FHA Borrowers at Greater Risk: What Lenders and Investors Should Know After 2025 Foreclosure Rise

FHA Borrowers at Greater Risk: Why fixed-income investors and lenders must act now

Hook: If your portfolio includes mortgage credit — whether directly through non‑agency RMBS, servicer advances, bank balance sheets, or indirectly via agency MBS sensitivity — the 2025 spike in foreclosures changed the risk calculus. ATTOM’s Year‑End 2025 report shows foreclosure filings rose 14% to 367,460 properties, and that uptick is concentrated where FHA paper is thickest: lower‑income borrowers, single‑family starter homes and thinly capitalized servicers. For lenders and fixed‑income investors, that means a higher probability of credit stress, more volatile cash flows, and a need to recalibrate hedges and weights now rather than later.

Quick takeaway

• FHA borrowers are structurally more exposed because of higher LTVs, lower credit scores and geographic concentration in stressed markets.
• FHA‑backed MBS (Ginnie Mae) carry different risks — direct credit loss to investors is limited by the government guarantee, but duration, prepayment and operational risk rise and fiscal exposure to the Mutual Mortgage Insurance (MMI) fund increases.
• Actionable investor moves: re‑stress RMBS books, tilt away from junior credit, buy tailored credit protection where available, shorten duration and increase liquidity buffers.

What happened in 2025 — the data that matters

ATTOM’s 2025 dataset is the clearest call‑to‑action: foreclosure filings increased 14% year‑over‑year to 367,460 properties, with December 2025 showing a sharp month‑on‑month and year‑on‑year pick up. ATTOM noted the rise reflects a housing market "normalization" after historically low distress in recent years, but the important nuance for investors is concentration and composition.

“Foreclosure activity increased in 2025, reflecting a continued normalization of the housing market following several years of historically low levels,” said Rob Barber, CEO at ATTOM.

Simultaneously, bank earnings across large lenders weakened in late 2025 and early 2026 amid consumer stress in lower income cohorts — a classic sign of a K‑shaped recovery where the wealthy continue to perform but the rest face cash‑flow pressure. That macro backdrop compounds mortgage credit risks concentrated in FHA origination channels.

Why FHA borrowers are more exposed — the structural drivers

Understanding the exposure starts with borrower profile and program design.

1) Borrower economics and underwriting

• Higher LTVs and thinner equity: FHA loans are designed to expand access with low down payments. That leaves borrowers with smaller equity cushions, increasing loss severity when house prices stall or dip.
• Lower credit scores and higher DTI: FHA originations disproportionately include borrowers with scores and debt ratios that are more sensitive to unemployment and wage stress.
• Concentration in first‑time buyer cohorts: These households have less savings to absorb shocks like medical bills or job loss.

2) Geographic concentration and housing fundamentals

FHA market share is not uniform. FHA production is higher in Sunbelt and Rust Belt communities with elevated housing turnover and where starter‑home inventories are larger. When housing demand cools, those markets experience outsized price weakness — increasing both default frequency and loss severity.

3) Servicer and operational risk

FHA foreclosures and claims require active servicer workflows and HUD engagement. Smaller servicers with thin liquidity can slow modifications, extend REO timelines, and create operational backlogs that escalate investor cash‑flow uncertainty. Those effects hit non‑agency RMBS investors and banks more than holders of agency guaranteed coupons.

How FHA trouble maps to MBS and mortgage credit risk

Not all MBS investors are affected the same way. It’s critical to separate instrument types and channels.

Ginnie Mae (FHA‑backed) securities — guaranteed but not immune

Key fact: Ginnie Mae securities carry a federal guarantee of timely principal and interest on the pass‑through. That eliminates direct credit default risk for investors in coupon payments. But that guarantee does not make them immune to market‑pricing risk:

• Duration and prepayment risk: rising distress can alter prepayment patterns and extension risk — impacting valuation.
• Operational and cash‑flow timing risk: foreclosure processing, servicer advances and REO timelines can cause temporal dislocations that affect secondary market liquidity and yields.
• Fiscal and political risk: large increases in FHA claims drain the MMI fund and can lead to policy responses (premium adjustments, capital calls) that alter forward issuance and guarantee parameters — a subtle but real risk for long‑dated players.

Non‑agency RMBS, credit tranches and bank portfolios — direct credit exposure

These investors are first in line to feel higher defaults and loss severity. Non‑agency RMBS and mezzanine tranches have limited or no government backstop. An FHA borrower default in these pools means real principal loss after recovery and insurance offsets — and recovery rates can fall when house prices are weak.

Quantifying the potential hit: scenario analysis

Precision is impossible without portfolio‑level data, but scenario analysis gives disciplined bounds for decision‑making. Below are transparent, conservative scenarios tied to observable foreclosure moves and plausible portfolio sensitivities.

Common assumptions

• ATTOM baseline foreclosure filings rose from 0.23% of housing stock in 2024 to 0.26% in 2025.
• FHA borrowers have an elevated foreclosure incidence: for scenario purposes assume FHA pools see 25%–75% larger increases relative to aggregate filings due to borrower profile.
• Loss severity (net of MI recoveries and REO) conservatively ranges 25%–40% of unpaid principal for FHA loans in stressed markets, after insurance claims and repossession costs.
• Duration of a typical MBS holding assumed 3–6 years for translating spread moves to P&L.

Scenarios (illustrative)

1. Low‑stress — FHA foreclosure incidence rises 10% above aggregate. Incremental expected loss: ~5–10 bps of pool balance. Result: modest spread widening (5–15 bps) in non‑agency credit tranches; minimal effect on Ginnie Mae coupons beyond liquidity premium.
2. Medium‑stress — FHA foreclosure incidence rises 40% above aggregate. Incremental expected loss: ~25–40 bps. Result: junior tranche markdowns 1–4% and senior spreads widen 15–45 bps depending on structural credit support.
3. High‑stress — sustained labor market deterioration in FHA‑dense counties, conversion of forbearance cohorts to claims. Incremental expected loss: 75–150 bps across FHA pools. Result: deep re‑pricing in mezzanine and equity tranches, potential capital hits to thrift/bank holders and pressure on servicer liquidity requiring market intervention or fiscal backstops.

These ranges are illustrative but useful: even a 25–40 bps rise in expected loss can translate into double‑digit mark‑to‑market hits on strained mezzanine tranches and force troubled holders to sell, amplifying spread moves.

Practical hedging and portfolio reweighting tactics

Fixed‑income investors should combine immediate tactical hedges with medium‑term portfolio tilts. Below are prioritized, actionable steps.

Immediate triage (0–3 months)

• Run concentrated stress tests: Reprice holdings under the three scenarios above; map exposures by loan vintage, FICO, LTV, MI coverage and geography. Prioritize positions with high concentration in FHA collateral.
• Increase liquidity buffers: Move cash buffers higher, especially for funds with gating or redemption risk. Trim positions that require active repo financing if MBS basis risk spikes.
• Hedge interest‑rate and basis risk: Use Treasury futures, interest‑rate swaps and agency MBS futures to manage duration and hedge agency‑Treasury basis moves that often accompany mortgage stress.
• Buy direct credit protection where available: For non‑agency positions, buy CDS or index protection (CMBX/other securitized credit indices) if liquid and cost‑effective.

Portfolio reweighting (3–12 months)

• Reduce exposure to junior RMBS tranches: Shift from mezzanine/equity slices to senior tranches or other securitized credit with better structural protection.
• Favor seasoned agency collateral: Seasoned pools typically have lower default risk and more predictable prepayment profiles.
• Consider Ginnie Mae for credit‑averse mandates: While not free of market risk, Ginnie Mae passthroughs provide principal/interest guarantees that non‑agency cannot match — useful for investors prioritizing credit safety over yield.
• Geographic diversification: Reweight away from FHA‑heavy counties and states where jobless claims and house price momentum are deteriorating.
• Revisit MSR exposure: Mortgage servicing rights are highly leveraged to credit and prepayment. Trim long MSR positions or hedge by buying credit protection or shorting corresponding non‑agency RMBS where possible.

Advanced hedges and yield enhancement (12+ months)

• Structured overlays: Use CLO‑style warehousing and reinvestment strategies to pick up spread while maintaining seniority.
• Option strategies: Buy payer swaptions or put options on agency MBS futures to protect against extension and spread widening.
• Short non‑agency indices tactically: When valuations diverge, short RMBS baskets or use securitized CDS to express conviction.

What lenders should do now

• Tighten underwriting overlays: Revisit DTI, reserves and documentation standards for FHA production, especially in risk corridors.
• Scale loss‑mitigation programs: Prioritize early interventions (modifications, short sales) to reduce foreclosure timelines and minimize REO costs.
• Shore up servicer liquidity: Increase lines or capital allocations to cover advances and REO holding costs during cycles of elevated foreclosure activity.
• Enhance geographic monitoring: Use county‑level data (ATTOM, local MLS, bankruptcy filings) to proactively manage portfolios and pricing.

Monitoring checklist: indicators to watch in 2026

• ATTOM and HUD delinquency & foreclosure indices: monthly trends and county‑level breakdowns.
• MMI fund metrics: claim rates, loss ratios and any HUD communications on premium adjustments.
• Servicer advance levels and special servicing counts: early warning signs of operational stress.
• Local labor markets and eviction/forbearance expiry cliffs: unemployment and lease delinquency trends predict mortgage stress.
• Spread moves in non‑agency RMBS and securitized credit indices: widening indicates repricing of credit risk.

Case study: How a mid‑sized fund limited losses in late 2025

Experience matters. One mid‑sized credit fund that held significant non‑agency exposure repositioned in Q4 2025 after running county‑level stress tests. They:

1. Reduced junior tranche exposure by 40% and redeployed into seasoned agency pools;
2. Hedged remaining mezzanine exposure with a CMBX protection purchase (where available) and shorted a concentrated RMBS basket;
3. Increased weekly monitoring of servicer advance filings and local foreclosure timelines.

Result: the fund avoided a forced sale when spreads widened by 80–120 bps on some non‑agency paper and preserved liquidity to buy discounted assets in early 2026.

Final analysis: what this means for markets in 2026

The foreclosure uptick in 2025 is a signal, not an immediate crisis. But for investors and lenders exposed to mortgage credit, it raises three structural implications for 2026:

• Higher idiosyncratic volatility: FHA concentrations will create winners and losers at a county level — active allocation and monitoring will beat passive blanket exposure.
• Policy and fiscal risk: worsening FHA claims could invite program changes that alter issuance flows and guarantee economics — watch HUD/HHS communications.
• Opportunity for disciplined buyers: dislocations create pick‑up opportunities in senior, well‑underwritten securitized credit if investors insist on structural protection and tighten underwriting on new exposure.

Actionable checklist for portfolio managers (next 30 days)

• Run concentrated stress tests on any holdings with FHA collateral exposure.
• Increase cash and reduce levered positions dependent on repo financing.
• Buy liquid interest‑rate hedges (Treasuries, swaps) to manage duration and basis risk.
• Acquire direct securitized credit protection where liquidity permits (CMBX/RMBS CDS).
• Rebalance toward senior, seasoned and agency‑guaranteed collateral if mandates permit.

Conclusion — concise takeaways

The 2025 foreclosure rise is small in aggregate but asymmetrically concentrated where FHA borrowers live. For lenders and fixed‑income investors, the prudent path in 2026 is defensive specificity: run granular stress tests, reduce concentration in FHA‑heavy credit slices, shore up liquidity and use available credit and rate hedges to protect portfolios. Those actions convert the risk indicated by ATTOM’s data into an advantage — positioning to buy dislocated, higher‑quality assets when repricing stabilizes.

Ready to act? If you manage mortgage credit or agency allocations, begin with a county‑level stress run and a three‑scenario P&L analysis. WorldEconomy.Live provides bespoke dashboards and weekly FHA/foreclosure monitoring for institutional investors — contact our research desk for a tailored stress package and tradeable hedge ideas aligned to your mandate.

Related Reading

• Prebiotic Sodas and Sandwiches: Pairings That Aid Digestion (and Sales)
• Compatibility Review: CES 2026 Picks — Which Devices Play Nicely with Home Hubs?
• BBC x YouTube: Could We See UK-Made Gaming Shows Landing on YouTube?
• Host an Alcohol-Free Cocktail Party with Syrup Kits and Ambience Bundles
• Create & Sell Translated Micro-Courses with Gemini Guided Learning Templates