Housing market shift: Foreclosures are creeping back up again
Want more housing market stories from Lance Lambert's ResiClub in your inbox? Subscribe to the ResiClub newsletter.
This week, the Federal Reserve Bank of New York published its quarterly Household Debt and Credit Report. It shows that while still low, distress is creeping back into the housing market.
Here's how the U.S. housing foreclosures in Q1 of 2025 compare to previous years:
Q1 2014: 144,500
Q1 2015: 111,820
Q1 2016: 96,680
Q1 2017: 90,460
Q1 2018: 76,360
Q1 2019: 71,040
Q1 2020: 74,720
Q1 2021: 11,400
Q1 2022: 24,220
Q1 2023: 35,640
Q1 2024: 44,180
Q1 2025: 61,660
When COVID-19 lockdowns began, the federal government implemented a nationwide foreclosure moratorium to protect homeowners from the economic fallout. These protections—including forbearance programs—were extended multiple times. At the same time, a historic surge in housing demand pushed home prices to new highs during the pandemic housing boom, boosting homeowner equity and keeping foreclosure activity unusually low.
But in recent quarters, foreclosures have steadily returned, inching closer to pre-pandemic 2019 levels. That foreclosure rebound picked up pace in Q1 2025, following the expiration of the moratorium on foreclosures of home loans backed by the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs.
The question heading forward: Will housing foreclosures continue to rise through the rest of 2025 and in 2026? Let's take a closer look at the leading indicators.
Before U.S. housing foreclosures rise, delinquencies of 90-plus days typically increase. While credit card and auto delinquencies of 90 days or more have surged in recent quarters, delinquencies of 90-plus days on household mortgages remain well below pre-pandemic 2019 levels.
Here's how the recent share of household mortgage balances that are 90-plus days delinquent compares to previous years:
Q1 2014: 3.72%
Q1 2015: 2.95%
Q1 2016: 2.08%
Q1 2017: 1.67%
Q1 2018: 1.22%
Q1 2019: 1.00%
Q1 2020: 1.06%
Q1 2021: 0.59%
Q1 2022: 0.47%
Q1 2023: 0.44%
Q1 2024: 0.60%
Q1 2025: 0.86%
On the delinquency front, the most noticeable development this quarter is that student loan delinquencies surged to a five-year high in early 2025. While the jump was expected after years of artificially low student loan delinquency rates, Fed researchers warned of serious consequences for behind student-loan borrowers, including damaged credit and reduced access to mortgages and auto loans.
According to the New York Fed, superprime U.S. borrowers—those with credit scores above 760—who carry unpaid student loan balances are expected to see their credit scores drop by an average of 171 points this spring. That's because student loan delinquencies, which hadn't been reported to credit bureaus since the start of the pandemic, are now being reported again. This sudden credit hit could temporarily push some borrowers out of the housing market in 2025 and 2026.
The Treasury has also resumed collection tactics on student loans, including wage garnishment and tax refund seizures, raising questions about potential spillover into other areas of consumer credit.
And before 90-plus day delinquencies typically increase, 30-plus day delinquencies usually rise first. Indeed, 30-plus day mortgage delinquencies have returned to pre-pandemic 2019 levels.
Here's how the portion of household mortgages transitioning into 30-plus days delinquent compares to historic data.
Q1 2014: 4.92%
Q1 2015: 4.05%
Q1 2016: 3.70%
Q1 2017: 3.51%
Q1 2018: 3.38%
Q1 2019: 3.50%
Q1 2020: 3.48%
Q1 2021: 1.59%
Q1 2022: 1.66%
Q1 2023: 2.43%
Q1 2024: 3.24%
Q1 2025: 3.71%
Big picture: While U.S. housing foreclosures remain low and below pre-pandemic 2019 levels, the 30-plus days delinquency data suggests that foreclosures could gradually near pre-pandemic 2019 by the end of 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Bloomberg
15 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
US Inflation to Tick Higher as Tariffs Reach Consumers
By and Craig Stirling Save Subscribe to Economics Daily for the latest news and analysis. US consumers probably saw slightly faster inflation in May, notably for merchandise, as companies gradually pass along higher import duties.
Travel Weekly
24 minutes ago
- Travel Weekly
Are you booking or designing travel?
Richard Turen Looking back, I know that I would never have opened up a travel consultancy had I not worked the supplier side for quite a while. And I certainly would not dare write about our industry had I not walked both sides of the street. They are very different, even though they might be in the same neighborhood. I worked for one of the largest cruise lines, starting out on the West Coast. I visited travel agencies four days a week. I was a director of sales, and my job was to drum up business. But my reality was that our ships were starring in a little TV series called "The Love Boat" then, and they were sold out much of the time. I might have been a lousy salesperson, but no one knew it, and I was promoted to be vice president of the East Coast and the Midwest. Now I was responsible for 26 states; lots of agencies to visit. So starting on the West Coast and then taking on the East Coast and the Midwest, I was in and out of more agencies than I could count. During every visit, I was looking forward to discovering dozens of new business models. It would all be so stimulating. But it usually wasn't! There were precious few unique business models, and innovation was rare. Everything was sold on some sort of airline-owned CRM system. Airline sales made up just over 70% of a typical agency's sales. It was always the same scene. Two chairs in front of a desk with the client facing the back of the computer. And so it was for about four decades. Technology improved, and we noticed our clients searching online instead of seeking out a storefront. We were no longer booking robots; that could be done online. We started evolving into advisors. ASTA, an organization I feel has always had the collective backs of the membership it represents, caught on and went so far as to change its organization's name, with that last "A" now standing for "advisors" rather than "agents." We are now advisors -- sort of important to the families we serve. I see us as financial advisors, except our role is less about showing our clients how to grow their money and more about advising them on ways to dispense with some of it. Which leads me to an April article by Julie Bogen in the Washington Post. She explores the growth of the trend for agents to describe themselves as online travel "designers" who concentrate on creating truly personalized itineraries, travel troubleshooting and providing luxury perks. The article explains how contemporary consumers want to hire a "designer" instead of an "agent." The concept of a travel "agent" is now dated. Several successful designers are profiled in the piece, including one who created an itinerary with perks she felt would meet the needs of four prominent influencers. Sure enough, they liked the presentation, and it started being circulated on Instagram. Of course, a true travel designer has to be an FIT specialist, and some of you will surely feel that FITs are unusually time-consuming and less profitable than booking brochure programs. A travel office where every journey is custom-designed to meet the guest's profile may be fashionable, trendy, hip and always personalized, but I can't help but wonder what a travel design firm would need to charge guests in order to be profitable. I actually like the "designer" designation. I also like "travel architect" and "dream creator." It is possible that, at our best, we listen and then design what is best suited for the client instead of trying to sell them a program without taking into account their unique profile. But will we have to start spending more on our business attire if we start describing ourselves as designers? Will we need to be a bit more flamboyant? If we "flamboyantize" our industry in the months to come, I'm just not sure that my blue blazer will survive.
Wall Street Journal
31 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Tesla, Cleveland-Cliffs, Dollar General and More Stocks That Defined the Week
U.S. steelmakers rallied on President Trump's recent move to double steel and aluminum tariffs to 50%. Cleveland-Cliffs shares surged 23% on Monday, while Steel Dynamics and Nucor shares each gained 10%. Meantime, bargain chains are bucking the trend of falling retail demand, thanks to an influx of higher-income customers looking for deals. Dollar General shares soared 16% Tuesday. And as a fierce feud between President Trump and Elon Musk ramped up on Thursday. Tesla shares fell 14% Thursday, losing about $152.4 billion in market value, the company's biggest one-day slide on record. Read more about this week's biggest stock moves and the news that drove them:
