPLIANCE: Philadelphia City Code CHAPTER 19-200. CITY FUNDS--DEPOSITS, INVESTMENTS, DISBURSEMENTS R.F.I. Questionnaire Annual Request for Information Calendar Year 2009 for Republic First Bank, pg. 6. 27. Ibid, pg. 6.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200938.
1.0 Background
Thefollowingchartindicatesthenumberofsmallbusinessloans,homemortgages,homeimprovementloans,andcommunitydevelopmentinvestmentsthatRepublicFirstBankmadewithinlowandmoderate-incomeneighborhoodswithintheCityofPhiladelphiafor2009.
TyPE 2009gOALS 2009RESuLTS
SMALLBuSINESSLOANS N/A 42
HOMEMORTgAgES N/A 0
HOMEIMPROvEMENTLOANS N/A 0
COMMuNITyDEvELOPMENTINvESTMENTS N/A 3
RepublicFirstBankisactivelyinvolvedwiththeCommunityLendersCommunityDevelopmentCorporation(CLDC)andtheWomen’sOpportunityResourceCenter(WORC).TheCLDCpromotesrevitalizationthroughfinancingof,andinvestmentin,housingandcommunitydevelopmentactivitiesandaddressesneedsoflowandmoderateincomepersoninareasthroughoutBucks,Chester,Delaware&MontgomeryCounties,withspecificemphasisoncommunitieswherethememberBanksarelocated.TheWORCpromotessocialandeconomicself-sufficiencyforeconomicallydisadvantagedwomenandtheirfamilies.RepublicFirstBankopensaccounttosupporttheabove-referencedsavingactivitiesandservesontheBoardofWORC,aswellasitsLoanCommittee.
1.2.10 Sovereign Bank
TotalAssets:$75,117,853,000(asof06/30/09)28
Employees:9,03629
OfficesinPhiladelphia:1530 CommunityReinvestmentActrating:Outstanding(asof2008) Structure:SubsidiaryofBancoSantander,S.A.
SovereignBankdidnotsubmitaresponsetotheAnnualRequestforCommunityReinvestmentgoalstotheCityofPhiladelphiafor2009.
SovereignisnowpartofSantandergroup.Serving80millioncustomersin40countries,Santanderwasnamed“BestBankintheWorld”in2008.
SovereignBankoffersabroadarrayoffinancialservices,includingretail,business,andcorporatebanking;cashmanagement;capitalmarkets;privatewealthmanagement;andinsurance.Itsrootsreachbackto1902,whenitwasestablishedasabuildingandloanassociationhelpingPennsylvaniatextileworkersbecomehomeowners.
28. http://consumer-banking.findthebest.com/detail/24/Sovereign-Bank.29. Ibid.30. https://www.sovereignbank.com.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200939.
SovereignsuccessfullyexpandedintoNewEnglandin2000,andtheNewyorkareain2006.TheexpansionintoNewEnglandincludedapproximately$12billionindeposits,$8.1billioninloans,281branches,and550ATMsfromFleetBostonFinancial,whichwasthelargestbranchacquisitioninbankinghistory.Today,Sovereignoffersmorethan750branchesand2,300ATMsfromMainetoMaryland.
In2005,SovereignandSantanderestablishedastrategicpartnership,andonJanuary30,2009,SovereignjoinedSantandergroup,addingitssuccessfulu.S.franchisetoSantander’sglobalstrength.Foundedin1857,Santanderhasasuccessfulhistoryinretailandcommercialbanking,andhasgrowntobecomeoneofthe5largestbanksintheworldbyprofit.
SovereignBankcertifiesthatitmakesalllawfuleffortstoimplementthefairemploymentpracticesembodiedintheMacBridePrinciples,rejectsanypolicyoractivitythatpromotespredatorylendingpractices,anddoesnotparticipateinsubprimelending.SovereignBankstatesthatthereisnoindicationthatanySovereignBankpredecessorshadanyinvolvementintheslavetrade,directownershipofslaves,oreverofferedloanssecuredthroughslaves.
Aspartofitscommunitydevelopmentplan,Sovereignhasprovidedover$400,000totheHispanicAssociationofContractorsEnterprise(HACE),innorthPhiladelphiaaspartofafiveyearcommitmenttothiscommunitydevelopmentinitiative.
1.2.11 TD Bank
TotalAssets:$564,791,007,407(asof12/31/09)31 Employees:1,370withinPennsylvania/737withinPhiladelphia32 OfficesinPhiladelphia:1433 CommunityReinvestmentActrating:Satisfactory(asof2008) Structure:SubsidiaryofTDBankFinancialgroup
TDBankisasubsidiaryofTDBankFinancialgroupwhoseofficeheadquartersislocatedinToronto,Canada.TDBankisoneofthe15largestcommercialbanksintheunitedStatesandoffersabroadrangeoffinancialproductsandservicestocustomersinConnecticut,Delaware,theDistrictofColumbia,Florida,Maine,Maryland,Massachusetts,NewHampshire,NewJersey,Newyork,Pennsylvania,vermont,andvirginia.
InanattempttofurtherexpandthroughouttheunitedStates,TDBankFinancialgroupofToronto,CanadaacquiredCommerceBankonMarch31,2008.Together,theyarenowcalledTDBank,America’sMostConvenientBank(TDBank).ThecompanystatesthatTDBankisfocusedondeliveringaward-winningcustomerserviceandhassle-freeproductstocustomersfromMainetoFlorida.
1.0 Background
31. Amount quoted is converted from Canadian Dollars into US Dollars 1 CAD = 1.01359 USD. TD Bank 2009 Annual Report.32. City of Philadelphia Office of the City Treasurer Authorized Depository COMPLIANCE: Philadelphia City Code CHAPTER 19-200. CITY FUNDS--DEPOSITS, INVESTMENTS, DISBURSEMENTS R.F.I. Questionnaire Annual Request for Information Calendar Year 2009 for TD Bank, pg. 6.33. Ibid, pg. 7.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200940.
1.0 Background
TDBank,N.A.doesnotprovideapolicyonMacBridePrinciples,asitdoesnothaveanyoffices,branches,depositories,orsubsidiariesinNorthernIreland.TDBankalsocertifiedthatitcomplieswithgoverningdisclosurepracticesnecessaryforCityresidentstoprotectthemselvesagainstpredatorylendingpractices.
Thefollowingchartindicatesthenumberofsmallbusinessloans,homemortgages,homeimprovementloans,andcommunitydevelopmentinvestmentsthatTDBankmadewithinlowandmoderate-incomeneighborhoodswithintheCityofPhiladelphiafor2009.
TyPE 2009gOALS 2009RESuLTS
SMALLBuSINESSLOANS 100 106
HOMEMORTgAgES 254 227
HOMEIMPROvEMENTLOANS 75 65
COMMuNITyDEvELOPMENTINvESTMENTS $1M $54.5M
TDBankexceededitsgoalsforSmallBusinessLoansandCommunityDevelopmentInvestmentsfor2009.TheBankswasnotabletomeetitsgoalsforHomeMortgagesandHomeImprovementLoans.TDBank’sCommunityDevelopmentInvestmentswerestrong,totaling$54.5million.Thisincluded:
» 41grantsandsponsorshipstonon-profitsandsocialserviceagenciesinsupportofaffordablehousing,financialliteracy,economicdevelopment,humanservices,healthcare,smallbusinessdevelopmentandothercommunityprograms,initiativesandactivities-$640,714.
» Eightlowincomehousingtaxcreditinvestmentsforthepurchase,developmentand/orrenovationofmulti-familyaffordablerentalhousingintheCityofPhiladelphia-$53,852,389.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200941.
1.2.12 United Bank of Philadelphia
TotalAssets:$68,317,793(asof12/31/09)34 Employees:30withinPA/30withinPhiladelphia35
OfficesinPhiladelphia:336
CommunityReinvestmentActrating:Outstanding(asof2006) Structure:SubsidiaryofunitedBancshares,Inc
unitedBankofPhiladelphia(unitedBank),headquarteredinPhiladelphia,hasbeena state-charteredfull–servicecommercialbanksince1992.unitedBankiswhollyownedbyunitedBancshares,Inc.,abankholdingcompanyheadquarteredinPhiladelphiaandAfricanAmericancontrolledandmanaged.unitedBankoffersavarietyofconsumerandcommercialbankingservices,withanemphasisoncommunitydevelopmentandservicestounderservedneighborhoodsandsmallbusinesses.ThebankcurrentlyworksoutofthreeofficeslocatedthroughoutPhiladelphiaCounty,including:WestPhiladelphiaBranch,MountAiryBranch,andProgressPlazaBranch.AlthoughthelocationsandprimaryserviceareaisinPhiladelphia County,unitedBankalsoservesportionsofMontgomery,Bucks,Chester,andDelaware CountiesinPennsylvania;NewCastleCountyinDelaware;andCamden,Burlingtonand gloucesterCountiesinNewJersey.
Theu.S.TreasuryDepartmenthascertifiedunitedBankasaCommunityDevelopmentFinancialInstitution.Thiscertificationrequiresthatthebankhaveaprimarymissionofpromoting communitydevelopment.unitedBank’sstatedmissionistodeliverexcellentcustomerserviceataprofitandtomakeunitedBankofPhiladelphiathe“hometown”bankofchoicewithagoaltofostercommunitydevelopmentbyprovidingqualitypersonalizedcomprehensivebankingservicestobusinessandindividualsinthegreaterPhiladelphiaRegion,withaspecialsensitivitytoBlacks,Hispanics,Asians,andwomen.
unitedBankcertifiesthatitdoesnothaveanyfundsinvestedincompaniesdoingbusinessinorwithNorthernIreland,providesallloancustomerswiththeconsumerdisclosuresrequiredbyFederalRegulation(i.e.goodfaithestimate,truthinlending,fairlendingnotice),anddidnotprofitfromslaveryand/orslaveryinsurancepoliciesduringtheslaveryera.
1.0 Background
34. United Bank 2009 Annual Report.35. City of Philadelphia Office of the City Treasurer Authorized Depository COMPLIANCE: Philadelphia City Code CHAPTER 19-200. CITY FUNDS--DEPOSITS, INVESTMENTS, DISBURSEMENTS R.F.I. Questionnaire Annual Request for Information Calendar Year 2009 for United Bank, pg. 6.36. Ibid, pg. 6.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200942.
1.0 Background
Thefollowingchartindicatesthenumberofsmallbusinessloans,homemortgages,homeimprovementloans,andcommunitydevelopmentinvestmentsthatunitedBankmadewithinlowandmoderate-incomeneighborhoodswithintheCityofPhiladelphiafor2009.
TyPE 2009gOALS 2009RESuLTS
SMALLBuSINESSLOANS 34 26
HOMEMORTgAgES 2 2
HOMEIMPROvEMENTLOANS 2 1
COMMuNITyDEvELOPMENTINvESTMENTS 0 0
TheBankmetits2009goalsforHomeMortgagesbutfellshortofitsloangoalsforSmallBusinessLoansandHomeImprovementsLoans.unitedBankhadnoCommunityDevelopmentInvestmentgoalsfor2009.
unitedBankisparticipatingintheBankonPhiladelphiaprogram,designedbytheCitytohelplowandmoderateincomefamiliesgainaccesstomainstreamfinancialservices.
unitedBankisalsoparticipatinginanumberofoutreachprogramsgearedtowardminorities,low-incomepersons,immigrants,orwomenwiththeuSDepartmentofTransportation(DOT)LendingProgram,PhiladelphiaIndustrialDevelopmentCorporation(PIDC),uSSmallBusinessAdministration(SBA)andtheSecuredvisaCardProgram
1.2.13 Wells Fargo Bank
TotalAssets:$1,243,646,000,000(asof12/31/09)37 Employees:9,034withinPA/2,812withinPhiladelphia38
OfficesinPhiladelphia:4239 CommunityReinvestmentActrating:Outstanding(asof2008) Structure:SubsidiaryofWellsFargoBank,N.A
HeadquarteredinSanFrancisco,CA,WellsFargo&Companyisadiversifiedfinancialservicescompanyprovidingbanking,insurance,investments,mortgage,andconsumerandcommercialfinancethroughmorethan9,000storesand12,000ATMsandtheInternet(wellsfargo.comandwachovia.com)acrossNorthAmericaandinternationally.OneinthreehouseholdsinAmericadoesbusinesswithWellsFargo.WellsFargohas$1.2trillioninassetsandmorethan278,000teammembersacross80+businesses.
37. Wells Fargo 2009 Annual Report.38. City of Philadelphia Office of the City Treasurer Authorized Depository COMPLIANCE: Philadelphia City Code CHAPTER 19-200. CITY FUNDS--DEPOSITS, INVESTMENTS, DISBURSEMENTS R.F.I. Questionnaire Annual Request for Information Calendar Year 2009 for Wells Fargo Bank, pg. 7.39. Ibid pg. 6.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200943.
WellsFargo’sPennsylvaniaregionalheadquartersislocatedinPhiladelphia,PA.Thebankservesitscustomersandcommunitiesthroughphilanthropicinvestingtononprofitsandschoolsthroughcorporateandfoundationgiving,grantstohousingnonprofitsforbuildingandrehabilitatinghomes,homeownereducation,andforeclosureprevention,$149millioninCommunityReinvestmentAct-qualifiedcommunitydevelopmentloansandinvestmentsforaffordablehousing,communityservices,andeconomicdevelopment,$1.1billioninhomeloansfor10,700low-andmoderate-incomefamiliesandindividuals,and$893millioninhomeloansfor5,600peopleofcolor.
WellsFargoBank,N.A.certifiesthatitisincompliancewiththeMacBridePrincipals.WellsFargoBank,N.A.anditsrelevantdivisions(whichincludeWachovia)andaffiliatescertifythattheyprovideallapplicabledisclosuresrequiredbyfederal,stateandlocallawsandregulationsandhavecomprehensivecomplianceandfairlendingprogramsthatincludeextensivecontrolsandmonitoringsystems.Theyareanationalindustryleaderonanti-predatoryissues.
Thefollowingchartindicatesthenumberofsmallbusinessloans,homemortgages,homeimprovementloans,andcommunitydevelopmentinvestmentsthatWellsFargoBankmadewithinlowandmoderate-incomeneighborhoodswithintheCityofPhiladelphiafor2009.
TyPE 2009gOALS 2009RESuLTS
SMALLBuSINESSLOANS 477 393
HOMEMORTgAgES 2323 2125
HOMEIMPROvEMENTLOANS N/A 78
COMMuNITyDEvELOPMENTINvESTMENTS N/A 2
TheBankdidnotmeetits2009goalsforsmallbusinessloansandhomemortgages.It’sLMItractproductionof2200unitswasat95%ofgoalandLMIneighborhoodproductionwasnearly172%morethan2008andaccomplishedduringasignificant(30%+)declineinmortgagelendinginthePhiladelphiamarket.Marketconditionsweredifficultin2009duetothecontinuationoftheeconomicrecession,highforeclosuresrates,highunemploymentandcredittightening.
1.3 Mortgage Foreclosures
Inthepastfewyears,theuShasfacedaforeclosureandunemploymentcrisisthathasdev-astatedcommunities.Whiletheimpactofforeclosureismostimmediatelyfeltbydefaultinghomeowners,ithasalsohadadramaticimpactontheimmediateneighborhoodsandcitiesinwhichtheylive.
Theboomandbustinnon-primeandnon-traditionalmortgagelendingintheunitedStatesisunprecedented.Inthefallof2008,thehousingfinancesystemreachedthebrinkofcollapse.
1.0 Background
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200944.
1.0 Background
Whileitisdifficulttoknowforcertainwhatcausedtheboomandtheparticularcharacteristicsofthebustthatfollowed,therearefourlikelyfactorsthateachplayedasignificantrole:
» globalliquiditywhichledtolowinterestrates,expectationsofrapidlyrisinghomepricesandgreaterleverage,
» Theoriginationofmortgageloanswithunprecedentedrisksthroughrelaxationofmortgageunderwritingstandardsandthelayeringofrisks,especiallyintheprivate-labelsecuritiesmarketandintheportfoliosofsomelargebanksandthrifts,globalliquiditywhichledtolowinterestrates,expectationsofrapidlyrisinghomepricesandgreaterleverage,
» Themultiplicationandmispricingofthisriskthroughfinancialengineeringinthecapitalmarkets,and
» Regulatoryandmarketfailures.
1.3.1 Federal
Since2007,nearlyninemillionpropertieshavereceivedforeclosurefilings.Federalprogramshavebeeninplacesincemid-2008.TheseprogramsincludeHopeforHomeownersandtheMakingHomeAffordableprogram(MHA).MHAhasfeaturessuchasamodificationprogram(HAMP)andarefinanceprogram(HARP).
Thusfar,HAMPhasproveninsufficienttohalttheforeclosurecrisis.Documentedchallenges40 includedeficientprogramdesign,disorganizedandinconsistentimplantation,andaninability tokeeppacewithchangingmarketconditions.ArecentdetailedevaluationofHAMPbythegovernmentAccountabilityOffice(gAO)andtheSpecialInspectorgeneralfortheTroubled AssetReliefProgram(SIgTARP)indicatesthattheseissuesremain“substantialchallenges”thatwillrestrictHAMP’sfutureperformance.Duetothesechallenges,itisunlikelythattheprogramwillreachtheoriginalintendedscaleofhelpingthreetofourmillionhomeowners.
WhiletheTreasuryDepartmentestimatesthatHAMPwillcreatepermanentmortgage modificationsfor1.5to2millionhomeowners,theCongressionalOversightPanelestimates thatonly276,000foreclosures–“lessthanfourpercentofthetotal60+daydelinquencies” willbepreventedbyHAMP.Toaddressthisshortfall,manystateandcitygovernmentshaveimplementedaggressiveandinnovativeprogramstoaddresstheproblemlocally.
40. National Community Reinvestment Coalition (NCRC), National Consumer Law Center, Center for Economic and Policy Research and Center for American Progress.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200945.
1.3.2 State
Inresponsetothecrisis,somestateshavemadechangestotheirforeclosureprocessesto providemoreopportunitiesforhomeownerstoavoidforeclosures.Somestateshaveextendedthelengthoftheforeclosureprocessinordertoincreasetheamountoftimeahomeownerisgiventofindalternativetoforeclosure.Othershavespecificprovisionsdesignedtoprovide noticetohomeowners,toprovideaccesstocounselingorlegalservices,and/orencourage orrequirecommunicationamongparties.Stillothershavepassedregulationsthatprovide protectionfromriskylendingpracticesinthefuture.Suchregulationincludesminimum licensurestandardsformortgagebrokerstoensuretheirfinancialsolvencyandtechnicalfitnesstocarryoutresponsibilities,minimumunderwritingandloanproductsstandards(e.g.abilitytopayverification);prohibitionofnodocumentationloans;restrictionofpre-paymentpenalties;andincreasedenforcementofexistinglawsandincreasingpenaltiesforfraud.
InPennsylvaniatherearetwoformsofforeclosures:judicialandnon-judicial.Judicial foreclosuresmustgothroughthecourtsystemtoproveaborrowerhasdefaulted,whereasnon-judicialforeclosuresarecarriedoutwithoutcourtprocedurebecausethelender’srighttosellinacaseofdefaultiswrittenintothemortgageinstrument.ManyofPhiladelphia’scurrenteffortstoassisthomeownersfacingforeclosurearepartofthestate’smandatedprocess.
1.3.3 Local
Philadelphiawasthefirstcitytocreateamandatedforeclosurecounselinginitiative.The MortgageForeclosureDiversionprogramwasinitiatedafterthecityrequestedthesherifftocallamoratoriumonallforeclosuresinApril2008.Inresponse,severaljudgesquicklyestablishedthemitigationprogram,basedonaprototypeestablishedin2004byJudgeAnnetteM.Rizzo.Sincethisorder,nopropertyinPhiladelphiacangotoasheriffsalewithoutthehomeownerfirstgoingthroughareconciliationconference.
Theprogram,applicableonlytoresidentialowneroccupiedproperties,requireshomeownersenteringtheforeclosureprocesstospendadayincourtwithfreelegalservicesandadvicefromloancounselors,attorneysandbankofficialswhohelpthemfindalternativestoforeclosure.
Asof2009,forty-twopercentofallhouseholdsinPhiladelphiawereinforeclosure.Ofthehomeownerswhohaveparticipatedintheprogram,nearly85percenthavebeenabletodelayoravoidforeclosurethroughalternativeresolutionssuchasloanmodification,forbearanceorgracefulexits(i.e.deed-in-lieuorshortsale).
1.0 Background
2.0 Statistical Analysis of Residential Mortgage Lending Practices in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200948.
2.0 Statistical Analysis of Residential Mortgage Lending Practices in Philadelphia 2.1 Purpose
ThissectionanalyzesfairlendingpracticesamongCitydepositoriesandtheentireuniverseoflenderswithinPhiladelphia.Weexamineacombinationofstatisticaldataofbankinginformationandresidentialinformationfromthecensustoassess(1)ifdiscriminatorypracticesexist,andifthesubsetofCitydepositoriesdiffersfromtheentiresampleoflenders,and(2)ifso,torecommendpublicpoliciestoeliminatethediscrimination,asrequiredbyfederal,state,andlocallegislation.
Wefirstexaminetheuniverseofalllenders,andthenturntoanalyzingthedataforthedepositories.NotethatthespecificCitylegislationrequiresananalysisofCitydepositoriestoassesswhethertheycomplywithpracticesoffairlending,yettheseinstitutionsoriginateonlyasmallportion(approximately33percent)ofresidentialloans.
Thecentralfocusofthisanalysisaddressesthefollowingquestion:doesthedataindicatepracticesofracialorethnicdiscriminationbyregulatedmortgagelenders(andthesubsetoflenderswhowerealsoCitydepositories)withintheCityofPhiladelphiaforhomepurchase,refinancing,orhomeimprovementloans?Theanalysisofdiscriminationintheaccesstocreditconsiders(1)denialrates,bytypeofloanapplication(homepurchase,homeimprovement,andrefinancing),and(2)less-favorablelendingterms(e.g.subprimeversesprimeloans).
TheCity’sfairlendinglegislationrequiresanassessmentofdiscriminatorylendingpracticesbybanks.Ouranalysisindicatesstatisticallysignificantdisparitiesacrosstheracialandethniccharacteristicsofborrowers,yetnotabledifferencesexistbetweenCitydepositoriesandtheoverallsampleoflenders,whichindicatemorefavorableconditionsamongtheCitydepositoriesregardinghomepurchaseloans.
Whileourregressionanalysiscontrolledforfactorsthatwerelikelytoinfluencelendingdecisions,itwasunfortunatelyconstrainedbythelackofpotentiallyexplanatorydata.Forinstance,theanalysisdidnotcontaindataontheborrower’s(1)creditratingscoreand(2)wealthandexistingdebtload.Ifthesedatawereincludedintheanalysis,theexistinggapamongdifferentracialandethnicgroupsmightshrinkordisappearcompletely.Still,theexistinginformationindicatesastatisticallysignificantnegativeeffectassociatedwithraceandethnicity,whichwarrantsconcernandadditionalexamination.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200949.
2.2 Data Sources
Thisstudyuses2009(calendaryear)mortgageapplicationdatacollectedundertheHomeMortgageDisclosureActfortheCityofPhiladelphia.1Atotalof50,114loanapplicationsforowneroccupiedhomeswereusedinthisanalysis.Ofthese,16,994wereloanapplicationstooneoftheCitydepositories.Inadditiontoloan-specificdata,thisanalysisalsoutilizesdataatthecensustractlevelonmedianhomevaluesandvacancyratesobtainedfromtheCensus2000SummaryFile4(www.census.gov).
2.3 Model Specification and Methodology
Wemodelthelender’sdecisionsonwhethertoofferordenyaloanbytypeofloan(homepurchase,homeimprovement,andrefinancing).Additionally,withinthesampleofloansgrantedweanalyzedwhethertherewerediscriminatorypracticeswithinthetermsoftheloanofferedthroughananalysisofprimeorsubprimeloans.Asboththedependentvariableswerebinary(loandenied=0,1sub-prime=0,1)weemployedabinarylogisticregressionmodeltoboundtheintervalbetween0and1.Theindependentvariablesincludebothneighborhoodandindividual-levelcharacteristics,aswellascharacteristicsoftheloanrequestedanddummyvariablesfortheparticularlender.
2.3.1 The Dependent Variables
Thedependentvariablesforthisanalysisincludeloandenialratesandsubprimevs.primeloanapprovals.
» Thefirstdependentvariableinthisstudywasadichotomousvariable,definedaswhetherornotanapplicantwasdeniedapprovalofa(1)homepurchaseloan,(2)homeimprovementloan,or(3)arefinancingloan.Iftheapplicantwasapprovedforaloanthedependentvariableassumesavalueofzero(0)andiftheapplicationwasdeniedaloanthedependentvariableassumesavalueofone(1).
» Theseconddependentvariableexaminesthetermsoftheloan,solelyforhomepurchaseloans.Thevariablewasassignedavalueof1iftheofferwasasubprimeloan andavalueof0ifitwasnotsubprime.
2.3.2 The Independent Variables
Weincludedindependentvariablesinthemodeltocontrolforfactorsthatwerelikelytoinflu-encethelendingdecision.Individual-levelcharacteristicsincludegender,logofannualincome,andrace(African-American,Asian,Hispanic,orMissing)withnon-HispanicWhitesastherefer-encecategory.Neighborhoodcharacteristicsinclude:tract-levelinformationonthemedianlevelofincome(asapercentageofmedianincomeintheentireCity),andthevacancyrateofunoccupiedhome;onespecificationofthemodelalsoincludesavariableforpercentofminor-itywithinthecensustract.Loancharacteristicsinclude:amountofloan(logged),andwhetheritwasaconventionalorFHAloan.Anadditionalvariablemeasurestheloan-to-valueratioasameasureoftheamountofloanrequesteddividedbythemedianhomevalueinthecensustract.
2.0 Statistical Analysis of Residential Mortgage Lending Practices in Philadelphia
1. This is the same data source (HMDA) used in the previous lending disparity reports, as described in Section 1.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200950.
Thefollowingisabulletedlistofallvariables:
IndividualCharacteristics
» gender
» RaceorEthnicity
» Applicantincome(logged)
NeighborhoodCharacteristics
» Medianincomeofthecensustract(as%medianincomeofCity)
» vacancyratesbycensustract
» Percentageminority
LoanCharacteristics
» Typeofloan(ConventionalorFHA)
» Amountofloan(logged)
» Dummyvariablesbylender
» Loan-to-valueRatio(loanamountrelativetomedianhomevalueinthecensustract)
WealsoincludeaninteractiontermtoexaminelendingpracticestowardAfrican-Americanmalesandfemalesseparately.SeveralpotentialcontrolvariablesweremissingfromthismodelduetothelimitationsoftheHMDAdata.Theseincludeanapplicant’scredithistory,andwealthandexistingassets.
Credithistoriesarecrucialfactorsthatbanksusetoassessrisk.Additionally,thereisastrongpossibilitythatcreditscoresmaybecorrelatedwithraceandethnicity.Withoutthisinformation,wecannotfullyassesswhetherthebanksmadediscriminatorydecisions.Wecan,however,comparethepracticesoftheCitydepositorieswiththeuniverseofalllenders.Additionallywecancomparethe2009datawiththepreviousyeartoanalyzeifanychangeshavetakenplace.
Additionally,whilethedatasetdoesnotcontaininformationontheinterestrateassociatedwithloansgranted,weestimatethepotentialfordiscriminatorypracticesininterestratesbyusingaproxyforwhetherloansweregrantedasprimeorsubprimerate.
2.0 Statistical Analysis of Residential Mortgage Lending Practices in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200951.
2.4 Findings: All Lender Sample
2.4.1 All Lenders: Home Purchase Loans
TheestimatedcoefficientsandstandarderrorsfromthefullsampleareshowninAppendix1Table1.AfricanAmericanshavea7.8percentgreaterprobabilityofbeingdeniedahomepurchaseloanthanWhites,andHispanicshavea2.1percentgreaterprobabilityofbeingdenied.African-Americanmaleshaveanadditional1.5percentlikelihood(foratotalof9.3percent)overnon-HispanicWhites.Similarlytoyearspast,individualsapplyingforgreaterloanamountshadalowerlikelihoodofbeingdeniedaloan.
(SeeAppendix1,Table1)
2.4.2 All Lenders: Red-Lining
Red-liningrelatestodiscriminatorypracticesbasedongeographicratherthanindividualcharacteristics,wherebylendersexhibitapatternofavoidingloansinspecificgeographicareas.Ouranalysisofred-liningbehaviorincorporatesavariablethatcapturestheminoritypopulationshareatthecensustractlevel.Whilethevariableonpercentofminoritypopulationwassignificant,theimpactwassomarginal(approximately0.1percent)thatthesedatadonotsupportthehypothesisofred-liningbehavior. (SeeAppendix1,Table2)
2.4.3 All Lenders: Prime and Subprime Loans
Thenextsectionoftheanalysisexamineswhether,whengrantedaloan,discriminatorypracticesexistregardingthetermsoftheloan.Themodelperformsabinarylogisticregressionmodelanalyzingthelikelihoodofbeinggrantedaprimeorasubprimeloan.Thismodeltestswhether,witheverythingelsebeingequal,racialorethnicgroupswereofferedadisproportionatelyhighnumberofsubprimehomepurchasemortgages.Thetablerevealsthat,whenofferedaloan,AfricanAmericanshavea1.4percenthigherprobabilityofbeingofferedasubprimeloan,andHispanicshavea1.7percenthigherprobabilitycomparedtonon-HispanicWhites.
(SeeAppendix1,Table3)
2.4.4 All Lenders: Refinancing
Astheconditionsandcircumstancesforhomepurchase,homeimprovement,andrefinancingvarygreatly,theseloantypeswereanalyzedseparately.Thefollowingmodelconsidersloansforrefinancing.TheresultsshowthatAfricanAmericansweredeniedloansforrefinancing17.7percentmorefrequentlythanWhites,whileHispanicsweredeniedloans17.9percentmorefrequently.
(SeeAppendix1,Table4)
2.0 Statistical Analysis of Residential Mortgage Lending Practices in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200952.
2.4.5 All Lenders: Home Improvement Loans
Wehavealsoexaminedthepatternsofloanapprovalsanddenialsforhomeimprovementloans.Inthecaseofhomeimprovementloans,AfricanAmericansweredeniedloans15.8percentmorefrequentlyandHispanicsweredeniedloans19.9percentmorefrequentlythannon-HispanicWhites.
(See Appendix 1, Table 5)
2.5 Findings: Depository Sample
2.5.1 Depository Sample: Home Purchase Loans
The next section of the report analyzes Philadelphia depositories separately. This model shows that African Americans within the sample were 3.3 percent less likely to be denied a home purchase loan at a Philadelphia depository than they were in the universe of all lenders in the sample. In addition, PNC Bank was about 8 percent less likely to deny a home purchase loan and Banco Santander was about 5 percent less likely to deny a home purchase loan than the other lenders in the sample.
(See Appendix 1, Table 6)
2.5.2 Depository Sample: Red-Lining
Weusedthesamesampletotestwhetherornottheselendersengagedinsystematicred-lining.Thevariablesforracewerereplacedwithavariablethatcapturestheminoritypopulationshareatthecensustractlevel.Theestimatedcoefficientforthisvariablewassignificantbutthecoefficientwasverysmall(0.1percent).
(See Appendix 1, Table 7)
2.5.3 Depository Sample: Prime and Subprime Loans
Thenextsectionoftheanalysisexamineswhether,whengrantedaloan,discriminatorypracticesexistregardingthetermsoftheloan.Themodelperformsabinarylogisticregressionmodelanalyzingthelikelihoodofbeinggrantedaprimeorasubprimeloan.Thismodeltestswhether,witheverythingelsebeingequal,racialorethnicgroupswereofferedadisproportionatelyhighnumberofsubprimehomepurchasemortgages.ThemodelforprimeandsubprimeloansrevealsthatAfricanAmericanswere0.4percentmorelikelytobeofferedasubprimeloanfromadepositorythantheywerefromtheuniverseofalllenders.
(See Appendix 1, Table 8)
2.5.4 Depository Sample: Refinancing Loans
TheanalysisonrefinancingloansalsosuggestsdiscriminatorypracticeswerelesscommonamongthePhiladelphiadepositoriesthantheywereintheuniverseofalllenders.IntheanalysisofallotherlenderswefoundthatAfricanAmericansweredeniedloansforrefinancing17.3percentmorefrequentlythanWhites,whileHispanicsweredeniedloans14.6percent
2.0 Statistical Analysis of Residential Mortgage Lending Practices in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200953.
morefrequently.AmongthePhiladelphiadepositoriesAfricanAmericanswere0.7percentlesslikelytobedeniedaloanthantheywereamongalllenders,whileHispanicborrowerswere5.6percentmorelikelytobedeniedaloanbyPhiladelphiadepositories.
(See Appendix 1, Table 9)
2.5.5 Depository Sample: Home Improvement Loans
TheanalysisonhomeimprovementloanssuggestsdiscriminatorypracticesamongthePhiladelphiadepositorieswerenodifferentthantheuniverseofalllenders.ThedataindicatenodifferencesbetweenthedepositoriesandtheentireuniverseoflendersintermsofhomeimprovementloansandtheresultsfortheentireuniverseoflendersindicatedthatAfricanAmericansweredeniedloans22.3percentmorefrequentlyandHispanicsweredeniedloans19.3percentmorefrequentlythannon-HispanicWhites.AmongthePhiladelphiadepositoriesAfricanAmericanswere11.4percentlesslikelytobedeniedaloanthantheywereamongalllenders,whileHispanicborrowerswere1percentlesslikelytobedeniedaloanbyPhiladelphiadepositories.
(See Appendix 1, Table 10)
2.0 Statistical Analysis of Residential Mortgage Lending Practices in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200954.
2.6 Comparison with Previous Year Analysis (2007)
Theresultsfromanidenticalanalysisbasedondatafortheuniverseofalllendersfrom2008reveallargelysimilartrends.TheresultsforthePhiladelphiadepositorieswerenotdirectlycomparablefromyeartoyearbecausethelistofdepositorieschanged.Inordertoexaminethechangesfrom2008to2009thelistofdepositoriesfor2009andthecurrentmodelspecificationwasusedagainstthe2008data.
ThecurrentmodelrevealedthatAfricanAmericanswere3.3percentlesslikelytobedeniedahomepurchaseloanfromaPhiladelphiadepositoryduring2009comparedto2.3percentduring2008.Onceagain,itisimportanttonotethatwedonothaveaccesstocreditscoresorotherpersonalinformationthatbanksusetoassessrisk.yetthesetrendsdoindicatedifferencesbetweenthePhiladelphiadepositoriesandtheentireuniverseoflendersinPhiladelphiabasedonraceandethnicity.
Thecomparisonofthered-liningmodelbetween2008and2009doesnotshowanysignificantdifference.Thecoefficientonthepercentageoftheminoritypopulationwassignificantbutitwasverysmall(lessthan0.1percent).
Themodelforsubprimeloansshowsthatbetween2008and2009,thechancesofanAfrican-AmericanbeingofferedasubprimeloanfromaCitydepositoryincreasedslightly.In2008,AfricanAmericanswereabout3percentlesslikelytobeofferedasubprimeloanfromaPhiladelphiadepositorythanfromtheuniverseofalllenders,whilein2009theywere0.3percentmorelikelytoreceiveasubprimeloanfromaCitydepository.
AcomparisonofthedenialratesamongPhiladelphiadepositoriesinrefinancingindicatessomeimprovementbetween2008and2009.Theanalysisfrom2008suggeststhatAfricanAmericanswere0.6percentmorelikelytobedeniedahomeimprovementloanfromCitydepositoriesthanfromtheuniverseofalllenders.In2009,AfricanAmericanswere0.7percentlesslikelytobedeniedrefinancingfromadepositorythantheywerefromtheuniverseofalllenders.
Inconclusion,thedatasuggestthatdiscriminatorypracticesexistedinthesampleofalllendersinallthreetypesofloans:homepurchase,refinancingandhomeimprovement.WithinthesampleofPhiladelphiadepositories,itappearsAfricanAmericansexperiencedlessdiscriminationforhomepurchaseloans,refinancingloans,andhomeimprovementloans.However,theywereslightlymorelikelytoreceiveasubprimeloanfromPhiladelphiadepositories.
2.0 Statistical Analysis of Residential Mortgage Lending Practices in Philadelphia
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Section
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200958.
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lendingpatternsforeachloantypewereanalyzedbyborrowerrace,borrowerincome,tractminoritylevel,tractincomelevel,andborrowergender.Forbothborrowerincomeandtractincomeanalyses,borrowersandtractsweredividedintogroupsbasedontheirreportedincomeandthemedianfamilyincomefortheMetropolitanStatisticalArea.1Percentagesandratioswereroundedtothenearestwholenumber.Seereferencedtablesforspecificnumbers.
3.1 All Loans
3.1.1 All Loans - Overall Observations (see Table 3.1)
Outofatotalofapproximately50,000loanapplications,therewereover26,000loansmadein2008.Oftheseloans,approximately24,000wereprimeloansandnearly1,700weresubprimeloans.Therewereover12,000applicationsthatweredenied,settinganoveralldenialrateof24.8percent.
» Theoverallnumberofloanshaddecreasedsteadilyfrom2006through2008,yetincreasedfromtheprioryear(26,159)forthefirsttimein2009.Therewasadecreaseintotalloansof33.3percentfrom2006to2009,anda10.7percentincreasefrom2008to2009.
» Thenumberofprimeloans(24,490)decreasedby2.6percentfrom2006to2009,yetincreasedby24.7percentfrom2008through2009.
» Thenumberofsubprimeloans(1,669)decreasedby88.1percentfrom2006to2009andby58.2percentfrom2008to2009.
» Primeloansmadeup93.6percentofloansmade,withsubprimeloanscomprisingtheremaining6.4percentin2009.In2008,thesplitwas83.1percentprimeand16.9percentsubprime.In2006,64.1percentofloanswereprimeand35.9percentweresubprime.
» Theoveralldenialrate(24.8percent)decreasedforthefirsttimesince2006,afterincreasingineachofthethreepriorstudyyears,with33.7percentdeniedin2008,32.4percentin2007and30.3percentin2006.
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
1. Philadelphia County’s 2009 median family income was $77,800, as calculated by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. Below are the income subsets: • Low-to-moderate-income (LMI): less than 80 percent of the median family income (less than $62,240). • Middle-to-upper-income (MUI): 80 percent or more of the median family income ($62,240 and higher).
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200959.
Table 3.1: All Loan Applications and Originations in Philadelphia
yEAR APPLICATIONS DENIALS DENIALRATE LOANS PRIMELOANS
SuBPRIMELOANS
TOTALLOAN
AMOuNT
2006 91,624 22,774 30.3% 39,224 25,131 14,093 $11.25B
2007 77,080 24,955 32.4% 32,329 23,791 8,538 $10.27B
2008 53,913 18,147 33.7% 23,633 19,638 3,995 $3.27B
2009 50,114 12,440 24.8% 26,159 24,490 1,669 $4.54B
DIFFERENCE2006-2009 -45.3% -55.2% -18.2% -33.3% -2.6% -88.2% -59.6%
DIFFERENCE2008-2009 -7.0% -31.4% -26.4% +10.7% +24.7% -58.2% +22.0%
(See Appendix 2: Tables 1-5)
3.1.2 All Loans – by Borrower Race (see Table 3.2)
» Theoverallnumberofprimeloansgiventowhiteborrowersincreasedby40.4percentfrom2008to2009afteradecreaseof4.6percentfrom2007to2008.Primeloanstowhiteborrowersincreasedby15.2percentfrom2006to2009.Subprimeloanstowhitesdecreasedby43.0percentin2009followingadecreaseof43.8percentbetween2007and2008.Subprimeloanstowhiteborrowersdecreasedby82.8percentfrom2006to2009.
» Thetotalnumberofloanapplicationsforwhitesincreasedby16.1percentfrom2008to2009,whiletotaldenialsdecreasedby14.9percent.From2006to2009,thetotalnumberofloanapplicationsforwhitesdecreasedby30percent,whiletotaldenialsdecreasedby32.2percent.
» TheoverallnumberofloansissuedtoAfrican-Americanborrowersdecreasedby23.2percentfrom2008to2009,anddecreased33.3percentbetween2007and2008.From2006to2009,totalloanstoAfrican-Americanborrowersdecreasedby59percent.Primeloansdecreasedby5.2percentandsubprimeloansdecreasedby64.7percentbetween2008and2009.From2006to2009,primeloansforAfrican-Americanborrowersdecreasedby24.5percent,whilesubprimeloansdecreasedby89.3percent.
» Subprimeloansaccountedfor13.9percentoftotalloanstoAfricanAmericansin2009,adecreasefrom30percentin2008,butstillthehighestpercentageofanyracialcategory.In2006,subprimeloanswere53.3percentofthetotalloansissuedtoAfricanAmericans.
» African-Americanborrowersweredenied2.0timesasoftenaswhiteborrowersin2008,anincreaseoverthe1.8ratioof2008and1.7ratioof2007.
» LoanstoAsianborrowersdecreasedby2.5percentin2009,followinga28.8percentdecreasebetween2007and2008.From2006to2009,thetotalnumberofloanstoAsianborrowersdecreasedby41.8percent.
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200960.
» DespiterepresentingthesmallestpercentageoftotalPhiladelphiahouseholds,in2009Asianborrowersgeneratedhighernumbersofprimeloanproportionversushouseholdproportionthantheotherracialgroupsstudied(1.9,or3.5percentofhouseholdsbut6.7percentofprimeloans).Thiswasadecreasefromfindingsin2008(2.4)and2006(3.1).
» TotalapplicationsbyAsiansdecreasedby7.9percentfrom2008to2009,followinga19.1percentdecreasefrom2007to2008.From2006to2009,totalapplicationsbyAsiansdecreasedby37.7percent.Totaldenialsdecreasedby9.6percentbetween2008and2009,andby26.8percentbetween2006and2009.
» ThenumberofprimeloanstoHispanicborrowersincreasedby2.6percentfrom2008to2009,followingadecreaseof29.4percentfrom2007to2008.PrimeloanstoHispanicborrowersdecreasedby24.5percentfrom2006to2009.ThenumberofsubprimeloanstoHispanicborrowersdecreasedby61.4percentfrom2008to2009,followingadecreaseof48.3percentbetween2007and2008.From2006to2009,thenumberofsubprimeloanstoHispanicborrowersdecreasedby86.6percent.
» In2009thedenialrateforAfrican-Americanborrowersdecreasedfrom45.1percentto36.2percent.Thisgrouphasthehighestdenialrate,followedbyHispanicborrowersat32.3percent.Theaveragedenialratewas24.8percent.
» In2009,thedenialrateforAfrican-Americanborrowerscomparedtothatofwhitesincreased,from1.8to2.0.In2006,thisratewas1.8.
» Hispanicborrowerssawanincreaseinthedenialratecomparedtowhiteborrowersfrom1.64in2008to1.77in2009,similartotheincreasebetween2007(1.55)and2008(1.64).In2006,thisratewas1.54.
» Thepercentageofsubprimeloansdecreasedfrom2008to2009acrossallracialgroups,withwhiteborrowersseeingthegreatestdecrease(56.9percent).From2006to2009,thedecreasewassimilaracrossallracialgroups,withwhiteborrowersagainseeingthegreatestdecrease(81.4percent).
Table 3.2: Share of All Loans in Philadelphia by Borrower Race (2009)
BORROWERRACE PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLLOANS
PERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS
WHITE 69.1% 43.3% 67.3% 47.8%
AFRICAN-AMERICAN 18.1% 39.9% 19.6% 40.2%
ASIAN 6.7% 5.5% 6.6% 3.5%
HISPANIC 6.1% 11.3% 6.5% 6.5%
(See Appendix 2: Table 1, and Appendix 3: Maps 3 and 6)
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200961.
3.1.3 All Loans - by Borrower Income (see Table 3.3)
» Primeloansincreasedineverycategoryfrom2008to2009,comparedtothedecreaseacrossallincomegroupsbetween2007and2008.Theupperincomegroupsawthelargestincrease,at28.9percent.From2006to2009,primeloansdecreasedacrossallbutoneincomegroups;theprimeloansissuedtoupperincomeborrowersincreasedby0.9percent.
» Allincomecategoriessawadecreaseinthenumberofsubprimeloansgrantedfrom2008to2009,withthemiddleincomegroupseeingthegreatestdecline,at65.5percent.
» BorrowersintheLMIincomegroupreceived74percentofsubprimeloans.2Lowincomeborrowersreceivedthelargestshareofthesubprimeloansgiven(40.9percent,whencomparedamongthefoursub-dividedincomegroups).
» Theprime/subprimesplitofloanstothelowincomegroupwas87.1percent/12.9percent.Thiswastheincomegroupwiththelowestproportionofprimeloanstoallloans.Theproportionofprimeloansincreasesasincomerises,withborrowersintheupperincomegroupreceivingaprime/subprimesplitof97.8percent/2.2percent.
» In2009allincomegroupsreceivedagreaterproportionofprimeloanscomparedtosubprimeloansthanin2008.
» Thenumberofapplicationsdecreasedacrossallincomecategories,withtheexceptionoftheupperincomegroup,whichincreasedby8.0percent.Thelowincomecategorysawthegreatestdecreaseof22.3percentbetween2008and2009.From2006to2009,applicationsfromlowincomePhiladelphiansdecreasedby53percentandby27.8percentforupperincomeresidents.
» Thenumberofdenialsdecreasedacrossallincomecategories,withthemiddleincomegroupseeingthegreatestdecrease(40.4percent).From2006to2009,themoderateincomecategoryhadthegreatestdecreaseindenials,at58.9percent,slightlygreaterthanthelowincomecategoryat58.7percent.
» From2008to2009,thenumberofdenialsdecreasedby35.7percentforthelowincomegroup.Therateofdenialsreducedasonemoveduptheincomecategories,withtheupperincomegroupseeingadenialrateof18.5percentcomparedtoa36.0percentdenialrateinthelowincomegroup.
» Lowincomeborrowershavethehighestdenialrateat36percent,whichwas2.0timesgreaterthanupperincomeborrowers.In2008,thisratiowas1.9,andin2006,itwas2.0.TheLMIgrouphas1.5timesthedenialrateastheuMIgroup.In2008,thisratiowas1.4,andin2006,itwas1.5.
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
2. The calculation of a category’s proportion of total loans is based on the total number of loans where applicants filled out information for the respective categorization. As an example, the total number of subprime loans by borrower income is 1,549, as this is the total of all subprime loans where respondents indicated income. The total number of all subprime loans, including those where borrowers did not include income information, was 1,669, as listed in the tables. This calculation holds true for all Fair Lending analysis.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200962.
Table 3.3: Share of All Loans in Philadelphia by Borrower Income (2009)
BORROWERINCOME
PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS APPLICATIONS DENIALS DENIALRATE
LOW(<50%MSAINCOME) 18.8% 40.9% 11,466 4,130 36.0%
MODERATE(50-80%MSA
INCOME)30.7% 33.1% 14,272 3,548 25.1%
MIDDLE(80-120%MSA
INCOME)24.0% 17.4% 10,308 2,147 20.8%
uPPER(>120%MSAINCOME) 26.4% 8.6% 10,515 1,944 18.5%
LMI(<80%MSAINCOME) 49.6% 74.0% 25,738 7,714 30.0%
uMI(>80%MSAINCOME) 50.4% 26.0% 20,823 4,091 19.6%
(See Appendix 2: Table 2)
3.1.4 All Loans - by Tract Minority Level (see Table 3.4)
» Thenumberofloansmadetohomesincensustractswithlessthan50percentminorityresidents(non-minoritytracts)increasedby26.5percent,whileloansmadetohomesincensustractswithmorethan50percentminorityresidents(minoritytracts)decreasedby15.1percent.Overallloansincreasedby10.7percent.From2006to2009,loanstonon-minoritytractshavedecreasedby17.9percent,whileloanstominoritytractshavedecreasedby54.2percent.Overallloansdecreasedby33.3percentduringthatperiod.
» Thenumberofprimeloansmadeinnon-minoritytractsincreasedby35.7percentfrom2008to2009and6.9percentfrom2006to2009.
» Thenumberofsubprimeloansmadeinnon-minoritytractsdecreasedby48.9percentfrom2008to2009and86.3percentfrom2006to2009.
» From2008to2009applicationsincreasedby10.6percentinnon-minoritytractsanddecreasedby27.7percentinminoritytracts.From2006to2009,applicationsdecreasedby28.5percentand61.5percent,respectively.
» From2008to2009,denialratesdecreasedby26.7percentinnon-minoritytractsandby18.6percentinminoritytracts.From2006to2009,theseratesdecreasedby13.8percentand9.7percent,respectively.
» Applicantsinminoritytractsweredenied1.7timesasoftenasapplicantsinnon-minorityareasin2009,comparedto1.5timesasoftenin2008,1.5timesasoftenin2007and1.6timesasoftenin2006.
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200963.
Table 3.4: Share of All Loans in Philadelphia by Tract Minority Level (2009)
MINORITyLEvEL
LOANAPPLICATIONS DENIALRATE PERCENTOF
PRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PRIMESHARETO
HOuSEHOLDSHARERATIO
SuBPRIMESHARETO
HOuSEHOLDSHARERATIO
0-49%MINORITy 32,136 19.9% 72.4% 49.2% 1.42 0.97
50-100%MINORITy 17,966 33.6% 27.6% 50.8% 0.56 1.04
(See Appendix 2: Table 3, and Appendix 3: Maps 1 and 4)
3.1.5 All Loans - by Tract Income Level (see Table 3.5)
» In2009(unlikein2008,2007,and2006),moreloansweremadeinuMItracts(51percent)thaninLMItracts(49percent).TheLMI/uMIsplitwas57.7percent/42.3percentin2008,62.8percent/37.2percentin2007,and63.2percent/36.8percentin2006.
» LMItractsreceived47.6percentofprimeloansand69.8percentofsubprimeloans.
» Middleincometractsreceivedthemostloansofthefoursub-dividedgroups(10,910,or41.7percent).Consequently,theyalsoreceivedthemostprimeloans(10,434,or42.6percent).Moderateincometractsreceivedthegreatestnumberofsubprimeloans(808,or48.4percent).
» Onlyborrowersinthelowincometractgroupdecreasedinthenumberofprimeloansissued(1.7percentdecrease)from2008to2009.Allothergroupsincreasedthenumberofprimeloans,withtheupperincomegroupseeingthegreatestincrease(59.7percent).MuItractshadagreaterincreaseinprimeloans(41.7percentincrease)versusLMItracts(10.2percentincrease).
» Applicationsdecreasedforallincometractgroupsbetween2008and2009,exceptfortheupperincometractcategory.upperincometractapplicationsincreasedby54.3percent.From2006to2009,thisgrouphasincreasedapplicationsby24.5percent,whileallotherincometractgroupshavedecreased.Thelowincometractgroupshowedthegreatestdecreaseinapplicationsbetween2006and2009of64percent.
» Thedenialratedecreasedinallbuttheupperincometractsfrom2008to2009,withmiddleincometractsshowingthegreatestdecrease(28.2percent).Theupperincometractdenialrateincreasedby9.8percentduringthisperiod,andby8.84percentbetween2006and2009.From2006to2009,middleincometractshavealsoshownthegreatestdecreaseinthedenialrate(15.2percentdecrease).
» Low-incometractsweredenied2.2timesasoftenasupper-incometracts,adecreasefromthe2.9ratioof2008,andthe2.6ratioof2006.
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200964.
Figure 3.5: Share of All Loans in Philadelphia by Tract Income Level (2009)
TRACTINCOME LOANAPPLICATIONS
DENIALRATE
INCOMETOuPPERINCOMEDENIALRATIO
PERCENTOFALLLOANS
PRIMESHARETOOOHu
SHARERATIO
SuBPRIMESHARETO
OOHuSHARERATIO
LMI(79.99%MSA
INCOME)27,402 29.9% 1.60 49.0% 0.71 10.4
MuI(>80%MSA
INCOME)22,674 18.7% 1.00 51.0% 1.59 0.91
(See Appendix 2: Table 4, and Appendix 3: Maps 2 and 5)
3.1.6 All Loans - by Borrower Gender (see Table 3.6)
» Themale/female/jointsplitoftotalloanswas33.7/33.6/32.8percentin2009,34.5/37.5/28.0percentin2008,36.6/40.0/23.3percentin2007,and37.1/40.0/23.0percentin2006.
» Thenumberofsubprimeloanstomendecreasedby59.1percentfrom2008to2009.From2006to2009,menhavehadthegreatestdecreaseinsubprimeloans(90percentdecrease).
» Totalloanstowomendecreasedby0.4percentfrom2008to2009andby45.2percentfrom2006to2009.Totalloanstomenhavedecreasedby40.8percentfrom2006to2009,butincreasedby8.5percentbetween2008and2009.Jointgenderhouseholdssawthegreatestincreaseintotalloansbetween2008and2009(30.4percentincrease)andthesmallestdecreasebetween2006and2009(4.4percentdecrease).
» Jointapplicationsreceivedthehighestproportionofprimeloans,with95.5percentoftheirtotalloanscategorizedasprime.93.7percentofloansmadetomenwereprime,aswere91.7percentofloansmadetowomen.Thismaybedue,inpart,toagreaterproportionofdual-incomehouseholdsandthedisparityofincomesbetweenmenandwomen.
» Totalloanapplicationsbymendecreasedby8.1percentin2009,whiledenialsdecreasedby28.1percent.From2006to2009,loanapplicationsbymendecreasedby48.3percent,whiledenialsdecreasedby54.2percent.
» Totalloansapplicationsbyjointhouseholdsincreasedby10.6percentfrom2008to2009,whileapplicationsbyfemalehouseholdsdecreasedby16.6percent.
» Womenweredeniedloansat26.3percent(a21.8percentdecreasefrom2008),whilejointhouseholdsweredeniedloansat19.6percent(a32.5percentdecreasefrom2008).Bothjointandfemalehouseholdssawgreaterdecreasesindenialratesfrom2006to2009(23.4percentand17.8percentdecrease,respectively).
» Femalehouseholdsweredeniedatapproximatelythesamerateasmalehouseholds(1.0in2009),whilejointhouseholdsweredeniedatalowerrate(0.7).
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200965.
Table 3.6: Share of All Loans in Philadelphia by Borrower Gender (2009)
BORROWERgENDER PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS DENIALRATE
MALE 33.7% 33.4% 22.4% 26.5%
FEMALE 32.9% 43.5% 44.9% 26.3%
JOINT(MALE/FEMALE) 33.4% 23.0% 32.7% 19.6%
(See Appendix 2: Table 5)
3.2 Home Purchase Loans
3.2.1 Home Purchase Loans – Overall Observations (see Table 3.7)
In2009,therewere14,479applicationsforhomepurchaseloans,a12.9percentdecreasefromthe16,620applicationsin2008.From2006to2009,therewasa47.8percentdecreaseinapplicationsforhomepurchaseloans.Ofthe2009applications,9,976loansweremade,a7percentdecreasefrom2008,followingadecreaseof27.1percentfrom2007to2008.From2006to2009,thetotalnumberofhomepurchaseloanshasdecreasedby41.7percent.Thedenialratewas14.3percent,whichwaslowerthanthe15.9percentrateof2008,andthe17.5percentdenialratein2007and2006.Ofthe9,976loansthatweremade,93.8percentwereprimeloansand6.2percentweresubprimeloans.In2006,73.9percentofhomepurchaseloanswereprimeloansand26.1percentweresubprimeloans.
Table 3.7: Home Purchase Loan Applications and Originations in Philadelphia
APPLICATIONS DENIALS DENIALRATE LOANS PRIMELOANS SuBPRIMELOANS
2006 27,748 4,866 17.5% 17,113 12,651 4,462
2007 23567 4,116 17.5% 14,726 12,177 2,549
2008 16,620 2,639 15.9% 10,729 9,462 1,267
2009 14,479 2,077 14.3% 9,976 9,356 620
2006-2009DIFFERENCE -47.8% -57.3% -18.0% -41.7% -26.1% -86.1%
2008-2009DIFFERENCE -12.9% -21.3% -9.8% -7.0% -1.1% -51.1%
3.2.2 Home Purchase Loans - by Borrower Race (see Table 3.8)
» From2008to2009,primeloansdecreasedoverallandacrossallracialcategoriesexceptforAfrican-American(0.1percentincrease)andHispanic(8.2percentincrease).Primeloansdecreasedacrossallracialcategoriesfrom2006to2009,withAsiansshowingthegreatestdecrease(53.6percent).Overall,primeloansdecreasedby26.0percentfrom2006to2009.
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200966.
» Theoverallnumberofsubprimeloansdecreasedbymorethan51.1percentfrom2008to2009,withAfrican-Americanborrowersseeingthegreatestdecreaseat53.2percent.Asianborrowerssawthesmallestdecreaseat10.2percent.From2006to2009,subprimeloanstoAfrican-Americanborrowershavedecreasedthemost(87.3percent)whilethosetoAsianborrowershavedecreasedtheleast(70.2percent).
» Whiteborrowersreceived59.8percentofallprimeloans,whileAfricanAmericansreceived21.3percentofallprimeloans.Whitescomprise47.8percentofPhiladelphiahouseholds,whileAfricanAmericanscomprise40.2percent.
» Asianborrowers,whocomprise3.5percentofallPhiladelphiahouseholds,received9percentofallloans.In2008,Asianborrowersreceived10.7percentofallloans,and13.4percentin2006.
» From2008to2009,onlyAsianborrowerssawadecrease(1.0percent)intheproportionofloansthatwereprime;thiswasinconsistentwiththetrendsin2008and2007(whentheproportionofprimetosubprimeincreased).
» Thenumberofapplicationsdecreasedinallcategoriesfrom2008to2009,butAsianborrowerssawthegreatestdecreaseat24.7percent.African-Americanborrowersalsosawthegreatestdecreaseinapplicationsfrom2006to2009,at58.8percent.
» From2008to2009,thedenialrateincreasedforAsianborrowers(by15.3percent),butdecreasedforwhiteborrowers(by8.3percent),African-Americanborrowers(by12.5percent),andforHispanicborrowers(by24.2percent).From2006to2009,thedenialrateincreasedforAsianborrowersby40.3percent,butdecreasedforwhiteborrowers(14.8percent),African-Americanborrowers(21.7percent),andforHispanicborrowers(29.9percent).
» From2008to2009,thedenialrateofAfrican-Americanborrowerswas1.9timesgreaterthanwhites;in2008,thedenialratewas2.0timesgreaterthanwhites,adecreasefromthe2.3ratioof2007andthe2.1ratioof2006.
Table 3.8: Share of Home Purchase Loans in Philadelphia by Borrower Race (2009)
BORROWERRACE LOANAPPLICATIONS
DENIALRATE
RACETOWHITEDENIAL
PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
WHITE 6,642 10.1% 1.00 59.8% 32.8%
AFRICAN-AMERICAN 3,017 19.0% 1.89 21.3% 39.7%
ASIAN 1,166 17.0% 1.69 9.0% 9.4%
HISPANIC 1,224 13.6% 1.36 9.8% 18.1%
(See Appendix 2: Table 6, and Appendix 3, Maps 7-10)
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200967.
3.2.3 Home Purchase Loans - by Borrower Income (see Table 3.9)
» Lowandmoderateincomegroupsbothreceivedanincreaseinthenumberofprimeloansfrom2008to2009,at24.4percentand11.8percent,respectively.Themiddleandupperincomegroupssawfewerprimeloanswithdecreasesof11.9and27.5percent,respectively.Allincomegroups,exceptlowincomeborrowers,haveseenadecreaseinprimeloansfrom2006to2009,withupperincomeborrowersshowingthegreatestdecreaseof49.2percent.Primeloanstolowincomeborrowershaveincreasedby16.7percentfrom2006to2009.
» In2009allgroupsalsoreceivedfewersubprimeloans,withtheupperincomegroupreceivingthelargestdecreaseof65.3percent.Borrowersinthelowincomegroupreceivingthelowestpercentreductioninsubprimeloansat40percent.From2006to2009,subprimeloanstoupperincomeborrowershavedecreasedby92.4percent,andby74.1percentforlowincomeborrowers.
» TheLMIgroupreceivesmostoftheloans,at61.9percent.
» LMIborrowersarereceivingagreatershareoftheprimeloans(60.9percent)relativetotheMuIborrowers(39.1percent).TheLMIgroup,however,receives78.2percentofsubprimeloans,comparedto21.8percentbytheMuIgroup.
» Thepercentageoflowincomeborrowerswithprimeloansincreasedby25.7percentin2009;thiswasthelargestincreaseseenbythefoursub-dividedincomegroups.From2006to2009,thispercentagehasincreasedby55.2percent.Thepercentageofupperincomeborrowerswithprimeloanshasdecreasedby32.6percentfrom2006to2009.
» From2008to2009thepercentageofMuIborrowerswithsubprimeloansdecreasedby24.8percent.ThepercentageofLMIborrowerswithsubprimeloansincreasedby10.1percent.
» Thedenialratedecreasedasincomerose,withborrowersinthelowincomegroup1.6timesmorelikelytobedeniedasaborrowerintheupperincomegroup.Middleincomeborrowerswerelesslikelytobedeniedthanborrowersintheupperincomegroup,withadenialrateratioof1.0.
Table 3.9: Share of Home Purchase Loans in Philadelphia by Borrower Income (2009)
BORROWERINCOME PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS
LMI(<79.99%MSAINCOME) 60.9% 78.2% 67.7%
MuI(>80%MSAINCOME 39.1% 21.8% 32.3%
(See Appendix 2: Table 7)
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200968.
3.2.4 Home Purchase Loans - by Tract Minority Level (see Table 3.10)
» Thenumberofloansforminoritycensustractsdecreasedby14.7percentfrom2008 to2009andby51.9percentfrom2006to2009.
» Primeloansfornon-minoritycensustractsincreasedby0.81percentfrom2008to 2009anddecreasedby23.4percentfrom2006to2009.
» Borrowersinminoritycensustractsreceived31.9percentofallloans,30.6percent ofallprimeloans,and51.1percentofallsubprimeloans.
» Ofallloansmadetoborrowersinminoritycensustracts,90.1percentwereprimeand9.9percentweresubprime.
» Theproportionofprimeloansmadetoborrowersinminoritycensustractsincreased by11percentfrom2008to2009,andby42.7percentfrom2006to2009.
» In2009thenumberofapplicationsdecreasedforbothcategories,withminoritytractborrowershaving22.8percentfewerapplicationsandnon-minorityborrowershaving 6.6percentfewerapplications.
» Thedenialrateforborrowersinminoritycensustractswas19.0percentin2009,whichwasa9.1percentdecreasefromthedenialrateof2008(20.9percent),anda18.3percentdecreasefromthedenialrateof2006(23.3percent).
» Borrowersinminoritycensustractsweredenied1.6timesasoftenasthosein non-minoritytracts,adecreasefromthe1.7ratioof2008,andthe1.8ratioof2006.
Table 3.10: Share of Home Purchase Loans in Philadelphia by Tract Minority Level (2009)
MINORITyLEvEL PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS
0-49%MINORITy 69.4% 48.9% 51.0%
50-100%MINORITy 30.6% 51.1% 49.0%
(See Appendix 2: Table 8)
3.2.5 Home Purchase Loans - by Tract Income Level (see Table 3.11)
» Thenumberofapplicationsdecreasedacrossallcategoriesfrom2008to2009,withborrowersinmiddleincometractsseeingthegreatestreductionat32.4percent.From2006to2009,applicantsfromlowincometractssawthegreatestdecreaseinapplications,at58.8percent.
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200969.
» Thenumberofloansalsodecreasedacrossallcategories,mostsignificantlyforborrowersinupperincometracts,whosawadecreaseof25.2percentfrom2008to2009.From2006to2009,borrowersinlowincometractshavehadthegreatestdecreaseintotalloans,at51.4percent.
» In2009,thenumberofprimeloansincreasedformoderateandmiddleincometracts(0.9percentand3.2percent,respectively)anddecreasedforlowandupperincometracts(3.3percentand24.7percent,respectively).
» Thenumberofsubprimeloansdecreasedinallincometractgroupsfrom2008to2009,withborrowersinmoderateincometractsreceivingthegreatestdeclineat53.2percent.From2006to2009,thenumberofsubprimeloansissuedtothisgroupdecreasedby85.7percent.
» In2009borrowersinMuItractssaw43.9percentfewersubprimeloansthanin2008.Thisdecreasewassimilartothedecreasebetween2007and2008.
» Theproportionofprime/subprimeloansshiftedtowardsanincreaseinthenumberofprimeloansacrossallcategories.Borrowersinlowincometractssawanincreaseof11.1percentfrom2008to2009,givingthatgroupaprime/subprimesplitof89.2percentprime/10.8percentsubprime.
» OfalltheloansmadeinanMuItract,96.5percentwereprime,whichwasanincreaseof2.6percentfrom2008to2009.
» Thedenialrategenerallydecreasedastractincomeincreased.Borrowersinmiddleincometractsweredenied11.0percentofthetimewhileborrowersinupperincometractsweredenied11.6percentofthetime.Thedenialratedecreasedforallbutupperincometractsfrom2008to2009,atrendsimilartotheperiodbetween2006and2009.Denialratesinupperincometractsincreasedby26.7percentbetween2008and2009,andby30.3percentfrom2006to2009.Denialratesforlowincometractsdecreasedby13.7percentbetween2008and2009,andby17.5percentfrom2006to2009.
» In2009borrowersinLMItractsweredenied16.5percentofthetime,or1.5timesperevery1MuIdenial.Thisdecreasedfrom2008whenborrowersinLMItractsweredenied1.7timesforevery1MuIdenial,andin2006whenborrowersinLMItractsweredenied1.8timesforevery1MuIdenial.
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200970.
Table 3.11: Share of Home Purchase Loans in Philadelphia by Tract Income Level (2009)
TRACTINCOME
LOANAPPLICATIONS
DENIALRATE
INCOMETOuPPERINCOMEDENIALRATE
PERCENTOFALLLOANS
PERCENTOFALL
HOuSEHOLDS
PRIMESHARETO
HOuSEHOLDSHARERATIO
SHARETOHOuSEHOLDSHARERATIO
LMI(<79.99%MSA
INCOME)
8,597 16.5% 1.49 57.5% 67.0% 0.84 1.14
MuI(>80%MSA
INCOME)5,868 11.1% 1.00 42.5% 33.0% 1.32 0.72
(See Appendix 2: Table 9)
3.2.6 Home Purchase Loans - by Borrower Gender (see Table 3.12)
» Thenumberofapplicationsdecreasedacrossallcategoriesin2009,withthedecreaseinfemaleapplicationsat14.1percent.From2006to2009,thegreatestdecreaseinapplicationswasfrommalehouseholds(54.1percent).
» Allthreecategoriesshowedadecreaseinthenumberofloans,primeloansandsubprimeloansbetween2006and2009.Thesametrendoccurredbetween2008and2009,exceptmaleprimeloansincreasedby1.9percent.
» In2009maleborrowersshowedthegreatestdecreasesinthenumberofsubprimeloansat55.8percent.
» Subprimeloanstofemaleborrowersdecreasedby46.8percent,andprimeloanstothisgroupdecreasedby0.3percent.Jointhouseholdshad40.9percentlesssubprimeloansthan2008,and4.5percentlessprimeloans.
» Maleandfemaleborrowersreceivedaboutthesamenumberofprimeloans(3,249formalesand3,184forfemales),whilejointhouseholdsreceived2,248loans.
» Ofalltheprimeloansthatweremade,37.4percentwenttomaleborrowersand36.7percentwenttofemaleborrowers.Thiswasanincreaseinproportionfrom2008by2.6percentand0.3percent,respectively.
» Foralltheloansmadetojointhouseholds,95.6percentwereprimeloans.Thiswasanincreaseof27.2percentfrom2008,anda10.2percentincreasefrom2006to2009.
» Applicationsbymaleswerethemostlikelytobedenied,atarateof16.4percent.Femaleborrowershadadenialrateof13.6.Denialratesdecreasedfrom2008to2009forthesetwogroupsby11.6percentand16.1percent,respectively.
» Applicationsfiledbyjointmale/femalehouseholdsweredeniedonly10.8percentofthetime,a22.4percentincreasefrom2008to2009anda2.1percentincreasefrom2006to2009.
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200971.
Table 3.12: Share of Home Purchase Loans in Philadelphia by Borrower Gender (2009)
BORROWERgENDER PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
gENDERSHARETOMALESHARERATIO:
PRIME
gENDERSHARETOMALESHARERATIO:
SuBPRIME
MALE 93.8% 6.2% 1.00 1.00
FEMALE 92.4% 7.6% 0.99 1.22
JOINT(MALE/FEMALE) 95.6% 4.4% 1.02 0.71
(See Appendix 2: Table 10)
3.3 Home Refinance Loans
3.3.1 Home Refinance Loans – Overall Observations (see Table 3.13)
In2009,therewere33,030applicationsforhomerefinanceloans,anincreaseof1.7percentfrom2008.Outofthatpool,9,008applicationswererejected,yieldingadenialrateof27.3percent.Ofthe15,395loansthatlendersmade,14,569wereprimeloans(or94.6percent)and826weresubprime(or5.4percent).Thenumberofprimeloansincreasedby55.5percentfrom2008to2009andincreasedby38.9percentfrom2006to2009.Thenumberofsubprimeloansdeclinedby62.4percentfrom2008to2009anddeclinedby90.7percentfrom2006to2009.
Table 3.13: Home Refinance Loan Applications and Originations in Philadelphia
APPLICATIONS DENIALS DENIALRATE LOANS PRIMELOANS SuBPRIMELOANS
2006 55,816 18,974 34.0% 19,320 10,486 8,834
2007 46,237 17,240 37.3% 15,183 9,927 5,256
2008 32,489 12,841 39.5% 11,568 9,370 2,198
2009 33,030 9,008 27.3% 15,395 14,569 826
2006-2009DIFFERENCE -40.8% -52.5% -19.8% -20.3% +38.9% -90.7%
2008-2009DIFFERENCE +1.7% -29.9% -31.0% +33.1% +55.5% -62.4%
3.3.2 Home Refinance Loans - by Borrower Race (see Table 3.14)
» From2008to2009primeloansdecreasedforAfrican-Americanborrowersby5.6percent,andforHispanicborrowersby2.3percent.Primeloanstowhiteborrowersincreasedby88.3percent,whileincreasingby62.4percentforAsianborrowers.
» Subprimeloansdecreasedforallgroupsfrom2008to2009,withAfrican-Americanborrowersexperiencingthegreatestdecreaseat70.8percent.African-Americanborrowersalsohadthegreatestdecreaseofallracialgroupsforsubprimeloansbetween2006and2009,at91.8percent.
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200972.
» African-Americanborrowersreceived62.2percentfewerloansin2009thanin2006.Whiteborrowersreceived22.3percentmoreloansin2009thanin2006.
» Whiteborrowersreceived75.7percentofallprimeloans(upfrom63.3percentin2008),whileAfricanAmericansreceived15.6percentofallprimeloans(downfrom26.0percentin2008).
» African-Americanborrowersreceived38.9percentofallsubprimeloans(downfrom52.1percentin2008),whilewhiteborrowersreceived51.6percentofallsubprimeloans(upfrom36.2percentin2008).
» In2009,allgroupsreceivedmoreprimeloansthansubprimeloans,astheyhadin2008and2007.In2006,bothAfricanAmericansandHispanicborrowershadahigherproportionoftotalloanscomprisedofsubprimeloans.
» African-Americanborrowersreceived1,791primeloans(86.9percent)and271subprimeloans(13.1percent).
» From2008to2009thenumberofapplicationsincreasedforwhiteresidents(36percent)andAsianresidents(20.2percent).ThenumberofapplicationsdecreasedforAfrican-Americanresidents(37.8percent)andHispanicresidents(31.5percent).From2006to2009,applicationsdecreasedacrossallracialcategories,withAfricanAmericansseeingthelargestdecrease(61.6percent).
» ThedenialrateforHispanicborrowerswas41.8percent,thehighestofallgroups.However,alldenialratesdecreasedfrom2008to2009,withdenialratesforwhiteborrowersdecreasingthemostat34.2percent.
» African-AmericanandHispanicborrowersweredenied1.93and2.00times,respectively,asoftenaswhiteapplicantsin2009.Thiswashigherthan2008whentheywere1.58and1.59times,respectively,aslikelytobedeniedaswhiteapplicants.
Table 3.14: Share of Home Refinance Loans in Philadelphia by Borrower Race (2009)
BORROWERRACE PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS
DENIALRATE
WHITE 757.% 51.6% 47.8% 20.9%
AFRICAN-AMERICAN 15.6% 38.9% 40.2% 40.3%
ASIAN 5.1% 2.7% 3.5% 31.3%
HISPANIC 3.6% 6.7% 6.5% 41.8%
(See Appendix 2: Table 11)
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200973.
3.3.3 Home Refinance Loans - by Borrower Income (see Table 3.15)
» From2008to2009,thenumberofprimeloansincreasedforallcategories,withborrowersintheupperincomegroupseeingthegreatestdecreaseof91.8percent.From2006to2009,allincomegroupsincreasedthenumberofprimeloans,exceptlow-incomeborrowers,whosawadecreaseof1.8percent.
» Allincomegroupssawadecreaseinthenumberofsubprimeloansfrom2008to2009,withthoseinthemoderateincomegroupexperiencingthegreatestdeclineof68.7percent.From2006to2009,allincomegroupshaveseenadecreaseinsubprimeloans,withmoderateandmiddleincomegroupsseeingthelargestdecreaseof92.4percent.
» MuIborrowersreceived51.2percentofallprimeloansin2008;thisincreasedto59percentofallprimeloansin2009.From2006to2009,theMuIgroupincreaseditsproportionofprimeloansrelativetototalloansby16.7percent.
» Allincomegroupsreceivedmoreprimeloansthansubprimeloans.Theproportionofprimeloansoversubprimeloansforeachgroupincreasedwithincome,withthoseintheupperincomegroupreceiving98.3percentoftheirloansasprimeand1.7percentassubprime.In2008,theupperincomegroupreceived91.8percentoftheirloansasprimeand8.2percentoftheirloansassubprime.In2006,thissplitwas71.6percent/28.4percent.
» In2009allgroups(excludingupperincomeresidents)submittedfewerapplicationsthanin2008and2006,withlowincomeapplicantsseeingthegreatestdecline,of59.6percent,from2006to2009.Applicationsfromupperincomeresidentsincreasedby36.2percentbetween2008and2009.
» From2008to2009,LMIapplicationsdecreasedby18.4percentandMuIapplicationsincreasedby12.0percent.
» Thedenialratedecreasedforallgroupsin2009,withthoseinthemiddleincomegroupseeingthegreatestdecreaseof33.7percent.Asin2006,2007,and2008,thelowincomegrouphadthehighestdenialrate,whichwas42.3percentin2009.
» ApplicantsintheLMIgroupweredenied1.6timesforeveryMuIdenial;thisincreasedfromthe1.4denialsforeveryMuIdenialin2008,andthe1.3denialsforeveryMuIdenialin2006.
Table 3.15: Share of Home Refinance Loans in Philadelphia by Borrower Income (2009)
BORROWERINCOME LOANAPPLICATIONS
DENIALRATE
INCOMETOuPPERINCOME
DENIALRATE
PERCENTOFALLLOANS
PERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS
LMI(<79.99%MSAINCOME) 14,997 34.9% 1.60 42.5% 67.7%
MuI(>80%MSAINCOME 14,666 21.8% 1.00 57.5% 32.3%
(See Appendix 2: Table 12)
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200974.
3.3.4 Home Refinance Loans - by Tract Minority Level (see Table 3.16)
» From2008to2009,thenumberofprimeloanstonon-minoritycensustractsincreasedby76.3percent.
» Primeloanstoborrowersinminoritycensustractsincreasedby15.6percentfrom2008to2009,whilethesubprimeloansdecreasedby70.3percent.
» Non-minoritycensustractsreceived74.6percentofallprimeloansin2009.Thiswasa13.3percentincreasefrom2008to2009,anda12.5percentincreasefrom2006to2009.
» Themajorityofloanstobothgroupswereprimein2009.Borrowersfromminoritycensustractsreceivedmoreprimeloans(3,698loans,or90.3percent)thansubprimeloans(396loansor9.7percent),whichwasaslightlyhigherproportionofprimeloanscomparedto2008and2007.
» From2008to2009,whileprimeloansforborrowersinminoritytractsincreasedby15.6percent,subprimeandtotalloansforborrowersinminoritytractsdecreasedby70.3percentand9.7percent,respectively.
» From2008to2009,applicationsforresidentsinnon-minoritytractsincreasedby26.1percentwhileapplicationsfromresidentsinnon-minoritytractsdecreasedby25.7percent.Denialsdecreasedby15.4percentinnon-minoritycensustractsandby41.8percentinminoritycensustractsbetween2008and2009.From2006to2009,applicationsdecreasedforbothgroupswithminoritytractresidentsseeingthelargestdecreaseof61.3percent.Denialsdecreasedbetween2006and2009,withborrowersinminoritytractsseeingthegreatestdecrease,of64.9percent.
Table 3.16: Share of Home Refinance Loans in Philadelphia by Tract Minority Level (2009)
MINORITyLEvEL PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLOOHu
DENIALRATE
0-49%MINORITy 74.6% 52.1% 51.0% 22.7%
50-100%MINORITy 25.4% 47.9% 49.0% 36.0%
(See Appendix 2: Table 13)
3.3.5 Home Refinance Loans - by Tract Income Level (see Table 3.17)
» Allincometractgroupsexperiencedanincreaseinprimeloansfrom2008,withupperincometractborrowersseeingthegreatestincreaseof179.5percent.From2006to2009,allincometractgroupsincreasedprimeloans,excludinglowincometractborrowers,whichdecreasedby9.9percent.Thelargestincreasefrom2006to2009waswithupperincometractborrowers,at212.3percent.
» Allcategoriesexperiencedadecreaseinsubprimeloans,withborrowersinthelowincometractgroupseeingthegreatestdecline,71.6percent.From2006to2009,lowincometractborrowerssawthegreatestdeclineinsubprimeloans,witha92.3percentdecrease.
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200975.
» Borrowersinthemiddleincometractgroupreceivedthelargestshareofprimeloansat46.5percent,whilemoderateincometractgroupborrowersreceivedthelargestshareofsubprimeloans,at46.6percent.
» ThenumberofprimeloansmadetotheMuIgroupincreasedby78.2percentfrom2006to2009,whiletheoverallnumberofprimeloansincreasedby38.9percent.
» Allcategoriesreceivedmoreprimeloansthansubprimeloans.Theproportionofprimetosubprimeloansincreasedwithincome,withborrowersinthelowincomegroupreceiving1,035primeloans(88.2percent)totheir139subprimeloans(11.8percent).The2009resultsweresimilartothe2008and2007results,inwhichlowincomeborrowersreceivedmoreprimeloansthansubprimeloans.In2006,lowincometractborrowersreceivednearly1.5timesasmanysubprimeloansasprimeloans.
» Thenumberofapplicationsfellacrosslowandmoderateincometractcategoriesfrom2008to2009,mostsignificantlyamongapplicantsinthelowincomegroup(33.1percent).Middleandupperincometractapplicationsincreasedby24.4percentand134.4percent,respectively.From2006to2009,applicationsfromborrowersinthelowandmoderateincometractgroupsfellthemostat65.8and53percent,respectively.upperincometractapplicationshaveincreasedby112.3percentfrom2006to2009.
» Asinthepreviousthreeyears,borrowersinthelowincometractgrouphadthehighestdenialrate,whichwas40.8percentin2009.
Table 3.17: Share of Home Refinance Loans in Philadelphia by Tract Income Level (2009)
TRACTINCOME
PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLOOHu
PRIMESHARE
TOOOHuSHARERATIO
SuBPRIMESHARE
TOOOHuSHARERATIO
DENIALRATE
INCOMETOuPPER-INCOMEDENIAL
LMI(<79.99%MSA
INCOME)
41.7% 63.4% 56.0% 0.62 0.95 33.4% 1.60
MuI(>80%MSA
INCOME)58.3% 36.6% 44.0% 1.77 1.11 20.9% 1.00
(See Appendix 2: Table 14)
3.3.6 Home Refinance Loans - by Borrower Gender (see Table 3.18)
» Thenumberofprimeloansincreasedacrossallhouseholdsfrom2008to2009,withjointborrowersshowingthegreatestincrease,at90.0percent.Primeloansincreasedfrom2006to2009,andjointborrowerssimilarlysawthelargestincreaseat77.0percent.
» Thenumberofsubprimeloansdecreasedforallhouseholdsfrom2008to2009,withfemalehouseholdsdecreasingthemost(65.3percent).Subprimeloansdecreasedthemostforfemalehouseholdsfrom2006to2009,at91.7percent.
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200976.
» Jointborrowersreceived68.5percentmoreloans,and,forthefirsttimeinthefouryears,receivedthelargestnumberofloans,whichwas5,306in2009.
» Asinthepastthreeyears,femaleborrowersreceivedthemostsubprimeloans,306,or41.1percentofallsubprimeloans.
» Allthreecategoriesreceivedmoreprimeloansthansubprimeloans.Jointborrowersreceivedthehighestproportionofprimeloans,at96.2percent.
» Thenumberofapplicationsincreasedamongallbutfemaleresidentsfrom2008to2009.Whileapplicationsfromfemaleresidentsdecreasedby12.4percent,applicationsfromjointhouseholdssawthelargestincreaseinapplicationsat25.0percent.
» Femaleapplicantshadthehighestdenialrateof29.6percent,relativetoanoveralldenialrateof27.3percent.
» Thedenialrateforjointapplicantsexperiencedthehighestdecreasefrom2008to2009of40.2percent,relativetothedecreaseintheoveralldenialrateof30.9percent.
Table 3.18: Share of Home Refinance Loans in Philadelphia by Borrower Gender (2009)
BORROWERgENDER LOANAPPLICATIONS
DENIALRATE
gENDERTOMALEDENIALRATIO
PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
MALE 10,104 29.2% 1.00 94.6% 5.4%
FEMALE 9,808 29.6% 1.01 92.9% 7.1%
JOINT(MALE/FEMALE) 9,520 21.6% 0.74 96.2% 3.8%
(See Appendix 2: Table 15)
3.4 Home Improvement Loans
3.4.1 Home Improvement Loans – Overall Observations (see Table 3.19)
In2009,therewere5,635applicationsforhomeimprovementloans,a41.5percentdeclinefromtheyearbefore.Oftheseapplications,3,060,or54.3percent,weredenied,anincreaseof1.1percent.From2006to2009,applicationshavedecreasedby67.8percent,whiledenialshavedecreasedby61.6percent.From2006to2009,subprimeloansdecreasedby76.4percent,whileprimeloansdecreasedby74.8percent.
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200877.
Table 3.19: Home Improvement Loan Applications and Originations in Philadelphia
APPLICATIONS DENIALS DENIALRATE LOANS PRIMELOANS SuBPRIMELOANS
2006 17,473 7,958 45.5% 6,927 5,684 1,243
2007 15,864 7,735 48.8% 5,712 4,584 1,128
2008 9,638 5,171 53.7% 3,043 2,354 689
2009 5,635 3,060 54.3% 1,728 1,435 293
2006-2009DIFFERENCE -67.8% -61.6% 19.4% -75.1% -74.8% -76.4%
2008-2009DIFFERENCE -41.5% -40.8% 1.1% -43.2% -39.0% -57.5%
3.4.2 Home Improvement Loans – by Borrower Race (see Table 3.20)
» Whiteborrowersreceived64.2percentofallprimeloans,a31percentincreasefrom2008anda2.8percentdecreasefrom2006.
» AfricanAmericansreceived43.8percentofallsubprimeloansin2009,a17.2percentdecreasefrom2008anda27.8percentdecreasefrom2006.Whiteborrowersreceived44.2percentofsubprimeloans,a43.2percentincreasefrom2008and22.4percentincreasefrom2006.
» Whiteborrowersreceivedahighershareofloansthantheirshareofhouseholds(60.3percentand47.8percent,respectively).Thatcomparedto57.4percent/47.8percentin2007and54.6percent/47.8percentin2008.
» Asinthepreviousthreeyears,allgroupsreceivedmoreprimeloansthansubprimeloansin2009.Whiteborrowershadthehighestproportionofprimeloans;85.5percentoftheirloanswereprimeand14.5percentweresubprime.
» WhiteandAfrican-Americanapplicationsfellby40.4percentand46.8percent,respectively,whileAsianandHispanicapplicationsfellby56.1percentand47.5percentrespectively,from2008to2009.From2006to2009,applicationshavedecreasedacrossallracialcategories,withapplicationsfromAsianresidentsdecreasingbythemost(74.5percent).
» Hispanicborrowershadthehighestdenialrateof70.6percent,followedbyAfrican-Americanborrowersat64.5percent.Thesetworacialgroupssimilarlyhadthehighestdenialratesin2008and2006.
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200878.
Table 3.20: Share of Home Improvement Loans in Philadelphia by Borrower Race (2009)
BORROWERRACE
LOANAPPLICATIONS DENIALRATE PERCENTOF
PRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PRIMESHARETO
HOuSEHOLDSHARERATIO
SuBPRIMESHARETO
HOuSEHOLDSHARERATIO
WHITE 1,815 39.6% 64.2% 44.2% 1.34 0.92
AFRICAN-AMERICAN 1,916 64.5% 28.0% 43.8% 0.70 1.09
ASIAN 177 55.4% 3.8% 3.0% 1.09 0.86
HISPANIC 449 70.6% 4.0% 9.0% 0.61 1.38
(See Appendix 2: Table 16)
3.4.3 Home Improvement Loans - by Borrower Income (see Table 3.21)
» Ofthefoursub-categories,moderateincomeborrowersreceivedthemostloansandthemostprimeloansat31.7percentand31percent,respectively.Thiswassimilartothetrendin2008,whenmoderateincomeborrowersreceived29.5percentofprimeloansand29.2percentoftotalloans.
» Lowincomeandmoderateincomeborrowersreceivedthemostsubprimeloans(47.1percentand27.7percent,respectively).Thisissimilartothetrendin2008whenlowincomeborrowersreceived43.1percentofsubprimeloans,andmoderateincomeborrowersreceived30.7percent.
» LMIborrowerscomprise67.7percentofhouseholds,butreceived74.7percentofallsubprimeloans.
» Allcategoriesreceivedmoreprimeloansthansubprimeloans.Asinotherloancategories,theproportionofprimeloansincreasedwithincome.Primeloanscomprised66.7percentoftotalloanstolowincomeborrowers,while93.5percentofloanstoupperincomeborrowerswereprimeloans.
» LMIborrowersreceived2.5subprimeloansforevery1issuedtoanMuIborrower,comparedto2.2subprimeloansforevery1issuedtoanMuIborrowerin2008.In2006,thisratiowas2.0to1.
» Thenumberofapplicationsdecreasedineveryincomecategoryfrom2008to2009,withthemiddleincomegroupseeingthelargestdeclineof46.3percent.Similarly,themiddleincomegrouphasseenthelargestdecreasefrom2006to2009,at71.9percent.
» Thedenialrateincreasedfrom2008to2009forlowandmoderateincomegroupsby5.9percentand1.2percent,respectively.From2006to2009,thedenialratesforlowandmoderateincomegroupsincreasedby11.7percentand18.4percent,respectively.Denialratesdecreasedformoderateandupperincomegroupsby10.8percentand0.6percent,respectively,from2008to2009.From2006to2009,moderateandupperincomegroupdenialratesincreasedby18.4percentand24.4percent,respectively.
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200879.
» Asinthethreepreviousyears,lowincomeborrowershadthehighestdenialrate,whichwas67.2percentin2009.
Table 3.21: Share of Home Improvement Loans in Philadelphia by Borrower Income (2008)
BORROWERINCOME
PERCENTOFALLLOANS
PERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS
PRIMESHARETOHOuSEHOLDSHARE
RATIO
SuBPRIMESHARETOHOuSEHOLDSHARE
RATIO
DENIALRATE
LMI(<79.99%MSAINCOME) 54.7% 67.7% 0.75 1.10 61.2%
MuI(>80%MSAINCOME) 45.3% 32.3% 1.53 0.78 39.8%
(See Appendix 2: Table 17)
3.4.4 Home Improvement Loans - by Tract Minority Level (see Table 3.22)
» Lendersissued64.7percentofprimeloanstoborrowersinnon-minoritytractsin2006,anincreasefrom63.4percentin2008andaslightdecreasefrom64.8percentin2006.
» Ofallsubprimeloansissued,58.7percentwenttominoritycensustracts.Thiswasanincreaseoverboth2008(64.7percent)and2006(61.6percent).
» Philadelphiahouseholdssplitevenlyintominority(49.0percent)andnon-minority(51.0percent)censustracts,yet60.8percentofloanswereissuedtonon-minoritytracts,anincreasefromthe57.1percentofloansissuedtothesetractsin2008.
» Asinthepreviousthreeyears,bothgroupsreceivedmoreprimeloansthansubprimeloans.Non-minoritytractsreceiveahigherproportionofprimeloanstosubprimeloans,at88.5percentprimeto11.5percentsubprime.Thiscomparestoasplitof74.6percentprimeto25.4percentsubprimeforminoritytracts.
» Non-minoritytractapplicationsdecreasedby40.4percentfrom2008andby69.5percentfrom2006.
» In2009,applicantsinminoritycensustractsweremorelikelytobedenied.Foreverydenialtoanon-minoritytract,minoritytractapplicantsreceived1.5denials.Thiswasupfromtheratioof1.4denialsin2008,anddownfromtheratioof1.6denialsin2006.
Table 3.22: Share of Home Improvement Loans in Philadelphia by Tract Minority Level (2009)
MINORITyLEvEL LOANAPPLICATIONS
DENIALRATE
PERCNTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLOOHu
0-49%MINORITy 2,581 43.4% 64.7% 41.3% 51.0%
50-100%MINORITy 3,050 63.5% 35.3% 58.7% 49.0%
(See Appendix 2: Table 18)
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200880.
3.4.5 Home Improvement Loans - by Tract Income Level (see Table 3.23)
» Moderateincometractsreceivedthemostsubprime(128,or43.8percent)whilemiddleincometractsreceivedthemostprimeloans(602,or42percent).
» Thenumberofprimeloansdecreasedforallincometractgroups,withupperincometractborrowersshowingthegreatestdeclineof54percent.
» TheLMItractgroupcomprises67.0percentofallPhiladelphiahouseholdsandreceived57.2percentofallloans,adecreasefromthe58.9percentofloansreceivedin2008.Theyalsoreceived75.3percentofthesubprimeloans,anincreasefromthe74.9percentreceivedin2008.
» Asinthethreepreviousyears,allcategoriesreceivedmoreprimeloansthansubprimein2009.Theproportionofprimeloansincreaseswithtractincome;ofthe68loansmadetoupperincometracts,94.1percentwereprimeloans.
» In2009applicationsfellacrossallcategories,withapplicationsfrommoderateincometractsdecliningthemostat43.9percent.From2006to2009,middleincometractapplicationsdecreasedthemostat69.6percent.
» Asinthepreviousthreeyears,thedenialratefellastractincomerose.Foreverydenialmadetoanapplicantinanupperincometract,1.9denialsweremadetoapplicantsinlowincometracts,adecreasefromthe2.6denialsforevery1in2008,and2.5denialsforevery1in2006.
Table 3.23: Share of Home Improvement Loans in Philadelphia by Tract Income Level (2009)
TRACTINCOME PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
INCOMESHARETOuPPER
INCOME-SHARERATIO:PRIME
INCOMESHARETOuPPER
INCOME-SHARERATIO:SuBPRIME
DENIALRATE
LMI(<79.99%MSAINCOME) 53.6% 75.3% 0.80 1.12 61.0%
MuI(>80%MSAINCOME) 46.4% 24.7% 1.00 1.00 38.8%
(See Appendix 2: Table 19)
3.4.6 Home Improvement Loans - by Borrower Gender (see Table 3.24)
» Thenumberofprimeandsubprimeloansfellacrossallcategoriesfrom2008to2009.Femaleborrowersreceivedthegreatestdecreaseintotalloansandprimeloans,at44.3percentand40percent,respectively.Jointborrowerssawthegreatestdecreaseinsubprimeloans,at60.2percent.
» Femaleborrowersreceivethemostsubprimeloans,at48.2percent(anincreasefrom47percentin2008)andjointapplicantsreceivedthemostprimeloansat38.9percent(anincreasefrom37.2percentin2008).
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200881.
» Asinthepastthreeyears,allgroupsreceivedmoreprimeloansthansubprimeloansin2009.Jointborrowersweremostlikelytoreceiveaprimeloan,at88.5percent.
» Applicationsweredowninallcategories.Femaleborrowersandjointborrowerseachsawthelargestdecreaseofabout42percentbetween2008and2009.From2006to2009,applicationshavedecreasedby67.8percentacrossallcategories.
» Thedenialrateincreasedforallbutjointborrowersfrom2008to2009,withthehighestincreaseoccurringformaleborrowersat1.5percent.From2006to2009,denialratesformaleborrowersincreasedby21.9percent,thehighestofalltheborrowergroups.
» Femaleborrowershadthehighestdenialrateof58.6percent,butwerefollowedcloselybymaleborrowersat58.1percent.
Table 3.24: Share of Home Improvement Loans in Philadelphia by Borrower Gender (2009)
BORROWERgENDER
PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PRIMESHARETO
HOuSEHOLDSHARERATIO
SuBPRIMESHARETO
HOuSEHOLDSHARERATIO
DENIALRATEgENDERTOMALEDENIAL
RATE
MALE 26.4% 28.1% 1.18 1.25 58.1% 1.00
FEMALE 34.7% 48.2% 0.77 1.07 58.6% 1.01
JOINT(MALE/FEMALE) 38.9% 23.7% 1.19 0.73 39.4% 0.68
(See Appendix 2: Table 20)
3.0 Prime and Subprime Home Lending in Philadelphia
4.0 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200984.
4.0 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas
4.0 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas LendingtotheCityofPhiladelphia’sresidentswascomparedtolendingtoresidentsoftheCity’sfoursuburbancounties–Bucks,Chester,Delaware,andMontgomery-aswellastolendinginBaltimore,Detroit,andPittsburgh,threecitiesidentifiedasausefulcomparisongrouptotheCity.Specifically,aggregatesingle-familyhomepurchase,homeimprovement,andhomerefinancelendingwasanalyzed(seeAppendix2,Tables21-40).
4.1 Home Lending in Philadelphia vs. Suburbs
4.1.1 Home Lending in Philadelphia vs. Suburbs – by Borrower Race (see Table 4.1)
» AfricanAmericansborrowersinsuburbanhouseholdsreceived3.0percentofallprimeloansissued,a30.9percentdecreasefromthe2008share(4.3percent)anda39.4percentdecreasefromthe2006share(4.9percent).ComparedtotheCity,theirshareofprimeloanshavedecreasedfrom2008to2009andfrom2006to2009,butnotasmuch(23.6percentdecreaseand25.3percentdecrease,respectively).
» OfallloanstoAsiansinthesuburbs,1.2percentweresubprime(versus5.6percentintheCity),downfrom3.1percentin2008(8.7percentintheCity).
» Inthesuburbs,Asiansrepresented2.5percentofsuburbanhouseholds,whileAsianborrowersreceived4.8percentofsuburbanprimeloansand2.2percentofsuburbansubprimeloans.Thesepercentagesremainedrelativelyflatfrom2008to2009.
» In2009,fourpercentofloanstoHispanicborrowersweresubprimeinthesuburbs,comparedto11.9percentintheCity;bothproportionsdecreasedby50percentfrom2008to2009.
» Hispanicsrepresented1.6percentofhouseholdsinthesuburbs,whileHispanicborrowersreceived1.5percentofsuburbanprimeloansand2.3percentofsuburbansubprimeloans.
» Ofallloanstowhitesinthesuburbs,2.5percentweresubprime(versus4.4percentintheCity),downfrom5.5percentin2008(10.2percentintheCity).
» LoanapplicationscontinuedtobedeniedatahigherrateintheCitythaninthesuburbs,aswasthecaseinthepastthreeyears;15.3percentofloansweredeniedinthesuburbs,comparedto24.8percentofloansintheCity.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200985.
4.0 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas
» DenialrateswerehigherintheCityversusthesuburbsforeachracialcategory,aconsistentfindingwithprioryearstudies.Asinthepastthreeyears,thecategorywiththegreatestdisparitywastheHispanicgroup,withadenialrateof32.3percentintheCityand19.7percentinthesuburbs.
» Thelargestchangesindenialratesfrom2008to2009wereforHispanicborrowers(33.8percentdecrease)andforwhiteborrowers(29percentdecrease).
» Inthesuburbs,theratioofAfrican-AmericantoWhitedenialsincreased,asdidtheratioofAsiantowhiteandHispanictowhitedenials,atrendsimilarto2008.
» Asinthepastthreeyears,AfricanAmericansweretwiceaslikelytoreceiveadenialaswhiteborrowers,withthis̀ ratioremainingrelativelyflatfrom2006to2009.
» Forthefirsttimeinfouryears,Asianborrowersweremorelikelythanwhitestobedeniedloans.Forevery1denialtoawhiteapplicant,therewere1.1denialstoAsianapplicantsinthesuburbsin2009.
Table 4.1: Share of All Loans by Borrower Race, Philadelphia vs. Suburbs (2009)
TOTAL PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS
DENIALRATE
WHITE 90.7% 87.4% 87.8% 13.9%
AFRICAN-AMERICAN 3.0% 8.1% 7.1% 28.5%
ASIAN 4.8% 2.2% 2.5% 15.2%
HISPANIC 1.5% 2.3% 1.6% 19.7%
(See Appendix 2: Table 1 and 21)
4.1.2 Home Lending in Philadelphia vs. Suburbs – by Borrower Income (see Table 4.2)
» Inallyearsstudied,theupper-incomegroupreceivedthelargestnumberofallloans(51.7percent,anincreasefromthe48.8percentof2008)aswellasthelargestnumberofprimeloans(52.2percent,anincreasefromthe50.0percentof2008)inthesuburbs.Infact,inthesuburbs,thehighertheincomegroup,thehighertheproportionofallloansandprimeloans.ThiswasunliketheCitypattern,wherethemoderate-incomegroupconsistentlyreceivedboththemostloansandthemostprimeloans.
» LMIborrowersreceived22.1percentofprimeloansand39.8percentofsubprimeloans.Thepercentofprimeloansdecreasedby1.1percentfrom2008to2009,whilethepercentofsubprimeloansincreasedby1.2percent.From2006to2009,theLMIborrowers’shareofprimeloansincreasedby2.8percent,whileitsshareofsubprimeloansincreasedby24.3percent.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200986.
4.0 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas
» CityLMIborrowersreceived49.6percentofallprimeloansand74.0percentofallsubprimeloansintheCity.Thiswasadecreaseof2.2percentforprimeloansandanincreaseof36.5percentforsubprimeloans.From2006to2009,thepercentofprimeloansforLMIborrowersremainedflat,whilesubprimeloanshareincreasedby11.3percent.
» Asinprioryearsofthestudy,agreaterproportionofsubprimeloanswasissuedtoLMIborrowersthantomiddleandupperincome(MuI)borrowersintheCity,butinthesuburbs,agreaterproportionofsubprimeloanswasissuedtoupperandmiddleincomeborrowersthanwasissuedtoLMIborrowers(60.2percentinsuburbscomparedto26percentintheCity).
» Subprimeloanswere22.5percentoftheloansissuedtoLMIborrowersintheCity,comparedto10.6percentoftheloanstoLMIborrowersinthesuburbs.AswithMuIborrowers(andforallfoursub-dividedincomecategories),theproportionofsubprimeloansdecreasedcomparedto2007.ThiswastrueinboththeCityandsuburbs.
» Similartoprioryears,inthesuburbs,thedenialratedeclinedasincomelevelrose.
» TheLMIgroupwasdeniedaloan30percentofthetimeintheCity(andecreaseof21.9percentfrom2008)and22percentofthetimeinthesuburbs(adecreaseof25.8percent).
» Inthesuburbs,theLMIdenialratewas22.0percent,whiletheMuIdenialratewas13.3percent.From2006to2009,theLMIdenialratedecreasedby19.6percentwhiletheMuIdenialratedecreasedby21.4percent.
Table 4.2: 2009 Share of Subprime Loans by Borrower Income, Philadelphia vs. Suburbs
TOTAL PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS DENIALRATE
LOW(<50%MSAINCOME) 4.5% 13.3% 21.2% 32.0%
MODERATE(50-79.99%MSAINCOME) 17.6% 26.5% 17.3% 18.5%
MIDDLE(80-119.99%MSAINCOME) 25.7% 26.8% 20.3% 15.1%
uPPER(120%ORMOREMSAINCOME) 52.2% 33.5% 41.2% 12.3%
LMI(<79.99%MSAINCOME) 22.1% 39.8% 38.5% 22.0%
MuI(>80%MSAINCOME) 77.9% 60.2% 61.5% 13.3%
(See Appendix 2: Table 2 and 22)
4.1.3 Home Lending in Philadelphia vs. Suburbs – by Tract Minority Level (see Table 4.3)
» Cityminoritytractsreceived59.8percentofallsubprimeloans,whilesuburbanminoritytractsreceived3.2percentofallsubprimeloans.Thiswasadecreasefrom2008of15.1percentand55.6percent,respectively.From2006to2009,minoritytractshareofsubprimeloansdecreasedby11.5percentintheCity,andby54.3percentinthesuburbs.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200987.
4.0 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas
» In2009,10.7percentofloansinminoritytractsweresubprime.Thiswasadecreaseof26.6percentfrom2008.
» Suburbanminoritytractsreceived69.3percentfewersubprimeloansin2009thanin2008(versus64.5percentfewerforCityminoritytracts).From2006to2009,borrowersinsuburbanminoritytractsreceived91.4percentfewersubprimeloans,andborrowersinCityminoritytractshavereceived89.5percentfewersubprimeloans.
» BothCityandsuburbanborrowersinminoritycensustractsreceivedprimeloansabout89percentofthetime,anincreaseofabout22percentforbothgroupsfrom2008to2009.
» In2009,suburbanborrowersinminoritytractswere4.1timesmorelikelytogetsubprimeloansthanborrowersinnon-minoritytracts,comparedto2.5timesintheCity.In2008,thesuburbanratiowas4.6andtheCityratiowas2.4.
» ThedenialratesinsuburbanandCityminoritycensustractswere33.8percentand33.6percent,respectively.Thiswasadecreaseof20.1percentand18.6percent,respectively,from2008.
Table 4.3: 2009 Share of Prime Loans by Tract Minority Level, Philadelphia vs. Suburbs
TOTAL PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS
DENIALRATE
0-49%MINORITy 99.3% 96.8% 97.4% 15.0%
50-100%MINORITy 0.7% 3.2% 2.6% 33.8%
(See Appendix 2: Table 3 and 23)
4.1.4 Home Lending in Philadelphia vs. Suburbs – by Tract Income Level (see Table 4.4)
» Inthesuburbs,thepercentageofprimeandallloansincreasedwiththecensustract’sincomelevel.Thepercentageofsubprimeloansincreasedfromlowtomoderatetomiddleincometracts,butthendecreasedfrommiddletoupperincometracts.
» LMItractsintheCityreceived47.6percentofallprimeloansand69.8percentofallsubprimeloans;thiswasan11.6percentdecreaseinprimeloanshareanda9.1percentdecreaseinsubprimeloansharefrom2008.SuburbanLMItractsreceived2.7percentofallprimeloansand8.5percentofallsubprimeloans;theserepresenta34.7percentdecreaseanda40.8percentdecrease,respectively,from2008to2009.
» OfallloanstosuburbanLMItracts,7.7percentweresubprime,comparedto2.5percentofloansforMuItracts.OfallloanstoLMItractsintheCity,9.1percentweresubprime,comparedto3.8percentofloansforMuItractsin2009.
» CityapplicantsinLMItractsweredenied29.9percentofthetime,comparedtoarateof25.8percentinthesuburbs.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200988.
4.0 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas
» IntheCity,LMIresidentswere1.6timesmorelikelytobedeniedthanMuIresidents;inthesuburbstheywere1.7timesmorelikelytobedeniedthanMuIresidents.Thisiscomparedtothe2008denialratesof1.5forCityLMIapplicantsand1.7forsuburbanLMIapplicants.
Table 4.4: 2009 Share of All Loans by Tract Income Level, Philadelphia vs. Suburbs
TOTAL PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS DENIALRATE
LOW(<50%MSA) 0.1% 0.7% 0.8% 35.9%
MODERATE(50-79.99%MSA) 2.6% 7.8% 4.8% 24.9%
MIDDLE(80-119.99%MSA) 29.3% 46.4% 35.5% 18.0%
uPPER(120%ORMOREMSA) 68.0% 45.1% 58.9% 13.3%
LMI(<79.99%MSA)INCOME 2.7% 8.5% 5.6% 25.8%
MuI(>80%MSAINCOME) 97.3% 91.5% 94.4% 14.9%
(See Appendix 2: Table 4 and 24)
4.1.5 Home Lending in Philadelphia vs. Suburbs – by Borrower Gender (see Table 4.5)
» Inallyearsstudied,joint(male/female)applicantswerethemostlikelytobeapprovedinboththeCityandthesuburbs.
» Similartopreviousyearsofthestudy,jointapplicantswerethemostlikelytoreceiveprimeloansinthesuburbs.
» OfallloanstojointapplicantsintheCity,95.5percentwereprime,anincreaseof9.3percentfrom2008to2009.Ofallloanstojointapplicantsinthesuburbs,97.7percentwereprime,anincreaseof2.9percent.
» In2009,femalesreceived43.5percentofsubprimeloansintheCity(adecreaseof2.1percentfrom2008)and23.8percentsubprimeloansinthesuburbs(adecreaseof7.9percentfrom2008).
» Maleapplicantsreceived33.4percentofthesubprimeloansintheCityand22.4percentofsubprimeloansinthesuburbs.Thiswasadecreaseof3.2percentintheCityand22.3percentdecreaseinthesuburbs.
» Malesreceivedsubprimeloansat1.49timestherateoftheirshareofhouseholdsin2009,intheCityand1.26timesmoreinthesuburbs.Thiswasadecreasefrom1.54intheCityand1.62inthesuburbsin2008.
» Maleborrowersweredeniedatarateof26.5percentintheCityand18.2percentinthesuburbs.Thiswasadecreaseof21.8percentand26.5percent,respectively,from2008to2009.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200989.
4.0 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas
» Femaleborrowersweredeniedatarateof26.3percentintheCityand17.5percentinthesuburbs.Thiswasadecreaseof27percentand26.9percent,respectively,from2008to2009.
» Jointapplicationsweredenied12.5percentofthetimeinthesuburbs(anincreaseof32.1percentfrom2008to2009)and19.6percentofthetimeintheCity(adecreaseof32.5percentfrom2008to2009).
Table 4.5: 2009 Share of Prime Loans by Borrower Gender, Philadelphia vs. Suburbs
TOTAL PERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS
DENIALRATE
MALE 22.0% 22.4% 17.8% 18.2%
FEMALE 17.2% 23.8% 28.6% 17.5%
JOINT(MALE/FEMALE) 60.9% 53.8% 56.6% 12.5%
(See Appendix 2: Table 5 and 25)
4.2 Home Lending in Philadelphia vs. Comparison Cities
Philadelphia,Baltimore,Detroit,andPittsburghhavemanysimilarities.Allofthesecitieshavehaddecliningpopulationssince2000,accordingtouSCensusestimates.WiththeexceptionofPittsburgh,themajorityofhouseholdsinthesecitiesareheadedbyminorities,andthecitiesallhaveaginghousingstockandinfrastructure.Femalehouseholdersoccupybetween43and49percentofthehouseholdsinallfourcities.
Between2006and2009,lendingdecreasedinallfourcities,particularlyinDetroit(whichsawa92.8percentdeclineduringthattimeperiod)andparticularlyforsubprimeloans(whichsawdeclinesfrom75percentto98percent,dependingonthecity).In2009,6.4percentofloansinPhiladelphiaweresubprime,comparedto6.2percentinBaltimore,20.8percentinDetroit,and8.6percentinPittsburgh(seeTable4.6).
Between2008and2009,thereweresomegainsacrosssomecitiesinhomelending.Philadelphia,Baltimore,andPittsburghincreasedthenumberofprimeloansissued,whichledtoanincreaseintotalloansforPhiladelphiaandPittsburgh(of10.7percentand23.1percent,respectively).Baltimoresawa5.5percentincreaseinprimeloansanda65.0percentdecreaseinsubprimeloanissuancebetween2008and2009,leavingitwithanoveralldecreaseinloansof6.2percent.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200990.
4.0 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas
Table 4.6: All Loans, Philadelphia vs. Comparison Cities
2009 PRIMELOANS SuBPRIMELOANS TOTALLOANS
PHILADELPHIA 24,490 1,669 26,159
BALTIMORE 8,985 592 9,577
DETROIT 1,038 273 1,311
PITTSBuRgH 4,265 402 4,667
2008 PRIMELOANS SuBPRIMELOANS TOTALLOANS
PHILADELPHIA 19,638 3,995 23,633
BALTIMORE 8,517 1,692 10,209
DETROIT 1,967 1,142 3,109
PITTSBuRgH 3,015 776 3,791
2006 PRIMELOANS SuBPRIMELOANS TOTALLOANS
PHILADELPHIA 25,131 14,093 39,224
BALTIMORE 23,743 10,997 34,740
DETROIT 5,299 13,011 18,310
PITTSBuRgH 3,563 1,622 5,185
2008-2009DIFFERENCE PRIMELOANS SuBPRIMELOANS TOTALLOANS
PHILADELPHIA 25% -58% 11%
BALTIMORE 5% -65% -6%
DETROIT -47% -76% -58%
PITTSBuRgH 41% -48% 23%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200991.
4.0 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas
2006-2009DIFFERENCE PRIMELOANS SuBPRIMELOANS TOTALLOANS
PHILADELPHIA -3% -88% -33%
BALTIMORE -62% -95% -72%
DETROIT -80% -98% -93%
PITTSBuRgH 20% -75% -10%
4.2.1 Home Lending in Philadelphia vs. Comparison Cities – by Borrower Race (see Table 4.7, Table 4.8, Table 4.9, and Table 4.10)
(See Appendix 2: Tables 1, 41, 46, and 51)
» Similartotrendsofpreviousstudyyears,Philadelphia,Baltimore,Detroit,andPittsburghallshowedadisparityinprimelendingtoAfricanAmericanscomparedtotheirshareofhouseholds,withDetroitshowingtheleastdisparityin2009(0.93).
» In2009,AfricanAmericanswereissuedsubprimeloans13.9percentofthetimeinPhiladelphia(downfrom30.3percentin2008),comparedto11.6percentinBaltimore,23.4percentinDetroit,and15.2percentinPittsburgh.
» African-Americanborrowerswere3.2timesaslikelytoreceiveasubprimeloanrelativetowhiteborrowersinPhiladelphia,comparedto3.9timesaslikelyinBaltimore,1.7timesaslikelyinDetroit,and1.8timesaslikelyinPittsburgh.
» In2009,thedenialratiobetweenAfrican-AmericanandwhiteborrowerswashighestinPittsburgh,withascoreof2.03.Philadelphiahadthesecondhighestratio,withascoreof1.98,anincreasefrom1.81in2008.ThisratioincreasedinDetroitfrom1.17in2008to1.28in2009.
» InBaltimore,thedenialratiobetweenAfrican-Americanandwhiteborrowersdecreasedin2009from1.95to1.87.
Table 4.7: 2009 African-American Proportion of Prime Loans and Households, Philadelphia vs. Comparison Cities
CITy AFRICAN-AMERICANPERCENTOFALLLOANS
AFRICAN-AMERICANPERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS
PHILADELPHIA 19.6% 40.2%
BALTIMORE 37.2% 58.9%
DETROIT 76.7% 80.1%
PITTSBuRgH 6.1% 24.1%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200992.
4.0 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas
Table 4.8: 2009 African-American to White Denial Ratio, Philadelphia vs. Comparison Cities
CITy AFRICAN-AMERICANTOWHITEDENIALRATIO
PHILADELPHIA 1.98
BALTIMORE 1.87
DETROIT 1.28
PITTSBuRgH 2.03
» HispanicborrowersinBaltimorereceivedapercentageofprimeloansthatexceededthepercentageshareofHispanichouseholds(1.3).ThiswasalsotrueforPittsburgh,witharatioof1.1.
» InDetroit,14.8percentofHispanicborrowersreceivedsubprimeloans,comparedto11.9percentinPhiladelphia,9.8percentinPittsburgh,and5.7percentinBaltimore.
» In2009,thegreatestdisparitybetweenHispanicandwhitedenialrateswasinPhiladelphia,whereHispanicswere1.8timesmorelikelytobedeniedthanwhites.Thiswasanincreasefromthedisparitydenialratioof1.6in2008.
» HispanicborrowersinDetroitwereaslikelytoreceiveasubprimeloanandmorelikelytoreceiveaprimeloanrelativetowhiteborrowers.Theproportionratioforthetwogroupsweretheclosestofanyofthecomparisoncities(1.0forprimeloansand1.1forsubprimeloans).
» HispanicborrowersinPhiladelphiaweredenied1.8timesmoreoftenthanwhites,comparedto1.6timesinBaltimore,1.5timesinDetroitand1.2timesinPittsburgh.Thesewereallincreasesfrom2008to2009.
Table 4.9: White and Hispanic Market Share of Subprime Loans, Philadelphia vs. Comparison Cities (2009)
CITy PERCENTOFWHITESRECEIvINgSuBPRIMELOANS
PERCENTOFHISPANICSRECEIvINgSuBPRIMELOANS
PHILADELPHIA 4.4% 11.9%
BALTIMORE 3.0% 5.7%
DETROIT 14.2% 14.8%
PITTSBuRgH 8.4% 15.2%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200993.
4.0 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas
» InPhiladelphia,Detroit,andBaltimore,Asianborrowersreceivedprimeloansataproportionthatwasgreaterthantheirshareofhouseholds.DetroitandBaltimoreofferedthesecond-highestratioof1.3,afterPhiladelphia’s1.9.AsianborrowersinPittsburghreceivedprimeloansataproportionthatwaslessthantheirshareofhouseholds,witharatioof0.8.
» InbothPittsburghandBaltimore,Asianswerelesslikelythanwhitestoreceivesubprimeloans,similartopreviousyearsofthestudy.However,forthefirsttimeinthestudy,AsianborrowersinPhiladelphiaandDetroitweremorelikelytoreceivesubprimeloans,withsharesof1.3and1.6,respectively.
» AsiansweredeniedatahigherraterelativetowhitesinBaltimoreandPhiladelphia(1.3and1.4,respectively).ThereweredeniedatalesserrateinDetroit(0.9)andinPittsburgh(0.9).
Table 4.10: Percentage of Prime Loans to Household Share for Asians, Philadelphia vs. Comparison Cities (2009)
CITy ASIANPRIMESHARETOHOuSEHOLDSHARERATIO
PHILADELPHIA 1.93
BALTIMORE 1.32
DETROIT 1.32
PITTSBuRgH 0.81
4.2.2 Home Lending in Philadelphia vs. Comparison Cities – by Borrower Income (see Table 4.11)
» Similartoallprioryearsofthestudy,LMIborrowersreceivedasmallerproportionofprimeloansthantheirshareofhouseholdsinallfourcitiesin2009.
» Philadelphia’sratioofprimeloanstoLMIborrowers,comparedtohouseholdshare,wasthesecond-highestofallcitiesat0.7,whilePittsburghhadthelowestratioof0.6.DetroithadthehighestratioofprimeloanstoLMIborrowerscomparedtohouseholdshare,witharatioof0.9.Thecitiesheldthesameorderin2008.
» Inallofthefourcities,borrowersinallincomecategoriesweremorelikelytoreceiveprimeloansthansubprimeloans.
» Philadelphiahadthegreatestdisparityinsubprimelending,withLMIborrowers2.7timesaslikelytoreceiveasubprimeloancomparedtoanMuIborrower.PhiladelphiawasfollowedbyBaltimore,whereLMIborrowerswere2.6timesaslikelytoreceivesubprimeloansasMuIborrowers.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200994.
4.0 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas
» LMIborrowersinPittsburghandDetroitwerealsomorelikelythanMuIborrowerstoreceivesubprimeloans;withLMIborrowers1.3timesaslikelytoreceivesubprimeloansrelativetoMuIborrowersinDetroitand2.0timesaslikelyinPittsburgh.
» Similartoprioryearsofthestudy,Baltimore’sdenialrateforLMIapplicants(29.1percent)wasthelowestofallfourcities.
» At56.7percent,Detroit’sdenialrateforLMIapplicantswasthehighest,althoughitwassimilartoits51.1percentdenialrateforMuIapplicants.Detroit’sdenialrateforLMIapplicantsdeclinedfrom59.0percentin2008.
» ThedenialrateforLMIapplicantsdecreasedacrossallcities,withPittsburghseeingthegreatestdeclineof28.8percentfrom2008to2009.
(See Appendix 2: Tables 2, 42, 47, and 52)
Table 4.11: LMI, MUI Denial Rate, Philadelphia vs. Comparison Cities (2009)
CITy LMIDENIALRATE MuIDENIALRATE
PHILADELPHIA 30.0% 19.6%
BALTIMORE 29.1% 19.6%
DETROIT 56.7% 51.1%
PITTSBuRgH 29.3% 17.2%
4.2.3 Home Lending in Philadelphia vs. Comparison Cities – by Tract Minority Level (see Table 4.12)
» Asinallyearsinthestudy,inPhiladelphia,Baltimore,andPittsburgh,borrowersinminoritytractsreceivedprimeloansatasmallerproportionthantheirshareofhouseholds.Similarly,borrowersinminoritytractsinDetroitreceivedprimeloansatalmostthesameproportionastheirshareofhouseholdsin2009.
» Similarto2008,Pittsburghhadthegreatestdisparityofprimeloanstohouseholdproportionforminoritytracts,with5.3percentofprimeloanscomparedto16.5percentofhouseholds(givingaratioof0.6).Philadelphiafollowedwiththenexthighestdisparitywith27.6percentofprimeloanscomparedto49.0percentofhouseholds(aratioof0.6).DisparitiesforBaltimore,Philadelphia,andPittsburghalldecreasedfrom2008to2009.
» Inallofthefourcities,bothminoritytractsandnon-minoritytractsweremorelikelytoreceiveprimeloansthansubprimeloans.Thisisatrendthatbeganin2007,andhasincreased(moreprimeloansthansubprimeloans)eachyear.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200995.
4.0 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas
» MinoritytractborrowersinPhiladelphiawere2.5timesaslikelytoreceivesubprimeloansrelativetoborrowersinnon-minoritytracts.InBaltimore,minoritytractborrowerswereoverthreetimesaslikelytoreceivesubprimeloans.
» LendersissuedsubprimeloanstoDetroitborrowersinminoritytracts20.7percentofthetimeandinnon-minoritytracts23.1percentofthetime.Thiswasadecreaseof43.4percentand42.0percent,respectively,from2008to2009.
» In2009,lendersdeniedapplicantsinminorityareasofPhiladelphiaabout1.7timesmoreoftenthanapplicantsinnon-minorityareas,whichwasanincreasefromthe2008ratioof1.5.
» ApplicantsinminoritytractsinPittsburghweredenied2.0timesasoftenasapplicantsinnon-minorityareasin2009,whichwasanincreasefrom1.8timesasoftenin2008.
» MinoritytractapplicantsinDetroitweredenied1.3timesasoftenasapplicantsinnon-minoritytractapplicants,anincreasefromthenearevenrateofdenialin2008.
» ThedenialratioforminoritytractapplicantsinBaltimoreremainedrelativelyflatbetween2008and2009(1.57to1.65,respectively).
(See Appendix 2: Tables 3, 43, 48, and 53)
Table 4.12: Percent of Prime Loans, Households in Minority Tracts, Philadelphia vs. Comparison Cities (2009)
CITy MINORITyTRACTPERCENTOFPRIMELOANS
MINORITyTRACTPERCENTOFALLHOuSEHOLDS
PHILADELPHIA 27.6% 49.0%
BALTIMORE 41.1% 60.2%
DETROIT 95.2% 96.3%
PITTSBuRgH 5.3% 16.5%
4.2.4 Home Lending in Philadelphia vs. Comparison Cities – by Tract Income Level (see Table 4.13)
» InPhiladelphia,Detroit,andPittsburgh,borrowersinmiddleincometractsreceivedthegreatestpercentageofprimeloans.BorrowersinmoderateincometractsreceivedthehighestpercentageofprimeloansinBaltimore.
» Asinprioryearsofthestudy,borrowersinLMItractsinallfourcitiesreceivedasmallerpercentageofprimeloansthantheshareofhousingunitsinthoseareasin2009.
» InPhiladelphia,borrowersinLMItractswere2.4timesmorelikelytoreceiveasubprimeloanasborrowersinMuItracts.Thiswasthecitywiththegreatestdisparitybetweenthesetwogroups.ThecitywiththeleastdisparitywasDetroit,whereborrowersinLMItracts1.1timesmorelikelytoreceivesubprimeloansasthoseinMuItracts.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200996.
4.0 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas
» Asin2007and2008,thecitywiththehighestdenialrateforborrowersinLMItractsin2009wasDetroit,where55.9percentreceiveddenials.Pittsburghfollowedwith32.2percent,thenPhiladelphiawith29.9percentandBaltimorewith26.4percent.
» Thedenialratesforalltractincomegroups(includingthefoursub-dividedcategories)decreasedineverycityfrom2008to2009.Pittsburghsawthelargestdecreases,witha28.1percentdeclineand37.8percentdeclineinLMIandMuIdenialrates,respectively.
» ThedifferenceindenialratesbetweenapplicantsinLMIandMuItractswasgreatestinPittsburgh,wheretheratiowas1.8,followedcloselybyPhiladelphiawitharatioof1.6(LMIdenialrate/MuIdenialrate).ThecitywiththelowestdisparitywasDetroit,witharatioof1.2.
(See Appendix 2: Tables 4, 44, 49, and 54)
Table 4.13: LMI, MUI Tracts Percent Receiving Subprime Loans, Philadelphia vs. Comparison Cities (2009)
CITy LMITRACTPERCENTRECEIvINgSuBPRIMELOANS
MuITRACTSPERCENTRECEIvINgSuBPRIMELOANS
PHILADELPHIA 9.1% 3.8%
BALTIMORE 8.1% 3.5%
DETROIT 21.8% 20.3%
PITTSBuRgH 13.1% 7.3%
4.2.5 Home Lending in Philadelphia vs. Comparison Cities – by Borrower Gender
» Asinpreviousyearsofthestudy,inallcities,femaleborrowersreceivedashareofprimeloansthatwaslowerthantheirshareofhouseholds.FemaleborrowersinDetroithadthehighestrateofprimeloanstohouseholdsat0.95.Thisratiowasthesamein2008.
» Philadelphia’sratiooffemaleborrowerswhoreceivedashareofsubprimeloanswasclosesttotheirshareofhouseholds,witharatioof0.97.ThiswasfollowedbyBaltimorewith1.06(thecitywiththehighestratio),Detroitwith0.96,andPittsburghwith0.69.
» InPhiladelphia,Baltimore,andPittsburgh,jointborrowersweremostlikelytoreceiveprimeloans.InDetroit,maleborrowersweremorelikelytoreceiveprimeloansthanfemaleandjointborrowerswiththepercentofloansthatwereprimereaching81.2percentformaleborrowers,comparedto78.6percentand73.1percentforfemaleandjointborrowers,respectively.
» Asinallpreviousyearsofthestudy,ineverycityexceptDetroit,femaleborrowersreceivedagreatershareofsubprimeloansthanmaleorjointborrowers.InDetroit,females(21.4percent)receivedalowerpercentageofsubprimeloansthanjointborrowers(26.9percent),buthigherthanmaleborrowers(18.8percent).
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 200997.
4.0 Philadelphia Compared to Other Areas
» Thenumberofapplicationsdroppedinallcategoriesandinallcities,exceptfemaleapplicantsfromPhiladelphia,between2008and2009.ApplicationsfromfemalesinPhiladelphiaincreasedby10.6percentin2009.
» Denialratesdecreasedforallgroupsinallcitiesfrom2008to2009.Jointapplicantssawthegreatestdecreaseindenialratesinallcitiesamongthecategories,decliningby32.5percentinPhiladelphia,20.7percentinBaltimore,18.2percentinDetroit,and43.7percentinPittsburgh.
» IneverycityexceptPhiladelphia,femaleapplicantshadthehighestdenialratesofanygroup.InPhiladelphia,thedenialratesformaleandfemaleapplicantswereaboutthesame,at26.5percentand26.3percent,respectively.Thedenialrateforjointapplicantswas19.6percent.
» Theratiooffemaledenialratescomparedtomaledenialrateswasverysmallinallcities,withPittsburghshowingthegreatestdisparityshowing1.1femaledenialsforeverymaledenial.Thisdisparityremainedthesamefrom2008.
(See Appendix 2: Tables 5, 45, 50, and 55)
5.0 Home Lending to Non-Owner-Occupied Borrowers
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009100.
5.0 Home Lending to Non-Owner-Occupied Borrowers
5.0 Home Lending to Non-Owner-Occupied BorrowersIn2009,7.8percentofallloansweremadetonon-occupantinvestors,adecreasefrom14.9percentin2008.Thenumberofnon-owner-occupiedloansdecreasedby46.3percentfrom2008to2009decreasing44.3percentfrom2007to2008),whilethenumberofowner-occupiedloansincreasedby10.7percentfrom2008(afterdecreasing26.9percentfrom2007to2008).Subprimeloanscomprised7.5percentofallnon-owner-occupiedloans(adecreasefromthe23.3percentof2008),ahighersharethanthe6.4percentofsubprimeloansforowner-occupiedborrowers(adecreasefrom16.9percent).
5.1 Home Lending to Non-Owner-Occupied Borrowers – by Borrower Race
» Asin2007and2008,Asianborrowersreceivedmorethanthreetimestheshareof non-occupantloansthantheirpercentageofCityhouseholdsin2009.
» Mostnon-occupantloanswenttowhiteborrowers,byamarginthatincreasedfrom63.4percentin2008to70.6percentin2009.
» Thenumberofnon-occupantloansdecreasedforeachracialcategoryfrom2008to2009.AfricanAmericanssawthegreatestdecreaseinnon-occupantloansat65percentbetween2008and2009.From2006to2009,thenumberofnon-occupantloanstoAfricanAmericanshasdecreasedby89.5percent,thegreatestdecreaseofanyracialcategory.
» Allracialcategoriesreceivedmoreprimeloansthansubprimein2009.
» Forthethirdconsecutiveyear,thepercentageofborrowersinallracialcategoriesreceivingprimeloansincreasedfrom2008to2009.AfricanAmericanssawthegreatestincreasebetween2008and2009,at51.8percent(from55.7percentin2008to84.5percentin2009)
» Forthefirsttimeinthestudy,Hispanicnon-occupantinvestorsweremorelikelythanHispanicowner-occupiedborrowerstoreceiveaprimeloan(88.9percentcomparedto88.1percent,respectively).
» Thenon-owner-occupantdenialrateincreasedby0.5percentfrom2008to31.8percentin2009.
» Asinallprioryearsofthestudy,denialratesincreasedforeveryracialcategoryfrom2008to2009.
» In2009,thehighestincreasefrom2008indenialrates(26.2percent)wasforAsianinvestors.African-Americaninvestorssawthesecondhighestincreasefrom2008(8.0percent).
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009101.
5.0 Home Lending to Non-Owner-Occupied Borrowers
» From2006to2009,Asianinvestorssawthegreatestincreaseindenialrates(92.3percent).Theoveralldenialrateincreasedby22.5percentduringthattimeperiod.
» In2008,Hispanicinvestorshadthehighestdenialrateat46.7percent.Thistrendcontinuedin2009,whereHispanicapplicantsweredenied50.3percentofthetime.African-Americanapplicationsin2009weredeniedatarateof47.3percent.
(See Appendix 2: Table 56)
5.2 Home Lending to Non-Owner-Occupied Borrowers – by Borrower Income
» 56.8percentofprimenon-owner-occupiedloanswenttoinvestorsintheupperincomegroup.Infact,asincomelevelsincreased,sodidthepercentagesofprimeandsubprimeloans.
» Themiddle-to-upperincomegroup(MuI)received76.4percentofprimeloansmade,comparedto23.6percentforthelow-to-moderateincomegroup(LMI).In2008,theLMIreceived19.5percentofallprimeloans.
» ThedisparitybetweentheshareofprimeloansandtheshareofhouseholdswaslowerforMuIowner-occupiedborrowers(0.8)thanfornon-occupantMuIinvestors(2.4).
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009102.
5.0 Home Lending to Non-Owner-Occupied Borrowers
» In2009,theshareofprimeloansforLMIborrowersincreasedfrom2008,whiletheshareofsubprimeloansdecreased.LMIborrowersreceived23.6percentofprimeloans(upfrom19.5percentin2008);and24.5percentofsubprimeloans(downfrom29.7percentin2008).
» Theproportionofnon-occupantprimeloansgoingtoLMItractsincreasedby39.3percentbetween2008and2009.From2006to2009,thisproportionhasincreasedby100.2percent.
» In2009,allgroupsreceivedmoreprimeloansthansubprimeloans,continuingthetrendfromthepreviousyear.
» Morethan4outof10applicationsforLMIinvestorsweredeniedwhichremainedunchangedfrom2007and2008.
» Denialratesincreasedfrom2008forbothLMIandMuIinvestorsto43.9percentand30.1percent,respectively.
(See Appendix 2: Table 57)
5.3 Home Lending to Non-Owner-Occupied Borrowers – by Tract Minority Level
» Slightlymoreloanswenttonon-minoritytracts(1,181loans)thanminoritytracts(1,035loans).
» Minoritycensustractsreceived45.5percentofprimeloans(adecreasefrom50.6percentin2008)and61.7percentofsubprimeloans(adecreasefrom69.8percentin2008).
» In2009,investorsinbothgroupsreceivedmoreprimeloansthansubprimeloans,atrendsimilartothatof2008.
» Theproportionofprimeloanstoborrowersinminoritytractsincreasedby27.6percentfrom2008to2009.From2006to2009,thisproportionincreasedby104.1percent.
» From2006to2009,denialratesincreasedforbothgroups,withnon-minoritytractapplicantsseeingthegreatestincreaseof49.4percent.
» Between2008and2009,thedenialrateforminoritytractapplicantsdecreasedby2.5percent.
» Foreverydenialinanon-minoritytract,therewere1.2denialsinaminoritytract.Thiswasadecreasefromthe2008ratioof1.4.
(See Appendix 2: Table 58)
5.4 Home Lending to Non-Owner-Occupied Borrowers – by Tract Income Level
» Inallfouryearsstudied,moderateincometractsreceivedthemostloans.In2009theseborrowersreceived42.5percentofloans,upfromthe42.2percentreceivedin2008.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009103.
5.0 Home Lending to Non-Owner-Occupied Borrowers
» Theshareofloanstolowincometractborrowersdecreasedby21.3percentfrom2008to2009;whiletheshareofloanstomiddleincometractborrowersincreasedby31.0percent.
» 69.8percentofowner-occupiedsubprimeloanswenttoborrowersinLMItractsin2009,comparedto84.4percentnon-owner-occupiedsubprimeloansthatwenttoLMItracts.
» In2009,allgroupsreceivedfewersubprimeloanscomparedto2008,withborrowersinlowincometractsseeingthegreatestdecreaseof85.7percent.
» From2006to2009,subprimeloanstoallgroupsdecreased.BorrowersinLMItractssawadecreaseof96.3percent,andborrowersinMuItractssawadecreaseof93.5percent.
» Allgroupsreceivedmoreprimeloansthansubprimeloansin2009.Thiswasalsotruein2007and2008.Thoughin2006,only43.3percentofloanswereprimeinlow-incometracts.Theremaininggroupsreceivedmoreprimeloansthansubprimeloansin2006.
» Thepercentageofprimeloanstoeachgroupincreasedwithtractincomelevel.98.1percentofloanstoupperincometractinvestorswereprimeloansin2009.
» InvestorsinLMItractsreceivedprimeloans90.7percentofthetime(anincreasefrom72.3percentofthetimein2008),comparedto96.3percentofthetimeforMuItractinvestors(anincreasefrom90.3percentin2008).
» BorrowersinLMIareaswere2.5timesaslikelytoreceiveasubprimeloanasborrowersinMuItracts.Thiswasadecreasefrom2.9in2008,andanincreasefrom2.1in2006.
» Thenumberofapplicationsdecreasedacrossallgroupsfrom2008to2009,withthenumberoflowincometractapplicationsdecreasingthemostat58.7percentbetween2008and2009.Lowincometractapplicationshavedecreasedthemostfrom2006to2009,at80.8percent.
» Denialratesdecreasedforlowandmoderateincometractapplicants,andincreasedformiddleandupperincometractapplicants.From2008to2009thedenialrateforupperincometractapplicantsincreasedby67.2percent.From2006to2009,thisratehasincreasedthemost,by130.0percent.
» Thedenialratewas33.9percentforLMInon-occupantborrowersand26.8percentforMuInon-occupantborrowersin2009.
(See Appendix 2: Table 59)
5.5 Home Lending to Non-Owner-Occupied Borrowers – by Borrower Gender
» In2009,malenon-occupantinvestorsreceivedlessthan50percentofloans,continuingthetrendfrom2008.
» Femalesreceived18.7percentofallprimeloans(comparedto20.0percentin2008)and21.3percentofallsubprimeloans(comparedto26.2percentin2008).
» Primeloansdecreasedforallgroupsbetween2008and2009.Maleinvestorssawthe
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009104.
5.0 Home Lending to Non-Owner-Occupied Borrowers
largestdecrease,at44.2percent.Similarly,maleinvestorshadthelargestdecreasefrom2006to2009,at74.8percent.
» Maleandfemaleinvestorsreceivedprimeloansover90percentofthetime,at90.5percentand91.1percentofthetime,respectively.Thisisincomparisontothelikelinessof2008,whichwas70.7percentformalesand68.2percentforfemales.
» Jointapplicantsweremostlikelytoreceiveaprimeloan(94.2percentofthetime).Thiswasanincreasefrom2008,whentheyreceivedprimeloans82.7percentofthetime.
» Allcategoriessawareductioninapplicationsfrom2008to2009,withfemalesseeingthehighestreduction,at54.5percent.From2006to2009,femaleapplicationsdeclinedby82.4percent.
» From2008to2009thedenialrateincreasedforallgroups,withmaleinvestorsseeingthehighestincrease,at8.6percent.From2006to2009,denialratesformaleinvestorsincreasedby44.0percent,anddenialratesforjointinvestorsincreasedby43.3percent.
» Thedenialrateswerehigherfornon-occupantmale,femaleandjointborrowerscomparedtoowner-occupiedmaleandfemaleborrowers.Bothmaleandfemalenon-occupantdenialratesexceedoccupantdenialratesbymorethan40percent.
(See Appendix 2: Table 60)
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009108.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending 6.1 City Depositories in Aggregate
In2009,13banksweredesignatedasCityofPhiladelphiadepositories:AdvanceBank,BankofAmerica,Citigroup,CitizensBank,CityNational,TDBank,M&TBank,BankofNewyorkMellonCorporation,PNCBank,RepublicFirstBank,BancoSantander(SovereignBank),unitedBankofPhiladelphia,andWellsFargo.Ofthese13,onlynineoriginatedmorethan25loans,apre-establishedthresholdforinclusioninthisanalysis.Basedonthiscriteria,BankofNewyorkMellon,CityNational,RepublicFirstBank,andunitedBankwereexcludedfromalldepositoryrankings.Further,whileAdvanceBankqualifiesforinclusionintherankingsforthefirsttimeinthestudy(with27loansissuedin2009),itdoesnotqualifyforanysegmentedrankingastherewerenot25loansissuedforhomeimprovement,homerefinance,orhomepurchaseonly.
Citydepositoriesinaggregatereceivednearly17,000loanapplicationsandoriginatednearly8,000primeloansandover600subprimeloanstotaling$1.5billionin2009.Thus,these13depositoriestogetherrepresentedoverathirdofallapplications,primeloans,subprimeloans,andtotalloanamountswithintheCity(seeTable6.1).ThetotalamountoflendingatallinstitutionsintheCitywas$4.5billion,upfrom$3.7billionthepreviousyear.
Table 6.1: Loan Applications and Originations for City Depositories
APPLICATIONS PRIMELOANS SuBPRIMELOANS TOTALLOANAMOuNT
2009-DEPOSITORIES 16,994 7,990 640 $1.5B
2009–ALLBANkS 50,114 24,490 1,669 $4.5B
2008-DEPOSITORIES 16,836 6,166 1,245 $1.0B
2008–ALLBANkS 53,913 19,638 3,995 $3.7B
2009PROPORTIONOFDEPOSITORIESTOALLBANkS
34% 33% 38% 33%
2008PROPORTIONOFDEPOSITORIESTOALLBANkS
31% 31% 31% 27%
(See Appendix 2: Tables 61, 62, 66, and 67)
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009109.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
6.2 Ranking of Depositories – Home Purchase Lending
Thirteenfactorswerecombinedtocreateacompositescoreforprimehomepurchaselendingperformanceforeachdepository:Thepercentageofloansoriginated,(2)rawnumberofloansanddenialratiosforAfricanAmericans,Hispanicsandlowandmoderateincome(LMI)borrowerswereeachweightedone-tenthofthecompositescore.Fouradditionalneighborhood-relatedfactorswerecollectivelyweightedasone-tenthofthecompositescore:thepercentageofloansoriginatedinLMIcensustracts,thepercentageofloansoriginatedinminoritytracts,andthedenialratiosforthosetwotypesoftracts.Thisweightinghastheeffectofequalizingtheplayingfieldbetweenhigher-volumeandlower-volumedepositories(seeTable6.2).
Table 6.2: Factors upon Which City Depositories Were Ranked in Small Business Lending
FACTOR WEIgHT
%LOANSORIgINATEDTOAFRICAN-AMERICANBORROWERS 10%
RAWNuMBEROFLOANSTOAFRICAN-AMERICANBORROWERS 10%
DENIALRATIO,AFRICAN-AMERICANAPPLICANTSvS.WHITEAPPLICANTS 10%
%LOANSORIgINATEDTOHISPANICBORROWERS 10%
RAWNuMBEROFLOANSTOHISPANICBORROWERS 10%
DENIALRATIO,HISPANICAPPLICANTSvS.WHITEAPPLICANTS 10%
%LOANSORIgINATEDTOLOWANDMODERATEINCOMEBORROWERS 10%
RAWNuMBEROFLOANSTOLOWANDMODERATEINCOMEBORROWERS 10%
DENIALRATIO,LOWANDMODERATEINCOMEAPPLICANTSvS.MIDDLEANDuPPERINCOMEAPPLICANTS 10%
%PRIMELOANSORIgINATEDINLOWTOMODERATEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 2.5%
%PRIMELOANSORIgINATEDINMINORITyTRACTS 2.5%
DENIALRATIO,LOWTOMODERATEINCOMETRACTSvS.MIDDLEANDuPPERINCOMETRACTS 2.5%
DENIALRATIO,MINORITyTRACTSvS.NON-MINORITyTRACTS 2.5%
TOTALFOR13FACTORS 100%
Foreachfactor,adepositoryreceivedascoreaccordingtohowdifferentitwasfromtheaveragelenderinPhiladelphia.Ifthedepositorywasbetterthanaverage,thescoreispositive;ifitwasbelowaverage,thescoreisnegative.These13scoreswereaddedtogethertoformthedepository’soverallratingscore.AratingscorethatisclosetozeromeansthatthelenderwasanaveragelenderinPhiladelphia.Apositiveratingscoremeansthatthedepositorywasaboveaverage.Thehigherthescore,themoreaboveaveragethedepositorywas.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009110.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
Again,onlylendersinPhiladelphiathatoriginated25loansormorein2009wereincludedinthecalculations.Asaresult,BankofNewyorkMellon,CityNational,RepublicFirstBank,andunitedBankwereexcludedfromalldepositoryrankings.Includingsuchsmalllendersintheratingswouldproduceunreliableandunusableresults.1
In2009,WellsFargo(whosepurchaseofWachoviawascompletedattheendofthe2008calendaryear),rankedfirst,followedbyBancoSantander(whichpurchasedSovereignBank),whichrankedfirstin2008.Citigroup,whichwasseventhin2008,andsixthin2007,significantlydecreaseditsissuanceofhomepurchaseloansinPhiladelphia(only13primeloansforhomepurchasewereissuedin2009),andwasnoteligibleforthisranking.M&TBank,anewlyaddeddepository,rankedseventhwithaslightlypositivecompositescoreof0.23.WhileBankofAmericaandCitizensBankbothslippedoneplaceintherankings,PNCmovedfromsixthtofifthbetween2008and2009.Noneofthedepositoriesmeasuredhadnegativecompositescores,suggestingthatallperformedbetterthantheaveragehomemortgagelenderintheCityin2009(seeTable6.3).2
Table 6.3: 2009 Ranking of City Depositories – Home Purchase Lending
2009RANkINg CITyDEPOSITORy 2009COMPOSITESCORE 2008RANkINg
1 WELLSFARgO(WACHOvIA) 28.30 5
2 BANCOSANTANDER(SOvEREIgNBANCORP,INC.) 19.81 1
3 BANkOFAMERICA 11.75 2
4 CITIZENSFINANCIALgROuP,INC 9.88 3
5 PNCFINANCIALSERvICESgROuP 2.84 6
6 TDBANkNORTH 2.53 4
7 M&TBANk 0.23 N/A
6.3 Aggregate Analysis of Depositories
6.3.1 Home Purchase Loans
» Thenumberofapplicationsremainedflat(anincreaseof2percentfromthepreviousyear),butthenumberofdenialsdecreasedby20percentbetween2008and2009.
» Citydepositoriesissued24.2percentoftheirprimeloanstoAfricanAmericans,7.3percenttoHispanics,10.1percenttoAsians,and35.7percenttoborrowersinminoritytracts.
1. See Appendix 2, Table 66 for more performance information on depositories that were not ranked. 2. See Appendix 2, Table 61, for additional ranking detail.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009111.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
» PrimeloansfromCitydepositoriesincreasedby11.4percentforAfrican-Americanborrowersanddecreasedby15.0percentforHispanicborrowersbetween2008and2009.From2008to2009,primeloanstoAsianborrowersincreasedby5.6percentandby6.5percentforborrowersinminoritytracts.
» Citydepositoriesissued63.5percentoftheirloanstoLMIborrowersand59.3percenttoborrowersinLMIcensustracts.From2008to2009,primeloanstoLMIborrowersfromCitydepositorieshaveincreasedby11.9percent.
» Femaleborrowersreceived42.4percentofprimeloansissuedbyCitydepositories.Thisisaslightdecreasefrom2008,whenfemaleborrowersreceived45percentofthedepositories’primeloans.
» HispanicapplicantsweredeniedbyCitydepositoriesmorethananyotherracialgroup,atarateof1.62timesforeverydenialissuedtoawhiteapplicant.Thiswasanincreasefromarateof1.55denialsperwhitedenialin2008.
» Asianapplicantsweredeniedtheleast,atarateof1.45denialsperwhitedenial,upfrom1.22in2008.
(See Appendix 2: Table 63)
Figure 6.4: Selected 2009 Results for City Depositories – Home Purchase Loans
DEPOSITORy
PERCENTOFLOANSTOAFRICANAMERICANS
PERCENTOFLOANSTOHISPANICS
PERCENTOFLOANSINMINORITyTRACTS
PERCENTOFLOANSTOLMI
BORROWERS
PERCENTOFLOANSINLMITRACTS
AFRICAN-AMERICANTOWHITEDENIALRATIO
HISPANICTOWHITEDENIALRATIO
ASIANTOWHITEDENIALRATIO
BANCOSANTANDER(SOvEREIgN
BANk)
42.1% 9.0% 45.1% 81.9% 70.5% 1.71 2.62 1.70
BANkOFAMERICA 15.4% 4.9% 29.0% 64.1% 56.6% 2.23 1.34 1.12
CITIZENSFINANCIALgROuP,INC.
37.6% 10.8% 47.2% 77.2% 71.6% 1.30 2.28 2.20
M&TBANk 21.4% 7.1% 40.5% 50.0% 64.3% 1.58 0.00 0.00
PNC 22.2% 5.2% 43.1% 54.9% 49.7% 0.58 1.71 0.00
TDBANk 10.6% 7.5% 27.3% 61.5% 56.5% 2.15 1.87 0.89
WELLSFARgO 21.3% 7.5% 32.6% 55.3% 54.5% 1.61 1.57 1.81
ALLDEPOSITORIES 24.2% 7.3% 35.7% 63.5% 59.3% 1.50 1.62 1.45
ALLLENDERS 18.4% 8.5% 30.6% 60.7% 56.3% 1.90 1.38 1.67
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009112.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
6.3.2 Home Refinance Loans
» ThenumberofapplicationsforhomerefinanceloansfromCitydepositoriesincreasedby8.9percent,thedenialratedecreasedby23.2percent,andthenumberofprimeloansincreasedby51.3percentbetween2008and2009.
» Citydepositoriesissued13.6percentoftheprimehomerefinanceloanstheymadetoAfrican-Americanborrowers,3.2percenttoHispanics,and6.5percenttoAsians.
» ThepercentofrefinanceloanstoAfricanAmericans,Hispanics,Asians,andminoritytractsissuedbyCitydepositorieschangedgreatlyfrom2008.ThelargestchangewasforpercentageofloanstoHispanics,whichdecreasedby52.5percentfrom2008to2009.ThenextlargestchangewasinthepercentageofloanstoAfricanAmericans,whichdecreasedby38.6percent.
» Citydepositoriesissued32.7percentoftheirprimeloanstoLMIborrowers(adecreaseof34.9percentfrom2008to2009)and40.1percentoftheirprimeloanstoborrowersinLMItracts(adecreaseof24.9percentfrom2008to2009).
» In2009,Hispanicapplicantsweredeniedaloan2.2timesasoftenaswhiteapplicants,anincreasefrom1.7in2008.Thiswasthelargestdenialraterelativetowhiteborrowers.Asiansweredeniedtheleast,atarateof1.6timesperwhitedenial,whichincreasedfrom1.1in2008.
(See Appendix 2: Table 64)
Table 6.5: Selected 2009 Results for City Depositories – Home Refinance Loans
DEPOSITORy
PERCENTOFLOANSTOAFRICANAMERICANS
PERCENTOFLOANSTOHISPANICS
PERCENTOFLOANSINMINORITyTRACTS
PERCENTOFLOANSTOLMI
BORROWERS
PERCENTOFLOANSIN
LMITRACTS
AFRICAN-AMERICANTOWHITEDENIALRATIO
HISPANICTOWHITEDENIALRATIO
ASIANTO
WHITEDENIALRATIO
BANCOSANTANDER(SOvEREIgN
BANk)
9.8% 1.9% 20.6% 46.8% 33.1% 2.84 5.84 1.54
BANkOFAMERICA 18.6% 4.4% 28.7% 39.5% 43.8% 1.29 1.74 1.37
CITIZENSFINANCIALgROuP,INC.
10.1% 2.6% 26.2% 44.2% 33.7% 2.44 2.66 1.95
CITIgROuP 20.2% 3.3% 36.2% 36.6% 49.3% 2.34 2.64 1.29
M&TBANk 7.7% 0.0% 15.4% 35.9% 30.8% 0.76 5.33 0.00
PNC 21.3% 3.7% 32.0% 34.2% 48.9% 2.20 3.18 2.90
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009113.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
TDBANk 6.4% 1.1% 23.4% 37.2% 43.6% 2.63 2.58 1.90
WELLSFARgO 11.0% 3.0% 24.2% 24.8% 38.3% 1.48 1.47 1.28
ALLDEPOSITORIES 13.6% 3.2% 26.0% 32.7% 40.1% 1.92 2.23 1.59
ALLLENDERS 12.4% 3.0% 25.4% 36.2% 41.6% 1.93 1.98 1.50
6.3.3 Home Improvement Loans
» ThenumberofapplicationstoCitydepositoriesforhomeimprovementloansdecreasedby36.4percentandthenumberofdenialsdecreasedby38.8percentin2009.
» Citydepositoriesissued22.4percentoftheirprimehomeimprovementloanstoAfrican-Americanborrowers,4.8percenttoHispanicborrowersand8.3percenttoAsianborrowers.
» 34.6percentofprimeloansmadebyCitydepositorieswenttoborrowersinminoritycensustracts(34.6percent).
» 48.7percentofprimehomeimprovementloanswereissuedtoLMIborrowers(adecreaseof29.9percentfrom2008to2009)and50.4percenttoborrowersinLMIcensustracts(adecrease24.9percentfrom2008to2009).
» In2009,femaleborrowersreceived46.5percentoftheprimeloansmadeavailablebyCitydepositories,adecreaseof9.8percent.
» CitydepositoriesdeniedHispanicsatthehighestrateandAsiansatthelowestrateforhomeimprovementloans.Hispanicapplicantsweredenied1.8timesforeverywhitedenial,anincreasefrom1.6timesin2008.Asiansweredenied1.3timesforeverywhitedenial,adecreasefrom1.5in2008.
» Applicantsinminoritycensustractsreceived1.7denialnoticesforeverynoticesenttoapplicantsinnon-minoritytractsin2009.Thisisanincreasefrom1.3in2008.
(See Appendix 2: Table 65)
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009114.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
Table 6.6: Selected 2009 Results for City Depositories – Home Improvement Loans
DEPOSITORy
PERCENTOFLOANSTOAFRICANAMERICANS
PERCENTOF
LOANSTOHISPANICS
PERCENTOF
LOANSINMINORITyTRACTS
PERCENTOFLOANSTOLMI
BORROWERS
PERCENTOF
LOANSINLMITRACTS
AFRICAN-AMERICANTOWHITEDENIALRATIO
HISPANICTO
WHITEDENIALRATIO
ASIANTO
WHITEDENIALRATIO
BANkOFAMERICA 12.0% 4.0% 24.0% 72.0% 60.0% 3.10 4.70 0.57
CITIZENSFINANCIALgROuP,INC.
53.8% 3.8% 7.7% 84.6% 80.8% 1.42 1.26 1.62
CITIgROuP 28.6% 0.0% 0.0% 28.6% 57.1% 1.35 1.71 2.45
PNC 34.2% 2.6% 13.2% 47.4% 50.0% 1.36 1.46 0.98
TDBANk 5.6% 5.6% 11.1% 44.4% 61.1% 1.59 1.37 0.98
WELLSFARgO 13.9% 6.9% 4.0% 37.6% 36.6% 1.73 1.84 1.09
ALLDEPOSITORIES 22.4% 4.8% 8.3% 48.7% 50.4% 1.70 1.80 1.25
ALLLENDERS 19.8% 4.2% 5.5% 57.0% 55.8% 1.88 2.02 1.27
ALLLENDERS 25.6% 5.3% 43.7% 62.3% 60.6% 1.58 1.55 1.35
6.4 Disaggregated Depository Analysis
6.4.1 Advance Bank
6.4.1.1 All Loans
» Issued24primeloansin2009.
» Scored1stinpercentofloanstominoritytractandLMItractborrowers.
» MetorexceededCityaveragesforpercentofloanstominoritytract,LMI,andLMItractborrowers.
» Didnotdenyanyapplicantsin2009,andwerethusexcludedfromtherankingswithotherdepositories.
» Issued24loansforhomepurchaseand3loansforhomerefinancing,thereforeAdvance
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009115.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
BankwasnoteligibleforinclusioninCitydepositoryrankingsforhomepurchase,homeimprovement,orhomerefinancelending.
6.4.2 Banco Santander (Sovereign Bancorp, Inc.)
6.4.2.2 All Loans
» Issued968primeloans,anincreaseof6.5percentfrom2008.
» Scored1stinpercentofloanstoAfrican-American,LMI,andfemaleborrowers.
» MetorexceededCityaveragesforpercentofprimeloanstoAfrican-American,Hispanic,LMI,LMItractandfemaleborrowers,aswellas,thedenialratetoAfrican-Americanapplicants.
» FailedtomeetCitybenchmarksforpercentofprimeloanstoAsianandminoritytractborrowers,aswellasthedenialratiosforHispanic,Asian,andminoritytractapplicants.
» Ofthe968loansissued,579werehomepurchaseloans,378wereloansforhomerefinancing,and11wereforhomeimprovement(anincreasefrom8in2008).BancoSantanderwasnotincludedinthehomeimprovementrankingswithotherdepositories.
6.4.2.3 Home Purchase Loans
» Issued579primehomepurchaseloans,adecreaseof22.9percentfrom2008.
» Ranked1stinpercentofloanstoAfrican-American,LMI,andfemaleborrowers.Ranked2ndinpercentofloanstoHispanic,minoritytract,andLMItractborrowers.
» DidnotmeettheCitybenchmarkfromanydenialratiosin2009;in2008,halfofalldenialratiocategoriesweremetorexceededforhomepurchaselending.
6.4.2.4 Home Refinance Loans
» Issued378primehomerefinanceloans,anincreaseof152percentfrom2008.
» Rankedlast(8th)foralldenialratiosforallcategories.
» Ranked1stforthepercentageofloanstoLMIborrowers.
» MetorexceededCitybenchmarksforpercentageofloanstoAsian,LMI,andfemaleborrowersin2009.
6.4.3 Bank of America
6.4.3.1 All Loans
» Issued1,733primeloans,adecreaseof12.3percentfrom2008.
» Applicationsdecreasedby25.2percentwhiledenialsdecreasedby32.9percentfrom
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009116.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
2008to2009.
» ExceededCitybenchmarksforpercentofloansissuedtoAsianandfemaleborrowers.
» DidnotmeetoverallCityaveragesinpercentageofloanstoAfrican-American,Hispanic,minoritytract,LMI,orLMItractborrowers.
» ScoredfirstinthepercentageofprimeloansissuedtoAsianborrowers(14.5percent).
» Wentuponerank,from6thto5th,inthepercentageofprimeloansissuedtoAfricanAmericanswhiledecreasingintheactualnumberfrom2008(to17.2percentin2009from17.8percentin2008).
» MetorexceededCitydenialratebenchmarksforeverycategoryfor2009,similarto2008.
6.4.3.2 Home Purchase Loans
» Issued710primehomepurchaseloans,adecreaseof16.4percentfrom2008to2009.
» Thenumberofapplicationsdecreasedby32.3percentandthenumberofdenialsby49.5percent.
» Ranked1stinpercentofloanstoAsians,similarto2008.
» MetorexceededCitybenchmarksintherateofdenialsofHispanictowhiteapplicants,whilefailingtomeetthebenchmarksfordenialratiosofAfricanAmericans,Asians,andminoritytractapplicants.
6.4.3.3 Home Refinance Loans
» Issued998primehomerefinanceloans,adecreaseof7.3percentfrom2008.
» Ranked1stinpercentageofloanstoHispanicandAsianborrowers.
» MetorexceedCityaveragesforalldenialrates,includingranking1stindenialratioofminoritytractapplicantsrelativetonon-minoritytractapplicants.
» MetorexceededCityaveragesinpercentofloanstoAfrican-American,Hispanic,Asian,minority,LMI,LMItract,andfemaleborrowersforthesecondyearinarow.
6.4.3.4 Home Improvement Loans
» Issued25primehomeimprovementloans,adecreaseof49percentfrom2008to2009.
» Ranked1stinpercentofloanstoAsianborrowers.
» Ranked1stintheAsiantowhiteapplicantdenialratio.
» Rankedlast(6th)inAfrican-American,Hispanic,minoritytonon-minoritytractdenialratios.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009117.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
» MetorexceededCitybenchmarksinpercentloanstoHispanic,LMIandLMItractborrowers.
6.4.4 Citizens Financial Group
6.4.4.1 All Loans
» Issued543primeloans,a10.2percentdecreasefrom2008.
» In2009,applicationsdecreasedby21.6percentanddenialsdeclinedby40.6percent.
» Scored1stinpercentageofprimeloanstoHispanicborrowers.
» MetorexceededCitybenchmarksinpercentageofloanstoAfrican-American,Hispanic,minoritytract,LMI,andLMItractborrowers.
» In2008,Citizensscored1stindenialrateofAfrican-American,Hispanic,andMinoritytractdenialratios;in2009,itdidnotmeettheCitybenchmarksforanycategoryindenialrates.
6.4.4.2 Home Purchase Loans
» Issued250primehomepurchaseloans,adecreaseof14.4percentfrom2008to2009.
» Sawa2.3percentdecreaseinapplicationsanda7.1percentincreaseindenialsin2009.
» Ranked1stinpercentofloanstominoritytractborrowersforthethirdyearinarow.AlsorankedhighestinpercentofloanstoAfricanAmericanscomparedtowhites,percentofloanstominorityrelativetonon-minoritytractsandthepercentofloanstoLMIborrowerscomparedtoMuIborrowersforthesecondyearinarow.
» MetorexceededCitybenchmarksforrateofdenialsforAfrican-Americanapplicantsrelativetowhiteapplicants,andforminoritytractapplicantsrelativetonon-minoritytractapplicants.
» MetorexceededCitybenchmarksforpercentofloanstoAfrican-American,Hispanic,minoritytract,LMI,LMItractandfemaleborrowersforthesecondyearinarow.
6.4.4.3 Home Refinance Loans
» Issued267primehomerefinanceloans,a35.5percentincreasefrom2008.
» In2009,thenumberofapplicationsdecreasedby11.6percentandthenumberofdenialsdecreasedby39.9percent.
» Rankedlast(8th)inpercentofloanstofemaleborrowers.
» MetorexceededCitybenchmarksinpercentofloanstominoritytractandLMI
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009118.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
borrowers.
» DidnotmeetorexceedCitybenchmarksindenialratesforanyofthefourcategories.
6.4.4.4 Home Improvement Loans
» Issued26homeimprovementloans,adecreasefromthe116issuedin2008.
» Ranked1stinthepercentageofloanstoAfrican-American,minoritytract,andLMItractborrowersforthesecondyearinarow.Alsoranked1stinpercentageofloanstoLMIborrowers.
» Didnotranklast(6th)inanycategoryin2009.
» Ranked1stinminoritytracttonon-minoritytractdenialratioandHispanictowhiteapplicantdenialratio.
6.4.5 CitiGroup
6.4.5.1 All Loans
» Issued233primeloans,adecreaseof33.6percentfrom2008to2009.
» Applicationsdecreasedby44.7percentanddenialsdecreasedby44.9percentbetween2008and2009.
» Ranked1stinminoritytracttonon-minoritytractdenialratio,animprovementfromthesecondplacerankingof2008.
» Ranked8thinpercentageofprimeloanstoHispanicandAsianborrowers,and9thinpercentageofloanstoLMIborrowers.RankingforpercentofloanstofemaleandAfrican-Americanborrowersimprovedfrom6thand5th,respectively,in2008,to4thin2009.
» ExceededCitybenchmarksinpercentageofloanstoAfrican-American,minority,andfemaleborrowers.
» ExceededCitybenchmarkforminoritytractdenialratio.
» RankingforpercentageofprimeloanstoAsianborrowerswentfrom2ndin2008to8thin2009,thelargestdecreaseforthisbank.
» Issued13loansforhomepurchase(downfrom92in2008),7loansforhomeimprovement(downfrom21in2008),and213homerefinanceloansin2009(downfrom238in2008).
6.4.5.2 Home Refinance Loans
» Issued213primeloansforhomerefinancing,adecreaseof10.5percentfrom2008to2009.
» Ranked1stinpercentofloanstominorityandLMItractborrowers.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009119.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
» Ranked2ndinpercentofloanstoAfrican-Americanborrowers.
» MetorexceededCitybenchmarksforthepercentofloanstoAfricanAmericans,Hispanic,LMItract,andfemaleborrowers.
» MetorexceededtheCity’saverageforthreeofthefourdenialrates:Hispanic,Asian,andminoritytract.
6.4.5.3 Home Improvement Loans
» Issued7primeloansforhomeimprovement,adecreaseof10.5percentfrom2008to2009.
» Ranked1stindenialratioofAfrican-Americanapplicantstowhiteapplicants.
» Ranked2ndinpercentofloanstominoritytractandfemaleborrowers.
» MetorexceededCitybenchmarksforthepercentofloanstoAfricanAmericans,minoritytract,andfemaleborrowers.
» MetorexceededtheCity’saveragefortwoofthefourdenialrates:African-Americanandminoritytract.
6.4.6 M&T Bank
6.4.6.1 All Loans
» Issued83primeloansin2009.
» Ranked6thforpercentageofloanstoAfrican-American,minoritytract,LMI,LMItract,andfemaleborrowers.
» Ranked1stindenialratioforAfrican-American,Hispanic,andAsianapplicants.
» Ofthe83primeloans,42wereforhomepurchase,39wereforhomerefinancing,and2wereforhomeimprovement.
6.4.6.2 Home Purchase Loans
» Issued42primehomepurchaseloansin2009.
» ExceededCitybenchmarksforpercentageofprimeloansissuedtoborrowersinLMItracts.
» Ranked1stindenialratiosforHispanicandAsianapplicantsrelativetowhiteapplicants.
» Ranked4thinpercentageofloanstoAfrican-American,Asian,minoritytract,andfemaleborrowers.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009120.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
6.4.6.3 Home Refinance Loans
» Issued39primehomerefinanceloansin2009.
» Ranked1stindenialratiosforAfrican-AmericanandAsianapplicants.
» Rankedlast(8th)inpercentageofloanstoHispanic,Asian,minoritytract,andLMItractborrowers.
» FailedtomeetorexceedtheCity’saverageforanylendingcategory,orfordenialratiosforHispanicorminoritytractapplicants.
6.4.7 PNC
6.4.7.1 All Loans
» Issued463primeloans,anincreaseof17.5percentfrom2008.
» Applicationdecreasedby9.6percentanddenialsdecreasedby14.8percentbetween2008and2009.
» Asin2008,PNCranked7thinpercentofloanstoAsianborrowersin2009,eventhoughthepercentageincreasedfrom1.8percentto4.1percent.
» DidnotmeetCitybenchmarkintermsofalldenialratios(African-American,Hispanic,Asian,andminoritytracts)for2009,asimilartrendfrom2008.
» MetorexceededCitybenchmarksinpercentofloanstoAfrican-American,minoritytracts,andfemaleborrowers.
6.4.7.2 Home Purchase Loans
» Issued153primehomepurchaseloans,adecreaseof23.1percentfrom2008to2009.
» Applicationsdecreasedby44.7percentanddenialsdecreasedby81.6percentbetween2008and2009.
» MetorexceededtheCitybenchmarkforpercentofprimehomepurchaseloanstoAfricanAmericansandminoritytractborrowersforthesecondyearinarow.
» Ranked1stindenialratiosforAfricanAmericans,animprovementfromthe7thplacerankingof2008.
6.4.7.3 Home Refinance Loans
» Issued272primehomerefinanceloans,anincreaseof65.9percentfrom2008.
» Ranked1stinpercentageofloanstoAfrican-Americanandfemaleborrowers.
» Ranked1stindenialratesforAfrican-AmericanandAsianapplicantsrelativetowhiteapplicants.
» Rankedlast(8th)fordenialratesforAsianapplicantsrelativetowhiteapplicants.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009121.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
» MetorexceededCitybenchmarksforpercentofloanstoAfrican-American,Hispanic,minoritytract,LMItract,andfemaleborrowers.
» FailedtomeetorexceedCityaveragesforthreeoutoffourdenialratios:Hispanic,Asian,andminoritytractapplicants.
6.4.7.4 Home Improvement Loans
» Issued38primeloansforhomeimprovement,anincreaseof22.6percentfrom2008to2009.
» Scored1stinthepercentageofloanstofemaleborrowers.
» MetorexceededCityaveragesforthepercentageofloanstoAfrican-American,Asian,minoritytract,LMI,andfemaleborrowers.
6.4.8 TD Bank
6.4.8.1 All Loans
» Issued273primeloans,adecreaseof28.9percentfrom2008.
» Rankedlast(9th)inpercentageofloanstoAfrican-Americanandminoritytractborrowers,and7thinpercentageofloanstofemaleborrowers.
» ExceededCitybenchmarkforpercentageofloanstoHispanic,Asian,LMI,andLMI tractborrowers.
» ExceededCitybenchmarkfortwodenialratios,andranked5thforminoritytonon-minoritytractdenialratio.
6.4.8.2 Home Purchase Loans
» Issued161primehomepurchaseloans,adecreaseof49.4percentfrom2008.
» Scored1stindenialrateofminoritytractapplicantsrelativetonon-minoritytractapplicantsin2009.
» Rankedlast(7th)inpercentofprimeloanstoAfrican-American,minoritytract,andfemaleborrowers.In2008,TDBankdidnotranklastinanycategoryforhomepurchaselending.
» ExceededtheCitybenchmarkforAsiandenialratios.
6.4.8.3 Home Refinance Loans
» Issued94primehomerefinanceloans,anincreaseof129percentfrom2008.
» Didnotrank1stinanycategory.
» Scoredlast(8th)inpercentageofloanstoAfrican-Americanborrowers.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009122.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
» MetorexceededCityaveragesforpercentageofloanstoAsian,LMI,andLMItractborrowers,inadditiontoexceedingtheCity’sdenialratioaverageforHispanicandminoritytractapplicants.
6.4.8.4 Home Improvement Loans
» Issued18primehomeimprovementloans,adecreaseof28percentfrom2008to2009.
» ExceededtheCitybenchmarkintwooutoffourdenialratios:HispanictowhiteandAsiantowhitedenialratio.
» Scoredlast(6th)inthepercentofloanstoAfricanAmericansforthesecondyearinarow.
» MetorexceededCityaveragesforthepercentageofloanstoHispanic,Asian,LMItract,andfemaleborrowers.
6.4.9 Wells Fargo (Wachovia Corporation)
6.4.9.1 All Loans
» Issued3,665primeloansin2009,anincreaseof141percentbetween2008and2009.WellsFargoissuedthegreatestnumberofprimeloansofanyCitydepository,atmorethandoubletheamountissuedbythenextdepository(BankofAmerica)3.
» Thenumberofapplicationsincreasedby55.6percentanddenialsdecreasedby18.8percentin2009.
» MetorexceededCitybenchmarkswithrespecttopercentofprimeloanstoHispanicandAsianborrowers.
» MetorexceededallCitybenchmarksfordenialratiosforeverycategory,atrendsimilarto2008.
» Ranked8thwithrespecttopercentofprimeloanstominoritytractandLMIborrowers,whileranking9thinpercentageofloanstoLMItractborrowers.
6.4.9.2 Home Purchase Loans
» Issued1,149primehomepurchaseloansin2009,upfrom427in2008.
» MetorexceededCitybenchmarksforpercentageofloanstoHispanic,Asian,andfemaleborrowers.In2008,WellsFargo/Wachoviarankedlastinpercentageofprimeloanstofemaleborrowers.
» FailedtomeetorexceedCityaveragesinpercentofloanstoAfrican-American,minoritytract,LMI,andLMItractborrowers.
» MetorexceededCityaveragefortwooutoffourdenialrates:Hispanicandminoritytractapplicants.
3. In addition, about 400 additional prime loans were originated via subsidiaries of Wells Fargo that were not listed in the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council websites as being held by Wells Fargo during Calendar Year 2009
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009123.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
6.4.9.3 Home Refinance Loans
» Issued2,145primehomerefinanceloans,upfrom1,045in2008.
» MetorexceededCitybenchmarksforpercentageofloanstoAfrican-American,Hispanic,andAsianborrowers.
» Rankedlast(8th)inpercentofloansissuedtoLMIborrowersin2009.
» Ranked1stindenialratioofHispanictowhiteborrowersandmetorexceededCitybenchmarksfortheotherthreedenialcategories.
6.4.9.4 Home Improvement Loans
» Issued101primehomeimprovementloans,upfrom48in2008.
Table 6.7: Selected 2009 Results for City Depositories – Home Purchase Loan
DEPOSITORy APPLICATIONS PRIMELOANSORIgINATED
RANk%OFLOANSTOAFRICAN
AMERICANS
RANk%OFLOANSTOHISPANICS
RANk%OFLOANSTOASIANS
RANk%OFLOANSTOLMI
BORROWERS
RANk%OFLOANSINLMITRACTS
RANkAFRICAN-AMERICANTOWHITEDENIALRATIO
RANkHISPANICTOWHITEDENIALRATIO
RANkASIANTO
WHITEDENIALRATIO
BANCOSANTANDER(SOvEREIgN
BANk)
835
579 1 2 7 1 2 5 7 5
BANkOFAMERICA
1,054
710 6 7 1 3 4 7 2 4
CITIZENSFINANCIALgROuP,INC.
419
250 2 1 5 2 1 2 6 7
M&TBANk 74
42 4 5 4 7 3 3 1 1
PNC 188
153 3 6 6 6 7 1 4 2
TDBANk 363
161 7 4 2 4 5 6 5 3
WELLSFARgO 2,197
1,419 5 3 3 5 6 4 3 6
ALLDEPOSITORIES
5,192
3,351
ALLLENDERS 14,479
9,356
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009124.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
» Scored1stinthepercentageofloanstoHispanicborrowers,forthesecondyearinarow.
» Rankedlast(6th)inthepercentageofloanstominoritytract,LMItract,andfemaleborrowers.
» DidnotmeetorexceedtheCityaveragesforanyofthedenialratiocategories.
Table 6.8: Selected 2009 Results for City Depositories – Home Refinance Loans
DEPOSITORy APPLICATIONSPRIMELOANS
ORIgINATED
RANk%OFLOANSTOAFRICAN
AMERICANS
RANk%OF
LOANSTOHISPANICS
RANk%OFLOANSTO
ASIANS
RANk%OFLOANSTOLMI
BORROWERS
RANk%OFLOANSINLMITRACTS
RANkAFRICAN-AMERICANTOWHITEDENIALRATIO
RANkHISPANIC
TOWHITEDENIALRATIO
RANkASIANTO
WHITEDENIALRATIO
BANCOSANTANDER(SOvEREIgN
BANk)
573
378 6 6 2 1 7 8 8 5
BANkOFAMERICA
2,077
998 3 1 1 3 3 2 2 4
CITIZENSFINANCIALgROuP,INC.
681
267 5 5 5 2 6 6 5 7
CITIgROuP 1,024
213 2 3 6 5 1 5 4 3
M&TBANk 63
39 7 8 8 6 8 1 7 1
PNC 675
272 1 2 7 7 2 4 6 8
TDBANk 288
94 8 7 3 4 4 7 3 6
WELLSFARgO 5,025
2,145 4 4 4 8 5 3 1 2
ALLDEPOSITORIES
10,415
4,411
ALLLENDERS 33,030
14,569
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009125.
6.0 City Depositories and Home Lending
Table 6.9: Selected 2009 Results for City Depositories – Home Improvement Loans
DEPOSITORy APPLICATIONSPRIMELOANS
ORIgINATED
RANk%OFLOANSTOAFRICAN
AMERICANS
RANk%OF
LOANSTOHISPANICS
RANk%OFLOANSTO
ASIANS
RANk%OFLOANSTOLMI
BORROWERS
RANk%OFLOANSINLMITRACTS
RANkAFRICAN-AMERICANTOWHITEDENIALRATIO
RANkHISPANIC
TOWHITEDENIALRATIO
RANkASIANTO
WHITEDENIALRATIO
BANkOFAMERICA
82
25 5 3 1 2 3 6 6 1
CITIZENSFINANCIALgROuP,INC
267
26 1 4 4 1 1 3 1 5
CITIgROuP 155
7 3 6 6 6 4 1 4 6
PNC 243
38 2 5 2 3 5 2 3 2
TDBANk 160
18 6 2 3 4 2 4 2 3
WELLSFARgO 390
101 4 1 5 5 6 5 5 4
ALLDEPOSITORIES
1,387
228
ALLLENDERS 2,605
565
ALLLENDERS 14,479
9,356
7.0 Small Business Lending
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009128.
7.0 Small Business Lending
7.0 Small Business Lending 7.1 Small Business Lending Overall – Philadelphia
AccordingtoCommunityReinvestmentAct(CRA)data,12,365loanswithanaggregatevalueof$580.7millionweremadetosmallbusinessinPhiladelphiaduring2009.3,870ofthoseloansweremadetosmallbusinesseswithannualrevenuesoflessthan$1million.Allofthesetotalsweredownfrom2006,2007,and2008totals(seeTable7.1).
Table 7.1: Small Business Lending Activity in Philadelphia
TOTALDOLLARSLOANEDTOSMALLBuSINESSESIN
PHILADELPHIA($M)
TOTALSMALLBuSINESSLOANSINPHILADELPHIA
TOTALLOANSTOSMALLBuSINESSESINPHILADELPHIA
WITHANNuALREvENuESOFLESSTHAN$1MILLION
2006 $881 34,844 11,704
2007 $926 37,173 12,915
2008 $802 28,533 8,216
2009 $581 12,365 3,870
%DIFFERENCE2008-2009 -28% -57% -53%
%DIFFERENCE2007-2009 -37% -67% -70%
(See Appendix 2: Tables 68-77)
7.2 Small Business Lending by Tract Income Level – Philadelphia
50.4percentofloansmadetosmallbusinessesinPhiladelphiaweremadetothoselocatedinlowandmoderateincomeareas.Thiscomparesto62.2percentofsmallbusinessesinPhiladelphiathatarelocatedinlowandmoderateincometracts(seeTable7.2)
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009129.
7.0 Small Business Lending
Table 7.2: Distribution of Loans to Small Businesses in Philadelphia by Tract Income Level
TRACTINCOMELEvELNuMBEROFLOANSIN
PHILADELPHIA
PERCENTAgEOFLOANSINPHILADELPHIA
NuMBEROFSMALLBuSINESSES
PERCENTAgEOFSMALLBuSINESSESINPHILADELPHIA
LOWINCOME 1,978 16.0% 24,914 24.8%
MODERATEINCOME 4,257 34.4% 37,602 37.4%
MIDDLEINCOME 3,533 28.6% 23,925 23.8%
uPPERINCOME 2,126 17.2% 11,963 11.9%
TRACTORINCOMENOTkNOWN 471 3.8% 21,22 2.1%
TOTAL 12,365 100.0% 100,526 100%
53.7percentofloansmadetobusinesseswithlessthan$1millioninrevenueweremadetothosebusinesseslocatedinlowandmoderateincomeareas.Thiscomparesto63.0percentofbusinesseswithlessthan$1millioninrevenuethatarelocatedinlowandmoderateincometracts(seeTable7.3).
Table 7.3: Distribution of Loans to Small Businesses with Revenues less than $1million in Philadelphia by Tract Income Level
TRACTINCOMELEvELNuMBEROFLOANSIN
PHILADELPHIA
PERCENTAgEOFLOANSINPHILADELPHIA
NuMBEROFSMALLBuSINESSES
PERCENTAgEOFSMALLBuSINESSESINPHILADELPHIA
LOWINCOME 672 17.4% 18,382 24.7%
MODERATEINCOME 1,365 35.3% 28,520 38.3%
MIDDLEINCOME 1,110 28.7% 18,097 24.3%
uPPERINCOME 640 16.5% 84,04 11.3%
TRACTORINCOMENOTkNOWN 83 2.1% 1,083 1.5%
TOTAL 3,870 100.0% 74,468 100.0%
(See Appendix 2: Table 79)
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009130.
7.0 Small Business Lending
7.3 Small Business Lending by Tract Minority Level – Philadelphia
Forsmallbusinesses,includingthosewithrevenuesoflessthan$1million,moreloansweremadeinnon-minorityareasthaninminorityareas.Forbothcategoriesofsmallbusinesses,theratioofloansfornon-minorityareastominorityareaswasmorethan2:1(seeTable7.4).
Table 7.4: Percentage of Loans to Small Business in Philadelphia by Minority Status
(See Appendix 2: Table 80)
7.4 Small Business Lending by Tract Income Level – Philadelphia vs. Suburban Counties
Aswasthecaseinpreviousyears,noloansweremadetobusinesseslocatedinlow–incomeareasforBucksCountyorChesterCountyin2009.Loanstosmallbusinessesinmoderate-incomearearepresented4.7percentofloansmadeinBucksCounty(downfrom4.9percentin2008)and2.8percentofthosemadeinChesterCounty(downfrom3.2percentin2008).Loanstobusinessesinlow-andmoderate-incomeareasofDelawareCountyrepresented7.9percent(downfrom8.3percentin2008)ofthetotalloanstosmallbusinesses.InMontgomeryCounty,thenumberofloansmadetosmallbusinessesinlow-andmoderate-incomeareasrepresented4.2percentofloans(upfrom3.2percentin2008)(seeTable7.5).
100.0%
90.0%
LOANSMADETO SMALLBuSINESSES
80.0%
70.0%
LOANSMADETO SMALLBuSINESSES<$1MINANNuALREvENuE
60.0%
50.0%
40.0%
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%LOANSMADEINMINORITyAREAS
LOANSMADEIN NON-MINORITy
AREAS
30.7% 32.6%
66.6% 65.9%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009131.
7.0 Small Business Lending
Table 7.5: Percentage of Loans in Low- and Moderate-Income areas for Philadelphia and the Suburban Counties.
Thepercentageofloanstosmallbusinessesinlow-andmoderate-incomeareasisfargreaterforPhiladelphiathanforitssurroundingscounties.ComparinglendinginPhiladelphiawithlendinginthesuburbancountiesbyincomelevelsandbyminoritystatusforbusinesseswithrevenueslessthan$1million,Philadelphiahasahigherperformanceratio.Additionally,therateoflendingtosmallbusinessesinlow-andmoderate-incomeareasisgreaterforPhiladelphiathanforthesuburbancountiescombined(seeTable7.6).
60.0%
50.0%
ALLSMALL BuSINESSLOANS
40.0%
30.0%
LOANSTOSMALLBuSINESS<$1MINANNuALREvENuE
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%
BuCkS CHESTER DELAWARE MONTgOMERy PHILADELPHIA
4.9% 4.9% 3.2% 2.8%
8.3% 8.2%3.8% 3.6%
52.1% 51.3%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009132.
7.0 Small Business Lending
Table 7.6: Percentage of Loans to Small Businesses by Tract Income Level for Philadelphia and the Suburbs
(See Appendix 2: Table 78 and 80)
7.5 Small Business Lending by Tract Minority Level – Philadelphia vs. Suburban Counties
Oftheapproximately74,500smallbusinesseswithannualrevenuesoflessthan$1millioninPhiladelphia,43percentarelocatedinminorityareas.Incontrast,alittlelessthan3percentofsmallbusinesseswithrevenueslessthan$1millionarelocatedinminorityareasinthesuburbancounties.1
In2009,nearly29percentofallsmallbusinessloansintheCitywereinminorityareas,comparedto1.4percentforthesuburbancounties.Forsmallbusinesseswithrevenueslessthan$1million,thepercentagewasnearly31percentand1.3percentrespectively.giventhattheCityhasahigherproportionofsmallbusinessesinminorityareas,comparedtothesuburbancounties,ahigherproportionofsmallbusinesslendingisexpectedtooccurinminorityareas.However,thepercentofloansthatgotominorityareasismuchclosertothepercentofbusinessesinminorityareasintheCitythaninthesuburbs.ThissuggeststhatbusinesseslocatedinpredominatelyminoritycommunitiesarebetterservedintheCitythaninthesuburbs.
AlthoughtheCityoutperformedthesuburbsinlendingtosmallbusinessesinlow-andmoderate-incomeareas,aswellasinareaswherethemajorityofthepopulationisminority,thepercentageofloansinareasofPhiladelphiawithlargeminoritypopulationsisstilldisproportionatelysmallerthanfornon-minorityareas.
(See Appendix 2: Table 80 and 81)
70.0%
60.0%
PHILADELPHIA
50.0%
40.0%
SuBuRBS
30.0%
20.0%
10.0%
0.0%LOWINCOME
MODERATEINCOME
MIDDLEINCOME
uPPERINCOME
16.9%
0.4%
35.2%
4.4%
28.4% 28.7%
15.7%
63.2%
1. The suburban proportion is based on 2006 data.
8.0 Rankings of Depositories - Small business Lending
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009136.
8.0 Rankings of Depositories - Small Business Lending
8.0 Rankings of Depositories - Small Business Lending 8.1 Small Business Lending - Methodology
SmallbusinesslendinginallcategoriesamongtheCitydepositoriesrepresentedover40percentofthetotalsmallbusinesslendingreportedinPhiladelphia.ToranktheCitydepositoriesonsmallbusinesslending,wereviewedthe2009InstitutionDisclosureStatementsfor10ofthe12depositories.DatawasnotavailableforAdvanceBankorunitedBank.
Therewerefivefactors,equallyweighted,consideredintherankingoftheninebanks.Eachbankwasgivenarating(1to9,where9isthehighestrating)oneachofthefactorsrelatingtoperformanceinPhiladelphiaCounty.Ratingswereassignedbasedonwhereeachinstitutionplacedinrelationtofellowinstitutions(seeTable8.1).
Table 8.1: Factors upon Which City Depositories Were Ranked in Small Business Lending
FACTOR DESCRIPTION
MarketshareofloanstosmallbusinessesinPhiladelphia(MStoSB)
Thisshowstherankingoftheindividualbankbasedonitsperformanceinrelationtoallinstitutionsservingthecityintermsofpercentageofloansmadetosmallbusinesses.
Marketshareofloanstothesmallestofsmallbusinesses(MStoSSB)
Thisshowstherankingoftheindividualbankbasedonitsperformanceinrelationtoallinstitutionsservingthecityintermsofpercentageofloanstosmallbusinesseswithrevenuesoflessthanonemilliondollars.
Lendingtosmallbusinesseslocatedinlowandmoderateincomeareas(LMI/MS)
Thisshowstherankingoftheindividualbankbasedonitsperformanceinrelationtoallinstitutionsservingthecityintermsofpercentageofloanstosmallbusinessesinlow-andmoderate-incomeareas.
Rankingamongdepositoriesforsmallbusinesslendingtothesmallestbusinesses(SSB/OtherDepositories)
Thisshowstheindividualbank’sperformanceinrelationtotheotherfivedepositoriesforlendingtosmallestbusinessesandisindicatedbythepercentageofitsowntotallendingtosmallbusinessesthatgoestosmallbusinesseswithrevenuesoflessthanonemilliondollars.
Rankingamongdepositoriesforsmallbusinesslendinginlowandmoderateincomeareas(LMI/OtherDepositories)
Thisshowstheindividualbank’sperformanceinrelationtotheotherfivedepositoriesforlendingtosmallbusinessesinlowandmoderateincomeareasasindicatedbythepercentageofitsownsmallbusinesslendingthatgoestolow-andmoderate-incomeareas.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009137.
8.0 Rankings of Depositories - Small Business Lending
Thesefivefactorswereselectedbecausetheyshowperformanceinrelationtotheentirecityandamongthedepositoriesonkeylendingpracticesaffectinglow-andmoderate-incomeandminoritybusinesses.Thesefactorsalsotakeintoconsiderationservicetothesmallestbusinesses(thosewithrevenueslessthan$1million).
8.2 Small Business Lending - Results
Ratingsweretotaledforeachbank,resultinginanoverallscorebyinstitution(seeTable8.2).
Table 8.2: Factor-by-Factor Rankings of City Depositories in Small Business Lending (1 to 9, Where 9 is the Highest Rating)
INSTITuTION MSTOSB
MSTOSSB LMI/MS SSB/OTHER
DEPOSITORIESLMI/OTHERDEPOSITORIES
TOTALSCORE
PNC 10 10 10 8 6 44
CITIgROuP 9 9 9 3 8 38
WELLSFARgO 8 8 8 4 5 33
BANkOFAMERICA 7 7 6 6 4 30
CITIZENS 6 6 7 2 7 28
SOvEREIgN 4 4 4 7 9 28
TDBANk 5 5 5 9 3 27
M&TBANk 3 2 3 1 10 19
REPuBLICFIRST 2 3 2 10 2 19
MELLON 1 1 1 5 1 9
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009138.
8.0 Rankings of Depositories - Small Business Lending
8.3 Small Business Lending - Rankings
Basedonthetotalscoresshownabove,theninedepositorieswererankedasfollows (seeTable8.3):
Table 8.3: Ranking of City Depositories in Small Business Lending
INSTITuTION 2009 RANkINg
2008 RANkINg
2007 RANkINg
2006 RANkINg
PNCBANk 1 2 2 1
CITIgROuP 2 1 1 N/A
WELLSFARgO 3 6 T4 3
BANkOFAMERICA 4 3 3 5
CITIZENS 5 T4 7 2
SOvEREIgNBANk 6 T4 T4 N/A
TDBANk 7 7 N/A N/A
M&TBANk 8 N/A N/A N/A
REPuBLICFIRSTBANk 9 8 6 N/A
BANkOFNEWyORk/MELLON 10 9 9 6
In2009,PNCrankedfirst,comparedtoasecondplacein2008.Thehighestrankedfrom2008and2007,Citigrouprankedsecondplacein2009.WellsFargoadvancedfromsixthplacetothird,whileBankofAmericamoveddowntofourthplacefromthird.Fromatieatfourthplacein2008,CitizensBankmoveddowntofifthandSovereignBankmovedtosixth,andforathirdyearinarow,BankofNewyork/Mellonrankedlast.Initsfirstyearintherankings,M&Tranked8th.
9.0 Bank Branch Analysis
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009142.
9.0 Bank Branch Analysis
9.0 Bank Branch Analysis 9.1 Overall
Therewere338bankbranchesinPhiladelphiain2009,accordingtotheFDIC’sInstitutionDirectoryandSummaryofDeposits,downfrom354in2008.Forthepurposeofthisanalysis,branchesweredefinedasofficeswithconsumerbankingservices.232branches,oraround69percent,wereownedbyCitydepositories,whichisdownfrom236branchesin2008,butupinpercentagetermsfrom67percentin2008(seeTable9.1).1
Table 9.1: Number of Branches in Philadelphia by Depository (* = Not a Depository during that Year)
BANkS 2009 BRANCHES
%OFALL2009CITyBRANCHES
2008 BRANCHES
%OFALL2008CITyBRANCHES
ADvANCE 1 0% 1 0%
BANkOFAMERICA 19 6% 18 5%
CITIBANk 7 2% 7 2%
CITIZENSBANk 60 18% 62 18%
CITyNATIONALBANk 1 0% * *
BANkOFNEWyORk/MELLON 2 1% 2 1%
M&T 8 2% * *
PNC 42 12% 42 12%
REPuBLICFIRST 7 2% 7 2%
SOvEREIgN 17 5% 17 5%
TDBANk 20 6% 29 8%
uNITEDBANkOFPHILADELPHIA 4 1% 4 1%
WELLSFARgO 44 13% 47 13%
ALLDEPOSITORIES 232 69% 236 67%
NON-DEPOSITORIES 106 31% 118 33%
ALLBANkS 338 100% 354 100%
1. FDIC Summary of Deposit data available as of June 2009 was used for this report.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009143.
9.0 Bank Branch Analysis
» TherewerefourfewerCitydepositorybranchesin2009than2008,althoughthedeclinewouldhavebeengreatersavefortheadditionofM&TBankandCityNationalasdepositories.
» Therewere12fewernon-depositorybanksin2009thanin2008.ThisisinfluencedbyM&TandCityNationalBankbecomingdepositories,whichrepresentedbothanincreaseindepositorybanksandadecreaseinnon-depositorybanks.
» BankofAmericaaddedonenetbranch,Citizenslosttwo,WellsFargolostthree,andTDBanklostnine;allotherbanksmaintainedthesamenumberofbranchesasin2008.
» Duetothefactthatmostdepositorieshavearelativelysmallnumberofbranches,thepercentageofbranchesinminorityorlow-to-moderate-income(LMI)areascanquicklychangewiththeopeningorclosingofjustoneortwooffices.
(See Appendix 2: Table 82)
9.2 Branch Locations in Minority Areas
» Twenty-threepercentofallbrancheswereinareasthatweremorethan50percentminority,whichwasslightlyabovethe22percentofallbranchesthatwerelocatedinminorityareasin2008.
» Over26percentofthedepositorybrancheswerelocatedinminorityareasin2009,upfrom25percentin2008andhigherthanthecitywideratioof23percentofallbranchesinareasthatweremorethan50percentminority.
» Sevenoutofthe13depositoriessurpassedtheCitywideratioof23percent.Sixoutof11didin2008.
» Citibank,BankofNewyork/Mellon,andRepublicFirsthadnobrancheslocatedinminorityareas,whichisunchangedfrom2008.
» BankofAmericaisupfrom2008,withtheadditionofabranchinaminorityarea.TDBankisupfrom2008asaresultofclosingseveralbranchesinnon-minorityareas.Bothremainbelowthecitybenchmark.
» Fifty-twopercentofcensustractsweremorethanhalfminority.OnlyAdvance(1outof1)andunited(3outof4)surpassedthecensusbenchmark.
(See Appendix 3: Maps 11, 13)
9.3 Branch Locations in LMI Areas
» In200957percentofallbrancheswereinLow-to-Moderate-Income(LMI)areas,whichhaveamedianincomeoflessthan80percentoftheareamedian.Thiswasthesameasin2008.
» 58percentofCitydepositorieshadbranchesinLMIareasin2009,comparedto57percentofallbankbranchesCitywide.ThepercentageofCitydepositoriesinthisareaisupfrom57percentin2008.EightCitydepositoriessurpassthisbenchmark.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009144.
9.0 Bank Branch Analysis
» Advance,CityNational,M&T,PNC,Republic,Sovereign,unitedBank,andWellsFargosurpassedtheCitywidebenchmarkforlocatingbranchesinLMIareas.AdvanceandCityNational’ssolebranches,75percentofM&T’sbranches,86percentofRepublic’sbranches,58percentofSovereign’s,75percentofunitedBank’sbranches,and68percentofWellsFargo’sbrancheswerelocatedinLMIareas.
» BankofNewyork/Mellon,Citizens,andTDBankwerewithin6percentagepointsfromachievingthe2009benchmark,whileBankofAmericaandCitibankweremorethantenpercentagepointsofachievingthe2009benchmark.
» Sixty-fivepercentofcensustractsintheCityareLMItracts.Advance,CityNational,M&T,unitedBank,RepublicFirst,andWellsFargowereabletoreachthisgoal.
(See Appendix 3: Map 12)
9.4 Conclusion
» ThemajorityofCitydepositoriescontinuedtodoabetterjoblocatingbranchesinminorityareasthanallbanks,thoughfewsurpassedthecensusbenchmarkforminoritytracts.
» AmajorityofCitydepositories(eight)didmeetorexceedtheCitywidebankbenchmarkforlocatingbranchesinLMIareas.
10.0 Neighborhood Analysis
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009148.
10.0 Neighborhood Analysis
10.0 Neighborhood Analysis 10.1 Neighborhoods Analyzed
ThehomeandbusinesslendingpracticesinnineCityneighborhoodswereexamined.Theseneighborhoodscontaincensustractsclassifiedasminorityandlow-to-moderate-income(LMI).Allnineneighborhoodsarelocatedinareaswherecommunitydevelopmentcorporationsandempowermentzoneshavebeenestablished.Theseareasandtheircorrespondingentitiesandcensustractsarelistedbelow:
» AssociationofPuertoRicansontheMarch(APM)–156
» HispanicAssociationofContractors&Enterprises(HACE)–175,176.01,176.02,195
» AlleghenyWestFoundation(AWF)–170,171,172,173
» OgontzAvenueRevitalizationCommittee(OARC)–262,263.01,263.02,264,265,266,267
» ProjectHome–151,152,168,169.01
» People’sEmergencyCenter(PEC)–90,91,108,109
» AmericanStreetEmpowermentZone–144,156,157,162,163
» NorthCentralEmpowermentZone–140,141,147,148,165
» WestPhiladelphiaEmpowermentZone–105,111
(See Appendix 2, Table 83)
10.2 Demographics and Lending Practices by Neighborhood (see Table 10.1)
10.2.1 Asociación Puertorriqueños en Marcha
AsociaciónPuertorriqueñosenMarcha(APM)islocatedinthenortheasternsectionofPhiladelphia.Morethanthree-quartersofthisarea’shouseholdsareHispanic,givingAPMthelargestHispanicpopulationofallneighborhoodsexaminedinthissection.ThenextlargestgroupisAfricanAmericans(14percentofhouseholds).Themedianfamilyincomeisapproximately36percentoftheregionalmedianfamilyincome.Thereare289owner-occupiedhousingunits(OOHus)intheAPMneighborhood,whichislessthan0.1percentofallOOHusintheCity.
In2009,atotalof2loansweremadeintheAPMneighborhood,downfrom2008(where12weremade).Asinpreviousyears,APMreceivedthefewestloansofanyneighborhoodexamined.Oneofthoseloanswasaprimeloanandtheotherwassubprime.Theseloansrepresentlessthan0.01percentofallloansintheCity,includinglessthan0.01percentofallprimeloansand0.06percentofallsubprimeloans.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009149.
10.0 Neighborhood Analysis
10.2.2 Hispanic Association of Contractors & Enterprises
TheHispanicAssociationofContractors&Enterprises(HACE)islocatedwithintheneighborhoodsurroundingtheNorthFifthStreetclusterofkeyLatinoneighborhoodbusinessesandculturalinstitutions.Hispanichouseholdsmakeup75percentofallhouseholdsinthisneighborhood,and19percentofallhouseholdsareAfrican-American.Withamedianfamilyincomeofonly24percentoftheregionalmedianfamilyincome,HACEisthepoorestofthenineneighborhoodsevaluatedforthisstudy.Theneighborhoodcontains4,022OOHus,approximatelyonepercentofallCityOOHus.
Atotalof70loansweremadewithintheHACEcommunityin2009,adecreasefrom121in2008.Theseloansrepresented0.3percentofallloansmadeintheCity,asmallersharethantheportionofOOHuscontainedinthisneighborhood(1.2percent).LendersprovidedHACEborrowerswith41primeloansand29subprimeloans(0.2percentofallCityprimeand1.7percentofallCitysubprimeloans).Asin2008and2009,theneighborhoodreceivedahighershareofsubprimeloansandasmallershareofprimeloansincomparisontotheirshareofOOHus.
10.2.3 Allegheny West Foundation
TheAlleghenyWestFoundation(AWF)islocatedinNorthPhiladelphia,apredominatelyAfrican-Americanneighborhood.Ninety-fourpercentofallhouseholdsareAfrican-AmericanandonepercentareHispanic.AWFhasamedianfamilyincomethatis46percentoftheregionalmedianfamilyincome.Theneighborhoodiscomprisedoffourcensustractsandcontains4,584units,whichismorethanonepercentoftheCity’stotalOOHus.
BorrowersfromtheAWFneighborhoodreceivedatotalof60loansin2009,adecreaseof49loansfromlastyear.Over73percentoftheseloanswereprimeand26.7percentweresubprime.AWFborrowersreceived0.2percentofallloansoriginatedinPhiladelphia,buttheneighborhoodcontains1.3percentofCity-wideOOHus.LendersgaveborrowersfromthissectionoftheCitya0.2shareofCityprimeloans)andanda1.0percentshareofsubprimeloans.
10.2.4 Ogontz Avenue Revitalization Corporation
TheOgontzAvenueRevitalizationCorporation(OARC)islocatedintheWestOakLanesectionoftheCity.Ninety-sixpercentoftotalhouseholdsintheneighborhoodareAfrican-American,while0.8percentoftheneighborhood’stotalhouseholdsareHispanic.Thoughthemedianfamilyincomeisonly76percentoftheregionalmedianfamilyincome,itisthehighestofthenineneighborhoods.OARCisalsothelargestofthenineneighborhoodsdiscussedinthissectionandtypicallyreceivesthemostloans(fromeachdepositorandoverall).ItcontainssevencensustractsandthreepercentofallCityOOHusarelocatedthere.
TheOARCcommunityreceived576loansin2009,thelargestamountofthenineneighborhoods.Thenumberoforiginatedloansdecreasedby160from2008.Theseloansmadeup2.2percentofallloansissuedintheCity.Nearly88percentoftheloansreceivedinOARCwereprimeloansand12percentweresubprimeloans.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009150.
10.0 Neighborhood Analysis
10.2.5 Project HOME
TheProjectHOMEneighborhoodislocatedneartheSpringgardensectionoftheCity.Ninety-eightpercentofitshouseholdsareAfrican-American,makingitthelargestAfrican-Americanpopulationofalltheneighborhoodsdetailedinthisstudy.LessthanonepercentofallhouseholdsareHispanic.Themedianfamilyincomeis34percentoftheregionalmedianfamilyincomeandthe3,894housingunitslocatedinthisareacompriseapproximatelyonepercentoftheCity’stotalowner-occupiedunits.
Lendersprovided51loanstotheProjectHOMEneighborhoodin2009,82percentofwhichwereprimeand18percentweresubprimeloans.Theseloansaccountedfor0.2percentofallloansmadeinPhiladelphia.WithrespecttotheirshareoftheCity’sOOHus,theborrowersintheProjectHOMEneighborhoodreceivedalowershareofsubprimeloansandprimeloans.
10.2.6 Peoples’ Emergency Center
ThePeoples’EmergencyCenter(PEC)neighborhoodislocatedintheCity’sWestPhiladelphiasection.Thisneighborhoodcontainsfourcensustractsand1,445OOHus,whichisapproximately0.4percentofallCityunits.Nearlytwo-thirdsofhouseholdsinthisneighborhoodareAfrican-AmericanandapproximatelythreepercentareHispanic.ThemedianfamilyincomeforPECis36percentoftheregionalmedianfamilyincome.
In2009,51loansweremadetoborrowersinthePECneighborhood.Thiswasaincreaseof10loansfrom2008.Eighty-sixpercentoforiginatedloanswereprime.BorrowersinthePECneighborhoodreceived0.2percentofallloansmadeintheCity.
10.2.7 American Street Empowerment Zone
TheAmericanStreetEmpowermentZoneislocatedintheOlneysectionoftheCity.ItspopulationispredominatelyHispanic,withtwo-thirdsoftotalhouseholdsbeingfromthisethnicgroup.SeventeenpercentofthehouseholdsareAfrican-American.Thezoneiscomprisedoffivecensustractsandcontains2,165owner-occupiedhousingunits,or0.6percentofthetotalowner-occupiedhousingunitsintheCityofPhiladelphia.Themedianfamilyincomeis37percentoftheregionalmedianfamilyincome.
BorrowersintheAmericanStreetEmpowermentZonereceived113loansin2009,adecreaseof10loansfrom2008.Theseloanscomprised0.4percentofallloansmadeintheCity.Eighty-fourpercentoftheseloanswereprime(anincreaseof7percentover2008and17percentover2007).
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009151.
10.0 Neighborhood Analysis
10.2.8 North Central Empowerment Zone
TheNorthCentralEmpowermentZoneislocatedinNorthPhiladelphiaandiscomprisedoffivecensustractsand1,339OOHus,or0.4percentofCityunits.NorthCentralis90percentAfrican-American.FivepercentofhouseholdsareHispanic.ThemedianfamilyincomeforNorthCentralis33percentoftheregionalmedianfamilyincome.
Only51loansweremadein2009withintheNorthCentralneighborhood,adecreaseofsevenloansover2008.Theseloanscomprisedonly0.19percentofallCitylending.Seventy-eightpercentoforiginatedloanswereprime,largelyunchangedfrom79percentin2008,butstillupfromfrom55percentin2006and2007.
10.2.9 West Philadelphia Empowerment Zone
TheWestPhiladelphiaEmpowermentZoneislocatedintheWestPhiladelphiasectionoftheCity.Ninety-fivepercentofhouseholdsintheareaareAfrican-AmericanandlessthanonepercentareHispanic.Theneighborhoodcontainstwocensustractsand1,399OOHus(0.4percent)oftheCity.Themedianfamilyincomeforthisareais41percentoftheregionalmedianfamilyincome.
In2009,lendersprovided17loanstotheWestPhiladelphiaEmpowermentZone,downfrom26in2008.Ofalloftheneighborhoodsexamined,theWestPhiladelphiaEmpowermentZonehadthesecondlowestnumberofloans,behindonlyAPM.Overseventy-sixpercentofthoseloanswereprime,downfrom85percentin2008.Only0.1percentofallloansmadeinPhiladelphiawenttotheWestPhiladelphiaEmpowermentZone.
Table 10.1: Demographics and Lending Practices by Neighborhood
ORgANIZATION LOCATIONMAJORETHNICgROuP
2000MEDIANINCOMEASA%OFREgIONALMEDIAN
INCOME#LOANS %LOANSTHAT
WERESuBPRIME
APM NPHILA HISP 36% 2 50.0%
HACE N5THST HISP 24% 70 41.4%
AWF NPHILA AFRAM 46% 60 26.7%
OARC WOAkLN AFRAM 76% 576 12.3%
PROJECTHOME SPRgRDN AFRAM 34% 51 17.6%
PEC WPHILA AFRAM 36% 51 13.7%
AMERICANSTEZ kENSINgTON HISP 36% 113 15.9%
NORTHCENTRALEZ NPHILA AFRAM 33% 51 21.6%
WESTPHILAEZ WPHILA AFRAM 41% 17 23.5%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009152.
10.0 Neighborhood Analysis
10.3 Depository Lending Practices by Neighborhood
10.3.1 Advance Bank
Ofthe27totalloansmadeintheCityofPhiladelphiabyAdvanceBank,onlyonewasmadeinoneofthenineneighborhoodsexamined.TheloanwasmadeinthePECneighborhood.
10.3.2 Bank of America
BankofAmericaprovided108loanstoborrowersintheneighborhoodsexaminedaspartofthisanalysis.LendingbyBankofAmericatotheseneighborhoodsrepresented3.3percentofallloansthebankoriginatedintheCity.Thirty-sixofthoseloanswereinOARC;BankofAmerica’smarketshare,however,wasonly6.2percentinthisneighborhood.ItsmarketshareofallCitylendingwas6.8percent,comparedwith6.0inthenineneighborhoods.
10.3.3 CitiGroup
Citigroupmadeatotalof13loanstoborrowersinfourofthenineCDCneighborhoods.Itissued4.2percentofitsPhiladelphialendingtotheseborrowers.Citigrouporiginated1.3percentofalllendingtothenineneighborhoods,comparedwith4.5percentmarketshareofalllendingintheCity.Aswithallotherbanks,thepluralityofCitigroup’slending(13loans)wasmadeintheOARCarea,constitutingaportfolioshare3.2percent.
10.3.4 Citizens Bank
CitizensBankmadeatotalof58loans,or8.0percentofallofitsCitylending,inthenineneighborhoods.Itmadeloansineveryneighborhood,expectforAPM.Thirty-eightpercentoftheseloansweremadeintheOARCneighborhood.Citizenswrote3.8percentofallloansinthatneighborhood,andthose22loansrepresent3.1percentofalllendingdonebyCitizensintheCity.
10.3.5 City National
CityNationaldidnotmakeanyloansintheCity.
10.3.6 Bank of New York / Mellon
BankofNewyork/Mellonmadeonly4loansintheCity,andnoneoftheloanswereintheneighborhoodsexaminedinthissection.
10.3.7 M&T Bank
M&TBankmadeatotalof5loans,or5.3percentofallofitsCitylending,inthenineneighborhoods.Itmadeloansinthreeofthenineneighborhoods.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009153.
10.0 Neighborhood Analysis
10.3.8 PNC Bank
Borrowersinthenineneighborhoodsreceived27loansfromPNCbank,downfrom36loansin2008.Theseloansrepresented5.2percentoflendingbyPNCintheCityofPhiladelphia.WithintheCDCneighborhoods,PNCheldamarketshareof2.8percent.Aswithalloftheotherde-positories,themajorityofPNC’sloansinthenineneighborhoodswenttotheOARCarea,whichreceived17loans.
10.3.9 Republic First Bank
RepublicFirstBankdidnotmakeanyloansintheneighborhoodsexaminedaspartofthisanalysis.
10.3.10 Sovereign Bank
Sovereignoriginated76loanstosevenoutofthenineCDCneighborhoods,thesecondlargesttotalafterWellsFargo.Thisconstitutes7.7percentofalllendingtotheseareas,comparedwitha4.1percentmarketshareofoveralllendingintheCity.MostofthelendingissuedbySovereigntotheCDCneighborhoodswenttoborrowersintheOARCsection.These42loansrepresentedaportfolioshareof3.9percent.
10.3.11 TD Bank
TDBankprovidedborrowersinfiveofthenineCDCneighborhoodswithatotalof10loans.Itoriginated1.0percentofallloansinthenineneighborhoods,comparedto1.1percentofallloansintheCity.TDBankmade3.4percentofitsPhiladelphialoansinthenineneighborhoods.TDBankoriginatedthemostloansintheOARC(5).
10.3.12 United Bank
unitedBankdidnotmakeanyloansintheneighborhoodsexaminedaspartofthisanalysis.
10.3.13 Wells Fargo
WellsFargomade114loanswithinthenineneighborhoods,themostloansofanycitydeposito-ry.WellsFargomade3.0percentofallitsCityloansinthosenineareas.Itsmarketshareintheneighborhoodswas11.5percent.ItsmarketshareinallofPhiladelphiawas14.5percent.ThelargestnumberofloansbyWellsFargowasmadeintheOARCneighborhood(62loans),whereWellsFargohadamarketshareof10.7percent.
(See Appendix 2, Table 84)
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009154.
10.0 Neighborhood Analysis
10.4 Small Business Lending in the Neighborhoods
Smallbusinesslendingwasexaminedinthenineneighborhoods,sinceinformationwasnotavailableatthecensustractlevelforindividualinstitutions.Thetablebelowshowsthenumberofsmallbusinessloansreportedinthe2009CRAdataforeachofthetargetedneighborhoods.Italsodisplaysthenumberofsmallbusinesseswithrevenueslessthan$1millionlocatedintheneighborhoods(seeTable10.2).
OARChasthelargestnumberofsmallbusinesseswithrevenueslessthan$1million,with1,337.TheOARCneighborhoodalsohadthehighestnumberofloanstosmallbusinesses,with116loanstosmallbusinessesdownfrom299in2008,and436in2007.Therewere41loanstothesmallestofsmallbusinesses,downfrom100in2008.
Theneighborhoodwiththenextlargestnumberofbusinesseswithrevenuesoflessthan$1millionwasAmericanStreet,with881businesses.Thisareahadthesecondhighestnumberofloanstosmallbusinesseswith107,whichwasdownfrom297in2008.Thisareaalsohadthesecondhighestnumberofloanstobusinesseswithrevenuesoflessthan$1millionwith39,downfrom90in2008.
Thethirdcolumnofthetablebelowshowsthepercentagesofsmallbusinessloansthatwenttobusinesseswithrevenueslessthanonemilliondollars.Inallcases,therangeofthispercentageofloansgoingtobusinesseswithrevenuesoflessthan$1millionwasbetween25percentand40percent.
Table 10.1: 2009 Small Business Loan Activity in Selected Philadelphia Neighborhoods
NEIgHBORHOOD
NuMBEROFSMALLBuSINESSLOANS
NuMBEROFLOANSTOSMALLBuSINESS<$1MILLIONIN
ANNuALREvENuE
PERCENTAgEOFLOANSTOSMALLBuSINESSESWITHANNuALREvENuES
<$1MILLION
NuMBEROFSMALLBuSINESS
NuMBEROFSMALLBuSINESSESWITH
ANNuALREvENuE<$1MILLION
APM 4 1 25% 151 101
HACE 57 23 40% 1064 834
AWF 83 31 37% 961 718
OARC 116 41 35% 1543 1337
PROJECTHOME 26 8 31% 728 591
PEC 85 30 35% 908 618
AMERICANSTEZ 107 39 36% 1185 881
NORTHCENTRALEZ 64 16 25% 926 690
WESTPHILAEZ 33 11 33% 575 418
(See Appendix 2, Table 85)
Appendix 1 – Regression Tables
Appendix1
1 AllLenders–HomePurchaseLoans 144
2 AllLenders–HomePurchaseLoansTestforRedlining 145
3 AllLenders–HomePurchaseLoansbyPrimeandSubprime 146
4 AllLenders–HomeRefinancingLoans 147
5 AllLenders–HomeImprovementLoans 148
6 Depositories–HomePurchaseLoans 150
7 Depositories–HomePurchaseLoansTestforRedlining 152
8 Depositories–HomePurchaseLoansbyPrimeandSubprime 154
9 Depositories–HomeRefinancingLoans 156
10 Depositories–HomeImprovementLoans 158
Table of Contents
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009160.
Appendix 1 – Regression Tables
Table 1: All Lenders - Home Purchase Loans
vARIABLES COEFF SE T-STAT PvAL 95%CONFIDENCEINTERvAL
RACE(REFERENCE=WHITE) BLACk 0.610*** 0.0903 6.747 0 0.432 0.787ASIAN 0.270*** 0.0928 2.906 0.00366 0.0878 0.451HISPANIC 0.180* 0.0997 1.803 0.0714 -0.0156 0.375MISSINgRACE 0.623*** 0.0770 8.090 0 0.472 0.773gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE)MALE 0.172*** 0.0622 2.773 0.00556 0.0505 0.294MISSINggENDER -0.250** 0.119 -2.093 0.0363 -0.483 -0.0159BLACkMALE 0.125 0.114 1.100 0.272 -0.0977 0.347vACANCyRATE 2.416*** 0.487 4.963 6.95E-07 1.462 3.370TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME 0.00265** 0.00131 2.028 0.0426 8.86E-05 0.00521LOg(LOANAMOuNT -0.369*** 0.0655 -5.632 1.78E-08 -0.497 -0.240LOg(INCOME) -0.394*** 0.0538 -7.317 0 -0.499 -0.288CONvENTIONALLOAN 0.530*** 0.183 2.905 0.00367 0.172 0.888FHALOAN -0.0332 0.181 -0.184 0.854 -0.387 0.321LOANTOvALuERATIO 0.100*** 0.0146 6.877 0 0.0718 0.129CONSTANT 0.511 0.342 1.493 0.135 -0.160 1.181 ***denotes 1% significance level; **denotes 5% significance level; * denotes 10% significance level
DEPENDENTvARIABLE:DENIAL
NuMBEROFOBSERvATIONS= 14327 LRCHI2(14)= 534.47 PROB>CHI2= 0.0000 LOgLIkELIHOOD= -5598.2543 PSuEDOR2= 0.0456
.TESTBLACkBLACk_MALE
(1)BLACk=0(2)BLACk_MALE=0
CHI2(2)=92.33PROB>CHI2=0.0000
MARgINALEFFECTSAFTERLOgITy=PR(DENIAL)(PREDICT)0.1299999
vARIABLES Dy/DX STD.ERROR Z P>Z 95%CONFIDENCE
LEvEL X
RACE(REFERENCE=WHITE) BLACk* 0.0785757 0.01304 6.03 0 0.053015 0.104136 0.209325ASIAN* 0.0331268 0.01231 2.69 0.007 0.008998 0.057255 0.081734HISPANIC* 0.021468 0.01254 1.71 0.087 -0.003115 0.04605 0.085712MISSINgRACE* 0.0821447 0.01156 7.11 0 0.059486 0.104804 0.161443gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE* 0.0194202 0.00697 2.79 0.005 0.005763 0.033078 0.537168MISSINggENDER* -0.0306672 0.01584 -1.94 0.053 -0.061708 0.000373 0.950653BLACk*MALE* 0.0146731 0.01385 1.06 0.29 -0.012479 0.041825 0.086131vACANCyRATE 0.2732271 0.05499 4.97 0 0.165452 0.381002 0.086315TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME 0.0002999 0.00015 2.03 0.043 9.90E-06 0.00059 78.4813LOg(LOANAMOuNT) -0.041704 0.00741 -5.63 0 -0.056222 -0.027186 4.99464LOg(INCOME) -0.0445505 0.00604 -7.37 0 -0.05639 -0.032711 4.01425CONvENTIONALLOAN* 0.0617316 0.02191 2.82 0.005 0.018791 0.104672 0.434634FHALOAN* -0.0037579 0.02048 -0.18 0.854 -0.043894 0.036378 0.544287LOANTOvALuERATIO 0.0113555 0.00165 6.89 0 0.008123 0.014588 2.49767(*) dy/dx is for discrete change of a dummy variable from 0 to 1
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009161.
Appendix 1 – Regression Tables
Table 2: All Lenders - Home Purchase Loans Tests for Redlining
vARIABLES COEFF SE T-STAT PvAL 95%CONFIDENCEINTERvAL
PERCENTMINORITyPOPuLATION 0.00741*** 0.000913 8.115 0 0.00562 0.00920MALE 0.179*** 0.0521 3.442 0.000577 0.0772 0.282MISSINggENDER -0.542*** 0.103 -5.275 1.33E-07 -0.743 -0.340vACANyRATE 0.730 0.532 1.373 0.170 -0.312 1.772TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME 0.00416*** 0.00129 3.227 0.00125 0.00163 0.00668LOg(LOANAMOuNT) -0.411*** 0.0638 -6.445 1.16E-10 -0.536 -0.286LOg(INCOME) -0.403*** 0.0530 -7.593 0 -0.507 -0.299CONvENTIONALLOAN 0.468*** 0.180 2.599 0.00934 0.115 0.822FHALOAN -0.0895 0.180 -0.497 0.619 -0.442 0.263LOANTOvALuERATIO 0.106*** 0.0145 7.287 0 0.0773 0.134CONSTANT 1.088*** 0.324 3.359 0.000783 0.453 1.723 ***denotes 1% significance level; **denotes 5% significance level; * denotes 10% significance level
DEPENDENTvARIABLE:DENIAL NuMBEROFOBSERvATIONS= 14327 LRCHI2(14)= 472.55 PROB>CHI2= 0.0000 LOgLIkELIHOOD= -5629.2114 PSuEDOR2= 0.0403
MARgINALEFFECTSAFTERLOgITy=PR(DENIAL)(PREDICT)0.13170466
vARIABLES Dy/DX STD.ERROR Z P>Z 95%CONFIDENCELEvEL X
PERCENTMINORITyPOPuLATION 0.0008476 0.0001 8.19 0 0.000645 0.00105 41.3692MALE* 0.0204223 0.0059 3.46 0.001 0.008858 0.031987 0.537168MISSINggENDER* -0.0737886 0.01629 -4.53 0 -0.10572 -0.041858 0.950653vACANyRATE 0.0834531 0.06079 1.37 0.17 -0.035702 0.202608 0.086315TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME 0.0004752 0.00015 3.23 0.001 0.000187 0.000764 78.4813LOg(LOANAMOuNT) -0.0470182 0.00729 -6.45 0 -0.061311 -0.032725 4.99464LOg(INCOME) -0.046054 0.00601 -7.66 0 -0.057841 -0.034267 4.01425CONvENTIONALLOAN* 0.0549375 0.0217 2.53 0.011 0.01241 0.097465 0.434634FHALOAN* -0.0102684 0.02071 -0.5 0.62 -0.050851 0.030315 0.544287LOANTOvALuERATIO 0.0120971 0.00166 7.3 0 0.00885 0.015344 2.49767
(*) dy/dx is for discrete change of a dummy variable from 0 to 1
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009162.
Appendix 1 – Regression Tables
Table 3: All Lenders - Home Purchase Loans by Prime and Subprime
vARIABLES COEFF SE T-STAT PvAL 95%CONFIDENCEINTERvAL
RACE(REFERENCE=WHITE) BLACk 0.417*** 0.139 2.990 0.00279 0.144 0.690ASIAN 0.502*** 0.165 3.045 0.00233 0.179 0.826HISPANIC 0.474*** 0.141 3.366 0.000764 0.198 0.751MISSINgRACE -0.609*** 0.210 -2.896 0.00378 -1.021 -0.197gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE -0.0684 0.110 -0.621 0.534 -0.284 0.147MISSINggENDER -0.614** 0.277 -2.216 0.0267 -1.158 -0.0710BLACkMALE -0.0597 0.181 -0.330 0.742 -0.415 0.295vACANCyRATE -1.495 0.992 -1.508 0.132 -3.439 0.449TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME -0.00802*** 0.00302 -2.656 0.00791 -0.0139 -0.00210LOg(LOANAMOuNT) -0.795*** 0.109 -7.313 0 -1.008 -0.582LOg(INCOME) 0.151 0.0961 1.575 0.115 -0.0371 0.340CONvENTIONALLOAN -0.903*** 0.114 -7.923 0 -1.126 -0.680LOANTOvALuERATIO 0.0752** 0.0299 2.513 0.0120 0.0165 0.134CONSTANT 1.447*** 0.559 2.588 0.00964 0.351 2.543
***denotes 1% significance level; **denotes 5% significance level; * denotes 10% significance level
DEPENDENTvARIABLE:SuBPRIME NuMBEROFOBSERvATIONS= 14327 LRCHI2(14)= 361.26 PROB>CHI2= 0.0000 LOgLIkELIHOOD= -234.0646 PSuEDOR2= 0.0713
.TESTBLACkBLACk_MALE
(1)BLACk=0(2)BLACk_MALE=0
CHI2(2)=12.00PROB>CHI2=0.025
MARgINALEFFECTSAFTERLOgITy=PR(SuBPRIME)(PREDICT)0.03130692
vARIABLES Dy/DX STD.ERROR Z P>Z 95%CONFIDENCELEvEL X
RACE(REFERENCE=WHITE) BLACk 0.0142291 0.00536 2.66 0.008 0.003734 0.024725 0.209325ASIAN 0.0186729 0.00737 2.53 0.011 0.004222 0.033124 0.081734HISPANIC 0.0173977 0.00621 2.8 0.005 0.005227 0.029569 0.085712MISSINgRACE -0.0153967 0.00435 -3.54 0 -0.02393 -0.006864 0.161443gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE -0.0020791 0.00335 -0.62 0.535 -0.008653 0.004495 0.537168MISSINggENDER -0.0243846 0.01395 -1.75 0.08 -0.051727 0.002958 0.950653BLACkMALE -0.0017682 0.00524 -0.34 0.736 -0.012045 0.008508 0.086131vACANCyRATE -0.0453443 0.02983 -1.52 0.128 -0.103805 0.013117 0.086315TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME -0.0002432 0.00009 -2.7 0.007 -0.000419 -0.000067 78.4813LOg(LOANAMOuNT) -0.0240961 0.00329 -7.33 0 -0.030542 -0.01765 4.99464LOg(INCOME) 0.0045913 0.00292 1.57 0.116 -0.001129 0.010311 4.01425CONvENTIONALLOAN -0.026636 0.00318 -8.39 0 -0.03286 -0.020412 0.434634LOANTOvALuERATIO 0.0022794 0.00091 2.52 0.012 0.000505 0.004054 2.49767(*) dy/dx is for discrete change of a dummy variable from 0 to 1
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009163.
Appendix 1 – Regression Tables
Table 4: All Lenders - Home Refinancing Loans
vARIABLES COEFF SE T-STAT PvAL 95%CONFIDENCEINTERvAL
RACE(REFERENCE=WHITE) BLACk 0.817*** 0.0483 16.92 0 0.723 0.912ASIAN 0.422*** 0.0622 6.793 0 0.301 0.544HISPANIC 0.799*** 0.0614 13.01 0 0.679 0.920MISSINgRACE 0.0521 0.0416 1.254 0.210 -0.0293 0.134gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE 0.0236 0.0339 0.697 0.486 -0.0428 0.0900MISSINggENDER -0.414*** 0.0588 -7.041 0 -0.529 -0.299BLACkMALE 0.0215 0.0649 0.332 0.740 -0.106 0.149vACANCyRATE 0.433 0.280 1.546 0.122 -0.116 0.981TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME -0.00281*** 0.000707 -3.976 7.02E-05 -0.00420 -0.00143LOg(LOANAMOuNT) 0.0559 0.0371 1.509 0.131 -0.0167 0.129LOg(INCOME) -0.513*** 0.0262 -19.60 0 -0.564 -0.462CONvENTIONALLOAN 0.0465 0.190 0.245 0.807 -0.326 0.419FHALOAN 0.0952 0.191 0.498 0.618 -0.279 0.469LOANTOvALuERATIO 0.113*** 0.0161 7.018 0 0.0813 0.144CONSTANT 0.913*** 0.243 3.756 0.000173 0.436 1.389 ***denotes 1% significance level; **denotes 5% significance level; * denotes 10% significance level
DEPENDENTvARIABLE:SuBPRIME NuMBEROFOBSERvATIONS= 29610 LRCHI2(14)= 1965.85 PROB>CHI2= 0.0000 LOgLIkELIHOOD= -16689.514 PSuEDOR2= 0.0556
.TESTBLACkBLACk_MALE
(1)BLACk=0(2)BLACk_MALE=0
CHI2(2)=496371PROB>CHI2=0.0000
MARgINALEFFECTSAFTERLOgITy=PR(SuBPRIME)(PREDICT)0.27075315
vARIABLES Dy/DX STD.ERROR Z P>Z 95%CONFIDENCELEvEL X
RACE(REFERENCE=WHITE) BLACk* 0.1774194 0.01119 15.86 0 0.155489 0.19935 0.186525ASIAN* 0.0901347 0.01416 6.37 0 0.062385 0.117885 0.046876HISPANIC* 0.1795943 0.01499 11.98 0 0.150208 0.208981 0.044343MISSINgRACE* 0.0103533 0.00831 1.25 0.213 -0.00593 0.026636 0.228234gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE* 0.0046563 0.00668 0.7 0.486 -0.00843 0.017742 0.533063MISSINggENDER* -0.0876041 0.01321 -6.63 0 -0.113486 -0.061722 0.913779BLACkMALE* 0.0042681 0.0129 0.33 0.741 -0.021019 0.029556 0.079737vACANCyRATE 0.0853491 0.05523 1.55 0.122 -0.022892 0.19359 0.080847TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME -0.0005546 0.00014 -3.98 0 -0.000828 -0.000282 84.5024LOg(LOANAMOuNT) 0.0110349 0.00731 1.51 0.131 -0.003298 0.025368 4.91823LOg(INCOME) -0.1012474 0.00514 -19.71 0 -0.111314 -0.091181 4.14446CONvENTIONALLOAN* 0.0091316 0.03709 0.25 0.806 -0.063556 0.081819 0.75846FHALOAN 0.0189915 0.03853 0.49 0.622 -0.05652 0.094503 0.236947LOANTOvALuERATIO 0.0222504 0.00317 7.02 0 0.016037 0.028464 2.08723(*) dy/dx is for discrete change of a dummy variable from 0 to 1
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009164.
Appendix 1 – Regression Tables
Table 5: All Lenders - Home Improvement Loans
vARIABLES COEFF SE T-STAT PvAL 95%CONFIDENCEINTERvAL
RACE(REFERENCE=WHITE) BLACk 0.639*** 0.139 4.602 4.19E-06 0.367 0.912ASIAN 0.312 0.226 1.383 0.167 -0.130 0.755HISPANIC 0.843*** 0.164 5.132 2.87E-07 0.521 1.165MISSINgRACE 0.719*** 0.151 4.750 2.04E-06 0.422 1.016gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE -0.124 0.118 -1.053 0.292 -0.354 0.107MISSINggENDER 0.0863 0.204 0.422 0.673 -0.314 0.487BLACkMALE 0.476*** 0.183 2.593 0.00951 0.116 0.835vACANCyRATE 1.107 0.942 1.176 0.240 -0.738 2.953TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME -0.00609** 0.00273 -2.235 0.0254 -0.0114 -0.000750LOg(LOANAMOuNT) -0.294*** 0.0824 -3.570 0.000357 -0.456 -0.133LOg(INCOME) -0.423*** 0.0713 -5.934 2.96E-09 -0.563 -0.283CONvENTIONALLOAN 0.0287 1.076 0.0267 0.979 -2.081 2.139FHALOAN -0.361 1.092 -0.330 0.741 -2.501 1.779LOANTOvALuERATIO 0.218*** 0.0779 2.801 0.00509 0.0656 0.371CONSTANT 2.200* 1.144 1.924 0.0544 -0.0415 4.443 ***denotes 1% significance level; **denotes 5% significance level; * denotes 10% significance level DEPENDENTvARIABLE:DENIAL NuMBEROFOBSERvATIONS= 2567 LRCHI2(14)= 360.53 PROB>CHI2= 0.0000 LOgLIkELIHOOD= -1597.0573 PSuEDOR2= 0.1014
.TESTBLACkBLACk_MALE
(1)BLACk=0(2)BLACk_MALE=0
CHI2(2)=66.86PROB>CHI2=0.0000
MARgINALEFFECTSAFTERLOgITy=PR(DENIAL)(PREDICT)0.51945256
vARIABLES Dy/DX STD.ERROR Z P>Z 95%CONFIDENCELEvEL X
RACE(REFERENCE=WHITE) BLACk* 0.1575537 0.03348 4.71 0 0.091941 0.223167 0.375536ASIAN* 0.077016 0.05458 1.41 0.158 -0.02996 0.183992 0.037787HISPANIC* 0.1995197 0.03536 5.64 0 0.130207 0.268832 0.103233MISSINgRACE* 0.1736687 0.03459 5.02 0 0.105866 0.241471 0.172185gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE* -0.0309094 0.02934 -1.05 0.292 -0.088411 0.026592 0.453448MISSINggENDER* 0.0215578 0.05109 0.42 0.673 -0.078583 0.121699 0.926763BLACkMALE* 0.1166414 0.04367 2.67 0.008 0.031053 0.20223 0.147254vACANCyRATE 0.2763779 0.235 1.18 0.24 -0.18421 0.736966 0.111516TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME -0.0015213 0.00068 -2.23 0.025 -0.002856 -0.000187 65.5356LOg(LOANAMOuNT) -0.0734055 0.02056 -3.57 0 -0.113704 -0.033107 3.73215LOg(INCOME) -0.1055532 0.01778 -5.94 0 -0.140411 -0.070696 3.71046CONvENTIONALLOAN* 0.0071647 0.26893 0.03 0.979 -0.519932 0.534262 0.94663FHALOAN* -0.0897675 0.26846 -0.33 0.738 -0.615947 0.436412 0.051811LOANTOvALuERATIO 0.0544943 0.01945 2.8 0.005 0.016369 0.09262 1.16641(*) dy/dx is for discrete change of a dummy variable from 0 to 1
NOTE:ADvANCEBANkDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy CITIZENSFINANCIALgROuPDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy BANkOFNEWyORkMELLONDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy REPuBLICFIRSTDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy uNITEDBANkOFPHILADELPHIADROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy CITyNATIONALDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009165.
Appendix 1 – Regression Tables
Table 6: Depositories - Home Purchase Loans
vARIABLES COEFF SE TSTAT PvAL 95%CONFIDENCEINTERvAL
RACE(REFERENCE=WHITE) BLACk 0.809*** 0.110 7.320 0 0.592 1.025ASIAN 0.329** 0.132 2.503 0.0123 0.0715 0.587HISPANIC -0.0217 0.139 -0.156 0.876 -0.294 0.250MISSINgRACE 0.865*** 0.0893 9.685 0 0.690 1.040DEPOSITORyRACE(INTERACTION)(REFERENCE=OTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS) BLACk*DEPOSITORy -0.351*** 0.125 -2.816 0.00486 -0.595 -0.107ASIAN*DEPOSITORy -0.426** 0.189 -2.253 0.0243 -0.796 -0.0554HISPANIC*DEPOSITORy 0.385** 0.195 1.977 0.0480 0.00341 0.766MISSINgRACE*DEPOSITORy -0.619*** 0.156 -3.975 7.05E-05 -0.924 -0.314gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE 0.159** 0.0659 2.419 0.0155 0.0303 0.289MISSINggENDER -0.254* 0.135 -1.884 0.0596 -0.518 0.0103BLACk*MALE 0.0870 0.120 0.723 0.470 -0.149 0.323vACANCyRATE 2.292*** 0.526 4.355 1.33E-05 1.261 3.324TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME 0.00238* 0.00141 1.687 0.0916 -0.000385 0.00515LOg(LOANAMOuNT) -0.357*** 0.0706 -5.065 4.08E-07 -0.496 -0.219LOg(INCOME) -0.454*** 0.0581 -7.807 0 -0.567 -0.340BANk(REFERENCE=ALLOTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS BANkOFAMERICA 0.583*** 0.111 5.273 1.34E-07 0.366 0.799CITIBANk 1.271*** 0.393 3.237 0.00121 0.501 2.040PNCBANk -1.087*** 0.394 -2.757 0.00583 -1.860 -0.314TDBANk 1.532*** 0.131 11.67 0 1.275 1.789WELLSFARgO 0.190** 0.0935 2.035 0.0418 0.00705 0.373BANCOSANTANDER -0.554*** 0.153 -3.631 0.000282 -0.853 -0.255M&TBANk 0.927*** 0.297 3.126 0.00177 0.346 1.508CONCENTIONALLOAN 0.510*** 0.0599 8.524 0 0.393 0.628LOANTOvALuERATIO 0.114*** 0.0163 7.009 0 0.0822 0.146CONSTANT 0.536* 0.315 1.704 0.0884 -0.0805 1.153 ***denotes 1% significance level; **denotes 5% significance level; * denotes 10% significance level DEPENDENTvARIABLE:DENIAL NuMBEROFOBSERvATIONS= 13273 LRCHI2(14)= 721.63 PROB>CHI2= 0.0000 LOgLIkELIHOOD= -4982.9144 PSuEDOR2= 0.0675
(1)BLACk=0(2)BLACk_MALE=0
CHI2(2)=87.96PROB>CHI2=0.0000
MARgINALEFFECTSAFTERLOgITy=PR(DENIAL)(PREDICT)0.12089926
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009166.
Appendix 1 – Regression Tables
vARIABLES Dy/DX STD.ERROR Z P>Z 95%CONFIDENCELEvEL X
RACE(REFERENCE=WHITE) BLACk* 0.1025919 0.01628 6.3 0 0.070675 0.134509 0.211557ASIAN* 0.0388144 0.01707 2.27 0.023 0.005367 0.072261 0.082498HISPANIC* -0.0022859 0.01455 -0.16 0.875 -0.030812 0.026241 0.088827MISSINgRACE* 0.1144203 0.01407 8.13 0 0.086848 0.141993 0.161682DEPOSITORyRACE(INTERACTION)(REFERENCE=OTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS) BLACk*DEPOSITORy* -0.0335121 0.01063 -3.15 0.002 -0.054341 -0.012683 0.099149ASIAN*DEPOSITORy* -0.0389782 0.01471 -2.65 0.008 -0.067817 -0.010139 0.039629HISPANIC*DEPOSITORy* 0.046782 0.02677 1.75 0.081 -0.005687 0.099251 0.031719MISSINgRACE*DEPOSITORy* -0.0532194 0.01056 -5.04 0 -0.073926 -0.032512 0.048218gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE* 0.0168785 0.00694 2.43 0.015 0.003269 0.030488 0.537407MISSINggENDER* -0.0294344 0.01697 -1.73 0.083 -0.062687 0.003818 0.954193BLACk*MALE* 0.0095074 0.01352 0.7 0.482 -0.016983 0.035998 0.086265vACANCyRATE 0.2436296 0.05587 4.36 0 0.134119 0.353141 0.085941TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME 0.0002532 0.00015 1.69 0.092 -0.000041 0.000548 78.1762LOg(LOANAMOuNT) -0.0379866 0.00751 -5.06 0 -0.052704 -0.023269 4.98423LOg(INCOME) -0.0482004 0.00612 -7.88 0 -0.060186 -0.036215 4.00226BANk(REFERENCE=ALLOTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS BANkOFAMERICA* 0.0743574 0.01652 4.5 0 0.041975 0.10674 0.078204CITIBANk* 0.2075684 0.08634 2.4 0.016 0.038352 0.376785 0.002562PNCBANk* -0.0775788 0.01718 -4.51 0 -0.111259 -0.043898 0.014089TDBANk* 0.2625272 0.03014 8.71 0 0.203453 0.321601 0.027123WELLSFARgO* 0.0212296 0.01093 1.94 0.052 -0.000183 0.042643 0.162058BANCOSANTANDER* -0.0489932 0.01101 -4.45 0 -0.070566 -0.027421 0.062232M&TBANk* 0.136555 0.0564 2.42 0.015 0.026005 0.247105 0.0055CONCENTIONALLOAN* 0.0560438 0.00675 8.31 0 0.042822 0.069265 0.425073LOANTOvALuERATIO 0.0121289 0.00173 7.01 0 0.008739 0.015519 2.47043(*) dy/dx is for discrete change of a dummy variable from 0 to 1
NOTE:ADvANCEBANkDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy CITIZENSFINANCIALgROuPDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy BANkOFNEWyORkMELLONDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy REPuBLICFIRSTDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy uNITEDBANkOFPHILADELPHIADROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy CITyNATIONALDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009167.
Appendix 1 – Regression Tables
Table 7: Depositories - Home Purchase Loans Test for Redlining
vARIABLES COEFF SE TSTAT PvAL 95%CONFIDENCELEvEL
PERCENTMINORITyPOPuLATION 0.00794*** 0.000973 8.162 0 0.00603 0.00985gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE 0.152*** 0.0552 2.764 0.00572 0.0443 0.261MISSINggENDER -0.473*** 0.112 -4.208 2.57E-05 -0.693 -0.252vACANCyRATE 0.349 0.574 0.608 0.543 -0.776 1.473TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME 0.00403*** 0.00138 2.910 0.00361 0.00131 0.00674LOg(LOANAMOuNT) -0.400*** 0.0684 -5.853 4.82E-09 -0.534 -0.266LOg(INCOME) -0.441*** 0.0569 -7.749 0 -0.553 -0.330BANk(REFERENCE=ALLOTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS BANkOFAMERICA 0.325*** 0.0890 3.654 0.000259 0.151 0.500CITIBANk 1.005*** 0.388 2.591 0.00956 0.245 1.766PNCBANk -1.343*** 0.389 -3.451 0.000558 -2.105 -0.580TDBANk 1.287*** 0.119 10.79 0 1.053 1.521WELLSFARgO -0.0491 0.0739 -0.664 0.507 -0.194 0.0958BANCOSANTANDER -0.704*** 0.136 -5.175 2.28E-07 -0.971 -0.438M&TBANk 0.700** 0.291 2.402 0.0163 0.129 1.270CONvENTIONALLOAN 0.256 0.186 1.379 0.168 -0.108 0.620FHALOAN -0.274 0.185 -1.479 0.139 -0.638 0.0893LOANTOvALuERATIO 0.119*** 0.0161 7.393 0 0.0876 0.151CONSTANT 1.251*** 0.343 3.650 0.000262 0.579 1.923 ***denotes 1% significance level; **denotes 5% significance level; * denotes 10% significance level DEPENDENTvARIABLE:DENIAL NuMBEROFOBSERvATIONS= 13273 LRCHI2(14)= 617.85 PROB>CHI2= 0.0000 LOgLIkELIHOOD= -5034.80283 PSuEDOR2= 0.0578
MARgINALEFFECTSAFTERLOgITy=PR(DENIAL)(PREDICT) 0.12382903
vARIABLES Dy/DX STD.ERROR Z P>Z 95%CONFIDENCELEvEL X
PERCENTMINORITyPOPuLATION 0.0008615 0.0001 8.24 0 0.000657 0.001066 41.5303gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE 0.0164762 0.00593 2.78 0.005 0.004844 0.028108 0.537407MISSINggENDER -0.0600636 0.01644 -3.65 0 -0.092295 -0.027832 0.954193vACANCyRATE 0.0378179 0.06225 0.61 0.543 -0.084182 0.159818 0.085941TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME 0.0004368 0.00015 2.91 0.004 0.000143 0.000731 78.1762LOg(LOANAMOuNT) -0.0434338 0.00743 -5.85 0 -0.05799 -0.028878 4.98423LOg(INCOME) -0.0478535 0.00612 -7.82 0 -0.059841 -0.035866 4.00226BANk(REFERENCE=ALLOTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS BANkOFAMERICA 0.0391021 0.01177 3.32 0.001 0.016035 0.062169 0.078204CITIBANk 0.1545611 0.07776 1.99 0.047 0.002149 0.306973 0.002562PNCBANk -0.0896433 0.01388 -6.46 0 -0.116849 -0.062438 0.014089TDBANk 0.210672 0.02588 8.14 0 0.15994 0.261404 0.027123WELLSFARgO -0.0052575 0.00782 -0.67 0.501 -0.020582 0.010067 0.162058BANCOSANTANDER -0.0606233 0.00899 -6.75 0 -0.078237 -0.043009 0.062232M&TBANk 0.0973928 0.04997 1.95 0.051 -0.000545 0.195331 0.0055CONvENTIONALLOAN* 0.0282012 0.02078 1.36 0.175 -0.012525 0.068928 0.425073FHALOAN* -0.0301114 0.02063 -1.46 0.144 -0.070547 0.010324 0.554886LOANTOvALuERATIO 0.0129276 0.00175 7.4 0 0.009504 0.016351 2.47043(*) dy/dx is for discrete change of a dummy variable from 0 to 1
NOTE:ADvANCEBANkDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy CITIZENSFINANCIALgROuPDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy BANkOFNEWyORkMELLONDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy REPuBLICFIRSTDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy uNITEDBANkOFPHILADELPHIADROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy CITyNATIONALDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009168.
Appendix 1 – Regression Tables
Table 8: Depositories - Home Purchase Loans by Prime and Subprime
vARIABLES SuBPRIME SE TSTAT PvAL CI_LOWCI_HIgH CI_HIgH
RACE(REFERENCE=WHITE) BLACk 0.214 0.168 1.272 0.203 -0.116 0.544ASIAN 0.818*** 0.194 4.218 2.46E-05 0.438 1.199HISPANIC 0.365** 0.167 2.187 0.0288 0.0378 0.692MISSINgRACE -1.008*** 0.268 -3.763 0.000168 -1.533 -0.483DEPOSITORyRACE(INTERACTION)(REFERENCE=OTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS) BLACk*DEPOSITORy 0.133 0.193 0.688 0.491 -0.246 0.512ASIAN*DEPOSITORy -0.411 0.366 -1.124 0.261 -1.128 0.306HISPANIC*DEPOSITORy 0.118 0.260 0.456 0.648 -0.391 0.628MISSINgRACE*DEPOSITORy 0.900*** 0.345 2.610 0.00906 0.224 1.576gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE -0.0422 0.115 -0.368 0.713 -0.267 0.182MISSINggENDER -0.564* 0.322 -1.753 0.0797 -1.194 0.0667BLACk*MALE -0.0646 0.191 -0.338 0.735 -0.440 0.310vACANCyRATE -0.984 1.110 -0.887 0.375 -3.159 1.191TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME -0.0102*** 0.00335 -3.041 0.00236 -0.0168 -0.00362LOg(LOANAMOuNT) -0.734*** 0.132 -5.577 2.45E-08 -0.991 -0.476LOg(INCOME) 0.204* 0.104 1.959 0.0501 -0.000125 0.408BANk(REFERENCE=ALLOTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS BANkOFAMERICA -2.112*** 0.402 -5.255 1.48E-07 -2.900 -1.324CITIBANk 0.0562 1.037 0.0542 0.957 -1.976 2.088PNCBANk -0.234 0.388 -0.604 0.546 -0.994 0.526TDBANk -1.859*** 0.593 -3.134 0.00173 -3.022 -0.696WELLSFARgO -0.555*** 0.172 -3.233 0.00123 -0.892 -0.219BANCOSANTANDER 0.510*** 0.170 3.005 0.00265 0.177 0.843M&TBANk 0.583 0.420 1.389 0.165 -0.240 1.406CONCENTIONALLOAN -1.001*** 0.125 -7.996 0 -1.246 -0.755LOANTOvALuERATIO -0.0264 0.0559 -0.472 0.637 -0.136 0.0832CONSTANT 1.395** 0.640 2.181 0.0292 0.141 2.649 ***denotes 1% significance level; **denotes 5% significance level; * denotes 10% significance level DEPENDENTvARIABLE:SuBPRIME NuMBEROFOBSERvATIONS= 13273 LRCHI2(14)= 491.24 PROB>CHI2= 0.0000 LOgLIkELIHOOD= -2093.8196 PSuEDOR2= 0.105
.TESTBLACkBLACk_MALE
(1)BLACk=0(2)BLACk_MALE=0
CHI2(2)=1.79PROB>CHI2=0.4093
MARgINALEFFECTSAFTERLOgITy=PR(SuBPRIME)(PREDICT)0.02583448
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009169.
Appendix 1 – Regression Tables
vARIABLES Dy/DX STD.ERROR Z P>Z 95%CONFIDENCELEvEL X
RACE(REFERENCE=WHITE) BLACk* 0.0057236 0.00479 1.2 0.232 -0.003658 0.015105 0.211557ASIAN* 0.0290175 0.00932 3.11 0.002 0.010759 0.047276 0.082498HISPANIC* 0.0106254 0.00563 1.89 0.059 -0.000417 0.021668 0.088827MISSINgRACE* -0.0190018 0.0037 -5.14 0 -0.02625 -0.011753 0.161682DEPOSITORyRACE(INTERACTION)(REFERENCE=OTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS) BLACk*DEPOSITORy* 0.0035278 0.00539 0.65 0.513 -0.007031 0.014087 0.099149ASIAN*DEPOSITORy* -0.0086929 0.00644 -1.35 0.177 -0.021308 0.003922 0.039629HISPANIC*DEPOSITORy* 0.0031442 0.00726 0.43 0.665 -0.011088 0.017376 0.031719MISSINgRACE*DEPOSITORy* 0.0340084 0.0184 1.85 0.065 -0.002057 0.070073 0.048218gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE* -0.0010636 0.00289 -0.37 0.713 -0.006732 0.004605 0.537407MISSINggENDER* -0.018254 0.01305 -1.4 0.162 -0.043823 0.007315 0.954193BLACk*MALE* -0.0015861 0.00458 -0.35 0.729 -0.010557 0.007385 0.086265vACANCyRATE -0.0247706 0.02782 -0.89 0.373 -0.079297 0.029755 0.085941TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME -0.0002564 0.00008 -3.1 0.002 -0.000418 -0.000095 78.1762LOg(LOANAMOuNT) -0.0184631 0.00339 -5.45 0 -0.0251 -0.011826 4.98423LOg(INCOME) 0.0051373 0.00263 1.95 0.051 -0.000018 0.010293 4.00226BANk(REFERENCE=ALLOTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS BANkOFAMERICA* -0.0265638 0.00233 -11.38 0 -0.031139 -0.021989 0.078204CITIBANk* 0.0014514 0.02751 0.05 0.958 -0.052469 0.055372 0.002562PNCBANk* -0.0052982 0.00786 -0.67 0.5 -0.020697 0.010101 0.014089TDBANk* -0.0228065 0.00301 -7.58 0 -0.028702 -0.01691 0.027123WELLSFARgO* -0.0118145 0.00309 -3.82 0 -0.017877 -0.005752 0.162058BANCOSANTANDER* 0.0159845 0.00658 2.43 0.015 0.003082 0.028886 0.062232M&TBANk* 0.0194721 0.01811 1.08 0.282 -0.016014 0.054959 0.0055CONCENTIONALLOAN* -0.0242964 0.00293 -8.29 0 -0.030038 -0.018554 0.425073LOANTOvALuERATIO -0.0006635 0.0014 -0.47 0.637 -0.003416 0.002089 2.47043(*) dy/dx is for discrete change of a dummy variable from 0 to 1
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009170.
Appendix 1 – Regression Tables
Table 9: Depositories - Home Refinancing Loans
vARIABLES COEFF SE TSTAT PvAL 95%CONFIDENCEINTERvAL
RACE(REFERENCE=WHITE) BLACk 0.802*** 0.0542 14.78 0 0.695 0.908ASIAN 0.344*** 0.0861 4.001 6.30E-05 0.176 0.513HISPANIC 0.665*** 0.0780 8.528 0 0.512 0.818MISSINgRACE 0.0656 0.0444 1.477 0.140 -0.0215 0.153DEPOSITORyRACE(INTERACTION)(REFERENCE=OTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS) BLACk*DEPOSITORy -0.0371 0.0711 -0.522 0.601 -0.177 0.102ASIAN*DEPOSITORy 0.0656 0.125 0.525 0.600 -0.179 0.310HISPANIC*DEPOSITORy 0.271** 0.124 2.190 0.0285 0.0284 0.513MISSINgRACE*DEPOSITORy -0.0933 0.0807 -1.157 0.247 -0.251 0.0648gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE 0.0168 0.0340 0.494 0.622 -0.0499 0.0835MISSINggENDER -0.425*** 0.0598 -7.095 0 -0.542 -0.307BLACk*MALE 0.0192 0.0653 0.294 0.769 -0.109 0.147vACANCyRATE 0.446 0.282 1.584 0.113 -0.106 0.999TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME -0.00266*** 0.000710 -3.751 0.000176 -0.00406 -0.00127LOg(LOANAMOuNT) 0.0775** 0.0375 2.067 0.0387 0.00402 0.151LOg(INCOME) -0.513*** 0.0263 -19.48 0 -0.565 -0.461BANk(REFERENCE=ALLOTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS BANkOFAMERICA 0.325*** 0.0621 5.230 1.70E-07 0.203 0.446CITIBANk 0.478*** 0.0798 5.990 2.10E-09 0.322 0.635PNCBANk -1.338 1.492 -0.897 0.370 -4.261 1.586TDBANk 0.603*** 0.0941 6.410 1.45E-10 0.419 0.788WELLSFARgO 0.832 1.512 0.550 0.582 -2.132 3.796BANCOSANTANDER 0.921*** 0.127 7.226 0 0.671 1.171M&TBANk -0.245*** 0.0492 -4.976 6.49E-07 -0.341 -0.148CONCENTIONALLOAN -0.688*** 0.125 -5.518 3.43E-08 -0.932 -0.444LOANTOvALuERATIO -0.119 0.324 -0.367 0.714 -0.754 0.516CONSTANT -0.0656** 0.0322 -2.037 0.0417 -0.129 -0.00248LOAN_2_vALuE 0.118*** 0.0163 7.251 0 0.0860 0.150CONSTANT 0.897*** 0.158 5.672 1.41E-08 0.587 1.207 ***denotes 1% significance level; **denotes 5% significance level; * denotes 10% significance level DEPENDENTvARIABLE:DENIAL NuMBEROFOBSERvATIONS= 29610 LRCHI2(14)= 2238.39 PROB>CHI2= 0.0000 LOgLIkELIHOOD= -16553.243 PSuEDOR2= 0.0633 NOTE: ADvANCEBANkDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITyCITIZENSFINANCIALgROuPDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITyBANkOFNEWyORkMELLONDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITyREPuBLICFIRSTDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy uNITEDBANkDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy CITyNATIONALDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy
.TESTBLACkBLACk_MALE
(1)BLACk=0(2)BLACk_MALE=0
CHI2(2)=338.20PROB>CHI2=0.0000
MARgINALEFFECTSAFTERLOgITy=PR(DENIAL)(PREDICT)0.26864627
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009171.
Appendix 1 – Regression Tables
vARIABLES Dy/DX STD.ERROR Z P>Z 95%CONFIDENCELEvEL X
RACE(REFERENCE=WHITE) BLACk* 0.1732476 0.01252 13.83 0 0.148699 0.197796 0.186525ASIAN* 0.0723051 0.01914 3.78 0 0.034796 0.109814 0.046876HISPANIC* 0.1466524 0.01868 7.85 0 0.110038 0.183267 0.044343MISSINgRACE* 0.0129961 0.00887 1.47 0.143 -0.004388 0.03038 0.228234DEPOSITORyRACE(INTERACTION)(REFERENCE=OTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS) BLACk*DEPOSITORy* -0.0072431 0.01376 -0.53 0.599 -0.034215 0.019729 0.065383ASIAN*DEPOSITORy* 0.0130651 0.02525 0.52 0.605 -0.036418 0.062548 0.022627HISPANIC*DEPOSITORy* 0.0562634 0.02703 2.08 0.037 0.003293 0.109233 0.017359MISSINgRACE*DEPOSITORy -0.0179704 0.01522 -1.18 0.238 -0.047801 0.01186 0.045593gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE* 0.0032994 0.00668 0.49 0.621 -0.009798 0.016397 0.533063MISSINggENDER* -0.0897237 0.01344 -6.67 0 -0.116075 -0.063372 0.913779BLACk*MALE* 0.003786 0.01292 0.29 0.769 -0.021529 0.029101 0.079737vACANCyRATE 0.0877134 0.05539 1.58 0.113 -0.020854 0.196281 0.080847TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME -0.0005233 0.00014 -3.75 0 -0.000796 -0.00025 84.5024LOg(LOANAMOuNT) 0.015227 0.00736 2.07 0.039 0.000794 0.02966 4.91823LOg(INCOME) -0.1007807 0.00515 -19.59 0 -0.110865 -0.090696 4.14446BANk(REFERENCE=ALLOTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS BANkOFAMERICA* 0.0678159 0.01368 4.96 0 0.041003 0.094629 0.059406CITIBANk* 0.1028224 0.01847 5.57 0 0.066618 0.139026 0.032624PNCBANk* -0.1807458 0.11965 -1.51 0.131 -0.415259 0.053767 0.000135TDBANk* 0.1325406 0.02247 5.9 0 0.088493 0.176589 0.019791WELLSFARgO* 0.1890253 0.37538 0.5 0.615 -0.546699 0.92475 0.000068BANCOSANTANDER* 0.2107951 0.03173 6.64 0 0.148613 0.272978 0.009659M&TBANk* -0.0461116 0.00886 -5.2 0 -0.063479 -0.028744 0.147991CONCENTIONALLOAN* -0.1136488 0.01668 -6.81 0 -0.146336 -0.080961 0.01871LOANTOvALuERATIO -0.0227083 0.06009 -0.38 0.706 -0.14049 0.095073 0.001993CONSTANT -0.0129857 0.00642 -2.02 0.043 -0.025576 -0.000395 0.75846LOAN_2_vALuE 0.0231634 0.00319 7.25 0 0.016903 0.029424 2.08723(*) dy/dx is for discrete change of a dummy variable from 0 to 1
NOTE:ADvANCEBANkDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITyCITIZENSFINANCIALgROuPDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITyBANkOFNEWyORkMELLONDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITyREPuBLICFIRSTDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITyuNITEDBANkOFPHILADELPHIADROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITyCITyNATIONALDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITyM&TBANkDROPPEDBECAuSEOFCOLLINEARITy
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009172.
Appendix 1 – Regression Tables
Table 10: Depositories - Home Improvement Loans
vARIABLES COEFF SE TSTAT PvAL 95%CONFIDENCEINTERvAL
RACE(REFERENCE=WHITE) BLACk 0.929*** 0.196 4.744 2.10E-06 0.545 1.313ASIAN 0.0377 0.433 0.0869 0.931 -0.812 0.887HISPANIC 0.837*** 0.251 3.330 0.000867 0.344 1.329MISSINgRACE 1.057*** 0.189 5.589 2.28E-08 0.686 1.428DEPOSITORyRACE(INTERACTION)(REFERENCE=OTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS) BLACk*DEPOSITORy -0.460** 0.182 -2.534 0.0113 -0.816 -0.104ASIAN*DEPOSITORy 0.172 0.510 0.338 0.735 -0.827 1.172HISPANIC*DEPOSITORy -0.0405 0.306 -0.132 0.895 -0.641 0.560MISSINgRACE*DEPOSITORy -0.775*** 0.273 -2.835 0.00459 -1.311 -0.239gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE -0.150 0.130 -1.152 0.249 -0.405 0.105MISSINggENDER 0.146 0.226 0.645 0.519 -0.298 0.590BLACk*MALE 0.487** 0.200 2.431 0.0151 0.0944 0.880vACANCyRATE 0.854 1.047 0.816 0.415 -1.198 2.905TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME -0.00653** 0.00311 -2.102 0.0355 -0.0126 -0.000442LOg(LOANAMOuNT) -0.141 0.0946 -1.492 0.136 -0.327 0.0443LOg(INCOME) -0.424*** 0.0791 -5.361 8.29E-08 -0.579 -0.269BANk(REFERENCE=ALLOTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS BANkOFAMERICA -0.125 0.269 -0.464 0.643 -0.652 0.402CITIBANk 0.274 0.217 1.266 0.206 -0.150 0.699PNCBANk 0.731*** 0.179 4.089 4.33E-05 0.381 1.081TDBANk 1.319*** 0.221 5.959 2.54E-09 0.885 1.752WELLSFARgO -0.597*** 0.161 -3.699 0.000217 -0.914 -0.281BANCOSANTANDER -0.465 0.322 -1.445 0.148 -1.095 0.166CONCENTIONALLOAN 0.0583 0.237 0.246 0.806 -0.406 0.523LOANTOvALuERATIO 0.167* 0.0892 1.871 0.0613 -0.00791 0.342CONSTANT 1.656*** 0.517 3.206 0.00135 0.644 2.668 ***denotes 1% significance level; **denotes 5% significance level; * denotes 10% significance level
DEPENDENTvARIABLE:DENIAL NuMBEROFOBSERvATIONS= 2244 LRCHI2(14)= 395.65 PROB>CHI2= 0.0000 LOgLIkELIHOOD= -1348.675 PSuEDOR2= 0.1279
.TESTBLACkBLACk_MALE
(1)BLACk=0(2)BLACk_MALE=0
CHI2(2)=51.69PROB>CHI2=0.0000
MARgINALEFFECTSAFTERLOgITy=PR(DENIAL)(PREDICT) 0.54866909
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009173.
Appendix 1 – Regression Tables
vARIABLES Dy/DX STD.ERROR Z P>Z 95%CONFIDENCELEvEL X
RACE(REFERENCE=WHITE) BLACk* 0.2234404 0.04489 4.98 0 0.135467 0.311414 0.389037ASIAN* 0.0093146 0.10694 0.09 0.931 -0.200292 0.218921 0.039661HISPANIC* 0.1934782 0.05218 3.71 0 0.091211 0.295746 0.113636MISSINgRACE* 0.2412804 0.03799 6.35 0 0.166816 0.315745 0.171123DEPOSITORyRACE(INTERACTION)(REFERENCE=OTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS) BLACk*DEPOSITORy* -0.1143178 0.04493 -2.54 0.011 -0.202382 -0.026253 0.258913ASIAN*DEPOSITORy* 0.0422435 0.12346 0.34 0.732 -0.199732 0.284219 0.028075HISPANIC*DEPOSITORy* -0.0100529 0.07606 -0.13 0.895 -0.159119 0.139013 0.067291MISSINgRACE*DEPOSITORy -0.1902483 0.06373 -2.99 0.003 -0.315161 -0.065336 0.046791gENDER(REFERENCE=FEMALE) MALE* -0.0370867 0.03219 -1.15 0.249 -0.100183 0.02601 0.450535MISSINggENDER* 0.0363495 0.05653 0.64 0.52 -0.074453 0.147152 0.92959BLACk*MALE* 0.1172355 0.04633 2.53 0.011 0.026429 0.208042 0.150178vACANCyRATE 0.2113988 0.25915 0.82 0.415 -0.296527 0.719325 0.113129TRACTPERCENTOFMEDIANINCOME -0.0016173 0.00077 -2.1 0.036 -0.003126 -0.000108 64.4965LOg(LOANAMOuNT) -0.0349468 0.02343 -1.49 0.136 -0.080861 0.010968 3.71059LOg(INCOME) -0.1050628 0.01959 -5.36 0 -0.143455 -0.066671 3.69078BANk(REFERENCE=ALLOTHERPHILADELPHIALENDERS BANkOFAMERICA* -0.0310269 0.06713 -0.46 0.644 -0.162608 0.100554 0.033868CITIBANk* 0.0667839 0.05162 1.29 0.196 -0.034391 0.167959 0.061052PNCBANk* 0.1709204 0.03827 4.47 0 0.095918 0.245923 0.107398TDBANk* 0.2799209 0.03605 7.76 0 0.209258 0.350584 0.07041WELLSFARgO* -0.1482265 0.03946 -3.76 0 -0.225565 -0.070888 0.16221BANCOSANTANDER* -0.11563 0.07908 -1.46 0.144 -0.270616 0.039356 0.022282CONCENTIONALLOAN 0.0144616 0.05895 0.25 0.806 -0.101085 0.130009 0.954991LOANTOvALuERATIO 0.0413517 0.0221 1.87 0.061 -0.001955 0.084659 1.16288(*) dy/dx is for discrete change of a dummy variable from 0 to 1
Appendix 2 - Tables
Appendix2
1 AllSingle-Family,OwnerOccupantLendinginPhiladelphiabyBorrowerRace 184
2 AllSingle-Family,OwnerOccupantLendinginPhiladelphiabyBorrowerIncome 185
3 AllSingle-Family,OwnerOccupantLendinginPhiladelphiabyTractMinorityLevel 186
4 AllSingle-Family,OwnerOccupantLendinginPhiladelphiabyTractIncomeLevel 187
5 AllSingle-Family,OwnerOccupantLendinginPhiladelphiabyBorrowergender 188
6 HomePurchaseSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginPhiladelphia byBorrowerRace
189
7 HomePurchaseSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginPhiladelphia byBorrowerIncome
190
8 HomePurchaseSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginPhiladelphia byTractMinorityLevel
191
9 HomePurchaseSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginPhiladelphia byTractIncome
192
10 HomePurchaseSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginPhiladelphia byBorrowergender
193
11 RefinanceSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginPhiladelphiabyBorrowerRace 194
12 RefinanceSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginPhiladelphia byBorrowerIncome
195
13 RefinanceSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginPhiladelphia byTractMinorityLevel
196
Table of Contents
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009178.
Appendix 2 – Tables
14 RefinanceSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginPhiladelphia byTractIncomeLevel
197
15 RefinanceSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginPhiladelphia byBorrowergender
198
16 HomeImprovementSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginPhiladelphia byBorrowerRace
199
17 HomeImprovementSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginPhiladelphia byBorrowerIncome
200
18 HomeImprovementSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginPhiladelphia byTractMinorityLevel
201
19 HomeImprovementSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginPhiladelphia byTractIncomeLevel
202
20 HomeImprovementSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginPhiladelphia byBorrowergender
203
21 AllSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbsbyBorrowerRace 204
22 AllSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbsbyBorrowerIncome 205
23 AllSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbsbyTractMinorityLevel 206
24 AllSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbsbyTractIncomeLevel 207
25 AllSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbsbyBorrowergender 208
26 HomePurchaseSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbs byBorrowerRace
209
27 HomePurchaseSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbs byBorrowerIncome
210
28 HomePurchaseSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbs byTractMinorityLevel
211
29 HomePurchaseSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbs byTractIncomeLevel
212
30 HomePurchaseSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbs byBorrowergender
213
31 RefinanceSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbsbyBorrowerRace 214
32 RefinanceSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbsbyBorrowerIncome 215
33 RefinanceSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbs byTractMinorityLevel
216
34 RefinanceSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbsbyTractIncomeLevel 217
35 RefinanceSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbsbyBorrowergender 218
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009179.
Appendix 2 – Tables
36 HomeImprovementSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbs byBorrowerRace
219
37 HomeImprovementSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbs byBorrowerIncome
220
38 HomeImprovementSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbs byTractMinorityLevel
221
39 HomeImprovementSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbs byTractIncomeLevel
222
40 HomeImprovementSingle-Family,Owner-OccupantLendinginSuburbs byBorrowergender
223
41 AllLoansbyBorrowerRaceinBaltimore 224
42 AllLoansbyBorrowerIncomeinBaltimore 225
43 AllLoansbyTractMinorityLevelinBaltimore 226
44 AllLoansbyTractIncomeLevelinBaltimore 227
45 AllLoansbyBorrowergenderinBaltimore 228
46 AllLoansbyBorrowerRaceinDetroit 229
47 AllLoansbyBorrowerIncomeinDetroit 230
48 AllLoansbyTractMinorityLevelinDetroit 231
49 AllLoansbyTractIncomeLevelinDetroit 232
50 AllLoansbyBorrowergenderinDetroit 233
51 AllLoansbyBorrowerRaceinPittsburgh 234
52 AllLoansbyBorrowerIncomeinPittsburgh 235
53 AllLoansbyTractMinorityLevelinPittsburgh 236
54 AllLoansbyTractIncomeLevelinPittsburgh 237
55 AllLoansbyBorrowergenderinPittsburgh 238
56 AllLoansbyBorrowerRaceinPhiladelphia(Non-Owner-Occupied) 239
57 AllLoansbyBorrowerIncomeinPhiladelphia(Non-Owner-Occupied) 240
58 AllLoansbyTractMinorityLevelinPhiladelphia(Non-Owner-Occupied) 241
59 AllLoansbyTractIncomeLevelinPhiladelphia(Non-Owner-Occupied) 242
60 AllLoansbyBorrowergenderinPhiladelphia(Non-Owner-Occupied) 243
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009180.
Appendix 2 – Tables
61 RankingofAllDepositories 244
62 DepositoryRanking–AllPrime,Single-FamilyLoansinPhiladelphia 247
63 DepositoryRanking–HomePurchasePrime,Single-FamilyLoansinPhiladelphia 249
64 DepositoryRanking–RefinancePrime,Single-FamilyLoansinPhiladelphia 251
65 DepositoryRanking–HomeImprovementPrime,Single-Family LoansinPhiladelphia
253
66 unrankedDepositories–AllPrime,Single-FamilyLoansinPhiladelphia 255
67 ListofDepositoryAffiliatesIncludedinAnalysis 257
68 CRASmallBusinessLendingbyIncome 262
69 CRASmallBusinessLending–BankofAmericaNA 263
70 CRASmallBusinessLending–BankofNewyorkMellon 263
71 CRASmallBusinessLending–CitizensBank 263
72 CRASmallBusinessLending–Citibank 264
73 CRASmallBusinessLending–M&TBank 264
74 CRASmallBusinessLending–PNCBank 264
75 CRASmallBusinessLending–RepublicFirstBank 265
76 CRASmallBusinessLending–SovereignBank 265
77 CRASmallBusinessLending–TDBank 265
78CRASmallBusinessLending–WellsFargoBank 266
79 SmallBusinessLending–byTractIncomeLevel 266
80 SmallBusinessLending–byTractMinorityLevel 267
81 SmallBusinessLending–PhiladelphiaandSuburbs 267
82 CityDepositories–byIncomeandMinorityLevel 268
83 NeighborhoodSingle-FamilyLendingAnalysis 269
84 NeighborhoodSingle-FamilyLendingAnalysisbyDepository 270
85 NeighborhoodSmallBusinessLendingAnalysis 271
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009181.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 1:
All
Sing
le-F
amily
, Ow
ner O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Phi
lade
lphi
a by
Bor
row
er R
ace
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
WHITE
13,804
635
14,439
69.1
%43
.3%
67.3
%28
2,06
347
.8%
1.45
0.91
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
3,614
585
4,19
918
.1%
39.9
%19
.6%
237,44
340
.2%
0.45
0.99
ASIAN
1,34
180
1,42
16.
7%5.
5%6.
6%20
,559
3.5%
1.93
1.57
HISPA
NIC
1,22
816
61,39
46.
1%11
.3%
6.5%
38,509
6.5%
0.94
1.74
TOTA
L24
,490
1,66
926
,159
590,28
3
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
WHITE
13,804
635
14,439
95.6
%4.
4%1.
001.
00AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
3,614
585
4,19
986
.1%
13.9
%0.
903.
17
ASIAN
1,34
180
1,42
194
.4%
5.6%
0.99
1.28
HISPA
NIC
1,22
816
61,39
488
.1%
11.9
%0.
922.
71TO
TAL
24,490
1,66
926
,159
93.6
%6.
4%0.
981.
45
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
ERACE
TOW
HITE
DEN
IALRAT
IO
WHITE
23,543
4,29
918
.3%
1.00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
10,402
3,76
736
.2%
1.98
ASIAN
2,69
768
825
.5%
1.40
HISPA
NIC
2,94
795
332
.3%
1.77
TOTA
L50
,114
12,440
24.8
%1.
36
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009182.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 2:
All
Sing
le-F
amily
, Ow
ner O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Phi
lade
lphi
a by
Bor
row
er In
com
e
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
4,28
963
44,92
318
.8%
40.9
%20
.3%
279,32
747
.3%
0.40
0.86
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)6,99
251
27,50
430
.7%
33.1
%30
.9%
120,15
820
.4%
1.51
1.62
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
5,45
827
05,72
824
.0%
17.4
%23
.6%
93,513
15.8
%1.
511.
10
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)6,017
133
6,15
026
.4%
8.6%
25.3
%97,285
16.5
%1.
600.
52
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
11,281
1,14
612
,427
49.6
%74
.0%
51.1
%39
9,48
667
.7%
0.73
1.09
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
11,475
403
11,878
50.4
%26
.0%
48.9
%19
0,79
732
.3%
1.56
0.80
TOTA
L24
,490
1,66
926
,159
590,28
3
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
ME
SHARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
4,28
963
44,92
387
.1%
12.9
%0.
895.
96
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)6,99
251
27,50
493
.2%
6.8%
0.95
3.16
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
5,45
827
05,72
895
.3%
4.7%
0.97
2.18
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)6,017
133
6,15
097
.8%
2.2%
1.00
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
11,281
1,14
612
,427
90.8
%9.
2%0.
942.
72
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
11,475
403
11,878
96.6
%3.
4%1.
001.
00
TOTA
L24
,490
1,66
926
,159
93.6
%6.
4%0.
962.
95
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
11,466
4,13
036
.0%
1.95
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)14
,272
3,58
425
.1%
1.36
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
10,308
2,147
20.8
%1.
13
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)10
,515
1,94
418
.5%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
25,738
7,71
430
.0%
1.53
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
20,823
4,09
119
.6%
1.00
TOTA
L50
,114
12,440
24.8
%1.
34
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se in
com
e w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009183.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 3:
All
Sing
le-F
amily
, Ow
ner O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Phi
lade
lphi
a by
Tra
ct M
inor
ity L
evel
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
17,726
821
18,547
72.4
%49
.2%
70.9
%17
8,316
51.0
%1.
420.
97
50-100
%
MINORITy
6,761
847
7,60
827
.6%
50.8
%29
.1%
171,33
549
.0%
0.56
1.04
TOTA
L24
,490
1,66
926
,159
349,65
1
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
0-49
%
MINORITy
17,726
821
18,547
95.6
%4.
4%1.
001.
00
50-100
%
MINORITy
6,761
847
7,60
888
.9%
11.1
%0.
932.
52
TOTA
L24
,490
1,66
926
,159
93.6
%6.
4%0.
981.
44
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
MINORITy
LEvELTO
WHITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
32,136
6,40
219
.9%
1.00
50-100
%
MINORITy
17,966
6,03
333
.6%
1.69
TOTA
L50
,114
12,440
24.8
%1.
25To
tals
incl
ude
info
rmati
on o
n lo
ans
to b
orro
wer
s w
hose
trac
t m
inor
ity
leve
l was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009184.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 4:
All
Sing
le-F
amily
, Ow
ner O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Phi
lade
lphi
a by
Tra
ct In
com
e Le
vel
TOTA
LPR
IME
LOANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
2,32
635
72,68
39.
5%21
.4%
10.3
%81
,464
23.3
%0.
410.
92
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)9,31
880
810
,126
38.1
%48
.4%
38.7
%15
2,80
543
.7%
0.87
1.11
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
10,434
476
10,910
42.6
%28
.5%
41.7
%10
0,76
428
.8%
1.48
0.99
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)2,39
927
2,42
69.
8%1.
6%9.
3%14
,605
4.2%
2.35
0.39
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
11,644
1,16
512
,809
47.6
%69
.8%
49.0
%23
4,26
967
.0%
0.71
1.04
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
12,833
503
13,336
52.4
%30
.2%
51.0
%11
5,36
933
.0%
1.59
0.91
TOTA
L24
,490
1,66
926
,159
349,63
8
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
ME
SHARE
TO
uPP
ER-INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
2,32
635
72,68
386
.7%
13.3
%0.
8811
.96
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)9,31
880
810
,126
92.0
%8.
0%0.
937.
17
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
10,434
476
10,910
95.6
%4.
4%0.
973.
92
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)2,39
927
2,42
698
.9%
1.1%
1.00
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
11,644
1,16
512
,809
90.9
%9.
1%0.
942.
41
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
12,833
503
13,336
96.2
%3.
8%1.
001.
00
TOTA
L24
,490
1,66
926
,159
93.6
%6.
4%0.
955.
73
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IALRAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
6,65
62,49
237
.4%
2.19
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)20
,746
5,69
427
.4%
1.61
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
18,759
3,57
019
.0%
1.11
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)3,91
566
917
.1%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
27,402
8,18
629
.9%
1.60
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
22,674
4,23
918
.7%
1.00
TOTA
L50
,114
12,440
24.8
%1.
45
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act i
ncom
e le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009185.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 5:
All
Sing
le-F
amily
, Ow
ner O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Phi
lade
lphi
a by
Bor
row
er G
ende
r
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPC
T.OFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
MALE
7,59
551
48,10
933
.7%
33.4
%33
.7%
132,27
822
.4%
1.50
1.49
FEMALE
7,41
266
98,08
132
.9%
43.5
%33
.6%
264,97
544
.9%
0.73
0.97
JOINT
(MALE/
FEMALE)
7,53
735
47,89
133
.4%
23.0
%32
.8%
193,03
032
.7%
1.02
0.70
TOTA
L24
,490
1,66
926
,159
590,28
3
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
MALE
7,59
551
48,10
993
.7%
6.3%
1.00
1.00
FEMALE
7,41
266
98,08
191
.7%
8.3%
0.98
1.31
JOINT
(MALE/
FEMALE)
7,53
735
47,89
195
.5%
4.5%
1.02
0.71
TOTA
L24
,490
1,66
926
,159
93.6
%6.
4%1.
001.
01
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
EgEN
DER
TO
MALEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
MALE
16,070
4,25
526
.5%
1.00
FEMALE
15,726
4,13
626
.3%
0.99
JOINT
(MALE/
FEMALE)
13,312
2,60
919
.6%
0.74
TOTA
L50
,114
12,440
24.8
%0.
94
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se g
ende
r was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009186.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 6:
Hom
e Pu
rcha
se S
ingl
e-Fa
mily
, Ow
ner-
Occ
upan
t Len
ding
in P
hila
delp
hia
by B
orro
wer
Rac
e
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
WHITE
4,79
618
54,98
159
.8%
32.8
%58
.0%
282,06
347
.8%
1.25
0.69
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
1,71
122
41,93
521
.3%
39.7
%22
.5%
237,44
340
.2%
0.53
0.99
ASIAN
723
5377
69.
0%9.
4%9.
0%20
,559
3.5%
2.59
2.70
HISPA
NIC
788
102
890
9.8%
18.1
%10
.4%
38,509
6.5%
1.51
2.77
TOTA
L9,35
662
09,97
659
0,28
3
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
WHITE
4,79
618
54,98
196
.3%
3.7%
1.00
1.00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
1,71
122
41,93
588
.4%
11.6
%0.
923.
12
ASIAN
723
5377
693
.2%
6.8%
0.97
1.84
HISPA
NIC
788
102
890
88.5
%11
.5%
0.92
3.09
TOTA
L9,35
662
09,97
693
.8%
6.2%
0.97
1.67
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
ERACE
TO
WHITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
WHITE
6,64
266
810
.1%
1.00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
3,017
574
19.0
%1.
89
ASIAN
1,16
619
817
.0%
1.69
HISPA
NIC
1,22
416
713
.6%
1.36
TOTA
L14
,479
2,07
714
.3%
1.43
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se r
ace
was
list
ed a
s “O
ther
” or
who
se r
ace
was
not
pro
vide
d.
Tabl
e 7:
Hom
e Pu
rcha
se S
ingl
e-Fa
mily
, Ow
ner-
Occ
upan
t Len
ding
in P
hila
delp
hia
by B
orro
wer
Inco
me
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
2,41
927
82,69
725
.9%
45.2
%27
.1%
279,32
747
.3%
0.55
0.96
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)3,26
220
33,46
535
.0%
33.0
%34
.8%
120,15
820
.4%
1.72
1.62
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
1,93
991
2,03
020
.8%
14.8
%20
.4%
93,513
15.8
%1.
310.
93
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)1,71
243
1,75
518
.3%
7.0%
17.6
%97,285
16.5
%1.
110.
42
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
5,68
148
16,16
260
.9%
78.2
%61
.9%
399,48
667
.7%
0.90
1.16
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,65
113
43,78
539
.1%
21.8
%38
.1%
190,79
732
.3%
1.21
0.67
TOTA
L9,35
662
09,97
659
0,28
3
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
ME
SHARE
TO
uPP
ER-INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
2,41
927
82,69
789
.7%
10.3
%0.
924.
21
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)3,26
220
33,46
594
.1%
5.9%
0.97
2.39
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
1,93
991
2,03
095
.5%
4.5%
0.98
1.83
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)1,71
243
1,75
597
.5%
2.5%
1.00
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
5,68
148
16,16
292
.2%
7.8%
0.96
2.20
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,65
113
43,78
596
.5%
3.5%
1.00
1.00
TOTA
L9,35
662
09,97
693
.8%
6.2%
0.96
2.54
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
4,04
274
718
.5%
1.56
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)4,84
365
913
.6%
1.15
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
2,86
233
211
.6%
0.98
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)2,60
430
811
.8%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
8,88
51,40
615
.8%
1.35
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
5,46
664
011
.7%
1.00
TOTA
L14
,479
2,07
714
.3%
1.21
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se in
com
e w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009187.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009188.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 8:
Hom
e Pu
rcha
se S
ingl
e-Fa
mily
, Ow
ner-
Occ
upan
t Len
ding
in P
hila
delp
hia
by T
ract
Min
ority
Lev
el
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
6,49
430
36,79
769
.4%
48.9
%68
.1%
178,316
51.0
%1.
360.
96
50-100
%
MINORITy
2,86
131
63,17
730
.6%
51.1
%31
.9%
171,33
549
.0%
0.62
1.04
TOTA
L9,35
662
09,97
634
9,65
1
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
0-49
%
MINORITy
6,49
430
36,79
795
.5%
4.5%
1.00
1.00
50-100
%
MINORITy
2,86
131
63,17
790
.1%
9.9%
0.94
2.23
TOTA
L9,35
662
09,97
693
.8%
6.2%
0.98
1.39
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
MINORITy
LEvELTOW
HITE
DEN
IALRAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
9,46
11,12
111
.8%
1.00
50-100
%
MINORITy
5,01
395
419
.0%
1.61
TOTA
L14
,479
2,07
714
.3%
1.21
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se
trac
t min
orit
y le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009189.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 9:
Hom
e Pu
rcha
se S
ingl
e-Fa
mily
, Ow
ner-
Occ
upan
t Len
ding
in P
hila
delp
hia
by T
ract
Inco
me
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,21
214
71,35
913
.0%
23.7
%13
.6%
81,464
23.3
%0.
561.
02
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)4,05
132
44,37
543
.3%
52.3
%43
.9%
152,80
543
.7%
0.99
1.20
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
3,44
714
03,58
736
.9%
22.6
%36
.0%
100,76
428
.8%
1.28
0.78
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)63
98
647
6.8%
1.3%
6.5%
14,605
4.2%
1.64
0.31
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
5,26
347
15,73
456
.3%
76.1
%57
.5%
234,26
967
.0%
0.84
1.14
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
4,08
614
84,23
443
.7%
23.9
%42
.5%
115,36
933
.0%
1.32
0.72
TOTA
L9,35
662
09,97
634
9,63
8
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
ME
SHARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
INCO
ME
SHARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,21
214
71,35
989
.2%
10.8
%0.
908.
75
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)4,05
132
44,37
592
.6%
7.4%
0.94
5.99
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
3,44
714
03,58
796
.1%
3.9%
0.97
3.16
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)63
98
647
98.8
%1.
2%1.
001.
00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
5,26
347
15,73
491
.8%
8.2%
0.95
2.35
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
4,08
614
84,23
496
.5%
3.5%
1.00
1.00
TOTA
L9,35
662
09,97
693
.8%
6.2%
0.95
5.03
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
2,15
943
820
.3%
1.75
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)6,43
898
315
.3%
1.32
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
4,92
854
311
.0%
0.95
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)94
010
911
.6%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
8,59
71,42
116
.5%
1.49
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
5,86
865
211
.1%
1.00
TOTA
L14
,479
2,07
714
.3%
1.24
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act i
ncom
e le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009190.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 10
: Hom
e Pu
rcha
se S
ingl
e-Fa
mily
, Ow
ner-
Occ
upan
t Len
ding
in P
hila
delp
hia
by B
orro
wer
Gen
der
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
MALE
3,24
921
63,46
537
.4%
37.2
%37
.4%
132,27
822
.4%
1.67
1.66
FEMALE
3,18
426
13,44
536
.7%
44.9
%37
.2%
264,97
544
.9%
0.82
1.00
JOINT
(MALE/
FEMALE)
2,24
810
42,35
225
.9%
17.9
%25
.4%
193,03
032
.7%
0.79
0.55
TOTA
L9,35
662
09,97
659
0,28
3
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
MALE
3,24
921
63,46
593
.8%
6.2%
1.00
1.00
FEMALE
3,18
426
13,44
592
.4%
7.6%
0.99
1.22
JOINT
(MALE/
FEMALE)
2,24
810
42,35
295
.6%
4.4%
1.02
0.71
TOTA
L9,35
662
09,97
693
.8%
6.2%
1.00
1.00
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
EgEN
DER
TO
MALEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
MALE
5,16
484
716
.4%
1.00
FEMALE
4,88
566
613
.6%
0.83
JOINT
(MALE/
FEMALE)
3,26
335
310
.8%
0.66
TOTA
L14
,479
2,07
714
.3%
0.87
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se g
ende
r was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009191.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 11
: Refi
nanc
e Si
ngle
-Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Phi
lade
lphi
a by
Bor
row
er R
ace
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
WHITE
8,70
536
09,06
575
.7%
51.6
%74
.3%
282,06
347
.8%
1.58
1.08
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
1,79
127
12,06
215
.6%
38.9
%16
.9%
237,44
340
.2%
0.39
0.97
ASIAN
588
1960
75.
1%2.
7%5.
0%20
,559
3.5%
1.47
0.78
HISPA
NIC
416
4746
33.
6%6.
7%3.
8%38
,509
6.5%
0.55
1.03
TOTA
L14
,569
826
15,395
590,28
3
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
NTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
WHITE
8,70
536
09,06
596
.0%
4.0%
1.00
1.00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
1,79
127
12,06
286
.9%
13.1
%0.
903.
31
ASIAN
588
1960
796
.9%
3.1%
1.01
0.79
HISPA
NIC
416
4746
389
.8%
10.2
%0.
942.
56
TOTA
L14
,569
826
15,395
94.6
%5.
4%0.
991.
35
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
ERACE
TOW
HITE
DEN
IALRAT
IO
WHITE
16,089
3,36
020
.9%
1.00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
6,41
52,58
340
.3%
1.93
ASIAN
1,43
645
031
.3%
1.50
HISPA
NIC
1,46
561
241
.8%
2.00
TOTA
L33
,030
9,00
827
.3%
1.31
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se r
ace
was
list
ed a
s “O
ther
” or
who
se r
ace
was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009192.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 12
: Refi
nanc
e Si
ngle
-Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Phi
lade
lphi
a by
Bor
row
er In
com
e
TOTA
LPR
IME
SuBP
RIME
NuMLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
PRIM
EPE
RCEN
TSu
BPRIME
PERC
ENT
LOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPC
THH
PRIM
ESHRH
HSu
BSHRH
H
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,72
924
81,97
713
.4%
34.8
%14
.6%
279,32
747
.3%
0.28
0.74
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)3,54
924
53,79
427
.6%
34.4
%27
.9%
120,15
820
.4%
1.36
1.69
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
3,40
114
63,54
726
.4%
20.5
%26
.1%
93,513
15.8
%1.
671.
29
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)4,18
674
4,26
032
.5%
10.4
%31
.4%
97,285
16.5
%1.
970.
63
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
5,27
849
35,77
141
.0%
69.1
%42
.5%
399,48
667
.7%
0.61
1.02
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
7,58
722
07,80
759
.0%
30.9
%57
.5%
190,79
732
.3%
1.82
0.95
TOTA
L14
,569
826
15,395
590,28
3
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
ME
SHARE
TO
uPP
ER-INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,72
924
81,97
787
.5%
12.5
%0.
897.
22
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)3,54
924
53,79
493
.5%
6.5%
0.95
3.72
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
3,40
114
63,54
795
.9%
4.1%
0.98
2.37
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)4,18
674
4,26
098
.3%
1.7%
1.00
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
5,27
849
35,77
191
.5%
8.5%
0.94
3.03
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
7,58
722
07,80
797
.2%
2.8%
1.00
1.00
TOTA
L14
,569
826
15,395
94.6
%5.
4%0.
963.
09
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IALRAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
6,29
22,65
942
.3%
2.09
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)8,68
52,56
929
.6%
1.47
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
7,05
41,66
123
.5%
1.17
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)7,61
21,53
620
.2%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
14,977
5,22
834
.9%
1.60
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
14,666
3,19
721
.8%
1.00
TOTA
L33
,030
9,00
827
.3%
1.35
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se in
com
e w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009193.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 13
: Refi
nanc
e Si
ngle
-Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Phi
lade
lphi
a by
Tra
ct M
inor
ity L
evel
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
10,869
430
11,299
74.6
%52
.1%
73.4
%17
8,316
51.0
%1.
461.
02
50-100
%
MINORITy
3,69
839
64,09
425
.4%
47.9
%26
.6%
171,33
549
.0%
0.52
0.98
TOTA
L14
,569
826
15,395
349,65
1
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
MINORITy
LEvELSHARE
TO
WHITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
MINORITy
LEvELSHARE
TO
WHITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
0-49
%
MINORITy
10,869
430
11,299
96.2
%3.
8%1.
001.
00
50-100
%
MINORITy
3,69
839
64,09
490
.3%
9.7%
0.94
2.54
TOTA
L14
,569
826
15,395
94.6
%5.
4%0.
981.
41
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
E
MINORITy
LEvELTO
WHITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
21,652
4,91
522
.7%
1.00
50-100
%
MINORITy
11,371
4,09
036
.0%
1.58
TOTA
L33
,030
9,00
827
.3%
1.20
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act
min
orit
y le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009194.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 14
: Refi
nanc
e Si
ngle
-Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Phi
lade
lphi
a by
Tra
ct In
com
e Le
vel
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TOOOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,03
513
91,174
7.1%
16.8
%7.
6%81
,464
23.3
%0.
310.
72
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)5,03
138
55,416
34.5
%46
.6%
35.2
%15
2,80
543
.7%
0.79
1.07
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
6,76
728
67,05
346
.5%
34.6
%45
.8%
100,76
428
.8%
1.61
1.20
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)1,73
016
1,74
611
.9%
1.9%
11.3
%14
,605
4.2%
2.84
0.46
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
6,06
652
46,59
041
.7%
63.4
%42
.8%
234,26
967
.0%
0.62
0.95
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
8,49
730
28,79
958
.3%
36.6
%57
.2%
115,36
933
.0%
1.77
1.11
TOTA
L14
,569
826
15,395
349,63
8
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,03
513
91,174
88.2
%11
.8%
0.89
12.9
2
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)5,03
138
55,416
92.9
%7.
1%0.
947.
76
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
6,76
728
67,05
395
.9%
4.1%
0.97
4.43
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)1,73
016
1,74
699
.1%
0.9%
1.00
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
6,06
652
46,59
092
.0%
8.0%
0.95
2.32
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
8,49
730
28,79
996
.6%
3.4%
1.00
1.00
TOTA
L14
,569
826
15,395
94.6
%5.
4%0.
965.
85
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
3,65
61,49
340
.8%
2.18
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)13
,203
4,13
031
.3%
1.67
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
13,238
2,83
021
.4%
1.14
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)2,90
954
418
.7%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
16,859
5,62
333
.4%
1.60
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
16,147
3,374
20.9
%1.
00
TOTA
L33
,030
9,00
827
.3%
1.46
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act i
ncom
e le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009195.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 15
: Refi
nanc
e Si
ngle
-Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Phi
lade
lphi
a by
Bor
row
er G
ende
r
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SHARE
RAT
IO
MALE
4,21
223
94,451
31.6
%32
.1%
31.6
%13
2,27
822
.4%
1.41
1.43
FEMALE
4,02
730
64,33
330
.2%
41.1
%30
.8%
264,97
544
.9%
0.67
0.92
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
5,10
719
95,30
638
.3%
26.7
%37
.7%
193,03
032
.7%
1.17
0.82
TOTA
L14
,569
826
15,395
590,28
3
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALESHARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALESHARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
MALE
4,21
223
94,451
94.6
%5.
4%1.
001.
00
FEMALE
4,02
730
64,33
392
.9%
7.1%
0.98
1.32
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
5,10
719
95,30
696
.2%
3.8%
1.02
0.70
TOTA
L14
,569
826
15,395
94.6
%5.
4%1.
001.
00
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
gEN
DER
TO
MALEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
MALE
10,104
2,95
529
.2%
1.00
FEMALE
9,80
82,90
729
.6%
1.01
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
9,52
02,05
421
.6%
0.74
TOTA
L33
,030
9,00
827
.3%
0.93
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se g
ende
r was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009196.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 16
: Hom
e Im
prov
emen
t Sin
gle-
Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Phi
lade
lphi
a by
Bor
row
er R
ace
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SHARE
RAT
IO
WHITE
693
118
811
64.2
%44
.2%
60.3
%28
2,06
347
.8%
1.34
0.92
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
302
117
419
28.0
%43
.8%
31.1
%23
7,44
340
.2%
0.70
1.09
ASIAN
418
493.
8%3.
0%3.
6%20
,559
3.5%
1.09
0.86
HISPA
NIC
4324
674.
0%9.
0%5.
0%38
,509
6.5%
0.61
1.38
TOTA
L1,43
529
31,72
859
0,28
3
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
WHITE
693
118
811
85.5
%14
.5%
1.00
1.00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
302
117
419
72.1
%27
.9%
0.84
1.92
ASIAN
418
4983
.7%
16.3
%0.
981.
12
HISPA
NIC
4324
6764
.2%
35.8
%0.
752.
46
TOTA
L1,43
529
31,72
883
.0%
17.0
%0.
971.
17
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
RACE
TO
WHITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
WHITE
1,81
571
839
.6%
1.00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
1,91
61,23
564
.5%
1.63
ASIAN
177
9855
.4%
1.40
HISPA
NIC
449
317
70.6
%1.
78
TOTA
L5,63
53,06
054
.3%
1.37
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se r
ace
was
list
ed a
s “O
ther
” or
who
se r
ace
was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009197.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 17
: Hom
e Im
prov
emen
t Sin
gle-
Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Phi
lade
lphi
a by
Bor
row
er In
com
e
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
272
136
408
19.0
%47
.1%
23.8
%27
9,32
747
.3%
0.40
0.99
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)45
280
532
31.7
%27
.7%
31.0
%12
0,15
820
.4%
1.55
1.36
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
358
4940
725
.1%
17.0
%23
.7%
93,513
15.8
%1.
581.
07
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)34
624
370
24.2
%8.
3%21
.5%
97,285
16.5
%1.
470.
50
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
724
216
940
50.7
%74
.7%
54.7
%39
9,48
667
.7%
0.75
1.10
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
704
7377
749
.3%
25.3
%45
.3%
190,79
732
.3%
1.53
0.78
TOTA
L1,43
529
31,72
859
0,28
3
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
ME
SHARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
272
136
408
66.7
%33
.3%
0.71
5.14
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)45
280
532
85.0
%15
.0%
0.91
2.32
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
358
4940
788
.0%
12.0
%0.
941.
86
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)34
624
370
93.5
%6.
5%1.
001.
00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
724
216
940
77.0
%23
.0%
0.85
2.45
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
704
7377
790
.6%
9.4%
1.00
1.00
TOTA
L1,43
529
31,72
883
.0%
17.0
%0.
892.
61
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,98
71,33
667
.2%
1.92
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)1,76
595
954
.3%
1.55
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
1,04
545
343
.3%
1.24
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)77
527
135
.0%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,75
22,29
561
.2%
1.54
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
1,82
072
439
.8%
1.00
TOTA
L5,63
53,06
054
.3%
1.55
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se in
com
e w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009198.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 18
: Hom
e Im
prov
emen
t Sin
gle-
Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Phi
lade
lphi
a by
Tra
ct M
inor
ity L
evel
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
929
121
1,05
064
.7%
41.3
%60
.8%
178,316
51.0
%1.
270.
81
50-100
%
MINORITy
506
172
678
35.3
%58
.7%
39.2
%171,33
549
.0%
0.72
1.20
TOTA
L1,43
529
31,72
834
9,65
1
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
MINORITy
LEvELSHARE
TO
WHITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
MINORITy
LEvELSHARE
TO
WHITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
0-49
%
MINORITy
929
121
1,05
088
.5%
11.5
%1.
001.
00
50-100
%
MINORITy
506
172
678
74.6
%25
.4%
0.84
2.20
TOTA
L1,43
529
31,72
883
.0%
17.0
%0.
941.
47
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
E
MINORITy
LEvELTO
WHITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
2,58
11,12
143
.4%
1.00
50-100
%
MINORITy
3,05
01,93
763
.5%
1.46
TOTA
L5,63
53,06
054
.3%
1.25
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act
min
orit
y le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009199.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 19
: Hom
e Im
prov
emen
t Sin
gle-
Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Phi
lade
lphi
a by
Tra
ct In
com
e Le
vel
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
168
9226
011
.7%
31.5
%15
.1%
81,464
23.3
%0.
501.
35
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)60
012
872
841
.8%
43.8
%42
.2%
152,80
543
.7%
0.96
1.00
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
602
6867
042
.0%
23.3
%38
.8%
100,76
428
.8%
1.46
0.81
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)64
468
4.5%
1.4%
3.9%
14,605
4.2%
1.07
0.33
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
768
220
988
53.6
%75
.3%
57.2
%23
4,26
967
.0%
0.80
1.12
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
666
7273
846
.4%
24.7
%42
.8%
115,36
933
.0%
1.41
0.75
TOTA
L1,43
529
31,72
834
9,63
8
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
ME
SHARE
TO
uPP
ER-INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
168
9226
064
.6%
35.4
%0.
696.
02
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)60
012
872
882
.4%
17.6
%0.
882.
99
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
602
6867
089
.9%
10.1
%0.
951.
73
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)64
468
94.1
%5.
9%1.
001.
00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
768
220
988
77.7
%22
.3%
0.86
2.28
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
666
7273
890
.2%
9.8%
1.00
1.00
TOTA
L1,43
529
31,72
883
.0%
17.0
%0.
882.
88
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,43
899
269
.0%
1.91
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)2,50
01,40
956
.4%
1.56
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
1,53
259
839
.0%
1.08
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)15
857
36.1
%1.
00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,93
82,40
161
.0%
1.57
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
1,69
065
538
.8%
1.00
TOTA
L5,63
53,06
054
.3%
1.51
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act i
ncom
e le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009200.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 20
: Hom
e Im
prov
emen
t Sin
gle-
Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Phi
lade
lphi
a by
Bor
row
er G
ende
r
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
MALE
347
7842
526
.4%
28.1
%26
.7%
132,27
822
.4%
1.18
1.25
FEMALE
455
134
589
34.7
%48
.2%
37.0
%26
4,97
544
.9%
0.77
1.07
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
510
6657
638
.9%
23.7
%36
.2%
193,03
032
.7%
1.19
0.73
TOTA
L1,43
529
31,72
859
0,28
3
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALESHARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALESHARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
MALE
347
7842
581
.6%
18.4
%1.
001.
00
FEMALE
455
134
589
77.2
%22
.8%
0.95
1.24
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
510
6657
688
.5%
11.5
%1.
080.
62
TOTA
L1,43
529
31,72
883
.0%
17.0
%1.
020.
92
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
gEN
DER
TO
MALEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
MALE
1,64
195
458
.1%
1.00
FEMALE
2,174
1,27
358
.6%
1.01
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
1,24
949
239
.4%
0.68
TOTA
L5,63
53,06
054
.3%
0.93
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se g
ende
r was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009201.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 21
: All
Sing
le-F
amily
, Ow
ner-
Occ
upan
t Len
ding
in S
ubur
bs b
y Bo
rrow
er R
ace
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
WHITE
70,394
1,82
972
,223
90.7
%87
.4%
90.6
%76
3,70
387
.8%
1.03
0.99
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
2,30
417
02,474
3.0%
8.1%
3.1%
61,927
7.1%
0.42
1.14
ASIAN
3,742
463,78
84.
8%2.
2%4.
8%21
,767
2.5%
1.93
0.88
HISPA
NIC
1,19
348
1,241
1.5%
2.3%
1.6%
14,060
1.6%
0.95
1.42
TOTA
L88
,328
2,37
390
,701
869,42
5
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
WHITE
70,394
1,82
972
,223
97.5
%2.
5%1.
001.
00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
2,30
417
02,474
93.1
%6.
9%0.
962.
71
ASIAN
3,742
463,78
898
.8%
1.2%
1.01
0.48
HISPA
NIC
1,19
348
1,241
96.1
%3.
9%0.
991.
53
TOTA
L88
,328
2,37
390
,701
97.4
%2.
6%1.
001.
03
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
RACE
TO
WHITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
WHITE
107,79
814
,945
13.9
%1.
00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
5,18
81,48
128
.5%
2.06
ASIAN
5,96
290
715
.2%
1.10
HISPA
NIC
2,20
943
619
.7%
1.42
TOTA
L141,90
021
,663
15.3
%1.
10
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se r
ace
was
list
ed a
s “O
ther
” or
who
se r
ace
was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009202.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 22
: All
Sing
le-F
amily
, Ow
ner-
Occ
upan
t Len
ding
in S
ubur
bs b
y Bo
rrow
er In
com
e
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
3,761
285
4,04
64.
5%13
.3%
4.7%
184,00
721
.2%
0.21
0.63
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)14
,616
568
15,184
17.6
%26
.5%
17.8
%15
0,36
317
.3%
1.02
1.53
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
21,303
574
21,877
25.7
%26
.8%
25.7
%176,69
420
.3%
1.26
1.32
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)43
,365
718
44,083
52.2
%33
.5%
51.7
%35
8,36
141
.2%
1.27
0.81
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
18,377
853
19,230
22.1
%39
.8%
22.6
%33
4,37
038
.5%
0.58
1.03
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
64,668
1,29
265
,960
77.9
%60
.2%
77.4
%53
5,05
561
.5%
1.27
0.98
TOTA
L88
,328
2,37
390
,701
869,42
5
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
3,761
285
4,04
693
.0%
7.0%
0.94
4.32
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)14
,616
568
15,184
96.3
%3.
7%0.
982.
30
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
21,303
574
21,877
97.4
%2.
6%0.
991.
61
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)43
,365
718
44,083
98.4
%1.
6%1.
001.
00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
18,377
853
19,230
95.6
%4.
4%0.
972.
26
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
64,668
1,29
265
,960
98.0
%2.
0%1.
001.
00
TOTA
L88
,328
2,37
390
,701
97.4
%2.
6%0.
991.
61
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
8,43
12,69
732
.0%
2.59
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)24
,794
4,59
918
.5%
1.50
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
33,801
5,11
015
.1%
1.22
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)65
,535
8,09
012
.3%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
33,225
7,29
622
.0%
1.65
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
99,336
13,200
13.3
%1.
00
TOTA
L141,90
021
,663
15.3
%1.
24
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se in
com
e w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009203.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 23
: All
Sing
le-F
amily
, Ow
ner-
Occ
upan
t Len
ding
in S
ubur
bs b
y Tr
act M
inor
ity L
evel
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIMELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
87,686
2,29
689
,982
99.3
%96
.8%
99.2
%63
1,63
397
.4%
1.02
0.99
50-100
%
MINORITy
642
7771
90.
7%3.
2%0.
8%16
,574
2.6%
0.28
1.27
TOTA
L88
,328
2,37
390
,701
648,20
7
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
0-49
%
MINORITy
87,686
2,29
689
,982
97.4
%2.
6%1.
001.
00
50-100
%
MINORITy
642
7771
989
.3%
10.7
%0.
924.
20
TOTA
L88
,328
2,37
390
,701
97.4
%2.
6%1.
001.
03
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
TOW
HITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
140,06
421
,042
15.0
%1.
00
50-100
%
MINORITy
1,83
662
133
.8%
2.25
TOTA
L141,90
021
,663
15.3
%1.
02
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act
min
orit
y le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009204.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 24
: All
Sing
le-F
amily
, Ow
ner-
Occ
upan
t Len
ding
in S
ubur
bs b
y Tr
act I
ncom
e Le
vel
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
127
1614
30.
1%0.
7%0.
2%5,13
40.
8%0.
180.
85
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)2,28
218
52,46
72.
6%7.
8%2.
7%31,196
4.8%
0.54
1.62
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
25,873
1,10
126
,974
29.3
%46
.4%
29.7
%23
0,23
535
.5%
0.82
1.31
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)60
,046
1,07
161
,117
68.0
%45
.1%
67.4
%38
1,55
458
.9%
1.15
0.77
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
2,40
920
12,61
02.
7%8.
5%2.
9%36
,330
5.6%
0.49
1.51
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
85,919
2,17
288
,091
97.3
%91
.5%
97.1
%611,78
994
.4%
1.03
0.97
TOTA
L88
,328
2,37
390
,701
648,11
9
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
ME
SHARE
TO
uPP
ER-INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
127
1614
388
.8%
11.2
%0.
906.
38
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)2,28
218
52,46
792
.5%
7.5%
0.94
4.28
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
25,873
1,10
126
,974
95.9
%4.
1%0.
982.
33
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)60
,046
1,07
161
,117
98.2
%1.
8%1.
001.
00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
2,40
920
12,61
092
.3%
7.7%
0.95
3.12
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
85,919
2,17
288
,091
97.5
%2.
5%1.
001.
00
TOTA
L88
,328
2,37
390
,701
97.4
%2.
6%0.
991.
49
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IALRAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
409
147
35.9
%2.
70
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)4,82
61,20
324
.9%
1.87
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
45,009
8,10
818
.0%
1.35
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)91
,654
12,204
13.3
%1.
00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
5,23
51,35
025
.8%
1.74
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
136,66
320
,312
14.9
%1.
00
TOTA
L141,90
021
,663
15.3
%1.
15
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act i
ncom
e le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009205.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 25
: All
Sing
le-F
amily
, Ow
ner-
Occ
upan
t Len
ding
in S
ubur
bs b
y Bo
rrow
er G
ende
r
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
MALE
17,992
484
18,476
22.0
%22
.4%
22.0
%15
4,32
417
.8%
1.24
1.26
FEMALE
14,060
516
14,576
17.2
%23
.8%
17.3
%24
8,34
028
.6%
0.60
0.83
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
49,840
1,16
451,004
60.9
%53
.8%
60.7
%49
1,94
656
.6%
1.08
0.95
TOTA
L88
,328
2,37
390
,701
869,42
5
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALESHARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALESHARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
MALE
17,992
484
18,476
97.4
%2.
6%1.
001.
00
FEMALE
14,060
516
14,576
96.5
%3.
5%0.
991.
35
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
49,840
1,16
451,004
97.7
%2.
3%1.
000.
87
TOTA
L88
,328
2,37
390
,701
97.4
%2.
6%1.
001.
00
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
gEN
DER
TO
MALEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
MALE
31,051
5,64
218
.2%
1.00
FEMALE
23,559
4,11
517
.5%
0.96
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
74,080
9,26
412
.5%
0.69
TOTA
L141,90
021
,663
15.3
%0.
84
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se g
ende
r was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009206.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 26
: Hom
e Pu
rcha
se S
ingl
e-Fa
mily
, Ow
ner-
Occ
upan
t Len
ding
in S
ubur
bs b
y Bo
rrow
er R
ace
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
WHITE
16,407
423
16,830
87.6
%81
.2%
87.4
%76
3,70
387
.8%
1.00
0.92
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
858
6392
14.
6%12
.1%
4.8%
61,927
7.1%
0.64
1.70
ASIAN
1,06
019
1,07
95.
7%3.
6%5.
6%21
,767
2.5%
2.26
1.46
HISPA
NIC
413
1642
92.
2%3.
1%2.
2%14
,060
1.6%
1.36
1.90
TOTA
L21
,025
587
21,612
869,42
5
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
WHITE
16,407
423
16,830
97.5
%2.
5%1.
001.
00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
858
6392
193
.2%
6.8%
0.96
2.72
ASIAN
1,06
019
1,07
998
.2%
1.8%
1.01
0.70
HISPA
NIC
413
1642
996
.3%
3.7%
0.99
1.48
TOTA
L21
,025
587
21,612
97.3
%2.
7%1.
001.
08
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
RACE
TO
WHITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
WHITE
21,320
1,45
76.
8%1.
00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
1,38
124
918
.0%
2.64
ASIAN
1,58
319
312
.2%
1.78
HISPA
NIC
590
7011
.9%
1.74
TOTA
L28
,418
2,36
88.
3%1.
22
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se r
ace
was
list
ed a
s “O
ther
” or
who
se r
ace
was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009207.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 27
: Hom
e Pu
rcha
se S
ingl
e-Fa
mily
, Ow
ner-
Occ
upan
t Len
ding
in S
ubur
bs b
y Bo
rrow
er In
com
e
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,36
755
1,42
26.
5%9.
5%6.
6%18
4,00
721
.2%
0.31
0.45
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)5,28
215
65,43
825
.2%
26.9
%25
.3%
150,36
317
.3%
1.46
1.56
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
5,92
818
66,11
428
.3%
32.1
%28
.4%
176,69
420
.3%
1.39
1.58
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)8,35
218
28,53
439
.9%
31.4
%39
.7%
358,36
141
.2%
0.97
0.76
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
6,64
921
16,86
031
.8%
36.4
%31
.9%
334,37
038
.5%
0.83
0.95
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
14,280
368
14,648
68.2
%63
.6%
68.1
%53
5,05
561
.5%
1.11
1.03
TOTA
L21
,025
587
21,612
869,42
5
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,36
755
1,42
296
.1%
3.9%
0.98
1.81
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)5,28
215
65,43
897
.1%
2.9%
0.99
1.35
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
5,92
818
66,11
497
.0%
3.0%
0.99
1.43
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)8,35
218
28,53
497
.9%
2.1%
1.00
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
6,64
921
16,86
096
.9%
3.1%
0.99
1.22
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
14,280
368
14,648
97.5
%2.
5%1.
001.
00
TOTA
L21
,025
587
21,612
97.3
%2.
7%0.
991.
27
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IALRAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
2,14
641
319
.2%
3.07
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)6,99
363
49.
1%1.
45
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
7,83
955
47.
1%1.
13
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)11
,131
698
6.3%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
9,13
91,04
711
.5%
1.74
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
18,970
1,25
26.
6%1.
00
TOTA
L28
,418
2,36
88.
3%1.
33
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se in
com
e w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009208.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 28
: Hom
e Pu
rcha
se S
ingl
e-Fa
mily
, Ow
ner-
Occ
upan
t Len
ding
in S
ubur
bs b
y Tr
act M
inor
ity L
evel
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TOOOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
20,709
566
21,275
98.5
%96
.4%
98.4
%63
1,63
397
.4%
1.01
0.99
50-100
%
MINORITy
316
2133
71.
5%3.
6%1.
6%16
,574
2.6%
0.59
1.40
TOTA
L21
,025
587
21,612
648,20
7
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
0-49
%
MINORITy
20,709
566
21,275
97.3
%2.
7%1.
001.
00
50-100
%
MINORITy
316
2133
793
.8%
6.2%
0.96
2.34
TOTA
L21
,025
587
21,612
97.3
%2.
7%1.
001.
02
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
TOW
HITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
27,901
2,26
38.
1%1.
00
50-100
%
MINORITy
517
105
20.3
%2.
50
TOTA
L28
,418
2,36
88.
3%1.
03
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act
min
orit
y le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009209.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 29
: Hom
e Pu
rcha
se S
ingl
e-Fa
mily
, Ow
ner-
Occ
upan
t Len
ding
in S
ubur
bs b
y Tr
act I
ncom
e Le
vel
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
671
680.
3%0.
2%0.
3%5,13
40.
8%0.
400.
22
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)96
562
1,02
74.
6%10
.6%
4.8%
31,196
4.8%
0.95
2.19
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
7,59
727
17,86
836
.1%
46.2
%36
.4%
230,23
535
.5%
1.02
1.30
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)12
,396
253
12,649
59.0
%43
.1%
58.5
%38
1,55
458
.9%
1.00
0.73
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
1,03
263
1,09
54.
9%10
.7%
5.1%
36,330
5.6%
0.88
1.91
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
19,993
524
20,517
95.1
%89
.3%
94.9
%611,78
994
.4%
1.01
0.95
TOTA
L21
,025
587
21,612
648,11
9
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
671
6898
.5%
1.5%
1.01
0.74
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)96
562
1,02
794
.0%
6.0%
0.96
3.02
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
7,59
727
17,86
896
.6%
3.4%
0.99
1.72
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)12
,396
253
12,649
98.0
%2.
0%1.
001.
00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
1,03
263
1,09
594
.2%
5.8%
0.97
2.25
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
19,993
524
20,517
97.4
%2.
6%1.
001.
00
TOTA
L21
,025
587
21,612
97.3
%2.
7%0.
991.
36
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IALRAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
119
3025
.2%
3.39
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)1,40
918
112
.8%
1.73
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
10,225
919
9.0%
1.21
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)16
,665
1,23
87.
4%1.
00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
1,52
821
113
.8%
1.72
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
26,890
2,15
78.
0%1.
00
TOTA
L28
,418
2,36
88.
3%1.
12
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act i
ncom
e le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009210.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 30
: Hom
e Pu
rcha
se S
ingl
e-Fa
mily
, Ow
ner-
Occ
upan
t Len
ding
in S
ubur
bs b
y Bo
rrow
er G
ende
r
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
MALE
5,47
513
85,61
327
.8%
25.7
%27
.7%
154,32
417
.8%
1.57
1.45
FEMALE
4,22
712
74,35
421
.4%
23.6
%21
.5%
248,34
028
.6%
0.75
0.83
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
10,006
273
10,279
50.8
%50
.7%
50.8
%49
1,94
656
.6%
0.90
0.90
TOTA
L21
,025
587
21,612
869,42
5
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALESHARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALESHARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
MALE
5,47
513
85,61
397
.5%
2.5%
1.00
1.00
FEMALE
4,22
712
74,35
497
.1%
2.9%
1.00
1.19
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
10,006
273
10,279
97.3
%2.
7%1.
001.
08
TOTA
L21
,025
587
21,612
97.3
%2.
7%1.
001.
10
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
gEN
DER
TO
MALEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
MALE
7,53
874
09.
8%1.
00
FEMALE
5,68
354
79.
6%0.
98
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
13,066
802
6.1%
0.63
TOTA
L28
,418
2,36
88.
3%0.
85
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se g
ende
r was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009211.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 31
: Refi
nanc
e Si
ngle
-Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Sub
urbs
by
Borr
ower
Rac
e
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
WHITE
52,263
1,13
353
,396
91.6
%88
.9%
91.5
%76
3,70
387
.8%
1.04
1.01
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
1,417
931,510
2.5%
7.3%
2.6%
61,927
7.1%
0.35
1.02
ASIAN
2,63
920
2,65
94.
6%1.
6%4.
6%21
,767
2.5%
1.85
0.63
HISPA
NIC
765
2979
41.
3%2.
3%1.
4%14
,060
1.6%
0.83
1.41
TOTA
L65
,288
1,46
166
,749
869,42
5
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
WHITE
52,263
1,13
353
,396
97.9
%2.
1%1.
001.
00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
1,417
931,510
93.8
%6.
2%0.
962.
90
ASIAN
2,63
920
2,65
999
.2%
0.8%
1.01
0.35
HISPA
NIC
765
2979
496
.3%
3.7%
0.98
1.72
TOTA
L65
,288
1,46
166
,749
97.8
%2.
2%1.
001.
03
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
RACE
TO
WHITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
WHITE
83,420
12,992
15.6
%1.
00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
3,64
81,16
531
.9%
2.05
ASIAN
4,27
168
516
.0%
1.03
HISPA
NIC
1,57
135
222
.4%
1.44
TOTA
L10
9,65
218
,593
17.0
%1.
09
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se r
ace
was
list
ed a
s “O
ther
” or
who
se r
ace
was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009212.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 32
: Refi
nanc
e Si
ngle
-Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Sub
urbs
by
Borr
ower
Inco
me
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
2,25
216
12,41
33.
7%12
.9%
3.9%
184,00
721
.2%
0.18
0.61
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)8,98
432
49,30
814
.9%
26.0
%15
.2%
150,36
317
.3%
0.86
1.51
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
14,880
311
15,191
24.8
%25
.0%
24.8
%176,69
420
.3%
1.22
1.23
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)34
,004
448
34,452
56.6
%36
.0%
56.1
%35
8,36
141
.2%
1.37
0.87
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
11,236
485
11,721
18.7
%39
.0%
19.1
%33
4,37
038
.5%
0.49
1.01
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
48,884
759
49,643
81.3
%61
.0%
80.9
%53
5,05
561
.5%
1.32
0.99
TOTA
L65
,288
1,46
166
,749
869,42
5
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
2,25
216
12,41
393
.3%
6.7%
0.95
5.13
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)8,98
432
49,30
896
.5%
3.5%
0.98
2.68
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
14,880
311
15,191
98.0
%2.
0%0.
991.
57
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)34
,004
448
34,452
98.7
%1.
3%1.
001.
00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
11,236
485
11,721
95.9
%4.
1%0.
972.
71
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
48,884
759
49,643
98.5
%1.
5%1.
001.
00
TOTA
L65
,288
1,46
166
,749
97.8
%2.
2%0.
991.
68
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
5,83
42,12
636
.4%
2.68
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)17,040
3,79
322
.3%
1.64
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
25,045
4,40
417
.6%
1.29
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)52
,742
7,17
913
.6%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
22,874
5,91
925
.9%
1.74
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
77,787
11,583
14.9
%1.
00
TOTA
L10
9,65
218
,593
17.0
%1.
25
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se in
com
e w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009213.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 33
: Refi
nanc
e Si
ngle
-Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Sub
urbs
by
Trac
t Min
ority
Lev
el
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
64,972
1,414
66,386
99.5
%96
.8%
99.5
%63
1,63
397
.4%
1.02
0.99
50-100
%
MINORITy
316
4736
30.
5%3.
2%0.
5%16
,574
2.6%
0.19
1.26
TOTA
L65
,288
1,46
166
,749
648,20
7
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
0-49
%
MINORITy
64,972
1,414
66,386
97.9
%2.
1%1.
001.
00
50-100
%
MINORITy
316
4736
387
.1%
12.9
%0.
896.
08
TOTA
L65
,288
1,46
166
,749
97.8
%2.
2%1.
001.
03
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
TOW
HITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
108,41
318
,118
16.7
%1.
00
50-100
%
MINORITy
1,23
947
538
.3%
2.29
TOTA
L10
9,65
218
,593
17.0
%1.
01
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act
min
orit
y le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009214.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 34
: Refi
nanc
e Si
ngle
-Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Sub
urbs
by
Trac
t Inc
ome
Leve
l
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
OOHu
PER
CENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
5611
670.
1%0.
8%0.
1%5,13
40.
8%0.
110.
95
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)1,28
210
21,38
42.
0%7.
0%2.
1%31,196
4.8%
0.41
1.45
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
17,635
676
18,311
27.0
%46
.3%
27.4
%23
0,23
535
.5%
0.76
1.30
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)46
,315
672
46,987
70.9
%46
.0%
70.4
%38
1,55
458
.9%
1.21
0.78
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
1,33
811
31,451
2.0%
7.7%
2.2%
36,330
5.6%
0.37
1.38
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
63,950
1,34
865
,298
98.0
%92
.3%
97.8
%611,78
994
.4%
1.04
0.98
TOTA
L65
,288
1,46
166
,749
648,11
9
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
ME
SHARE
TO
uPP
ER-INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
5611
6783
.6%
16.4
%0.
8511
.48
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)1,28
210
21,38
492
.6%
7.4%
0.94
5.15
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
17,635
676
18,311
96.3
%3.
7%0.
982.
58
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)46
,315
672
46,987
98.6
%1.
4%1.
001.
00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
1,33
811
31,451
92.2
%7.
8%0.
943.
77
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
63,950
1,34
865
,298
97.9
%2.
1%1.
001.
00
TOTA
L65
,288
1,46
166
,749
97.8
%2.
2%0.
991.
53
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
267
106
39.7
%2.
72
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)3,27
096
929
.6%
2.03
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
33,436
6,90
320
.6%
1.41
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)72
,677
10,614
14.6
%1.
00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,53
71,07
530
.4%
1.84
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
106,11
317,517
16.5
%1.
00
TOTA
L10
9,65
218
,593
17.0
%1.
16
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act i
ncom
e le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009215.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 35
: Refi
nanc
e Si
ngle
-Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Sub
urbs
by
Borr
ower
Gen
der
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
MALE
12,239
293
12,532
20.3
%22
.2%
20.3
%15
4,32
417
.8%
1.14
1.25
FEMALE
9,52
931
09,83
915
.8%
23.5
%16
.0%
248,34
028
.6%
0.55
0.82
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
38,527
717
39,244
63.9
%54
.3%
63.7
%49
1,94
656
.6%
1.13
0.96
TOTA
L65
,288
1,46
166
,749
869,42
5
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALESHARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALESHARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
MALE
12,239
293
12,532
97.7
%2.
3%1.
001.
00
FEMALE
9,52
931
09,83
996
.8%
3.2%
0.99
1.35
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
38,527
717
39,244
98.2
%1.
8%1.
010.
78
TOTA
L65
,288
1,46
166
,749
97.8
%2.
2%1.
000.
94
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
gEN
DER
TO
MALEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
MALE
22,823
4,717
20.7
%1.
00
FEMALE
17,186
3,40
119
.8%
0.96
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
58,851
8,17
213
.9%
0.67
TOTA
L10
9,65
218
,593
17.0
%0.
82
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se g
ende
r was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009216.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 36
: Hom
e Im
prov
emen
t Sin
gle-
Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Sub
urbs
by
Borr
ower
Rac
e
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
WHITE
3,17
339
73,57
094
.0%
89.6
%93
.5%
763,70
387
.8%
1.07
1.02
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
6829
972.
0%6.
5%2.
5%61
,927
7.1%
0.28
0.92
ASIAN
9012
102
2.7%
2.7%
2.7%
21,767
2.5%
1.06
1.08
HISPA
NIC
455
501.
3%1.
1%1.
3%14
,060
1.6%
0.82
0.70
TOTA
L3,96
749
04,45
786
9,42
5
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
WHITE
3,17
339
73,57
088
.9%
11.1
%1.
001.
00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
6829
9770
.1%
29.9
%0.
792.
69
ASIAN
9012
102
88.2
%11
.8%
0.99
1.06
HISPA
NIC
455
5090
.0%
10.0
%1.
010.
90
TOTA
L3,96
749
04,45
789
.0%
11.0
%1.
000.
99
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
ERACE
TOW
HITE
DEN
IALRAT
IO
WHITE
5,90
71,30
122
.0%
1.00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
327
148
45.3
%2.
05
ASIAN
229
8135
.4%
1.61
HISPA
NIC
125
4636
.8%
1.67
TOTA
L7,89
61,94
824
.7%
1.12
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se r
ace
was
list
ed a
s “O
ther
” or
who
se r
ace
was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009217.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 37
: Hom
e Im
prov
emen
t Sin
gle-
Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Sub
urbs
by
Borr
ower
Inco
me
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
235
8231
76.
0%16
.9%
7.2%
184,00
721
.2%
0.28
0.80
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)64
612
076
616
.4%
24.7
%17
.3%
150,36
317
.3%
0.95
1.43
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
1,03
013
31,16
326
.1%
27.4
%26
.3%
176,69
420
.3%
1.29
1.35
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)2,02
915
12,18
051
.5%
31.1
%49
.3%
358,36
141
.2%
1.25
0.75
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
881
202
1,08
322
.4%
41.6
%24
.5%
334,37
038
.5%
0.58
1.08
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,05
928
43,34
377
.6%
58.4
%75
.5%
535,05
561
.5%
1.26
0.95
TOTA
L3,96
749
04,45
786
9,42
5
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
ME
SHARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
INCO
ME
SHARE
TO
uPP
ER-INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
235
8231
774
.1%
25.9
%0.
803.
73
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)64
612
076
684
.3%
15.7
%0.
912.
26
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
1,03
013
31,16
388
.6%
11.4
%0.
951.
65
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)2,02
915
12,18
093
.1%
6.9%
1.00
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
881
202
1,08
381
.3%
18.7
%0.
892.
20
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,05
928
43,34
391
.5%
8.5%
1.00
1.00
TOTA
L3,96
749
04,45
789
.0%
11.0
%0.
961.
59
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
METO
uPP
ER-INCO
ME
DEN
IALRAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
806
351
43.5
%2.
50
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)1,52
749
132
.2%
1.85
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
2,01
248
023
.9%
1.37
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)3,48
560
717
.4%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
2,33
384
236
.1%
1.83
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
5,49
71,08
719
.8%
1.00
TOTA
L7,89
61,94
824
.7%
1.42
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se in
com
e w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009218.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 38
: Hom
e Im
prov
emen
t Sin
gle-
Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Sub
urbs
by
Trac
t Min
ority
Lev
el
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
3,93
947
54,414
99.3
%96
.9%
99.0
%63
1,63
397
.4%
1.02
0.99
50-100
%
MINORITy
2815
430.
7%3.
1%1.
0%16
,574
2.6%
0.28
1.20
TOTA
L3,96
749
04,45
764
8,20
7
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
0-49
%
MINORITy
3,93
947
54,414
89.2
%10
.8%
1.00
1.00
50-100
%
MINORITy
2815
4365
.1%
34.9
%0.
733.
24
TOTA
L3,96
749
04,45
789
.0%
11.0
%1.
001.
02
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
TOW
HITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
7,72
41,85
524
.0%
1.00
50-100
%
MINORITy
172
9354
.1%
2.25
TOTA
L7,89
61,94
824
.7%
1.03
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act
min
orit
y le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009219.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 39
: Hom
e Im
prov
emen
t Sin
gle-
Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Sub
urbs
by
Trac
t Inc
ome
Leve
l
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
76
130.
2%1.
2%0.
3%5,13
40.
8%0.
221.
55
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)85
2811
32.
1%5.
7%2.
5%31,196
4.8%
0.45
1.19
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
1,38
721
91,60
635
.0%
44.7
%36
.0%
230,23
535
.5%
0.98
1.26
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)2,48
823
72,72
562
.7%
48.4
%61
.1%
381,55
458
.9%
1.07
0.82
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
9234
126
2.3%
6.9%
2.8%
36,330
5.6%
0.41
1.24
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,87
545
64,33
197
.7%
93.1
%97
.2%
611,78
994
.4%
1.03
0.99
TOTA
L3,96
749
04,45
764
8,11
9
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
ME
SHARE
TO
uPP
ER-INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
76
1353
.8%
46.2
%0.
595.
31
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)85
2811
375
.2%
24.8
%0.
822.
85
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
1,38
721
91,60
686
.4%
13.6
%0.
951.
57
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)2,48
823
72,72
591
.3%
8.7%
1.00
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
9234
126
73.0
%27
.0%
0.82
2.56
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,87
545
64,33
189
.5%
10.5
%1.
001.
00
TOTA
L3,96
749
04,45
789
.0%
11.0
%0.
971.
26
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
METO
uPP
ER-INCO
ME
DEN
IALRAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
4221
50.0
%2.
44
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)31
913
943
.6%
2.12
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
3,00
185
728
.6%
1.39
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)4,53
493
120
.5%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
361
160
44.3
%1.
87
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
7,53
51,78
823
.7%
1.00
TOTA
L7,89
61,94
824
.7%
1.20
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act i
ncom
e le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009220.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 40
: Hom
e Im
prov
emen
t Sin
gle-
Fam
ily, O
wne
r-O
ccup
ant L
endi
ng in
Sub
urbs
by
Borr
ower
Gen
der
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
MALE
562
9966
115
.3%
21.4
%16
.0%
154,32
417
.8%
0.86
1.21
FEMALE
571
110
681
15.5
%23
.8%
16.5
%24
8,34
028
.6%
0.54
0.83
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
2,54
025
32,79
369
.2%
54.8
%67
.5%
491,94
656
.6%
1.22
0.97
TOTA
L3,96
749
04,45
786
9,42
5
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
MALE
562
9966
185
.0%
15.0
%1.
001.
00
FEMALE
571
110
681
83.8
%16
.2%
0.99
1.08
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
2,54
025
32,79
390
.9%
9.1%
1.07
0.60
TOTA
L3,96
749
04,45
789
.0%
11.0
%1.
050.
73
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
EgEN
DER
TO
MALEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
MALE
1,49
952
034
.7%
1.00
FEMALE
1,36
843
331
.7%
0.91
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
4,30
275
917
.6%
0.51
TOTA
L7,89
61,94
824
.7%
0.71
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se g
ende
r was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009221.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 41
: All
Loan
s by
Bor
row
er R
ace
in B
altim
ore
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
WHITE
4,73
914
74,88
660
.8%
28.3
%58
.8%
93,423
36.2
%1.
680.
78
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
2,73
336
03,09
335
.1%
69.2
%37
.2%
151,90
758
.9%
0.60
1.17
ASIAN
167
417
12.
1%0.
8%2.
1%4,19
31.
6%1.
320.
47
HISPA
NIC
150
915
91.
9%1.
7%1.
9%3,79
31.
5%1.
311.
18
TOTA
L8,98
559
29,57
725
7,78
8
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
WHITE
4,73
914
74,88
697
.0%
3.0%
1.00
1.00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
2,73
336
03,09
388
.4%
11.6
%0.
913.
87
ASIAN
167
417
197
.7%
2.3%
1.01
0.78
HISPA
NIC
150
915
994
.3%
5.7%
0.97
1.88
TOTA
L8,98
559
29,57
793
.8%
6.2%
0.97
2.05
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
ERACE
TOW
HITE
DEN
IALRAT
IO
WHITE
7,67
51,25
916
.4%
1.00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
7,18
32,20
630
.7%
1.87
ASIAN
316
6620
.9%
1.27
HISPA
NIC
329
8826
.7%
1.63
TOTA
L18
,498
4,40
323
.8%
1.45
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se r
ace
was
list
ed a
s “O
ther
” or
who
se r
ace
was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009222.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 42
: All
Loan
s by
Bor
row
er In
com
e in
Bal
timor
e
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,41
216
81,58
018
.5%
34.6
%19
.5%
129,40
250
.2%
0.37
0.69
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)2,30
718
12,48
830
.2%
37.3
%30
.7%
57,318
22.2
%1.
361.
68
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
1,70
098
1,79
822
.3%
20.2
%22
.2%
38,298
14.9
%1.
501.
36
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)2,20
838
2,24
628
.9%
7.8%
27.7
%32
,770
12.7
%2.
280.
62
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,71
934
94,06
848
.8%
72.0
%50
.1%
186,72
072
.4%
0.67
0.99
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,90
813
64,04
451
.2%
28.0
%49
.9%
71,068
27.6
%1.
861.
02
TOTA
L8,98
559
29,57
725
7,78
8
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,41
216
81,58
089
.4%
10.6
%0.
916.
28
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)2,30
718
12,48
892
.7%
7.3%
0.94
4.30
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
1,70
098
1,79
894
.5%
5.5%
0.96
3.22
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)2,20
838
2,24
698
.3%
1.7%
1.00
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,71
934
94,06
891
.4%
8.6%
0.95
2.55
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,90
813
64,04
496
.6%
3.4%
1.00
1.00
TOTA
L8,98
559
29,57
793
.8%
6.2%
0.95
3.65
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IALRAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
3,87
21,32
334
.2%
1.94
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)4,94
31,24
425
.2%
1.43
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
3,30
371
821
.7%
1.23
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)3,73
465
817
.6%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
8,81
52,56
729
.1%
1.49
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
7,03
71,376
19.6
%1.
00
TOTA
L18
,498
4,40
323
.8%
1.35
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se in
com
e w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
DEN
IALRAT
EDIFFERE
NT
2009
2008
DIFF
PHILADELPH
IA30
.00%
38.4
0%-0.218
75
BALTIM
ORE
29.1
0%34
.40%
-0.154
0697
67
DET
ROIT
56.7
0%59
.00%
-0.038
9830
51
PITT
SBuRg
H29
.30%
41.2
0%-0.288
8349
51
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009223.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 43
: All
Loan
s by
Tra
ct M
inor
ity L
evel
in B
altim
ore
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
5,28
917
25,46
158
.9%
29.1
%57
.0%
51,722
39.8
%1.
480.
73
50-100
%
MINORITy
3,69
642
04,11
641
.1%
70.9
%43
.0%
78,157
60.2
%0.
681.
18
TOTA
L8,98
559
29,57
712
9,87
9
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
0-49
%
MINORITy
5,28
917
25,46
196
.9%
3.1%
1.00
1.00
50-100
%
MINORITy
3,69
642
04,11
689
.8%
10.2
%0.
933.
24
TOTA
L8,98
559
29,57
793
.8%
6.2%
0.97
1.96
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
TOW
HITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
9,13
41,63
717
.9%
1.00
50-100
%
MINORITy
9,36
42,76
629
.5%
1.65
TOTA
L18
,498
4,40
323
.8%
1.33
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act
min
orit
y le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009224.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 44
: All
Loan
s by
Tra
ct In
com
e Le
vel i
n Ba
ltim
ore
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,18
713
51,32
213
.2%
22.8
%13
.8%
28,290
21.8
%0.
611.
05
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)3,95
931
64,27
544
.1%
53.4
%44
.6%
67,006
51.6
%0.
851.
03
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
2,63
212
32,75
529
.3%
20.8
%28
.8%
25,666
19.8
%1.
481.
05
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)1,20
618
1,22
413
.4%
3.0%
12.8
%8,917
6.9%
1.96
0.44
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
5,14
645
15,59
757
.3%
76.2
%58
.4%
95,296
73.4
%0.
781.
04
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,83
814
13,97
942
.7%
23.8
%41
.6%
34,583
26.6
%1.
600.
89
TOTA
L8,98
559
29,57
712
9,87
9
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,18
713
51,32
289
.8%
10.2
%0.
916.
94
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)3,95
931
64,27
592
.6%
7.4%
0.94
5.03
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
2,63
212
32,75
595
.5%
4.5%
0.97
3.04
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)1,20
618
1,22
498
.5%
1.5%
1.00
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
5,14
645
15,59
791
.9%
8.1%
0.95
2.27
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,83
814
13,97
996
.5%
3.5%
1.00
1.00
TOTA
L8,98
559
29,57
793
.8%
6.2%
0.95
4.20
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
3,05
393
930
.8%
2.06
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)8,63
02,147
24.9
%1.
67
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
4,93
81,03
721
.0%
1.41
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)1,87
628
014
.9%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
11,683
3,08
626
.4%
1.37
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
6,81
41,317
19.3
%1.
00
TOTA
L18
,498
4,40
323
.8%
1.59
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act i
ncom
e le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009225.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 45
: All
Loan
s by
Bor
row
er G
ende
r in
Balti
mor
e
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
MALE
2,53
115
72,68
831
.3%
28.4
%31
.1%
61,247
23.8
%1.
321.
20
FEMALE
3,05
328
23,33
537
.7%
51.1
%38
.6%
124,476
48.3
%0.
781.
06
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
2,51
311
32,62
631
.0%
20.5
%30
.4%
72,065
28.0
%1.
110.
73
TOTA
L8,98
559
29,57
725
7,78
8
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
MALE
2,53
115
72,68
894
.2%
5.8%
1.00
1.00
FEMALE
3,05
328
23,33
591
.5%
8.5%
0.97
1.45
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
2,51
311
32,62
695
.7%
4.3%
1.02
0.74
TOTA
L8,98
559
29,57
793
.8%
6.2%
1.00
1.06
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
EgEN
DER
TO
MALEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
MALE
5,42
11,35
525
.0%
1.00
FEMALE
6,68
51,72
725
.8%
1.03
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
4,37
583
019
.0%
0.76
TOTA
L18
,498
4,40
323
.8%
0.95
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se g
ende
r was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009226.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 46
: All
Loan
s by
Bor
row
er R
ace
in D
etro
it
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
WHITE
200
3323
321
.7%
13.2
%19
.9%
44,789
13.3
%1.
630.
99
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
689
210
899
74.7
%84
.0%
76.7
%26
9,35
480
.1%
0.93
1.05
ASIAN
103
131.
1%1.
2%1.
1%2,75
80.
8%1.
321.
46
HISPA
NIC
234
272.
5%1.
6%2.
3%12
,446
3.7%
0.67
0.43
TOTA
L1,03
827
31,311
336,48
2
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
WHITE
200
3323
385
.8%
14.2
%1.
001.
00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
689
210
899
76.6
%23
.4%
0.89
1.65
ASIAN
103
1376
.9%
23.1
%0.
901.
63
HISPA
NIC
234
2785
.2%
14.8
%0.
991.
05
TOTA
L1,03
827
31,311
79.2
%20
.8%
0.92
1.47
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
RACE
TO
WHITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
WHITE
692
278
40.2
%1.
00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
3,64
11,874
51.5
%1.
28
ASIAN
4416
36.4
%0.
91
HISPA
NIC
150
9060
.0%
1.49
TOTA
L5,39
42,72
450
.5%
1.26
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se r
ace
was
list
ed a
s “O
ther
” or
who
se r
ace
was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009227.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 47
: All
Loan
s by
Bor
row
er In
com
e in
Det
roit
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
241
8432
532
.4%
39.4
%34
.0%
176,92
952
.6%
0.62
0.75
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)25
271
323
33.9
%33
.3%
33.8
%65
,792
19.6
%1.
731.
70
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
140
3917
918
.8%
18.3
%18
.7%
49,842
14.8
%1.
271.
24
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)11
019
129
14.8
%8.
9%13
.5%
43,919
13.1
%1.
130.
68
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
493
155
648
66.4
%72
.8%
67.8
%24
2,72
172
.1%
0.92
1.01
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
250
5830
833
.6%
27.2
%32
.2%
93,761
27.9
%1.
210.
98
TOTA
L1,03
827
31,311
336,48
2
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
241
8432
574
.2%
25.8
%0.
871.
75
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)25
271
323
78.0
%22
.0%
0.91
1.49
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
140
3917
978
.2%
21.8
%0.
921.
48
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)11
019
129
85.3
%14
.7%
1.00
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
493
155
648
76.1
%23
.9%
0.94
1.27
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
250
5830
881
.2%
18.8
%1.
001.
00
TOTA
L1,03
827
31,311
79.2
%20
.8%
0.93
1.41
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,80
51,08
059
.8%
1.36
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)1,52
680
852
.9%
1.20
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
821
453
55.2
%1.
25
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)46
420
444
.0%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,33
11,88
856
.7%
1.11
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
1,28
565
751
.1%
1.00
TOTA
L5,39
42,72
450
.5%
1.15
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se in
com
e w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009228.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 48
: All
Loan
s by
Tra
ct M
inor
ity L
evel
in D
etro
it
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TOOOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
5015
654.
8%5.
5%5.
0%6,89
53.
7%1.
291.
47
50-100
%
MINORITy
988
258
1,24
695
.2%
94.5
%95
.0%
177,77
796
.3%
0.99
0.98
TOTA
L1,03
827
31,311
184,67
2
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
0-49
%
MINORITy
5015
6576
.9%
23.1
%1.
001.
00
50-100
%
MINORITy
988
258
1,24
679
.3%
20.7
%1.
030.
90
TOTA
L1,03
827
31,311
79.2
%20
.8%
1.03
0.90
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
TOW
HITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
196
7839
.8%
1.00
50-100
%
MINORITy
5,19
82,64
650
.9%
1.28
TOTA
L5,39
42,72
450
.5%
1.27
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act
min
orit
y le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009229.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 49
: All
Loan
s by
Tra
ct In
com
e Le
vel i
n D
etro
it
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TOOOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
5411
655.
2%4.
0%5.
0%17,007
9.2%
0.57
0.44
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)32
795
422
31.5
%34
.8%
32.2
%95
,031
51.5
%0.
610.
68
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
481
132
613
46.4
%48
.4%
46.8
%62
,796
34.0
%1.
361.
42
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)17
535
210
16.9
%12
.8%
16.0
%9,83
85.
3%3.
172.
41
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
381
106
487
36.7
%38
.8%
37.2
%11
2,03
860
.7%
0.61
0.64
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
656
167
823
63.3
%61
.2%
62.8
%72
,634
39.3
%1.
611.
56
TOTA
L1,03
827
31,311
184,67
2
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
5411
6583
.1%
16.9
%1.
001.
02
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)32
795
422
77.5
%22
.5%
0.93
1.35
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
481
132
613
78.5
%21
.5%
0.94
1.29
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)17
535
210
83.3
%16
.7%
1.00
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
381
106
487
78.2
%21
.8%
0.98
1.07
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
656
167
823
79.7
%20
.3%
1.00
1.00
TOTA
L1,03
827
31,311
79.2
%20
.8%
0.95
1.25
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
343
171
49.9
%1.
20
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)2,01
51,147
56.9
%1.
37
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
2,35
21,12
247
.7%
1.15
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)68
128
341
.6%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
2,35
81,31
855
.9%
1.21
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,03
31,40
546
.3%
1.00
TOTA
L5,39
42,72
450
.5%
1.22
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act i
ncom
e le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009230.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 50
: All
Loan
s by
Bor
row
er G
ende
r in
Det
roit
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
MALE
372
8645
838
.5%
33.0
%37
.3%
77,770
23.1
%1.
671.
43
FEMALE
453
123
576
46.9
%47
.1%
46.9
%16
5,31
549
.1%
0.95
0.96
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
141
5219
314
.6%
19.9
%15
.7%
93,397
27.8
%0.
530.
72
TOTA
L1,03
827
31,311
336,48
2
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
MALE
372
8645
881
.2%
18.8
%1.
001.
00
FEMALE
453
123
576
78.6
%21
.4%
0.97
1.14
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
141
5219
373
.1%
26.9
%0.
901.
43
TOTA
L1,03
827
31,311
79.2
%20
.8%
0.97
1.11
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
EgEN
DER
TO
MALEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
MALE
1,874
947
50.5
%1.
00
FEMALE
2,37
51,21
851
.3%
1.01
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
687
314
45.7
%0.
90
TOTA
L5,39
42,72
450
.5%
1.00
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se g
ende
r was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009231.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 51
: All
Loan
s by
Bor
row
er R
ace
in P
ittsb
urgh
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
WHITE
3,51
532
13,83
691
.0%
86.8
%90
.6%
101,22
970
.4%
1.29
1.23
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
218
3925
75.
6%10
.5%
6.1%
34,690
24.1
%0.
230.
44
ASIAN
845
892.
2%1.
4%2.
1%3,86
92.
7%0.
810.
50
HISPA
NIC
465
511.
2%1.
4%1.
2%1,58
61.
1%1.
081.
22
TOTA
L4,26
540
24,66
714
3,75
2
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
WHITE
3,51
532
13,83
691
.6%
8.4%
1.00
1.00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
218
3925
784
.8%
15.2
%0.
931.
81
ASIAN
845
8994
.4%
5.6%
1.03
0.67
HISPA
NIC
465
5190
.2%
9.8%
0.98
1.17
TOTA
L4,26
540
24,66
791
.4%
8.6%
1.00
1.03
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
ERACE
TOW
HITE
DEN
IALRAT
IO
WHITE
6,15
91,18
919
.3%
1.00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
628
246
39.2
%2.
03
ASIAN
159
2817
.6%
0.91
HISPA
NIC
8921
23.6
%1.
22
TOTA
L8,06
41,774
22.0
%1.
14
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se r
ace
was
list
ed a
s “O
ther
” or
who
se r
ace
was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009232.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 52
: All
Loan
s by
Bor
row
er In
com
e in
Pitt
sbur
gh
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
451
8153
210
.9%
20.8
%11
.8%
57,738
40.2
%0.
270.
52
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)88
211
799
921
.4%
30.1
%22
.1%
26,788
18.6
%1.
151.
61
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
1,02
110
61,12
724
.8%
27.2
%25
.0%
23,790
16.5
%1.
501.
65
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)1,76
885
1,85
342
.9%
21.9
%41
.1%
35,437
24.7
%1.
740.
89
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
1,33
319
81,53
132
.3%
50.9
%33
.9%
84,526
58.8
%0.
550.
87
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
2,78
919
12,98
067
.7%
49.1
%66
.1%
59,226
41.2
%1.
641.
19
TOTA
L4,26
540
24,66
714
3,75
2
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
451
8153
284
.8%
15.2
%0.
893.
32
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)88
211
799
988
.3%
11.7
%0.
932.
55
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
1,02
110
61,12
790
.6%
9.4%
0.95
2.05
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)1,76
885
1,85
395
.4%
4.6%
1.00
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
1,33
319
81,53
187
.1%
12.9
%0.
932.
02
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
2,78
919
12,98
093
.6%
6.4%
1.00
1.00
TOTA
L4,26
540
24,66
791
.4%
8.6%
0.96
1.88
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,21
943
735
.8%
2.37
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)1,79
244
624
.9%
1.65
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
1,87
238
120
.4%
1.35
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)2,85
343
115
.1%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,01
188
329
.3%
1.71
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
4,72
581
217
.2%
1.00
TOTA
L8,06
41,774
22.0
%1.
46
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se in
com
e w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009233.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 53
: All
Loan
s by
Tra
ct M
inor
ity L
evel
in P
ittsb
urgh
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TOOOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
4,04
136
54,40
694
.7%
90.8
%94
.4%
63,202
83.5
%1.
131.
09
50-100
%
MINORITy
224
3726
15.
3%9.
2%5.
6%12
,475
16.5
%0.
320.
56
TOTA
L4,26
540
24,66
775
,677
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
0-49
%
MINORITy
4,04
136
54,40
691
.7%
8.3%
1.00
1.00
50-100
%
MINORITy
224
3726
185
.8%
14.2
%0.
941.
71
TOTA
L4,26
540
24,66
791
.4%
8.6%
1.00
1.04
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
TOW
HITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
7,39
01,50
020
.3%
1.00
50-100
%
MINORITy
674
274
40.7
%2.
00
TOTA
L8,06
41,774
22.0
%1.
08
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act
min
orit
y le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009234.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 54
: All
Loan
s by
Tra
ct In
com
e Le
vel i
n Pi
ttsb
urgh
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TOOOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
7312
851.
7%3.
0%1.
8%4,40
25.
8%0.
290.
51
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)84
912
797
619
.9%
31.6
%20
.9%
23,882
31.6
%0.
631.
00
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
1,86
521
22,07
743
.7%
52.7
%44
.5%
34,242
45.2
%0.
971.
17
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)1,47
851
1,52
934
.7%
12.7
%32
.8%
13,150
17.4
%1.
990.
73
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
922
139
1,06
121
.6%
34.6
%22
.7%
28,285
37.4
%0.
580.
93
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,34
326
33,60
678
.4%
65.4
%77
.3%
47,392
62.6
%1.
251.
04
TOTA
L4,26
540
24,66
775
,677
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
7312
8585
.9%
14.1
%0.
894.
23
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)84
912
797
687
.0%
13.0
%0.
903.
90
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
1,86
521
22,07
789
.8%
10.2
%0.
933.
06
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)1,47
851
1,52
996
.7%
3.3%
1.00
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
922
139
1,06
186
.9%
13.1
%0.
941.
80
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,34
326
33,60
692
.7%
7.3%
1.00
1.00
TOTA
L4,26
540
24,66
791
.4%
8.6%
0.95
2.58
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
232
9239
.7%
3.03
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)2,02
863
531
.3%
2.39
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
3,55
675
321
.2%
1.62
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)2,247
294
13.1
%1.
00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
2,26
072
732
.2%
1.78
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
5,80
31,04
718
.0%
1.00
TOTA
L8,06
41,774
22.0
%1.
68
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act i
ncom
e le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009235.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 55
: All
Loan
s by
Bor
row
er G
ende
r in
Pitt
sbur
gh
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
MALE
1,32
012
01,44
033
.4%
31.9
%33
.3%
35,954
25.0
%1.
341.
28
FEMALE
1,02
311
21,13
525
.9%
29.8
%26
.2%
61,632
42.9
%0.
600.
69
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
1,60
514
41,749
40.7
%38
.3%
40.4
%46
,166
32.1
%1.
271.
19
TOTA
L4,26
540
24,66
714
3,75
2
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
MALE
1,32
012
01,44
091
.7%
8.3%
1.00
1.00
FEMALE
1,02
311
21,13
590
.1%
9.9%
0.98
1.18
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
1,60
514
41,749
91.8
%8.
2%1.
000.
99
TOTA
L4,26
540
24,66
791
.4%
8.6%
1.00
1.03
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
EgEN
DER
TO
MALEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
MALE
2,60
359
222
.7%
1.00
FEMALE
2,06
851
524
.9%
1.09
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
2,67
847
817
.8%
0.78
TOTA
L8,06
41,774
22.0
%0.
97
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se g
ende
r was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009236.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 56
: All
Loan
s by
Bor
row
er R
ace
in P
hila
delp
hia
(Non
-Ow
ner-
Occ
upie
d)
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
WHITE
1,01
465
1,07
972
.1%
53.3
%70
.6%
282,06
347
.8%
1.51
1.11
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
191
3522
613
.6%
28.7
%14
.8%
237,44
340
.2%
0.34
0.71
ASIAN
153
1616
910
.9%
13.1
%11
.1%
20,559
3.5%
3.12
3.77
HISPA
NIC
486
543.
4%4.
9%3.
5%38
,509
6.5%
0.52
0.75
TOTA
L2,04
916
72,21
659
0,28
3
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
RACE
SHARE
TO
WHITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
WHITE
1,01
465
1,07
994
.0%
6.0%
1.00
1.00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
191
3522
684
.5%
15.5
%0.
902.
57
ASIAN
153
1616
990
.5%
9.5%
0.96
1.57
HISPA
NIC
486
5488
.9%
11.1
%0.
951.
84
TOTA
L2,04
916
72,21
692
.5%
7.5%
0.98
1.25
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
ERACE
TOW
HITE
DEN
IALRAT
IO
WHITE
2,04
655
427
.1%
1.00
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
763
361
47.3
%1.
75
ASIAN
369
120
32.5
%1.
20
HISPA
NIC
171
8650
.3%
1.86
TOTA
L4,64
21,47
831
.8%
1.18
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se r
ace
was
list
ed a
s “O
ther
” or
who
se r
ace
was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009237.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 57
: All
Loan
s by
Bor
row
er In
com
e in
Phi
lade
lphi
a (N
on-O
wne
r-O
ccup
ied)
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
143
1015
38.
3%6.
8%8.
2%27
9,32
747
.3%
0.18
0.14
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)26
426
290
15.3
%17
.7%
15.5
%12
0,15
820
.4%
0.75
0.87
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
338
3937
719
.6%
26.5
%20
.1%
93,513
15.8
%1.
241.
67
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)98
072
1,05
256
.8%
49.0
%56
.2%
97,285
16.5
%3.
452.
97
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
407
3644
323
.6%
24.5
%23
.7%
399,48
667
.7%
0.35
0.36
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
1,31
811
11,42
976
.4%
75.5
%76
.3%
190,79
732
.3%
2.36
2.34
TOTA
L2,04
916
72,21
659
0,28
3
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
143
1015
393
.5%
6.5%
1.00
0.95
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)26
426
290
91.0
%9.
0%0.
981.
31
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
338
3937
789
.7%
10.3
%0.
961.
51
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)98
072
1,05
293
.2%
6.8%
1.00
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
407
3644
391
.9%
8.1%
1.00
1.05
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
1,31
811
11,42
992
.2%
7.8%
1.00
1.00
TOTA
L2,04
916
72,21
692
.5%
7.5%
0.99
1.10
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
464
235
50.6
%1.
81
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)74
129
439
.7%
1.42
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
880
307
34.9
%1.
25
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)2,06
557
828
.0%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
1,20
552
943
.9%
1.46
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
2,94
588
530
.1%
1.00
TOTA
L4,64
21,47
831
.8%
1.14
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se in
com
e w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009238.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 58
: All
Loan
s by
Tra
ct M
inor
ity L
evel
in P
hila
delp
hia
(Non
-Ow
ner-
Occ
upie
d)
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIME
SHARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
1,117
641,18
154
.5%
38.3
%53
.3%
178,316
51.0
%1.
070.
75
50-100
%
MINORITy
932
103
1,03
545
.5%
61.7
%46
.7%
171,33
549
.0%
0.93
1.26
TOTA
L2,04
916
72,21
634
9,65
1
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
SHARE
TOW
HITE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
0-49
%
MINORITy
1,117
641,18
194
.6%
5.4%
1.00
1.00
50-100
%
MINORITy
932
103
1,03
590
.0%
10.0
%0.
951.
84
TOTA
L2,04
916
72,21
692
.5%
7.5%
0.98
1.39
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
MINORITy
LEv
EL
TOW
HITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
0-49
%
MINORITy
2,23
164
028
.7%
1.00
50-100
%
MINORITy
2,411
838
34.8
%1.
21
TOTA
L4,64
21,47
831
.8%
1.11
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act
min
orit
y le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009239.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 59
: All
Loan
s by
Tra
ct In
com
e Le
vel i
n Ph
ilade
lphi
a (N
on-O
wne
r-O
ccup
ied)
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOFALL
LOANS
OOHu
PERC
ENTOF
ALLOOHu
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
OOHu
SHARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
OOHuSHARE
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
513
6357
625
.0%
37.7
%26
.0%
81,464
23.3
%1.
071.
62
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)86
378
941
42.1
%46
.7%
42.5
%15
2,80
543
.7%
0.96
1.07
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
466
2248
822
.7%
13.2
%22
.0%
100,76
428
.8%
0.79
0.46
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)20
74
211
10.1
%2.
4%9.
5%14
,605
4.2%
2.42
0.57
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
1,376
141
1,517
67.2
%84
.4%
68.5
%23
4,26
967
.0%
1.00
1.26
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
673
2669
932
.8%
15.6
%31
.5%
115,36
933
.0%
1.00
0.47
TOTA
L2,04
916
72,21
634
9,63
8
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OFPR
IME
LOANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
INCO
MESH
ARE
TO
uPP
ER-
INCO
MESH
ARE
RAT
IO:P
RIME
INCO
ME
SHARE
TO
uPP
ER-INCO
ME
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
513
6357
689
.1%
10.9
%0.
915.
77
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)86
378
941
91.7
%8.
3%0.
934.
37
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
466
2248
895
.5%
4.5%
0.97
2.38
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)20
74
211
98.1
%1.
9%1.
001.
00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
1,376
141
1,517
90.7
%9.
3%0.
942.
50
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
673
2669
996
.3%
3.7%
1.00
1.00
TOTA
L2,04
916
72,21
692
.5%
7.5%
0.94
3.98
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IAL
RAT
E
INCO
ME
TOuPP
ER-
INCO
ME
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
LOW(<
50%M
SA)
1,27
744
134
.5%
1.25
MODER
ATE(50-79
.99%
MSA
)2,02
667
833
.5%
1.21
MIDDLE(8
0-11
9.99
%M
SA)
947
251
26.5
%0.
96
uPP
ER(1
20%ORMORE
MSA
)39
210
827
.6%
1.00
LMI(<79.99
%M
SAIN
COME)
3,30
31,11
933
.9%
1.26
MuI(>80
%M
SAIN
COME)
1,33
935
926
.8%
1.00
TOTA
L4,64
21,47
831
.8%
1.16
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se tr
act i
ncom
e le
vel w
as n
ot p
rovi
ded.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009240.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 60
: All
Loan
s by
Bor
row
er G
ende
r in
Phila
delp
hia
(Non
-Ow
ner-
Occ
upie
d)
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
PERC
ENTOF
ALLLOANS
HOuSEHOLD
SPE
RCEN
TOFALL
HOuSEHOLD
S
PRIM
ESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
SuBP
RIMESH
ARE
TO
HOuSEHOLD
SH
ARE
RAT
IO
MALE
602
6366
540
.7%
49.6
%41
.4%
132,27
822
.4%
1.82
2.21
FEMALE
277
2730
418
.7%
21.3
%18
.9%
264,97
544
.9%
0.42
0.47
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
600
3763
740
.6%
29.1
%39
.7%
193,03
032
.7%
1.24
0.89
TOTA
L2,04
916
72,21
659
0,28
3
TOTA
LPR
IMELO
ANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
TOTA
LLO
ANS
PERC
ENTOF
PRIM
ELO
ANS
PERC
ENT
OF
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
PRIM
E
gEN
DER
SHARE
TO
MALE
SHARE
RAT
IO:
SuBP
RIME
MALE
602
6366
590
.5%
9.5%
1.00
1.00
FEMALE
277
2730
491
.1%
8.9%
1.01
0.94
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
600
3763
794
.2%
5.8%
1.04
0.61
TOTA
L2,04
916
72,21
692
.5%
7.5%
1.02
0.80
TOTA
LLO
AN
APP
LICA
TIONS
APP
LICA
TION
DEN
IALS
DEN
IALRAT
EgEN
DER
TO
MALEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
MALE
1,66
263
638
.3%
1.00
FEMALE
776
289
37.2
%0.
97
JOINT(M
ALE/
FEMALE)
1,15
729
825
.8%
0.67
TOTA
L4,64
21,47
831
.8%
0.83
Tota
ls in
clud
e in
form
ation
on
loan
s to
bor
row
ers
who
se g
ende
r was
not
pro
vide
d.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009241.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 61
: Ran
king
of A
ll D
epos
itorie
s COMPO
SITE
PRIM
ELENDINgTOAFR
ICAN
AMER
ICANS
AFR
ICAN-AMER
ICAN-TO-W
HITE
DEN
IALRA
TIO
ALLBANkS
SuMMARy
MEA
N0.
126.
551.
80
MAX
1.00
302.
007.
52
MIN
0.00
0.00
0.00
N21
426
380
ST.D
Ev.
0.20
28.1
31.
53
WEIgHT
0.10
0.10
0.10
INDIvIDuALBA
NkSC
ORE
S
BANkNAME
LOAN
SHARE
ZSC
ORE
LOAN
COuNT
ZSC
ORE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IOZSC
ORE
BANkOFAMER
ICA
19.8
10.
421.
5024
48.
441.
710.
07
CITIgRO
uP,IN
C11
.75
0.15
0.15
109
3.64
2.23
-0.27
CITIZENSFINANCIALgRO
uP,IN
C9.
880.
381.
2794
3.11
1.30
0.34
SOvER
EIgNBANCO
RP,INC.
0.23
0.21
0.46
90.
091.
580.
16
TDBANkNORT
H2.
840.
220.
5034
0.98
0.58
0.81
THEPN
CFINANCIALSERv
ICES
gRO
uP
2.53
0.11
-0.09
170.
372.
15-0.21
WAC
HOvIA
28.3
00.
210.
4530
210
.50
1.61
0.14
COMPO
SITE
PRIM
ELENDINgTOHISPA
NICS
HISPA
NICTOW
HITEDEN
IALRA
TIO
ALLBANkS
SuMMARy
MEA
N0.
043.
031.
77
MAX
0.67
213.
009.
.39
MIN
0.00
0.00
0.
00
N21
426
357
ST.D
Ev.
0.10
16.2
42.
10
WEIgHT
0.10
0.10
0.10
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009242.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 61
: Ran
king
of A
ll D
epos
itorie
s (c
ontin
ued)
INDIvIDuALBA
NkSC
ORE
S
BANkNAME
LOANSHARE
ZSC
ORE
LOANCOuNT
ZSC
ORE
DEN
IALRAT
IOZSC
ORE
BANCO
SANTA
NDER
0.82
1.05
474
5.96
1.87
-0.35
BANkOFAMER
ICA
0.64
0.53
455
5.71
1.93
-0.40
CITIZENSFINANCIALgRO
uP,
INC.
0.77
0.91
193
2.26
1.58
-0.14
M&TBA
Nk
0.50
0.11
21-0.01
3.89
-1.82
PNC
0.55
0.26
840.
822.
90-1.10
TDBANk
0.61
0.45
991.
021.
43-0.03
WELLSFARg
O0.
550.
2778
410
.04
1.54
-0.11
PRIM
ELENDINgTOLM
IBORR
OWER
SLM
I-TO-M
uID
ENIAL
ALLBANkS
SuMMARy
MEA
N0.
4621
.60
1.39
MAX
1.00
784.
007.
50
MIN
0.00
0.00
0.00
N21
426
394
ST.D
Ev.
0.34
75.9
31.
38
WEIgHT
0.10
0.10
0.10
INDIvIDuALBA
NkSC
ORE
S
BANkNAME
LOANSHARE
ZSC
ORE
LOANCOuNT
ZSC
ORE
DEN
IALRAT
IOZSC
ORE
BANCO
SANTA
NDER
0.82
1.05
474
5.96
1.87
-0.35
BANkOFAMER
ICA
0.64
0.53
455
5.71
1.93
-0.40
CITIZENSFINANCIALgRO
uP,
INC.
0.77
0.91
193
2.26
1.58
-0.14
M&TBA
Nk
0.50
0.11
21-0.01
3.89
-1.82
PNC
0.55
0.26
840.
822.
90-1.10
TDBANk
0.61
0.45
991.
021.
43-0.03
WELLSFARg
O0.
550.
2778
410
.04
1.54
-0.11
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009243.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 61
: Ran
king
of A
ll D
epos
itorie
s (c
ontin
ued)
PR
IMELENDINgIN
LMI
TRAC
TSLM
I-TO-M
uIT
RACT
DEN
IAL
PRIM
ELENDINgIN
MINORITy
TR
ACTS
MINORITy
-TO
-NON-
MINORITy
TR
ACTDEN
IAL
ALLBANkS
SuMMARy
MEA
N0.
471.
580.
251.
62
MAX
1.00
6.67
1.00
11.0
0
MIN
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
N21
491
214
94
ST.D
Ev.
0.35
1.36
0.29
1.82
WEIgHT
0.02
50.
025
0.02
50.
025
INDIvIDuALBA
NkSC
ORE
S
BANkNAME
SHARE
ZSC
ORE
RAT
IOZSC
ORE
SHARE
ZSC
ORE
RAT
IO
ZSC
ORE
BANCO
SANTA
NDER
0.70
0.17
2.92
-0.25
0.45
0.18
1.87
-0.03
BANkOFAMER
ICA
0.57
0.07
1.15
0.08
0.29
0.04
1.93
-0.04
CITIZENSFINANCIALgRO
uP,
INC.
0.72
0.18
2.19
-0.11
0.47
0.20
1.58
0.01
M&TBA
Nk
0.64
0.12
0.65
0.17
0.40
0.14
3.89
-0.31
PNC
0.50
0.02
0.79
0.15
0.43
0.16
2.90
-0.18
TDBANk
0.57
0.07
1.03
0.10
0.27
0.02
1.43
0.03
WELLSFARg
O0.
550.
050.
800.
140.
330.
071.
540.
01
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009244.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 62
: Dep
osito
ry R
anki
ng –
All
Prim
e, S
ingl
e-Fa
mily
Loa
ns in
Phi
lade
lphi
a
RACE
DEP
OSITO
RyAPP
LICA
TIONS
PRIM
ELO
ANS
ORIgINAT
ED
PERC
ENT
OFLO
ANS
TOAFR
ICAN
AMER
ICANS
RANk
PERC
ENT
OFLO
ANS
TOAFR
ICAN
AMER
ICANS
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
HISPA
NICS
RANk
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
HISPA
NICS
PERC
ENT
OFLO
ANS
TOASIANS
RANk
PERC
ENT
OF
LOANS
TO
ASIANS
PERC
ENT
OF
LOANSIN
MINORITy
TR
ACTS
RANk
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSIN
MINORITy
TR
ACTS
ADvA
NCE
BANk
27
24
12.5
%8
0.0%
94.
2%6
79.2
%1
BANCO
SANTA
NDER
1,461
9
68
29.2
%1
6.1%
25.
5%5
35.3
%5
BANkOFAMER
ICA
3,213
1,733
17
.2%
54.
6%5
14.5
%1
28.9
%7
CITIZENSFINANCIALgRO
uP,IN
C.1,367
5
43
24.9
%2
6.4%
15.
5%4
37.4
%2
CITIgRO
uP
1,213
2
33
20.2
%4
3.4%
83.
9%8
36.5
%4
M&TBA
Nk
147
8
3 16
.9%
63.
6%7
3.6%
930
.1%
6
PNC
1,106
4
63
22.7
%3
4.1%
64.
1%7
36.7
%3
TDBANk
811
2
73
8.8%
95.
1%3
12.5
%2
26.0
%9
WELLSFARg
O7,612
3,665
15
.1%
74.
8%4
6.7%
327
.4%
8
Z_DEP
OSIT
16,99
47,990
18
.3%
4.9%
8.1%
30.3
%
Z_TO
TAL
50,11
424,49
014
.9%
5.1%
5.6%
27.6
%
DEP
OSITO
RyPE
RCEN
TOF
LOANSTO
LMI
BORR
OWER
S
RANk
PERC
ENT
OFLO
ANS
TOLMI
BORR
OWER
S
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSIN
LMIT
RACTS
RANk
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSINLMI
TRACTS
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
FEMALES
RANk
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
FEMALES
ADvA
NCE
BANk
62.5
%2
87.5
%1
29.2
%9
BANCO
SANTA
NDER
67.8
%1
55.7
%2
47.6
%1
BANkOFAMER
ICA
50.0
%5
49.3
%7
39.2
%3
CITIZENSFINANCIALgRO
uP,IN
C.61
.3%
353
.4%
333
.5%
8
CITIgRO
uP
36.1
%9
50.6
%5
38.2
%4
M&TBA
Nk
42.2
%6
49.4
%6
37.3
%6
PNC
42.1
%7
49.2
%8
43.8
%2
TDBANk
52.0
%4
52.4
%4
35.5
%7
WELLSFARg
O37
.0%
844
.5%
938
.1%
5
Z_DEP
OSIT
46.1
%48
.4%
39.4
%
Z_TO
TAL
46.1
%47
.5%
38.9
%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009245.
Appendix 2 – Tables
DEN
IALS
DEP
OSITO
RyAPP
LICA
TIONS
DEN
IALS
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
TOW
HITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
RANk
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICAN
TOW
HITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
HISPA
NIC
TOW
HITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
RANk
HISPA
NIC
TOW
HITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
ASIANTO
WHITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
RANk
ASIANTO
WHITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
MINORITy
TO
NON-
MINORITy
TR
ACT
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
RANk
MINORITy
TO
NON-
MINORITy
TR
ACT
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
ADvA
NCE
BANk
27
-
99
99
BANCO
SANTA
NDER
1,461
1
79
1.77
43.
128
1.66
62.
097
BANkOFAMER
ICA
3,213
8
95
1.50
21.
793
1.13
21.
422
CITIZENSFINANCIALgRO
uP,IN
C.1,367
4
44
1.87
51.
955
1.78
71.
574
CITIgRO
uP
1,213
5
37
2.18
62.
526
1.33
51.
391
M&TBA
Nk
147
3
5 1.
251
0.95
10.
951
2.17
8
PNC
1,106
4
38
2.19
72.
777
2.37
81.
786
TDBANk
811
3
89
2.32
81.
904
1.17
31.
585
WELLSFARg
O7,612
1,405
1.
523
1.45
21.
314
1.45
3
Z_DEP
OSIT
16,99
44,352
1.
902.
051.
421.
63
Z_TO
TAL
50,11
412,43
51.
981.
771.
391.
69
DEP
OSITO
Ry
DEP
OSITO
RyAFR
ICAN-
AMER
ICANTO
WHITERAT
IO
RANk
AFIRC
AN
AMER
ICAN
TOW
HITE
RAT
IO
MINORITy
TR
ACT
TONON-
MINORITy
TR
ACT
RAT
IO
RANk
MINORITy
TR
ACT
TONON-
MINORITy
TR
ACTRAT
IO
LMITOM
uI
BORR
OWER
RAT
IO
RANkLM
ITO
MuI
BORR
OWER
RAT
IORANk
RAT
IO
LMI
TRACTS
TOM
uI
TRACTS
RAT
IO
RANk
LMI
TRACTS
TOM
uI
TRACTS
RAIO
ADvA
NCE
BANk
1.63
39.
961
7.72
11.
952
BANCO
SANTA
NDER
2.35
21.
435
1.39
22.
461
BANkOFAMER
ICA
1.38
51.
067
1.07
71.
175
CITIZENSFINANCIALgRO
uP,IN
C.2.
361
1.56
21.
263
1.86
3
CITIgRO
uP
1.36
61.
514
1.13
50.
669
M&TBA
Nk
0.90
81.
136
1.08
60.
856
PNC
1.59
41.
523
1.07
80.
857
TDBANk
0.54
90.
929
1.21
41.
274
WELLSFARg
O0.
917
0.99
80.
899
0.69
8
Tabl
e 62
: Dep
osito
ry R
anki
ng –
All
Prim
e, S
ingl
e-Fa
mily
Loa
ns in
Phi
lade
lphi
a
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009246.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 63
: Dep
osito
ry R
anki
ng –
Hom
e Pu
rcha
se P
rime,
Sin
gle-
Fam
ily L
oans
in P
hila
delp
hia
RACE
DEP
OSITO
RyAPP
LICA
TIONS
PRIM
ELO
ANS
ORIgINAT
ED
PERC
ENT
OFLO
ANS
TOAFR
ICAN
AMER
ICANS
RANk
PERC
ENT
OFLO
ANS
TOAFR
ICAN
AMER
ICANS
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
HISPA
NICS
RANk
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
HISPA
NICS
PERC
ENT
OF
LOANS
TO
ASIANS
RANk
PERC
ENT
OFLO
ANS
TO
ASIANS
PERC
ENT
OF
LOANSIN
MINORITy
TR
ACTS
RANk
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSIN
MINORITy
TR
ACTS
BANCO
SANTA
NDER
835
5
79
42.1
%1
9.0%
23.
8%7
45.1
%2
BANkOFAMER
ICA
1,054
7
10
15.4
%6
4.9%
721
.3%
129
.0%
6
CITIZENSFINANCIALgRO
uP,IN
C. 4
19
250
37
.6%
210
.8%
16.
8%5
47.2
%1
M&TBA
Nk
74
42
21.4
%4
7.1%
57.
1%4
40.5
%4
PNC
188
1
53
22.2
%3
5.2%
63.
9%6
43.1
%3
TDBANk
363
1
61
10.6
%7
7.5%
415
.5%
227
.3%
7
WELLSFARg
O2,197
1,419
21
.3%
57.
5%3
8.0%
332
.6%
5
Z_DEP
OSIT
5,192
3,351
24
.2%
7.3%
10.1
%35
.7%
Z_TO
TAL
14,47
99,356
18
.4%
8.5%
7.9%
30.6
%
INCO
ME/gEN
DER
DEP
OSITO
RyPE
RCEN
TOF
LOANSTO
LMI
BORR
OWER
S
RANk
PERC
ENT
OFLO
ANS
TOLMI
BORR
OWER
S
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSINLMI
TRACTS
RANk
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSIN
LMIT
RACTS
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
FEMALES
RANk
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
FEMALES
BANCO
SANTA
NDER
81.9
%1
70.5
%2
51.8
%1
BANkOFAMER
ICA
64.1
%3
56.6
%4
38.7
%5
CITIZENSFINANCIALgRO
uP,IN
C.77
.2%
271
.6%
142
.8%
2
M&TBA
Nk
50.0
%7
64.3
%3
40.5
%4
PNC
54.9
%6
49.7
%7
38.6
%6
TDBANk
61.5
%4
56.5
%5
35.4
%7
WELLSFARg
O55
.3%
554
.5%
641
.7%
3
Z_DEP
OSIT
63.5
%59
.3%
42.4
%
Z_TO
TAL
60.7
%56
.3%
41.7
%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009247.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 63
: Dep
osito
ry R
anki
ng –
Hom
e Pu
rcha
se P
rime,
Sin
gle-
Fam
ily L
oans
in P
hila
delp
hia
(con
tinue
d)
DEN
IALS
DEP
OSITO
RyAPP
LICA
TIONS
DEN
IALS
AFR
ICAN-
AMER
ICAN
TOW
HITE
DEN
IALRAT
IO
RANk
AFR
ICAN-
AMER
ICAN
TOW
HITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
HISPA
NIC
TOW
HITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
RANk
HISPA
NIC
TOW
HITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
ASIANTO
WHITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
RANk
ASIANTO
WHITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
MINORITy
TO
NON-
MINORITy
TR
ACT
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
RANk
MINORITy
TO
NON-
MINORITy
TR
ACT
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
BANCO
SANTA
NDER
835
6
6 1.
715
2.62
71.
705
1.87
4
BANkOFAMER
ICA
1,054
1
88
2.23
71.
342
1.12
41.
935
CITIZENSFINANCIALgRO
uP,IN
C. 4
19
60
1.30
22.
286
2.20
71.
583
M&TBA
Nk
74
16
1.58
30.
001
0.00
13.
897
PNC
188
7
0.
581
1.71
40.
002
2.90
6
TDBANk
363
1
31
2.15
61.
875
0.89
31.
431
WELLSFARg
O2,197
2
81
1.61
41.
573
1.81
61.
542
Z_DEP
OSIT
5,192
7
61
1.50
1.62
1.45
1.53
Z_TO
TAL
14,47
92,075
1.
901.
381.
671.
61
MARk
ETSHARE
RAT
IO
DEP
OSITO
RyAFR
ICAN-
AMER
ICANTO
WHITERAT
IO
RANk
AFIRC
AN
AMER
ICAN
TOW
HITE
RAT
IO
MINORITy
TR
ACT
TONON-
MINORITy
TR
ACTRAT
IO
RANk
MINORITy
TR
ACT
TONON-
MINORITy
TR
ACT
RAT
IO
LMITOM
uI
BORR
OWER
RAT
IO
RANkLM
ITO
MuI
BORR
OWER
RAT
IORANk
RAT
IO
LMI
TRACTS
TOM
uI
TRACTS
RAT
IO
RANkLM
ITR
ACTS
TOM
uI
TRACTS
RAIO
BANCO
SANTA
NDER
3.20
21.
862
1.86
22.
921
BANkOFAMER
ICA
1.08
50.
936
1.02
41.
153
CITIZENSFINANCIALgRO
uP,IN
C.3.
601
2.03
11.
961
2.19
2
M&TBA
Nk
0.97
61.
544
1.40
30.
657
PNC
1.40
31.
723
0.77
70.
796
TDBANk
0.51
70.
857
1.01
51.
034
WELLSFARg
O1.
104
1.10
50.
936
0.80
5
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009248.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 64
: Dep
osito
ry R
anki
ng –
Refi
nanc
e Pr
ime,
Sin
gle-
Fam
ily L
oans
in P
hila
delp
hia
RACE
DEP
OSITO
RyAPP
LICA
TIONS
PRIM
ELO
ANS
ORIgINAT
ED
PERC
ENT
OFLO
ANS
TOAFR
ICAN
AMER
ICANS
RANkPE
RCEN
TOFLO
ANS
TOAFR
ICAN
AMER
ICANS
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
HISPA
NICS
RANk
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
HISPA
NICS
PERC
ENT
OFLO
ANS
TOASIANS
RANk
PERC
ENT
OFLO
ANS
TOASIANS
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSIN
MINORITy
TR
ACTS
RANk
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSIN
MINORITy
TR
ACTS
BANCO
SANTA
NDER
573
3
78
9.8%
61.
9%6
8.2%
220
.6%
7
BANkOFAMER
ICA
2,077
9
98
18.6
%3
4.4%
19.
4%1
28.7
%3
CITIZENSFINANCIALgRO
uP,
INC.
681
2
67
10.1
%5
2.6%
54.
1%5
26.2
%4
CITIgRO
uP
1,024
2
13
20.2
%2
3.3%
33.
8%6
36.2
%1
M&TBA
Nk
63
39
7.7%
70.
0%8
0.0%
815
.4%
8
PNC
675
2
72
21.3
%1
3.7%
22.
9%7
32.0
%2
TDBANk
288
9
4 6.
4%8
1.1%
77.
4%3
23.4
%6
WELLSFARg
O5,025
2,145
11
.0%
43.
0%4
6.0%
424
.2%
5
Z_DEP
OSIT
10,41
54,411
13
.6%
3.2%
6.5%
26.0
%
Z_TO
TAL
33,03
014,56
912
.4%
3.0%
4.1%
25.4
%
INCO
ME/gEN
DER
DEP
OSITO
RyPE
RCEN
TOF
LOANSTO
LMI
BORR
OWER
S
RANk
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
LMI
BORR
OWER
S
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSINLMI
TRACTS
RANkPE
RCEN
TOFLO
ANSIN
LMIT
RACTS
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
FEMALES
RANk
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
FEMALES
BANCO
SANTA
NDER
46.8
%1
33.1
%7
41.3
%2
BANkOFAMER
ICA
39.5
%3
43.8
%3
39.6
%3
CITIZENSFINANCIALgRO
uP,
INC.
44.2
%2
33.7
%6
23.2
%8
CITIgRO
uP
36.6
%5
49.3
%1
37.1
%4
M&TBA
Nk
35.9
%6
30.8
%8
35.9
%5
PNC
34.2
%7
48.9
%2
44.1
%1
TDBANk
37.2
%4
43.6
%4
31.9
%7
WELLSFARg
O24
.8%
838
.3%
535
.6%
6
Z_DEP
OSIT
32.7
%40
.1%
36.7
%
Z_TO
TAL
36.2
%41
.6%
36.9
%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009249.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 64
: Dep
osito
ry R
anki
ng –
Refi
nanc
e Pr
ime,
Sin
gle-
Fam
ily L
oans
in P
hila
delp
hia
(con
tinue
d)
DEN
IALS
DEP
OSITO
RyAPP
LICA
TIONS
DEN
IALS
AFR
ICAN-
AMER
ICAN
TOW
HITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
RANkAFR
ICAN-
AMER
ICANTO
WHITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
HISPA
NIC
TOW
HITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
RANk
HISPA
NIC
TOW
HITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
ASIANTO
WHITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
RANk
ASIANTO
WHITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
MINORITy
TO
NON-
MINORITy
TR
ACT
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
RANk
MINORITy
TO
NON-
MINORITy
TR
ACT
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
BANCO
SANTA
NDER
573
9
0 2.
848
5.84
81.
545
2.75
8
BANkOFAMER
ICA
2,077
6
73
1.29
21.
742
1.37
41.
231
CITIZENSFINANCIALgRO
uP,
INC.
681
2
35
2.44
62.
665
1.95
71.
647
CITIgRO
uP
1,024
4
36
2.34
52.
644
1.29
31.
373
M&TBA
Nk
63
13
0.76
15.
337
0.00
11.
565
PNC
675
2
66
2.20
43.
186
2.90
81.
616
TDBANk
288
1
34
2.63
72.
583
1.90
61.
292
WELLSFARg
O5,025
1,008
1.
483
1.47
11.
282
1.40
4
Z_DEP
OSIT
10,41
52,857
1.
922.
231.
591.
51
Z_TO
TAL
33,03
09,005
1.
931.
981.
501.
58
MARk
ETSHARE
RAT
IO
DEP
OSITO
RyAFR
ICAN-
AMER
ICANTO
WHITERAT
IO
RANk
AFIRC
AN
AMER
ICAN
TOW
HITE
RAT
IO
MINORITy
TR
ACT
TONON-
MINORITy
TR
ACTRAT
IO
RANk
MINORITy
TR
ACTTO
NON-M
INORITy
TR
ACTRAT
IO
LMITOM
uI
BORR
OWER
RAT
IO
RANkLM
ITO
MuI
BORR
OWER
RAT
IORANk
RAT
IO
LMI
TRACTS
TOM
uI
TRACTS
RAT
IO
RANkLM
ITR
ACTS
TOM
uI
TRACTS
RAIO
BANCO
SANTA
NDER
0.75
60.
767
0.69
71.
551
BANkOFAMER
ICA
1.71
21.
183
1.09
31.
153
CITIZENSFINANCIALgRO
uP,
INC.
0.96
41.
044
0.71
61.
392
CITIgRO
uP
1.73
11.
661
1.36
11.
025
M&TBA
Nk
0.44
80.
538
0.62
80.
996
PNC
1.69
31.
382
1.34
20.
917
TDBANk
0.45
70.
906
1.08
41.
044
WELLSFARg
O0.
785
0.94
50.
875
0.58
8
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009250.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 65
: Dep
osito
ry R
anki
ng –
Hom
e Im
prov
emen
t Prim
e, S
ingl
e-Fa
mily
Loa
ns in
Phi
lade
lphi
a
RACE
DEP
OSITO
RyAPP
LICA
TIONS
PRIM
ELO
ANS
ORIgINAT
ED
PERC
ENT
OFLO
ANS
TOAFR
ICAN
AMER
ICANS
RANkPE
RCEN
TOFLO
ANS
TOAFR
ICAN
AMER
ICANS
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
HISPA
NICS
RANk
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
HISPA
NICS
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
ASIANS
RANk
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
ASIANS
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSIN
MINORITy
TR
ACTS
RANk
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSIN
MINORITy
TR
ACTS
BANkOFAMER
ICA
82
25
12.0
%5
4.0%
324
.0%
132
.0%
4
CITIZENSFINANCIAL
gRO
uP,IN
C. 2
67
26
53.8
%1
3.8%
47.
7%4
57.7
%1
CITIgRO
uP
155
7
28
.6%
30.
0%6
0.0%
657
.1%
2
PNC
243
3
8 34
.2%
22.
6%5
13.2
%2
44.7
%3
TDBANk
160
1
8 5.
6%6
5.6%
211
.1%
327
.8%
5
WELLSFARg
O 3
90
101
13
.9%
46.
9%1
4.0%
524
.8%
6
Z_DEP
OSIT
1,387
2
28
22.4
%4.
8%8.
3%34
.6%
Z_TO
TAL
2,605
5
65
19.8
%4.
2%5.
5%35
.8%
Z_TO
TAL
4,803
8
05
25.6
%5.
3%4.
3%43
.7%
INCO
ME/gEN
DER
DEP
OSITO
RyPE
RCEN
TOF
LOANSTO
LMI
BORR
OWER
S
RANk
PERC
ENT
OFLO
ANS
TOLMI
BORR
OWER
S
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSINLMI
TRACTS
RANkPE
RCEN
TOFLO
ANSIN
LMIT
RACTS
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
FEMALES
RANk
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
FEMALES
BANkOFAMER
ICA
72.0
%2
60.0
%3
40.0
%5
CITIZENSFINANCIAL
gRO
uP,IN
C.84
.6%
180
.8%
150
.0%
4
CITIgRO
uP
28.6
%6
57.1
%4
57.1
%2
PNC
47.4
%3
50.0
%5
63.2
%1
TDBANk
44.4
%4
61.1
%2
55.6
%3
WELLSFARg
O37
.6%
536
.6%
639
.6%
6
Z_DEP
OSIT
48.7
%50
.4%
46.5
%
Z_TO
TAL
57.0
%55
.8%
43.2
%
Z_TO
TAL
62.3
%60
.6%
43.4
%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009251.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 65
: Dep
osito
ry R
anki
ng –
Hom
e Im
prov
emen
t Prim
e, S
ingl
e-Fa
mily
Loa
ns in
Phi
lade
lphi
a (c
ontin
ued)
DEN
IALS
DEP
OSITO
RyAPP
LICA
TIONS
DEN
IALS
AFR
ICAN-
AMER
ICAN
TOW
HITE
DEN
IALRAT
IO
RANkAFR
ICAN-
AMER
ICANTO
WHITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
HISPA
NICTO
WHITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
RANk
HISPA
NIC
TOW
HITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
ASIANTO
WHITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
RANkASIAN
TOW
HITE
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
MINORITy
TO
NON-
MINORITy
TR
ACT
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
RANk
MINORITy
TO
NON-
MINORITy
TR
ACT
DEN
IAL
RAT
IO
BANkOFAMER
ICA
82
34
3.10
64.
706
0.57
13.
336
CITIZENSFINANCIAL
gRO
uP,IN
C. 2
67
149
1.
423
1.26
11.
625
1.23
1
CITIgRO
uP
155
9
1 1.
351
1.71
42.
456
1.23
2
PNC
243
1
65
1.36
21.
463
0.98
21.
413
TDBANk
160
1
24
1.59
41.
372
0.98
31.
554
WELLSFARg
O 3
90
116
1.
735
1.84
51.
094
1.78
5
Z_DEP
OSIT
1,387
7
34
1.70
1.80
1.25
1.72
Z_TO
TAL
2,605
1,355
1.
882.
021.
271.
75
Z_TO
TAL
4,803
2,667
1.
581.
551.
351.
33
MARk
ETSHARE
RAT
IO
DEP
OSITO
RyAFR
ICAN-
AMER
ICANTO
WHITERAT
IO
RANk
AFIRC
AN
AMER
ICAN
TOW
HITE
RAT
IO
MINORITy
TR
ACT
TONON-
MINORITy
TR
ACTRAT
IO
RANkMINORITy
TR
ACTTO
NON-M
INORITy
TR
ACTRAT
IO
LMITOM
uI
BORR
OWER
RAT
IO
RANkLM
ITO
MuI
BORR
OWER
RAT
IORANk
RAT
IO
LMIT
RACTSTO
MuIT
RACTS
RAT
IO
RANkLM
ITR
ACTSTO
MuIT
RACTS
RAIO
BANkOFAMER
ICA
0.62
40.
854
1.19
31.
942
CITIZENSFINANCIAL
gRO
uP,IN
C.4.
211
2.45
13.
331
4.15
1
CITIgRO
uP
1.08
32.
402
1.06
40.
306
PNC
2.07
21.
453
0.79
50.
683
TDBANk
0.25
60.
695
1.25
20.
604
WELLSFARg
O0.
585
0.59
60.
466
0.46
5
WAC
HOvIA
0.74
61.
392
1.30
40.
667
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2008252.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 66
: Unr
anke
d D
epos
itorie
s –
All
Prim
e, S
ingl
e-Fa
mily
Loa
ns in
Phi
lade
lphi
a
RACE
DEP
OSITO
RyAPP
LICA
TIONS
PRIM
ELO
ANS
ORIgINAT
ED
PERC
ENTOF
LOANSTO
AFR
ICAN
AMER
ICANS
PERC
ENTOFLO
ANS
TOHISPA
NICS
PERC
ENTOFLO
ANS
TOASIANS
PERC
ENTOFLO
ANS
INM
INORITy
TR
ACTS
BANkOFNEW
yORk
MELLO
NCORP
ORA
TION
64
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
0.0%
CITy
NAT
IONALBA
NCS
HARE
SCO
RPORA
TION
10
REPu
BLICFIRSTBANkC
ORP,INC.
50
uNITED
BANkOFPH
ILADELPH
IA25
10.
0%0.
0%0.
0%10
0.0%
INCO
ME/gEN
DER
DEP
OSITO
RyPE
RCEN
TOFLO
ANS
TOLMIB
ORR
OWER
PERC
ENTOFLO
ANS
INLMIT
RACTS
PERC
ENTOFLO
ANS
TOFEM
ALES
PRIM
ELO
ANDSTO
LM
IBORR
OWER
S
BANkOFNEW
yORk
MELLO
NCORP
ORA
TION
0.0%
50.0
%0.
0%0
CITy
NAT
IONALBA
NCS
HARE
SCO
RPORA
TION
0
REPu
BLICFIRSTBANkC
ORP,INC.
0
uNITED
BANkOFPH
ILADELPH
IA0.
0%10
0.0%
0.0%
0
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009253.
Appendix 2 – Tables
DEN
IALS
DEP
OSITO
RyAPP
LICA
TIONS
DEN
IALS
AFR
ICAN-AMER
ICAN
TOW
HITEDEN
IAL
RAT
IO
HISPA
NICTOW
HITE
DEN
IALRAT
IOASIANTOW
HITE
DEN
IALRAT
IO
MINORITy
TONON
MINORITy
TRACT
DEN
IALRAT
IO
BANkOFNEW
yORk
MELLO
NCORP
ORA
TION
62
CITy
NAT
IONALBA
NCS
HARE
SCO
RPORA
TION
11
REPu
BLICFIRSTBANkC
ORP,INC.
53
3.00
uNITED
BANkOFPH
ILADELPH
IA25
2495
.7%
MARk
ETSHARE
RAT
IO
DEP
OSITO
RyAFR
ICANAMER
ICAN
TOW
HITE
MINORITy
TRACT
TONON-M
INORITy
TR
ACT
LMIT
RACTSTOM
uI
TRACTS
LMIT
RACTSTOM
uI
TRACTS
BANkOFNEW
yORk
MELLO
NCORP
ORA
TION
0.00
0.00
1.10
0.00
CITy
NAT
IONALBA
NCS
HARE
SCO
RPORA
TION
--
--
REPu
BLICFIRSTBANkC
ORP,INC.
--
--
uNITED
BANkOFPH
ILADELPH
IA-
--
-
Tabl
e 66
: Unr
anke
d D
epos
itorie
s –
All
Prim
e, S
ingl
e-Fa
mily
Loa
ns in
Phi
lade
lphi
a (c
ontin
ued)
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009254.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Table 67: List of Depository Affiliates Included in Analysis
HOLDINgCOMPANy INSITuTION
ADvANCEBANk ADvANCEBANk
BANkOFNEWyORkMELLONCORPORATION
BANkOFNEWyORkMELLONCORPORATION BANkOFNEWyORkMELLONCORPORATION
BANkOFNEWyORkMELLONCORPORATION MELLONuNITEDNATIONALBANk
BANCOSANTANDER ADMINISTRACIONDEBANCOSLATINOAMERICANOS
BANCOSANTANDER BANCOSANTANDER
BANCOSANTANDER BANCOSANTANDERPuERTORICO
BANCOSANTANDER INDEPENDENCECOMMuNITyBANkCORP.
BANCOSANTANDER SANTANDERBANCORP
BANCOSANTANDER SANTANDERFINANCIALSERvICES,INC.
BANCOSANTANDER SANTANDERINvESTMENTI,S.A.
BANCOSANTANDER SOvEREIgNBANCORP
BANCOSANTANDER SOvEREIgNBANk
BANkOFAMERICA BACNORTHAMERICAHOLDINgCOMPANy
BANkOFAMERICA BANAHOLDINgCORPORATION
BANkOFAMERICA BANkOFAMERICACORPORATION
BANkOFAMERICA BANkOFAMERICA,NATIONALASSOCIATION
BANkOFAMERICA BESTMORTgAgERESOuRCE
BANkOFAMERICA BIRCHFIELDHOMEMORTgAgE
BANkOFAMERICA CBHHOMELOANS
BANkOFAMERICA CMvHOMELOANS
BANkOFAMERICA FIRSTFREEDOMMORTgAgE
BANkOFAMERICA FNBRMORTgAgE
BANkOFAMERICA HIgHLANDLOANSOuRCE
BANkOFAMERICA JLHMORTgAgE
BANkOFAMERICA MERRILLLyNCHCREDITCORPORATION
BANkOFAMERICA MERRILLLyNCHMORTgAgEANDINvESTMENTCORPORATION
BANkOFAMERICA NBHOLDINgSCORPORATION
BANkOFAMERICA NEWMORTgAgEADvISORS
BANkOFAMERICA PROPERTyMORTgAgE.COM
BANkOFAMERICA SRCMORTgAgE
BANkOFAMERICA THEgROuPguARANTEEDMORTgAgE
BANkOFAMERICA WESTERNMuTuALHOMELOANS
BANkOFAMERICA WESTERNPARADISEFINANCIAL
CITIZENSFINANCIALgROuP,INC. CITIZENSBANkOFPENNSyLvANIA
CITIZENSFINANCIALgROuP,INC. CITIZENSFINANCIALgROuP,INC.
CITIZENSFINANCIALgROuP,INC. RBSCITIZENS,NATIONALASSOCIATION
CITyNATIONALBANCSHARESCORPORATION CITyNATIONALBANCSHARESCORPORATION
CITyNATIONALBANCSHARESCORPORATION CITyNATIONALBANkOFNEWJERSEy
CITIgROuP CITIFINANCIALSERvICES,INC
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009255.
Appendix 2 – Tables
HOLDINgCOMPANy INSTITuTION
CITIgROuP ASSOCIATESFIRSTCAPITALCORPORATION
CITIgROuP CITIBANkDOMESTICINvESTMENTCORP.
CITIgROuP CITIBANk,N.A.
CITIgROuP CITICORP
CITIgROuP CITICORPBANkINgCORPORATION
CITIgROuP CITICORPHOMEEQuITy
CITIgROuP CITICORPTRuSTBANk,FSB
CITIgROuP CITIFINANCIALCOMPANy
CITIgROuP CITIFINANCIALCORPLLC
CITIgROuP CITIFINANCIALCORPORATION
CITIgROuP CITIFINANCIALCREDITCOMPANy
CITIgROuP CITIFINANCIALSERvICES
CITIgROuP CITIFINANCIALSERvICES,INC
CITIgROuP CITIFINANCIALSERvICES,INC.
CITIgROuP CITIFINANCIAL,INC
CITIgROuP CITIFINANCIAL,INC.
CITIgROuP CITIgROuPINC
CITIgROuP CITIMORTgAgEINC
M&TBANk FIRSTEMPIRESTATEHOLDINgCOMPANy
M&TBANk M&TBANkCORPORATION
M&TBANk M&TBANk,NATIONALASSOCIATION
M&TBANk M&TREALESTATETRuST
M&TBANk M&TREALTyCAPITALCORPORATION
M&TBANk MANuFACTuRERSANDTRADERSTRuSTCOMPANy
PNC PNCBANCORP,INC.
PNC PNCBANk,NATIONALASSOCIATION
PNC PNCFINANCIALSERvICESgROuP
REPuBLICFIRSTBANkCORP,INC. REPuBLICFIRSTBANkCORP,INC.
TDBANk TDBANk
TDBANk TDBANkuSHOLDINgCOMPANy
TDBANk TDuSP&CHOLDINgSuLC
TDBANk TORONTO-DOMINIONBANk
uNITEDBANkOFPHILADELPHIA uNITEDBANkOFPHILADELPHIA
WELLSFARgO +WACHOvIABANkOFDELAWARE,NATIONAL
WELLSFARgO +WACHOvIABANk,NATIONALASSOCIATION
WELLSFARgO +WELLSFARgOBANk,NATIONALASSOCIATION
WELLSFARgO 1STCAPITALMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO ADvANTAgEMORTgAgEPARTNERS,LLC
WELLSFARgO ALLIANCEHOMEMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO AMERICANPRIORITyMORTgAgE,LLC
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009256.
Appendix 2 – Tables
HOLDINgCOMPANy INSTITuTION
WELLSFARgO AMERICANSOuTHERNMORTgAgESERvICES,LLC
WELLSFARgO APMMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO ASCENTFINANCIALSERvICES,LLC
WELLSFARgO ASHTONWOODSMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO BANkERSFuNDINgCOMPANy,LLC
WELLSFARgO BELgRAvIAMORTgAgEgROuP,LLC
WELLSFARgO BENEFITMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO BERkSMORTgAgESERvICES,LLC.
WELLSFARgO BHSHOMELOANS,LLC
WELLSFARgO CAPSTONEHOMEMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO CAPSTONEHOMEMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO CAROLINAMORTgAgE/CDJ,LLC
WELLSFARgO CENTENNIALHOMEMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO CHOICEMORTgAgESERvICINg,LLC
WELLSFARgO CITyLIFELENDINggROuP,LLC
WELLSFARgO COLORADOCAPITALMORTgAgECO.,LLC
WELLSFARgO COLORADOMORTgAgEALLIANCE,LLC
WELLSFARgO COLORADOPROFESSIONALSMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO CONWAyHOMEMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO DECAPITALMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO DHFINANCIAL,LLC
WELLSFARgO EDWARDJONESMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO ELITEHOMEMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO EXPRESSFINANCIAL&MORTgAgESERvICES,LLC
WELLSFARgO FIRSTASSOCIATESMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO FIRSTCOMMONWEALTHHOMEMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO FIRSTMORTgAgECONSuLTANTS,LLC
WELLSFARgO FIRSTPENINSuLAMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO FIvESTARLENDINg,LLC
WELLSFARgO FLORIDAHOMEFINANCEgROuP,LLC
WELLSFARgO FOuNDATIONMORTgAgESERvICES,LLC
WELLSFARgO FuLTONHOMESMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO gENESISMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO gIBRALTARMORTgAgESERvICES,LLC
WELLSFARgO gIBRALTARMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO gREATEASTMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO gREATERATLANTAFINANCIALSERvICES,LLC
WELLSFARgO gREENPATHFuNDINg,LLC
WELLSFARgO gREENRIDgEMORTgAgESERvICES,LLC
WELLSFARgO guARANTEEPACIFICMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO HALLMARkMORTgAgEgROuP,LLC
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009257.
Appendix 2 – Tables
HOLDINgCOMPANy INSTITuTION
WELLSFARgO HENDRICkSMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO HERITAgEHOMEMORTgAgEgROuP,LLC
WELLSFARgO HOMEMORTgAgESPECIALISTS,LLC
WELLSFARgO HOMESERvICESLENDINg,LLC
WELLSFARgO ILLuSTRATEDPROPERTIESMORTgAgECOMPANy,
WELLSFARgO INTEgRITyHOMEFuNDINg,LLC
WELLSFARgO kELLERMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO LINEARFINANCIAL,LP
WELLSFARgO MARBENMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO MARTHATuRNERMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO MAXMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO MCOFAMERICA,LLC
WELLSFARgO MCMILLINHOMEMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO MORTgAgE100,LLC
WELLSFARgO MORTgAgESuNLIMITED,LLC
WELLSFARgO MOuNTAINSuMMITMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO MSCMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO NuCOMPASSMORTgAgESERvICES,LLC
WELLSFARgO PEACHTREERESIDENTIALMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO PERSONALMORTgAgEgROuP,LLC
WELLSFARgO PHXMORTgAgEADvISORS,LLC
WELLSFARgO PINNACLEMORTgAgEOFNEvADA,LLC
WELLSFARgO PLATINuMRESIDENTIALMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO PNCMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO PREMIAMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO PRIMESELECTMORgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO PRIvATEMORTgAgEADvISORS,LLC
WELLSFARgO PROFESSIONALFINANCIALSERvICESOFARIZONA,
WELLSFARgO PROFESSIONALMORTgAgEASSOCIATES,LLC
WELLSFARgO RAINIERMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO REALLIvINgMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO REALTyHOMEMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO RELIABLEFINANCIALSERvICES,INC.
WELLSFARgO RESIDENTIALHOMEDIvISION,LLC
WELLSFARgO RESIDENTIALMORTgAgEDIvISION,LLC
WELLSFARgO RESIDENTIALMORTgAgESERvICES,LLC
WELLSFARgO RIvERSIDEHOMELOANS,LLC
WELLSFARgO RWFMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO SANTAFEMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO SELECTHOMEMORTgAgE,LLC
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009258.
Appendix 2 – Tables
WELLSFARgO SELECTLENDINgSERvICES,LLC
WELLSFARgO SIgNATuREHOMEMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO SOuTHEASTHOMEMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO SOuTHEASTMINNESOTAMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO SOuTHERNOHIOMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO STIRLINgMORTgAgESERvICES,LLC
WELLSFARgO SuMMITNATIONALMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO THOROugHBREDMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO TOWN&COuNTRyMORTgAgEgROuP,LLC
WELLSFARgO TPgFuNDINg,LLC
WELLSFARgO TRADEMARkMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO vILLAgECOMMuNITIESFINANCIAL,LLC
WELLSFARgO WACHOvIAFINANCIALSERvICES,INC.
WELLSFARgO WELLSFARgOFuNDINg,INC.
WELLSFARgO WELLSFARgOHOMEMORTgAgEOFHAWAII,LLC
WELLSFARgO WFSMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO WILLIAMPITTMORTgAgE,LLC
WELLSFARgO WINMARkFINANCIAL,LLC
WELLSFARgO ADvANCEMORTgAgE
WELLSFARgO AMERICANMORTgAgENETWORkLLC
WELLSFARgO AMNETMORTgAgELLC
WELLSFARgO CENTRALFEDERALMORTgAgECOMPANy
WELLSFARgO CENTuRyBANCSHARES,INC.
WELLSFARgO CHARTERHOLDINgS,INC.
WELLSFARgO gREATERBAyBANCORP
WELLSFARgO IBID,INC.
WELLSFARgO INTRAWESTASSETMANAgEMENT,INC.
WELLSFARgO LEgACyMORTgAgE
WELLSFARgO MORTgAgEONE
WELLSFARgO MuLBERRyASSETMANAgEMENT,INC.
WELLSFARgO PELICANASSETMANAgEMENT,INC.
WELLSFARgO PLACERSIERRABANCSHARES
WELLSFARgO PRIORITyMORTgAgECOMPANyLLC
WELLSFARgO PROSPERITyMORTgAgECOMPANy
WELLSFARgO REALESTATELENDERS
WELLSFARgO REALLIvINgMTgLLC
WELLSFARgO SkOgMANMORTgAgECOMPANy
WELLSFARgO SOuTHWESTPARTNERS,INC.
WELLSFARgO vIOLETASSETMANAgEMENT,INC.
WELLSFARgO WELLSFARgO&COMPANy
WELLSFARgO WELLSFARgOFINANCIALSERvICES,INC.
WELLSFARgO WELLSFARgOFINANCIAL,INC.
WELLSFARgO WELLSFARgOvENTuRES,LLC
WELLSFARgO WFCHOLDINgSCORPORATION
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009259.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 68
: CRA
Sm
all B
usin
ess
Lend
ing
by In
com
e
INST
ITuTION
BANkOFAMER
ICA
BANkOFNEW
yO
Rk/M
ELLO
NCITIZENS
CITIBA
Nk
MAND
TBA
Nk
PNC
BANk
REPu
BLIC
FIRS
TSO
vER
EIgN
TD
BANk
WELLS
FARg
O
TOTA
LFO
RALLNON-
DEP
OSITO
RIES
TOTA
LFO
RALL
DEP
OSITO
RIES
TOTA
L
#OFSM
ALL
BuSINES
SLO
ANS
450
545
01,26
630
1,70
622
4823
179
27,36
55,00
012
,365
#LO
ANSTO
LO
WIN
COME
CENSu
STR
ACTS
742
105
236
1029
71
1431
142
1,06
691
21,97
8
#OFLO
ANS
TOM
ODER
ATE
INCO
ME
CENSu
STR
ACTS
135
016
653
614
602
921
7525
12,44
81,80
94,25
7
#OFLO
ANS
TOM
IDDLE
INCO
ME
CENSu
STR
ACTS
160
010
634
95
424
88
7819
42,20
11,33
23,53
3
#OFLO
ANS
TOuPP
ER
INCO
ME
CENSu
STR
ACTS
703
5610
50
328
43
4115
61,36
076
62,12
6
#TO
BuS<$1
MIL
439
543
31,22
629
1,65
122
4622
574
37,07
54,81
911
,894
#OFLO
ANSTO
ALLkNOWN
INCO
ME
gRO
uPS
294
321
769
314
1,19
522
3217
043
979
13,07
93,87
0
TOTA
LSM
ALL
BuSINES
SLO
ANSIN
PHILADELPH
IA
12,36
5
TOTA
LDOLLARS
LO
ANED
TO
SMALL
BuSINES
SIN
PHILADELPH
IA
$58
0,70
9,00
0
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009260.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Table 69: CRA Small Business Lending – Bank of America NA
INSTITuTION BANkOFAMERICA
TOTALFORALLDEPOSITORIES
%TOTALFORALLDEPOSITORIES
%TOTALFORPHILADELPHIA
#OFSMALLBuSINESSLOANS 450 5,000 0.09 0.04
#LOANSTOLOWINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 74 912 0.08 0.04
#OFLOANSTOMODERATEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 135 1,809 0.07 0.03
#OFLOANSTOMIDDLEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 160 1,332 0.12 0.05
#OFLOANSTOuPPERINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 70 766 0.09 0.03
#OFLOANSTOALLkNOWNINCOMEgROuPS 439 4,819 0.09 0.04
#TOBuS<$1MIL 294 3,079 0.10 0.08
Table 70: CRA Small Business Lending – Bank of New York Mellon
INSTITuTION
BANkOFNEWyORk/MELLON
TOTALFORALLDEPOSITIORIES
%TOTALFORALLDEPOSITORIES
%OFTOTALFOR
PHILADELPHIA
#OFSMALLBuSINESSLOANS 5 5,000 0.10% 0.04%
#LOANSTOLOWINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 2 912 0.22% 0.10%
#OFLOANSTOMODERATEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 0 1,809 0.00% 0.00%
#OFLOANSTOMIDDLEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 0 1,332 0.00% 0.00%
#OFLOANSTOuPPERINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 3 766 0.39% 0.14%
#OFLOANSTOALLkNOWNINCOMEgROuPS 5 4,819 0.10% 0.04%
#TOBuS<$1MIL 3 3,079 0.10% 0.08%
Table 71: CRA Small Business Lending – Citizens Bank
INSTITuTION CITIZENSBANk
TOTALFORALLDEPOSITORIES
%TOTALFORALLDEPOSITORIES
%OFTOTALFORPHILADELPHIA
#OFSMALLBuSINESSLOANS 450 5,000 9.00% 3.64%
#LOANSTOLOWINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 105 912 11.51% 5.31%
#OFLOANSTOMODERATEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 166 1,809 9.18% 3.90%
#OFLOANSTOMIDDLEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 106 1,332 7.96% 3.00%
#OFLOANSTOuPPERINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 56 766 7.31% 2.63%
#OFLOANSTOALLkNOWNINCOMEgROuPS 433 4,819 8.99% 3.64%
#TOBuS<$1MIL 217 3,079 7.05% 5.61%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009261.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Table 72: CRA Small Business Lending – Citibank
INSTITuTION CITIBANk TOTALFORALLDEPOSITORIES
%OFTOTALFORALLDEPOSITORIES
%OFTOTALFOR
PHILADELPHIA
#OFSMALLBuSINESSLOANS 1,266 5,000 25.32% 10.24%
#LOANSTOLOWINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 236 912 25.88% 11.93%
#OFLOANSTOMODERATEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 536 1,809 29.63% 12.59%
#OFLOANSTOMIDDLEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 349 1,332 26.20% 9.88%
#OFLOANSTOuPPERINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 105 766 13.71% 4.94%
#TOBuS<$1MIL 693 3,079 22.51% 17.91%
#OFLOANSTOALLkNOWNINCOMEgROuPS 1,226 4,819 25.44% 10.31%
Table 73: CRA Small Business Lending – M&T Bank
INSTITuTION MANDTBANk
TOTALFORALLDEPOSITORIES
%OFTOTALFORALLDEPOSITORIES
%OFTOTALFOR
PHILADELPHIA
#OFSMALLBuSINESSLOANS 30 5,000 0.60% 0.24%
#LOANSTOLOWINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 10 912 1.10% 0.51%
#OFLOANSTOMODERATEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 14 1,809 0.77% 0.33%
#OFLOANSTOMIDDLEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 5 1,332 0.38% 0.14%
#OFLOANSTOuPPERINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 0 766 0.00% 0.00%
#OFLOANSTOALLkNOWNINCOMEgROuPS 29 4,819 0.60% 0.24%
#TOBuS<$1MIL 14 3,079 0.45% 0.36%
Table 74: CRA Small Business Lending – PNC Bank
INSTITuTION PNC TOTALFORALLDEPOSITORIES
%OFTOTALFORALLDEPOSITORIES
%OFTOTALFOR
PHILADELPHIA
#OFSMALLBuSINESSLOANS 1,706 5,000 34.12% 13.80%
#LOANSTOLOWINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 297 912 32.57% 15.02%
#OFLOANSTOMODERATEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 602 1,809 33.28% 14.14%
#OFLOANSTOMIDDLEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 424 1,332 31.83% 12.00%
#OFLOANSTOuPPERINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 328 766 42.82% 15.43%
#OFLOANSTOALLkNOWNINCOMEgROuPS 1,651 4,819 34.26% 13.88%
#TOBuS<$1MIL 1,195 3,079 38.81% 30.88%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009262.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Table 75: CRA Small Business Lending – Republic First Bank
INSTITuTION REPuBLICFIRSTBANk
TOTALFORALLDEPOSITORIES
%OFTOTALFORALL
DEPOSITORIES
%OFTOTALFOR
PHILADELPHIA
#OFSMALLBuSINESSLOANS 22 5,000 0.44% 0.18%
#LOANSTOLOWINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 1 912 0.11% 0.05%
#OFLOANSTOMODERATEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 9 1,809 0.50% 0.21%
#OFLOANSTOMIDDLEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 8 1,332 0.60% 0.23%
#OFLOANSTOuPPERINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 4 766 0.52% 0.19%
#OFLOANSTOALLkNOWNINCOMEgROuPS 22 4,819 0.46% 0.18%
#TOBuS<$1MIL 22 3,079 0.71% 0.57%
Table 76: CRA Small Business Lending – Sovereign Bank
INSTITuTION SOvEREIgN TOTALFORALLDEPOSITORIES
%OFTOTALFORALLDEPOSITORIES
%OFTOTALFOR
PHILADELPHIA
#OFSMALLBuSINESSLOANS 48 5,000 0.96% 0.39%
#LOANSTOLOWINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 14 912 1.54% 0.71%
#OFLOANSTOMODERATEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 21 1,809 1.16% 0.49%
#OFLOANSTOMIDDLEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 8 1,332 0.60% 0.23%
#OFLOANSTOuPPERINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 3 766 0.39% 0.14%
#OFLOANSTOALLkNOWNINCOMEgROuPS 46 4,819 0.95% 0.39%
#TOBuS<$1MIL 32 3,079 1.04% 0.83%
Table 77: CRA Small Business Lending – TD Bank
INSTITuTION TDBANk TOTALFORALLDEPOSITORIES
%OFTOTALFORALL
DEPOSITORIES
%OFTOTALFORPHILADELPHIA
#OFSMALLBuSINESSLOANS 231 5,000 4.62% 1.87%
#LOANSTOLOWINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 31 912 3.40% 1.57%
#OFLOANSTOMODERATEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 75 1,809 4.15% 1.76%
#OFLOANSTOMIDDLEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 78 1,332 5.86% 2.21%
#OFLOANSTOuPPERINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 41 766 5.35% 1.93%
#OFLOANSTOALLkNOWNINCOMEgROuPS 225 4,819 4.67% 1.89%
#TOBuS<$1MIL 170 3,079 5.52% 4.39%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009263.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Table 78: CRA Small Business Lending – Wells Fargo Bank
INSTITuTION WELLSFARgO
TOTALFORALLDEPOSITORIES
%OFTOTALFORALL
DEPOSITORIES
%OFTOTALFOR
PHILADELPHIA
#OFSMALLBuSINESSLOANS 792 5,000 15.84% 6.41%
#LOANSTOLOWINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 142 912 15.57% 7.18%
#OFLOANSTOMODERATEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 251 1,809 13.88% 5.90%
#OFLOANSTOMIDDLEINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 194 1,332 14.56% 5.49%
#OFLOANSTOuPPERINCOMECENSuSTRACTS 156 766 20.37% 7.34%
#OFLOANSTOALLkNOWNINCOMEgROuPS 743 4,819 15.42% 6.25%
#TOBuS<$1MIL 439 3,079 14.26% 11.34%
Table 79: Small Business Lending – by Tract Income Level
CITyOFPHILADELPHIA ALLSMALLBuSINESSLOANS LOANSTOSMALLBuSINESSESWITH<$1MILLIONINREvENuE
ICOMELEvEL NuMBEROFLOANS PERCENTOFLOANS NuMBEROFLOANS PERCENTOFLOANS
LOWINCOME 1,978 16.0% 672 17.4%
MODERATEINCOME 4,257 34.4% 1,365 35.3%
MIDDLEINCOME 3,533 28.6% 1,110 28.7%
uPPERINCOME 2,126 17.2% 640 16.5%
TRACTORINCOMENOTkNOWN 471 3.8% 83 2.1%
TOTAL 12,365 100.0% 3,870 100.0%
SuBuRBANCOuNTIES ALLSMALLBuSINESSLOANS LOANSTOSMALLBuSINESSESWITH<$1MILLIONINREvENuE
INCOMELEvEL NuMBEROFLOANS PERCENTOFLOANS NuMBEROFLOANS PERCENTOFLOANS
LOWINCOME 163 0.36% 47 0.35%
MODERATEINCOME 1,931 4.30% 639 4.74%
MIDDLEINCOME 12,787 28.48% 4,119 30.54%
uPPERINCOME 28,831 64.22% 8,416 62.40%
TRACTORINCOMENOTkNOWN 1,184 2.64% 267 1.98%
TOTAL 44,896 100.00% 13,488 100.00%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009264.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Table 80: Small Business Lending – by Tract Minority Level
CITyOFPHILADELPHIA ALLSMALLBuSINESSLOANS LOANSTOSMALLBuSINESSESWITH<$1MILLIONINREvENuE
MINORITySTATuS NuMBEROFLOANS PERCENTOFLOANS NuMBEROFLOANS PERCENTOFLOANS
MINORITyAREAS 3,558 28.77% 1,190 30.75%
NON-MINORITyAREAS 8,498 68.73% 2,632 68.01%
TRACTuNkNOWNORNOPOPuLATION 309 2.50% 48 1.24%
TOTAL 12,365 100.00% 3,870 100.00%
SuBuRBANCOuNTIES ALLSMALLBuSINESSLOANS LOANSTOSMALLBuSINESSESWITH<$1MILLIONINREvENuE
MINORITySTATuS NuMBEROFLOANS PERCENTOFLOANS NuMBEROFLOANS PERCENTOFLOANS
MINORITyAREAS 605 1.35% 171 1.27%
NON-MINORITyAREAS 43,109 96.02% 13,050 96.75%
uNkNOWNORNOPOPuLATION 1,182 2.63% 267 1.98%
TOTAL 44,896 100.00% 13,488 100.00%
Table 81: Small Business Lending – Philadelphia and Suburbs
CITyOFPHILADELPHIA SuBuRBANCOuNTIES
REvENuESIZE NuMBEROFLOANS PERCENTOFLOANS NuMBEROFLOANS PERCENTOFLOANS
SMALLBuSINESSES 12,365 100.00% 44,896 100.00%
BuSINESSESWITHREvENuES<$1MILLION 3,870 31.30% 13,488 30.04%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009265.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Table 82: City Depositories – by Income and Minority Level
INCOMELEvEL
BANkS BRANCHES LMI TRACT
MuI TRATC
%OFBRANCHESINLMITRACTS/%OFALL
BRANCHESINLMITRACTSRATIO
%OFBRANCHESINLMITRACTS/%OFLMI
TRACTSRATIO
ADvANCE 1 100.0% 0.0% 1.76 1.53
BANkOFAMERICA 19 42.1% 52.6% 0.74 0.64
BANkOFNEWyORk/MELLON 2 50.0% 50.0% 0.88 0.77
CITIBANk 7 42.9% 57.1% 0.75 0.66
CITIZENSBANk 60 53.3% 45.0% 0.94 0.82
CITyNATIONAL 1 100.0% 0.0% 1.76 1.53
M&TBANk 8 75.0% 25.0% 1.32 1.15
PNC 42 57.1% 35.7% 1.01 0.87
REPuBLICFIRST 7 85.7% 14.3% 1.51 1.31
SOvEREIgN 17 58.8% 35.3% 1.04 0.90
TDBANk 20 50.0% 50.0% 0.88 0.77
uNITEDBANkOFPHILADELPHIA 4 75.0% 25.0% 1.32 1.15
WELLSFARgO 44 68.2% 31.8% 1.20 1.04
ALLBANkS 338 56.8% 40.8%
ALLCENSuSTRACTS 381 65.4% 30.7%
MINORITyLEvEL
BANkS BRANCHES50%ORMORE MINORITyTRACT
LESSTHAN50%MINORITy
TRACT
%OFBRANCHESINMINORITyTRACTS/%OFALLBRANCHESIN
MINORITyTRACTSRATIO
%OFBRANCHESINMINORITyTRACTS/%OFMINORITyTRACTSRATIO
ADvANCE 1 100.0% 0.0% 4.3 1.9
BANkOFAMERICA 19 15.8% 78.9% 0.7 0.3
BANkOFNEWyORk/MELLON 2 0.0% 100.0% 0.0 0.0
CITIBANk 7 0.0% 100.0% 0.0 0.0
CITIZENSBANk 60 26.7% 71.7% 1.2 0.5
CITyNATIONAL 1 0.0% 100.0% 0.0 0.0
M&TBANk 8 25.0% 75.0% 1.1 0.5
PNC 42 33.3% 61.9% 1.4 0.6
REPuBLICFIRST 7 0.0% 100.0% 0.0 0.0
SOvEREIgN 17 35.3% 58.8% 1.5 0.7
TDBANk 20 15.0% 85.0% 0.7 0.3
uNITEDBANkOFPHILADELPHIA 4 75.0% 25.0% 3.3 1.4
WELLSFARgO 44 29.5% 70.5% 1.3 0.6
ALLBANkS 338 23.1% 75.4%
ALLCENSuSTRACTS 381 52.2% 45.4%
[1] Not all percentages will total to 100 because income and minority information is not available for every tract
[2] Branches according to FDIC Summary of Deposits data as of June 2009
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2008266.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 83
: Nei
ghbo
rhoo
d Si
ngle
-Fam
ily L
endi
ng A
naly
sis
PORT
FOLIOSHARE
OFTH
ECITy
MARk
ETSHARE
OFTH
ECITy
NEIgHBO
RHOOD
LOCA
TION
MAJO
RET
HNIC
gRO
uP
PERC
ENTOF
CITy
OOHuS
PERC
ENT
OFCITy
LO
ANS
%OF
PRIM
ECITy
LO
ANS
%OF
SuBP
RIME
CITy
LOANS
TOTA
LLOANS
PRIM
ELOANS
PRIM
EAS
A%OFALL
LOANS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS
SuBP
RIMEAS
A%OFALL
LOANS
PRIM
ELO
ANS/
OOHuS
SuBP
RIME
LOANS/
OOHuS
APM
N.P
HILA
HISP
0.08
%0.
01%
0.00
%0.
06%
21
50.0
%1
50.0
%0.
35%
0.35
%
HAC
EN.5
THSTR
EET
HISP
1.15
%0.
27%
0.17
%1.
74%
7041
58.6
%29
41.4
%1.
02%
0.72
%
AWF
N.P
HILA
AFR
-AM
1.31
%0.
23%
0.18
%0.
96%
6044
73.3
%16
26.7
%0.
96%
0.35
%
OARC
W.O
AkLA
NE
AFR
-AM
3.37
%2.
20%
2.06
%4.
25%
576
505
87.7
%71
12.3
%4.
28%
0.60
%
PROJECT
HOME
SPRgRD
NAFR
-AM
1.11
%0.
19%
0.17
%0.
54%
5142
82.4
%9
17.6
%1.
08%
0.23
%
PEC
W.P
HILA
AFR
-AM
0.41
%0.
19%
0.18
%0.
42%
5144
86.3
%7
13.7
%3.
04%
0.48
%
AMER
ICAN
ST.E
ZkE
NSINgTO
NHISP
0.62
%0.
43%
0.39
%1.
08%
113
9584
.1%
1815
.9%
32.8
7%6.
23%
NORT
H
CENTR
ALEZ
N.P
HILA
AFR
-AM
0.38
%0.
19%
0.16
%0.
66%
5140
78.4
%11
21.6
%2.
99%
0.82
%
WES
TPH
ILA.E
ZW.P
HILA
AFR
-AM
0.40
%0.
06%
0.05
%0.
24%
1713
76.5
%4
23.5
%0.
93%
0.29
%
CITy
OF
PHILADELPH
IA2
100.
0%10
0.0%
100.
0%10
0.0%
26,159
24,490
93.6
%1,66
96.
4%7.
00%
0.48
%
PHILADELPH
IA17
2,17
365
279
710
513
01,03
240
70
1,81
023
,633
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009267.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Tabl
e 84
: Nei
ghbo
rhoo
d Si
ngle
-Fam
ily L
endi
ng A
naly
sis
by D
epos
itory
NEIgHBO
RHOOD
ADvA
NCE
BA
Nk
BANkOF
AMER
ICA
CITIgRO
uP
INC
CITIZENS
CITy
NAT
IONAL
BANkOFNEW
yO
Rk/M
ELLO
NM&T
BANk
PNCBA
Nk
REPu
BLIC
FIRS
TBA
Nk
APM
0.00
%0.
00%
0.00
%0.
00%
0.00
%0.
00%
0.00
%0.
00%
HAC
E0.
00%
0.39
%0.
00%
0.83
%0.
00%
1.05
%0.
38%
0.00
%
AWF
0.00
%0.
17%
0.32
%0.
28%
0.00
%0.
00%
0.77
%0.
00%
OARC
0.00
%2.
03%
3.22
%3.
05%
0.00
%2.
11%
3.26
%0.
00%
PRHOME
0.00
%0.
17%
0.00
%0.
83%
0.00
%0.
00%
0.38
%0.
00%
PEC
3.70
%0.
00%
0.00
%0.
28%
0.00
%0.
00%
0.19
%0.
00%
AMER
STEZ
0.00
%0.
11%
0.32
%1.
11%
0.00
%2.
11%
0.00
%0.
00%
NCE
Z0.
00%
0.17
%0.
32%
1.25
%0.
00%
0.00
%0.
19%
0.00
%
WPE
Z0.
00%
0.28
%0.
00%
0.42
%0.
00%
0.00
%0.
00%
0.00
%
ALL9CDC
NEIgHBO
RHOODS
3.70
%3.
32%
4.18
%8.
04%
0.00
%5.
26%
5.18
%0.
00%
PHILADELPH
IA10
0.00
%10
0.00
%10
0.00
%10
0.00
%10
0.00
%10
0.00
%10
0.00
%10
0.00
%
Tabl
e 84
: con
tinue
d
SOvER
EIgNBANk
TDBANk
uNITED
BANk
WELLS
FARg
O
BANk
ALL
LENDER
S
0.00
%0.
00%
0.00
%0.
00%
0.01
%
0.37
%1.
03%
0.00
%0.
13%
0.27
%
0.55
%0.
00%
0.00
%0.
26%
0.23
%
3.88
%1.
72%
0.00
%1.
63%
2.20
%
0.37
%0.
00%
0.00
%0.
16%
0.19
%
0.18
%0.
34%
0.00
%0.
13%
0.19
%
0.28
%0.
34%
0.00
%0.
45%
0.43
%
1.39
%0.
00%
0.00
%0.
21%
0.19
%
0.00
%0.
00%
0.00
%0.
03%
0.06
%
7.02
%3.
44%
0.00
%3.
00%
3.78
%
100.
00%
100.
00%
100.
00%
100.
00%
100.
00%
NuMBE
ROFLENDER
’SSINgLEFAMILyLO
ANSINANEIgHBO
RHOODDIvDIDED
ByALLOFALEN
DER
’SSINgLEFAMILyLO
ANSINTHECITy
LENDER
PORT
FOLIOSHARE
Table 85: Neighborhood Small Business Lending Analysis
NEIgHBORHOOD NuMBEROFSMALLBuSINESSLOANS
NuMBEROFLOANSTOSMALLBuSINESS
<$1MILLIONINANNuALREvENuE
%OFLOANSTOSMALLBuSINESSES
WITHANNuALREvENuES<$1
MILLION
NuMBEROFSMALLBuSINESS
NuMBEROFSMALLBuSINESSESWITHANNuALREvENuE<$1MILLION
ALLEgHENyWESTFOuNDATION(AWF) 83 31 37% 961 718
AMERICANSTREETEMPOWERMENT
ZONE107 39 36% 1185 881
ASSOCIATIONOFPuERTORICANSONTHEMARCH(APM)
4 1 25% 151 101
HISPANICASSOCIATIONOFCONTRACTORS&
ENTERPRISES(HACE)
57 23 40% 1064 834
NORTHCENTRALEMPOWERMENT
ZONE64 16 25% 926 690
OgONTZAvENuEREvIATLIZATION
COMMITTEE(OARC)116 41 35% 1543 1337
PEOPLE'SEMERgENCyCENTER
(PEC)85 30 35% 908 618
PROJECTHOME 26 8 31% 728 591
WESTPHILADELPHIAEMPOWERMENT
ZONE33 11 33% 575 418
TOTAL 575 200 35% 8041 6188
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2008268.
Appendix 2 – Tables
Appendix 3 - Maps
Table of Contents
Appendix3
1 PrimeLoansbyMinorityLevelofTract 276
2 PrimeLoansbyMedianHouseholdIncomeofTract 277
3 PrimeLoansbyImmigrantPopulationofTract 278
4 SubprimeLoansbyMinorityLevelofTract 279
5 SubprimeLoansbyMedianHouseholdIncomeofTract 280
6 SubprimeLoansbyImmigrantPopulationofTract 281
7 African-AmericanDenialRatesforHomePurchaseLoansbyTract 282
8 AsianDenialRatesforHomePurchaseLoansbyTract 283
9 HispanicDenialRatesforHomePurchaseLoansbyTract 284
10 WhiteDenialRatesforHomePurchaseLoansbyTract 285
11 BankBranchesbyMinorityLevelofTract 286
12 BankBranchesbyMedianHouseholdIncomeofTract 287
13 BankBranchesbyImmigrantPopulationofTract 288
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009274.
Appendix 3 – Maps
Map 1: Prime Loans by Minority Level of Tract
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009275.
Appendix 3 – Maps
Map 2: Prime Loans by Median Household Income of Tract
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009276.
Appendix 3 – Maps
Map 3: Prime Loans by Immigrant Population of Tract
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009277.
Appendix 3 – Maps
Map 4: Subprime Loans by Minority Level of Tract
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009278.
Appendix 3 – Maps
Map 5: Subprime Loans by Median Household Income of Tract
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009279.
Appendix 3 – Maps
Map 6: Subprime Loans by Immigrant Population of Tract
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009280.
Appendix 3 – Maps
Map 7: African-American Denial Rates for Home Purchase Loans by Tract
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009281.
Appendix 3 – Maps
Map 8: Asian Denial Rates for Home Purchase Loans by Tract
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009282.
Appendix 3 – Maps
Map 9: Hispanic Denial Rates for Home Purchase Loans by Tract
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009283.
Appendix 3 – Maps
Map 10: White Denial Rates for Home Purchase Loans by Tract
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009284.
Appendix 3 – Maps
Map 11: Bank Branches by Minority Level of Tract
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009285.
Appendix 3 – Maps
Map 12: Bank Branches by Median Household Income of Tract
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009286.
Appendix 3 – Maps
Map 13: Bank Branches by Immigrant Population of Tract
Appendix 4 - Methodology
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009290.
Appendix 4 – Methodology
Appendix 4 MethodologyData Sources
Ananalysisofthisscopeandcomplexityrequiredamyriadofdatasources:
» Homelendingwasanalyzedusing2009HomeMortgageDisclosureActdataobtainedfromtheFederalFinancialInstitutionsExaminationCouncil(FFIEC),whichcollectsdataannuallyfromlenders.
» TheFFIEC’sNationalInformationCenterdatabaseof2009HMDAreportinginstitutionswasusedtogeneratealistofaffiliatesforeachCityDepository.
» CommunityReinvestmentActaggregatedpublicdataonsmallbusinesslendingbycensustractandbyfinancialinstitutionwasdownloadedfromtheFFIECwebsite.
» Thenumberofsmallbusinessesandthenumberofbusinessesbusinesswithlessthan$1millioninrevenuewasderivedfrom2009datapurchasedfromPCiCorporation(©PCiCorporationCRAWiz,Tel:800-261-3111).
» Individualdepositorydataforthesmallbusinesslendinganalysiswasobtainedfromthe2009InstitutionalDisclosureStatementsontheFFIECwebsite.
» BankholdingcompanydatawasobtainedfromtheFDICandFFIECwebsitestoassignaffiliatedbankstoCitydepositories.ThisuseofasecondsourceallowedforamorethoroughassignmentofaffiliatedbankstoCitydepositories;previousyears’datawasthenre-runaccordingly,toenableafairercomparisonacrossyears.
» Othercensus-tract-levelsupplementarydata,suchasimmigrantpopulation,camefromthe2000census,themostrecentinformationavailableatthisgeography.unfortunately,thesedatabecomelessaccurateasthetimesincethelastdecennialcensusincreases.
Depository Analysis
usingtheFFIEC’sNationalInformationCenterdatabaseof2009HMDAreporters,alistofCityDepositoriesandtheiraffiliateswasgenerated.Fromthislist,thelendingperformanceoftheseinstitutionswasexamined.
Geographic Scopes
Censustract,countyandstatecodingwithintheHMDAdatasetwereusedtoidentifyspecificgeographicareas.ThelendinguniverseforPhiladelphiawasisolatedusingitscountycode.ThesuburbananalysiscombinedlendinginBucks,Chester,Delaware,andMontgomeryCounties.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009291.
Appendix 4 – Methodology
Home Lending
Allloantypes(conventional,FederalHousingAdministration,veteransAdministration,FarmServiceAgency/RuralHousingService)wereincludedintheanalysis.Propertieswithmorethanfour-unitsandmanufacturedhousingwereexcluded.Theremainingpropertieswereconsideredtobesingle-familydwellings.
Lendersrecordtheintendedpurposeofeachloan–homepurchase,refinanceorhomeimprovement.Anyanalysiscombiningallthreewasidentifiedas“AllLoans.”Insomeanalysestheloanpurposesweredisaggregated.
Toallowforcomparison,thisanalysiswasdoneusingthemethodologyestablishedinpreviousreport.Anyvariationswerenoted.
Homepurchaseandhomerefinanceloanssecuredbyafirstlienandappliedforduring2009wereincluded.Homeimprovementloanssecuredbyafirstorsecondlienandappliedforduring2009werealsoincluded.unlessotherwisenoted,theanalysisincludedonlyapplicationsbybuyersintendingtoliveintheproperty(owner-occupied)withoneexception,theSection5.0analysisofinvestor(non-occupantowner)lending.
50,114oftheloanapplicationsrecordedinPhiladelphiamettheseinitialcriteriaandwereincludedintheoverallowner-occupiedanalysis,andtherewere4,642intheoverallnon-occupantowneranalysis.However,smallersubsetswereusedforanalysesbyloanpurposeandloanrate.
Since2004,lendershavebeenrequiredtoreportloanratesthatarethreepointsgreaterthantherateonTreasurysecuritiesofcomparablematurity.Loanswithrateinformationwereidentifiedassubprimeloans.Loanswith“NA”intheratefieldwereconsideredtobeprimeloans.ItisimportanttonotethatnotallsubprimeloansarethreepercentagepointsormoreabovetheTreasuryAPR.Andsomeloansmaybeidentifiedassubprimebecauseoffeesoryieldspreadpremiums.
Calculating Denial Rates
Denialrateiscalculatedbydividingtotalapplicationsdeniedbytotalapplicationsreceived.Besidestheloanbeingoriginated,therearesevenotheroutcomesrecordedbybanks,allofwhichbankshavesomecontroloverintermsoffairlytreatingdifferentapplicants(seeTable1).
Table 1 – Actions Taken by Banks, 2009 Results
ACTIONTyPE DESCRIPTION 2009 FREQuENCy
2009 PROPORTION
1 Loanoriginated 26,159 52%2 Applicationapprovedbutnotaccepted 2,508 5%3 Applicationdeniedbyfinancialinstitution 12,440 25%4 Applicationwithdrawnbyapplicant 7,197 14%5 Fileclosedforincompleteness 1,790 4%6 Loanpurchasedbytheinstitution 0 0%7 Preapprovalrequestdeniedbyfinancialinstitution 20 0%8 Preapprovalrequestapprovedbutnotaccepted 0 0%
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009292.
Appendix 4 – Methodology
Borrower Race
Borrowerswereplacedinracialcategoriesbasedoninformationreportedbythelender.Lenderscouldreportuptofiveraceseachfortheapplicantandco-applicant.Inallbutafewrecords,nomorethantworaceswerereportedforthefirstapplicantandonefortheco-applicant.Forthisreason,theapplicantracewasdeterminedbasedonwhatwasreportedinthosefields.Threeraceswereincludedinthisanalysis–white,African-AmericanandAsian.
Inadditiontorace,theethnicityofeachapplicantcouldalsobereported.Fromthisinformation,afourthracialcategorywascreated–Hispanic.TobeplacedintheHispaniccategory,thefirstapplicantwasidentifiedasHispanic.JointapplicationswereincludedifthesecondapplicantwasidentifiedasHispanicorifethnicityinformationwasnotreported.BecauseHispanicapplicantscanbeofanyrace,thoseapplicantswereexcludedfromthethreeracialgroups.
Onemethodologicalchangefrompreviousyearswasmadehere.Iftheracialcategorywasundefined(“NA”orblank)andethnicityindicated“Hispanic,”thentheobservationwascoded“Hispanic.”Inpreviousstudies,theseobservationsweredropped.Tothenfairlycompareacrossyears,previousyears’resultswerere-runusingthischangeinmethodology.
Theresultisfourracialgroupings:non-Hispanicwhite,non-HispanicAfrican-American,non-HispanicAsian,andHispanic.“Other,”whichrepresentsasmallpercentage,wasnotincludedinthisanalysis.
Inkeepingwithpriorreports,onlysingleapplicantloans,orjointloanswherethesecondapplicant’sraceeithermatchedtheraceofthefirstapplicantorwasnotreported,wereincludedinaparticularracialgroup.ThesamemethodwasusedforHispanicapplicants.Fewapplicationswereexcluded.
Thedenominatorincludedonlyrecordswhereracialinformationwasprovidedbythelender.Thus,theracedenominatorwaslessthanthetotalnumberofloans.Ofthe26,159,approvedloansmeetingowner-occupiedanalysiscriteria,21,616includedraceinformation.
Thenumberofnon-Hispanicwhite,non-HispanicAfrican-American,non-HispanicAsian,andany-raceHispanichouseholdsinPhiladelphiawasdownloadedfromtheu.S.CensusBureauSummaryFile4releasetablePCT6.ThesenumberswerethendividedbythetotalnumberofhouseholdsinPhiladelphia.
Borrower Income
BorrowersweredividedintosixgroupsbasedontheirreportedincomerelativetothemedianfamilyincomefortheMetropolitanStatisticalArea(MSA).ThemedianwasdeterminedbytheDepartmentofHousingandurbanDevelopment(HuD).AccordingtotheFFIEC,HuD’s2009medianfamilyincomeforthePhiladelphiaareawas$77,800.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009293.
Appendix 4 – Methodology
IncomegroupsasaPercentofMSAMedianFamilyIncome:
» low-income–lessthan50percentofmedianincome
» moderate-income–between50and80percentofmedianincome
» middle-income–Between80and120percentofmedianincome
» upper-income–120percentormoreofmedianincome
» low-andmoderate-income(LMI)–lessthan80percentofmedianincome
» middle-andupper-income(MuI)–80percentormoreofmedianincome
Borrowerincomewasreportedinthousands.Thebreakstodeterminethegroupingswereroundedtothenearestwholenumber.
Allloansforwhichtheborrower’sincomewas“notavailable”wereexcludedfromthisanalysis.Whencalculatingthepercentofloansineachincomecategory,thedenominatorrepresentedthetotalofonlythoseloanscontainingincomeinformationfortheborrower.Ofthe26,159approvedloansmeetinginitialowner-occupiedanalysiscriteria,24,305includedapplicantincome.
ThenumberofhouseholdsineachincomecategoryinPhiladelphiawasdownloadedfromtheu.S.CensusBureauSummaryfile4releasetablePCT88.Incaseswherecensusincomecategorieswerenotinalignmentwiththeincomeclassificationsdescribedaboveweassumedthathouseholdswereevenlydistributedamongstincomesineachcategoryandallocatedthenumberofhouseholdsaccordingly.
Tract Minority Level
Eachtractwasplacedintooneoftwogroupsbasedonthepercentageofitspopulationthatwasminority.Theminoritycategoryincludesallracesexceptnon-Hispanicwhites.Populationandracedatawerefromthe2000census,themostrecentinformationavailable.
MinorityLevelgroups:
» minority–halformoreofthepopulationwasminority
» non-minority–lessthanhalfwasminority
Tract Income Level
Tractswereplacedintosixgroupsbasedonthetract’smedianfamilyincomerelativetotheMSAmedianfamilyincome.ThesepercentswereprovidedintheHMDAdataset.Theincomegroupingswerethesameasborrowerincomes:low,moderate,middle,upper,LMIandMuI.
Applicationsforwhichcensustractincomepercentagewasnotavailablewereexcludedfromthedenominator.Ofthe26,159approvedloansmeetinginitialowner-occupiedanalysiscriteria,26,145includedcensustractincome.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009294.
Appendix 4 – Methodology
Borrower Gender
Eachapplicant’sgenderwasreportedbythelender.Applicationswereseparatedintothreegroups:male,femaleandjoint.Applicationswitheitherasingleapplicantortwoapplicantsofthesamegenderwerecategorizedaseithermaleorfemale.Applicationswithamaleandfemaleborrowerwereclassifiedasjoint.
Applicationswithoutgenderinformationwerenotincludedinthedenominator.Ofthe26,159approvedloansmeetinginitialowner-occupiedanalysiscriteria,22,219includedapplicantgender.
Thenumberofhouseholdspergendercategorywasdownloadedfromtheu.S.CensusBureauSummaryFile4releasetablesPCT9and27.Thenumberofmalehouseholdsconsistsofthenumberofnon-familyhouseholdswithonlyamalehouseholder(fromPCT9)andthenumberoffamilyhouseholdswithonlyamalehouseholder(FromPCT27).Likewisethenumberoffemalehouseholdsisthesumofnon-familyfemalehouseholdsandfamilyhouseholdswithonlyafemalehouseholder.Jointhouseholdsconsistofthetotalmarriedcouplehouseholds(reportedinPCT27).
Composite Score
Astatisticalanalysiswasdonetomeasuretherelativeperformanceandassignacompositescoretoeachdepository,takingintoaccountseveralfactors.Thirteenfairlendingperformancemeasureswereidentifiedtoevaluatedepositories:
1. African-Americanshareofprimehomepurchaseloansoriginated
2. NumberofprimehomepurchaseloansoriginatedforAfricanAmericans
3. DenialratioofAfricanAmericanstowhitesforprimehomepurchaseloans
4. Hispanicshareofprimehomepurchaseloansoriginated
5. NumberofprimehomepurchaseloansoriginatedforHispanics
6. DenialratioofHispanicstowhitesforprimehomepurchaseloans
7. Low-andmoderate-incomeborrowershareofprimehomepurchaseloansoriginated
8. Numberofprimehomepurchaseloansoriginatedforlow-andmoderate-incomeborrowers
9. Denialratiooflow-andmoderate-incomeapplicantstomiddle-andupper-incomeapplicantsforprimehomepurchaseloans
10. Shareofprimehomepurchaseloansoriginatedinlowandmoderate-incometracts
11. Denialratiooflow-andmoderate-incometractstomiddle-andupper-incometractsforhomepurchaseloans
12. Shareofprimehomepurchaseloansoriginatedinminoritytracts
13. Denialratioofminoritytractstonon-minoritytractsforprimehomepurchaseloans
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009295.
Appendix 4 – Methodology
Thedepositorieswereevaluatedontheirperformanceineachofthese13factorsusingstandardizedscores,alsoknownasz-scores.Foreachfactor,themeanvalueandstandarddeviationfromthemeanwerecalculatedforallPhiladelphialendersthatoriginatedatleast25primehomepurchaseloansin2009.Thez-scoreforeachdepositorywascalculatedbysubtractingthemeanfactorvalueforalllendersfromthefactorvalueforthedepository,anddividingbythestandarddeviationforalllenders:
Z =F
Depository -μ
Where:
FDepositoryisthevalueofthefactor(e.g.,thedenialratioofHispanicstoWhites)
µ isthemeanforalllendersinPhiladelphiain2009forthefactor,and
σisthestandarddeviationofthefactorforalllendersinPhiladelphiain2009.
TheZ-scoreforeachfactorreflectsthenumberofstandarddeviationsadepositorysatawayfromthemeanvalueforalllenders.Ascoreofoneindicatesthedepositorywasonestandarddeviationabovethemean,anegativeonemeansthedepositorywasonestandarddeviationbelowthemean,andascoreofzeroindicatesthedepositoryhadtheaverage(mean)valueforalllendersinPhiladelphia.
Thesescoreswerecombinedtocreateacompositescorereflectingtheoverallfairlendingperformanceofeachdepository.Thefirstninefactorswereeachweightedas10percentofthescoreforatotalof90percent.Thefinalfourfactorswereweightedat2.5percenteach,totalingtheremaining10percent.
ThecompositescorereflectsthemagnitudeofdeviationofeachdepositoryfromtheaveragefairlendingperformanceoflendersintheCity.Apositivescoremeansthatadepositoryhadabove-averagefairlendingpractices.Ascoreclosertozeroindicatesthedepositoryhadaveragefairlendingpractices.Anegativescoremeansthedepositoryhadbelow-averagefairlendingpractices.Anoverallrankingwasgiventoeachdepositorybasedontheircombinedscore.Thedepositorywiththehighestscorewasrankedfirst.
Performance Rankings
Separatefromthecompositescore,thedepositorieswererankedcomparedtooneanotherbasedonperformancein15categories,whichwereestablishedinprioryearsofthisreport.Theserankingswerecalculatedforallloansandforeachhomeloanpurpose(purchase,refinanceandimprovement)individually.Onlyprime,single-family,owner-occupiedloanswereincluded.ThecollectiveperformanceoftheCityDepositories,aswellasallCitylenders,wasalsolisted.
σ
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009296.
Appendix 4 – Methodology
Performancecategoriesstudied:
1. PercentofLoanstoAfricanAmericans–PercentageofloansoriginatedbythedepositorytoAfrican-Americanborrowers.
2. PercentofLoanstoHispanic–PercentageofloansoriginatedbythedepositorytoHispanicborrowers.
3. PercentofLoanstoAsians–PercentageofloansoriginatedbythedepositorytoAsianborrowers.
4. PercentofLoansinMinorityTracts–Percentageofloansoriginatedbythedepositoryintractswhereatleasthalfofpopulationwasminority.
5. PercentofLoanstoLMIBorrowers–Percentageofloansoriginatedbythedepositorytoborrowerswithanincomeoflessthan80percentoftheMSAmedianfamilyincome.
6. PercentofLoansinLMITracts–Percentageofloansoriginatedbythedepositoryintractswherethemedianfamilyincomewaslessthan80percentoftheMSAmedianfamilyincome.
7. PercentofLoanstoFemales–Percentageofloansoriginatedbythedepositorytofemaleborrowers.
8. African-American-to-WhiteDenialRatio–ThepercentageofAfrican-Americanloanapplicantsdenieddividedbythepercentageofwhiteapplicantsdenied.AratiogreaterthanoneindicatesthatAfricanAmericansweredeniedmorefrequentlythanwhites.
9. Hispanic-to-WhiteDenialRatio–ThepercentageofHispanicapplicantsdenieddividedbythepercentageofwhiteapplicantsdenied.AratiogreaterthanoneindicatesthatHispanicsweredeniedmorefrequentlythanwhites.
10. Asian-to-WhiteDenialRatio–ThepercentageofAsianapplicantsdenieddividedbythepercentageofwhiteapplicantsdenied.AratiogreaterthanoneindicatesthatAsiansweredeniedmorefrequentlythanwhites.Conversely,aratiooflessthanonemeanswhitesweredeniedmoreoften.
11. MinorityTract-to-Non-minorityTractDenialRatio–Thepercentageofapplicationsinminoritytracts(populationatleasthalfminority)denieddividedbythepercentageofapplicationsinnon-minoritytractsdenied.Aratiogreaterthanoneindicatesthatapplicationsinminoritytractsweredeniedmorefrequentlythanthosethatwerenot.
12. African-American-to-WhiteMarketShareRatio–Thedepository’sshareofallloansintheCitytoAfricanAmericansdividedbyitsshareofallloansintheCitytowhites.AratioofgreaterthanonemeansthatthedepositoryhasagreatershareoftheCity’sAfrican-Americanloanmarketthanofthewhiteone,whichcanindicatethedepositorywasmakingagreaterefforttolendtoAfricanAmericans.
13. MinorityTract-to-Non-MinorityTractMarketShareRatio–Thedepository’sshareofallloansintheCityinminoritytractsdividedbyitsshareofallloansintheCityinnon-minorityones.AratioofgreaterthanonemeansthatthedepositoryhasagreatershareoftheCity’sminoritytractloanmarketthanofthenon-minorityone,whichcanindicatethedepositorywasmakingagreaterefforttolendinminoritytracts.
Lending Practices of Authorized Depositories for the City of Philadelphia Calendar Year 2009297.
Appendix 4 – Methodology
14. LMIBorrower-to-MuIBorrowerMarketShareRatio–Thedepository’sshareofallloansintheCitytoLMIborrowersdividedbyitsshareofallloansintheCitytoMuIborrowers.AratioofgreaterthanonemeansthatthedepositoryhasagreatershareoftheCity’sLMIborrowerloanmarketthanoftheMuIborrowerone,whichcanindicatethedepositorywasmakingagreaterefforttolendtoLMIborrowers.
15. LMITract-to-MuITractMarketShareRatio–Thedepository’sshareofallloansintheCityinLMItractsdividedbyitsshareofallloansintheCityinMuIones.AratioofgreaterthanonemeansthatthedepositoryhasagreatershareoftheCity’sLMItractloanmarketthanoftheMuIone,whichcanindicatethedepositorywasmakingagreaterefforttolendinLMItracts.
Small Business Lending
usingdatafromtheFFIECwebsite,afilewascreatedshowingthenumberofloanstosmallbusinessesandloanstobusinesseswithrevenuesoflessthan$1millionbycensustract,andtheincomestatusofeachtract,definedasfollows:
IncomegroupsasaPercentofMSAMedianFamilyIncome:
» low-income–lessthan50%ofmedianincome
» moderate-income–between50percentand80percentofmedianincome
» middle-income–between80percentand120percentofmedianincome
» upper-income–120percentormoreofmedianincome
ThedefinitionofasmallbusinesswasnotprovidedontheFFIECwebsite.However,itwasclearthatthebusinesseswithrevenuesoflessthan$1millioncomposedasubsetofallsmallbusinesses.
ThecensustractsinthisfilewerethenmatchedwithtractsfromaggregateddatafilesfromtheCensusBureautoaddaminoritystatusvariable.Minoritystatuswasdefinedasfollows:
» minority–halformoreofthepopulationwasminority
» non-minority–lessthanhalfofthepopulationwasminority
Thenumberofsmallbusinessesandsmallbusinesseswithlessthan$1millioninrevenueineachtractwasjoinedwiththeaggregatesmallbusinesslendingdatausingcensustractcodes.
Descriptivestatistics(includingfrequencydistributions,crosstabulations,andsums)wereruninSPSStoreportthefindingsforPhiladelphiainrelationtoitssuburbancountiesandsmallbusinesslendinginthetargetedneighborhoods.
Thesmallbusinesslendingrankingwasrestrictedtoonly11ofthedepositories,asunitedBankandAdvanceBankdidnotreportCRAdatain2009.Themethodologyforrankingtheinstitutionswasspecifiedinthatsectionofthereport.