Written by: Internal Analysis & Opinion Writers
The major mortgage backers, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, have recently curtailed publication of several of their longstanding public housing-market surveys and economic forecasts. This marks a sharp shift away from a history of openly sharing data that many lenders, analysts, and policymakers have relied on to gauge market sentiment and make informed decisions.
One of the most notable changes is the pause of the national housing-sentiment survey that feeds the widely followed Home Purchase Sentiment Index (HPSI). For the first time in more than 15 years, the survey was not released in November — a move that has raised eyebrows given its role in forecasting home-buying demand and consumer views on affordability.
Freddie Mac has also pulled back, discontinuing its regular economic, housing, and mortgage-market outlook reports. Their last forecast, released in January 2025, flagged elevated mortgage rates and muted volume, but since then no updates have been issued. Meanwhile, commentary from one of Fannie’s economic-research groups has also gone dark, with no public forecasts or analysis shared since early 2025.
The pullback is fueling industry concern. Without these data releases, lenders, investors, and housing-market watchers lose access to timely and standardized metrics — creating gaps in visibility over consumer sentiment, demand trends, and broader macroeconomic signals that have traditionally shaped mortgage strategies and risk assessments. Analysts warn that the sudden opacity could complicate underwriting decisions, pricing strategies, and market forecasting, especially in a period of elevated volatility and policy uncertainty.
Adding to the concern is the lack of clarity over whether the surveys and forecasts have been discontinued entirely or simply withheld from public release. Neither Fannie, Freddie, nor their regulator — the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) — have provided a public explanation or timeline indicating when or if the data stream will resume.
The withdrawal has prompted some market participants to urge for alternate sources of data and stress-testing scenarios, arguing that a vacuum of public information could undermine confidence in the housing system — especially among smaller lenders and community-level stakeholders who lack internal resources to substitute for what was once free and widely available data.
For now, the move underscores a broader shift in how the GSEs are approaching disclosure — and raises fresh questions about accountability, transparency, and the balance between private-company information and public-market stability.
