Pittsburgh Mortgage Products Survey

The Mortgage Products Survey is an email-based questionnaire designed to capture clear, comparable information about the home loan products offered by banks in our region. It includes a mix of multiple-choice and short-answer questions covering each product’s basic features and eligibility requirements, along with associated fees and insurance requirements.

This survey is a rich and valuable source of information because it compiles product details that are often scattered across marketing materials, difficult to compare across institutions, or not publicly presented in a consistent way. By collecting the same set of information points for many products, the survey helps surface patterns in how mortgage products are structured, who they are designed to serve, and what requirements may shape access for potential homebuyers.

We emailed the survey to 26 banks representing a mix of large, intermediate, and small institutions. We received responses from 15 banks: 10 large banks and 5 small or intermediate small banks. Banks were invited to report on as many mortgage products as they wished; in total, we received valid responses for 23 mortgage products. Of these, 15 products are from large banks. Open-ended responses varied across banks, so we cleaned and standardized the raw data, re-coding free-text answers into consistent categories to support objective, comparable analysis. To enable flexible analysis in Power BI, we organized the dataset into separate tables for bank-level information, product-level information (one row per mortgage product), and supporting bridge tables for multi-select fields such as downpayment assistance partners. These tables were linked using unique bank and product identifiers to create a relational data model that supports reliable aggregation, filtering, and cross-tabulation across dashboards. We retained “N/A” and “varies” as distinct response categories rather than imputing values, and we reviewed entries for basic consistency (e.g., fee amounts and percentage fields), flagging ambiguous responses where needed. Finally, because the survey is based on self-reported information and banks could choose which products to submit, the results should be interpreted as a structured snapshot of reported offerings rather than an exhaustive inventory of all products in the market.

We analyzed the survey results in aggregate and present the key findings in the dashboards that follow. In addition, at the end, we provide selected product-level information in a raw, bank-by-bank format so prospective homebuyers can more easily compare mortgage options across institutions.

1: Residential and Income Eligibility
This dashboard summarizes what kinds of homes the surveyed mortgage products can be used for and whether income is part of eligibility. Use the Bank Size filter to compare requirements for large banks versus small/intermediate banks.

Residential unit types (property size)

  • 1-unit single-family: a typical detached/attached single-family home with one housing unit.

  • 1–2 unit single-family: a single-family home that may include a second unit (for example, a duplex or a home with an accessory unit, depending on how the survey defined it).

  • 1–4 unit single-family: small multi-unit residential properties (duplex, triplex, fourplex).

In this sample, most products are eligible for 1–4 unit single-family properties (19 products; ~83%), while a small number are limited to 1-unit or 1–2 unit homes.

Additional residence-based eligibility
Some products also specify extra conditions about the property, such as:

  • Owner-occupied: the borrower must live in the home (not an investment property).

  • Site-built: traditionally constructed homes (as opposed to manufactured housing).

  • Manufactured / manufactured mobile homes: homes built in a factory and placed on-site (sometimes with additional underwriting rules).

  • N/A: no additional residence condition specified.

Income eligibility criteria
The top charts show whether products use:

  • Applicant income as an eligibility rule (about half do: 11 yes vs 12 no), and

  • Tract (neighborhood) income (fewer do: 9 yes vs 14 no).

Overall, the report highlights that most products allow a broad range of small residential property types, while income-based eligibility varies by product, and tract-income targeting is less common than applicant-income requirements.

2 :Maximum Eligible Debt-to-Income Ratios (DTI) for Surveyed Mortgage Products

This dashboard summarizes the maximum debt-to-income (DTI) limits reported for surveyed mortgage products and shows how those limits vary across products. DTI is a common underwriting guideline that compares a borrower’s monthly debt payments to monthly income:

  • Front-end DTI: housing costs only (typically mortgage payment, taxes, insurance, and any HOA) as a share of income.

  • Back-end DTI: housing costs plus other debts (e.g., car loans, credit cards, student loans).

Use the Bank Size filter to compare patterns between large banks and small/intermediate banks.

What the report shows

How banks reported DTI limits

  • For front-end DTI, just over half of products provide a numeric maximum, while the rest are reported as N/A, no stated cap, or dependent on AUS approval (automated underwriting outcomes rather than a fixed number).

  • For back-end DTI, most products report a numeric maximum, with a smaller number listed as N/A or dependent on AUS approval.

Distribution of numeric DTI limits

  • Front-end numeric limits cluster most often in the upper 20s to mid-30s, with a smaller number of products allowing higher front-end ratios (reaching into the 40–45% range).

  • Back-end numeric limits cluster heavily around the low 40s, with another noticeable group allowing back-end ratios near the upper 40s (around 48–50%).

Key takeaways

  • Back-end limits are more consistently specified than front-end limits, which are more often described in non-numeric ways (no cap/AUS-driven/unclear).

  • A meaningful share of products allow higher back-end DTI ceilings, suggesting that some products may be designed to accommodate borrowers with larger non-housing debt burdens—though actual approvals may still depend on compensating factors (credit score, reserves, etc.).

  • Because some products are N/A or AUS-based, the histograms reflect only the subset with numeric entries; a “missing/non-numeric” share exists alongside the numeric distribution.

3: Required Down Payment and Down Payment Assistance

This dashboard summarizes two related parts of mortgage affordability: (1) the minimum down payment required for surveyed mortgage products, and (2) the down payment assistance (DPA) options that banks report using or partnering with. Use the Bank Size filter to compare large banks versus small/intermediate banks.

What the report shows

Whether banks offer their own down payment assistance
The pie chart shows how often survey responses indicate that a bank has its own internal DPA program, versus relying on external assistance programs or not listing assistance. In this dataset, a majority of responses indicate yes, while the remainder are split between no and N/A/not reported.

Distribution of required down payment (%)
The histogram shows how many mortgage products fall into different required down payment levels. Most products cluster around low down payment requirements, with a smaller number requiring higher down payments. This view helps identify how common low-down-payment products are among the surveyed set.

Which DPA partners are most commonly used
The bar chart shows the share of surveyed mortgage products that list each DPA partner. Because a single mortgage product can list multiple partners, the percentages reflect “% of products that mention this partner,” so values do not need to sum to 100%.

In this sample, the most frequently listed partners include:

  • Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) (~61% of products)

  • Federal Home Loan Bank (~57%)

  • Allegheny County (~39%)

  • NeighborWorks (~30%)

  • Pennsylvania Housing Finance Agency (PHFA) (~22%)

A long tail of additional partners appears less frequently (single-digit shares), including various local housing organizations and program categories such as “others” or “programs not listed.”

Key takeaways

  • The required down payment distribution suggests many products aim to be accessible with relatively low upfront cash, although a few products still require higher down payments.

  • DPA access appears to be strongly shaped by external partnerships, with URA, FHLB, and county-level programs showing up most often across products.

  • The presence of “others/programs not listed” indicates DPA availability can be highly local and program-specific, and may not be consistently named across respondents—something to keep in mind when comparing products.

4: Origination Charges and Insurance Requirements

This dashboard summarizes two important cost drivers for borrowers across surveyed mortgage products: (1) whether private mortgage insurance (PMI) is required and (2) the level and consistency of reported origination charges. Use the Bank Size filter to compare patterns between large banks and small/intermediate banks.

What the report shows

Private mortgage insurance (PMI) requirements
The pie chart shows whether products require PMI. In this sample, products are split fairly evenly: 12 of 23 products (~52%) report requiring PMI, while 11 of 23 (~48%) do not. This is a useful indicator of potential monthly cost differences, especially for borrowers with lower down payments.

How origination charges were reported
The “Entries for origination charges” pie chart summarizes whether banks provided:

  • a numeric origination charge (most common),

  • N/A (not provided), or

  • varies (depends on borrower, product features, or other conditions).

A majority of products have a specific numeric value reported, but a non-trivial share is either not reported or described as variable—meaning some cost information may not be fully comparable across products.

Distribution of numeric origination charges
The histogram displays the distribution of origination charges for products with numeric entries. It shows that:

  • some products report $0 origination charges,

  • others cluster in higher fee bins (including around and above the $1,000 range).

Key takeaways

  • PMI is required for about half of surveyed products, suggesting borrowers’ monthly costs may differ substantially depending on product structure and down payment levels.

  • Origination charges are often reported as a specific dollar amount, but “varies” and “N/A” responses highlight that fees may be conditional or not consistently disclosed.

  • Seeing products with $0 origination charges alongside products with higher fees underscores the value of side-by-side comparison—origination costs can materially affect upfront affordability even when interest rates are similar.

5: Overview of Other Mortgage Product Practices by Bank

This dashboard summarizes bank-level practices and offerings that shape how accessible mortgage products are and how borrowers interact with the application process. Unlike the product-specific dashboards, this page focuses on bank-wide features reported by survey respondents. Use the Bank Size filter to compare patterns among large banks versus small/intermediate banks.

What the report shows

Online application availability
Most responding banks report that they use an online application to process mortgage products (11 of 15; ~73%). A smaller share report not using online applications (3 banks; 20%), and one bank reports that an online application process is currently in development (~7%). This gives a sense of how widely digital access is built into banks’ mortgage workflows.

VA and FHA loan origination
The dashboard also shows whether banks originate Veterans Affairs (VA) and Federal Housing Administration (FHA) loans—products that often support borrowers through lower down payments and more flexible credit criteria.

  • For both VA and FHA, about two-thirds of banks (10 of 15; ~67%) report originating these loans directly.

  • About one-quarter (4 of 15; ~27%) report not originating them.

  • A small number indicate offering them through a third party (~7%).

Dedicated CRA/LMI mortgage staff
Finally, the chart on CRA/LMI staffing shows whether banks have a CRA (Community Reinvestment Act) or LMI (Low- and Moderate-Income) mortgage loan originator. A majority of responding banks report having a dedicated CRA/LMI mortgage originator (9 of 15; 60%), while 40% do not. This can be an important indicator of whether borrowers seeking specialized or affordability-oriented products have a clear point of contact.

Key takeaways

Overall, the survey suggests that many banks report digital application capabilities and participation in VA/FHA lending, while dedicated CRA/LMI staffing is present at a majority—but not all—institutions. Together, these factors provide context for how mortgage products are delivered and supported, beyond the eligibility terms of individual products.

Definitions

  • Mortgage product: A distinct loan offering with its own eligibility rules, pricing, and requirements.

  • Down payment (%): Borrower’s upfront cash contribution as a share of the purchase price.

  • Down payment assistance (DPA): Grants/loans/programs that help cover down payment and/or closing costs.

  • Front-end DTI: Housing payment (PITI + HOA, if applicable) ÷ gross monthly income.

  • Back-end DTI: Housing payment + other monthly debts ÷ gross monthly income.

  • PMI: Private mortgage insurance, typically required when down payment is below 20% on conventional loans.

  • Origination charges: Lender fees charged to originate/process the loan (excludes many third-party closing costs).

  • LMI (Low- and Moderate-Income): Households or neighborhoods with incomes below an established threshold (often tied to Area Median Income). In this report, “LMI” generally refers to borrowers and/or census tracts that meet those income criteria.

  • CRA (Community Reinvestment Act): A U.S. federal law that encourages banks to help meet the credit needs of the communities where they operate, including LMI neighborhoods, consistent with safe and sound banking practices.

  • Assessment area: The geographic area(s) a bank designates for CRA evaluation—typically places where it has branches, deposit-taking ATMs, and/or does substantial lending. CRA performance is assessed primarily within these areas.