Home Blog

MBA: With 7% rates into 2027, win on revenue, not cost cuts


  • Key Insight: Find out how the MBA is shifting their expectations for 2027.
  • What’s at Stake: Smaller mortgage players face a widening profitability gap against their top competitors.
  • Expert Quote: “There are real risks that we get a significant slowdown.” — Mike Fratantoni, MBA

Overview bullets generated by AI with editorial review.

Processing Content

Even the economists at the Mortgage Bankers Association, seen by some as the most optimistic of home lending forecasters, predict a tough road ahead for the industry.

Expecting two more hikes from the Federal Reserve, one in December and one sometime in the first quarter of 2027, the trade group’s latest outlook sees 7% mortgage rates for the full year of 2027, with originations decreasing by 5% over this time.

With rates for the 30-year-fixed expected to remain elevated, the MBA at its annual conference in Chicago Sunday night announced that it will be publishing more detailed numbers on adjustable rate mortgage share, which currently make up about 10% share of loan count and a 20% share of the dollar volume of business. The MBA expects ARM share to remain at about a 9% share of loan count over the next year. 

The organization is calling for just under $2 trillion in volume next year. This includes a 0.8% year-over-year increase in purchase activity to $1.42 trillion. But refinance originations will decline by 17% in the high interest rate environment to $571 billion.

The likelihood of an economic downtown was also up significantly, according to MBA Chief Economist Mike Fratantoni, who detailed the organization’s response to a Wall Street Journal survey about economic expectations. 

Mike Fratantoni, Chief Economist of the Mortgage Bankers Association

Heidi Patalano/National Mortgage News

“Even in reasonably good times, we give an answer like 15, 20%” for a chance of recession, he said. “The most recent answer we gave was 35%. There are real risks that we get a significant slowdown.” 

MBA expects the 10-year Treasury yield to ease to about 5% through 2027, but mortgage rates won’t follow it all the way down. At the close of trading on Oct. 9, this yield was 5.24%.

Fratantoni said the global rate volatility of recent weeks has raised prepayment risk, pushing the spread between mortgages and Treasuries back up to roughly 220 basis points after it spent much of this year near 200. 

“I just don’t think investors are going to quickly forget this level of volatility that we’ve just lived through,” he said, adding that the MBA now expects the spread to stay wider than it had previously forecast.

The home equity opportunity

With roughly half of homeowners locked in at 4% rates or below, the growth opportunity remains within closed-end home equity loans and home equity lines of credit.

Joel Kan.JPG
Joel Kan, Deputy Chief Economist at the Mortgage Bankers Association

Heidi Patalano/National Mortgage News

“Thinking about the…lack of a cash-out refi opportunity for many borrowers, this might be one of the few ways that they can tap equity going forward,” said Vice President and Deputy Chief Economist of the MBA, Joel Kan. 

Who’s doing the most lending?

Out of the 4,600 entities making mortgages in the market now, the top 50 lenders in the country are doing half the business, said Marina Walsh, the MBA’s head of industry analysis. 

About 175 independent lenders have disappeared over the last four-to-five years, but independents still hold about 67% to 68% of production market share, she added. The top 50 lenders account for only half of retail, wholesale, and consumer direct volume, so the remainder is spread across many smaller players.

Marina Walsh, Head of Industry Analysis.JPG
Marina Walsh, Head of Industry Analysis for the Mortgage Bankers Association

Heidi Patalano/National Mortgage News

She noted that the profitability gap between top and bottom lenders comes mostly from revenue, not cost.

“The big difference, folks, is on the revenue side. Why is that? Due to product mix, secondary marketing income, or secondary marketing staff, having a good capital markets team,” she said. “Could it be company affiliation? Could it be geography? There are lots of different reasons why revenue might be different, but it’s something all of us need to start paying attention to.” 

Independent mortgage banks have averaged positive net production income for five straight quarters, at about 25 basis points or roughly $775 per loan. That remains below the 39 basis point average since 2008.



‘If nothing is done, it’s almost inevitable’: Ukraine’s Yuriy Ryzhenkov on why steelmaking is on the brink of collapse as Russian bombing intensifies 


Yuriy Ryzhenkov is that rare individual—a chief executive who has led his firm of 33,700 people during a never-ending war. He is the chief executive of the largest steelmaker in Ukraine, Metinvest. More than 8,000 of his employees are fighting Russian forces. Factories are under constant bombardment. Hundreds of Metinvest colleagues have been killed. 

Amid the flames and destruction, Ryzhenkov says that this period of the war is as tough as anything the company has seen since Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine more than four years ago. 

“The blockade of the seaports is more severe now than it was in 2022,” Ryzhenkov, who became CEO in 2013, tells me. “We’ve been hit numerous times. Our facilities have been hit over the last four and a half years, and even though we were restoring them after every hit, you lose. You get weaker with every such attack. 

“In wartime you cannot afford to restore to the original state. You do the best you can to continue operating and that best is never the ideal. Unfortunately, it was one of the most severe campaigns for bombing in August and September this year. We had to stop both of our steel mills. 

“We lost 14 people at our steel mills, which was probably the largest loss since 2023 in a single bombing. That’s where we are.” 

Metinvest factories are under constant bombardment and hundreds of Metinvest colleagues have been killed. 

Giulio PISCITELLI / AFP via Getty Images

Now there is another threat to the future of steelmaking in Ukraine, and it doesn’t come from the East, but from the European Union. In July, new tariffs were applied to all EU steel imports in an effort to protect the continent’s industry from cheaper foreign competition. The key steel tariff-rate quota for Ukraine from July 2026 was cut by 60%, and is expected to reduce steel imports from Ukraine to the EU by 1.3 million metric tons per year, according to the GMK Center, a Ukrainian think tank. 

Read more: He manages one of the most successful soccer clubs in the world and is the elite leader every CEO wants to talk to. So why has Mikel Arteta decided to go public on having his own DNA mapped? 

“If you compare the quotas that were allocated to Ukraine this year to what was supplied last year, it’s minus 60% and that’s at the time when the ports were already closed, and we literally have no other alternative,” Ryzhenkov says. 

“When the invasion happened, the EU pretty much realized that for Ukraine the only available market is actually the EU with the blockade of ports. They abolished any restrictions for the steel to be supplied there, which was, in my view, the correct answer. 

“In wartime you cannot afford to restore to the original state. You do the best you can to continue operating and that best is never the ideal”

Yuriy Ryzhenkov, CEO of Fortune 500 europe company, Metinvest

“And then suddenly, in the first half of this year, we got these quotas where we were pretty much dumped with all the other countries [outside the EU], and the fact that we had exceptional circumstances in terms of logistics, in terms of energy supply, in terms of personnel availability, they were not taken into account, in my view, at all. 

“It was too harsh, given the circumstances.” 

Negotiations continue and the EU has said it is aware that Ukraine is a unique case. But the pincer movement—the armed invasion from the East, and tariffs from the West—is leaving steelmaking in Ukraine in a perilous position. Between 2021 and 2025, steel production in Ukraine fell from 21 million metric tons to 7.4 million metric tons, the value of exports fell from $22 billion to $6 billion, and tax revenues dropped from $3.5 billion to $870 million. Russia’s constant attacks on factories, energy supply systems and the railways means that steel supply to the Ukrainian armed forces is also being degraded. 

“There is pretty much no future without a market to which you can sell,” Ryzhenkov says. “With the continuing disruptions, it’s very difficult to make a steel business economically viable. [This] is typically a business where you have to have 90% plus capacity utilization to be profitable, even in normal times, and where you have to develop your markets with long-term commitments, and in today’s circumstances, that’s just not possible.” 

I ask whether we could be witnessing the end of steelmaking in Ukraine? 

“Well, if nothing is done, it’s almost inevitable,” he says. “If Ukraine is not allowed to participate in the European market fully, and at the same time the circumstances preclude any significant investments, then I mean everything comes to an end eventually.” 

Ryzhenkov comes from a long line of steelmakers. His grandmother was a coal plant chemical engineer closely aligned to steel making, and his mother, father, and uncle all work in the sector. That family history does bring with it a high level of determination to continue despite the losses and the constant threats of more attacks. 

“To be honest, that’s the only choice we have, right?” he tells me. “Well, not the only choice. I mean, obviously, you can slam the door and walk out, but we have more than 35,000 people working for us with their families. We have 8,500 of our employees in the Ukrainian armed forces, which also rely on us. So, I mean, why would you slam the door if you can still try to do something to carry on? I just don’t find a reason for myself to do that.” 

Are You Wasting Your Startup’s Runway With the Wrong Product?


Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

Key Takeaways

  • Most product teams struggle because the structure around ideas and team talent isn’t optimized for impact.
  • A framework is a set of best practices, not an ironclad rulebook. The teams that get this right understand why each step exists, but also know when to use judgment instead.
  • Orient everything toward impact because that’s the only metric that actually matters.

The most common way startups burn through financial runway isn’t a bad hire or a botched launch. It’s building the right product, but for the wrong reason, at the wrong time and without enough validation that customers will actually want it. I’ve seen it happen at companies with great teams, strong funding and real market opportunity. 

Here’s what we’ve learned about keeping a product team oriented toward impact and away from the kind of well-intentioned “busywork” that can kill off startups.

1. Prototype the process itself

Most founders are rigorous about validating products before launching them. Fewer apply that same discipline to how their product team actually operates. They convene large groups, whiteboard a process, roll it out… and then watch it fall apart under real conditions because nobody pressure-tested it first.

The solution is to treat your process itself like a product. Start with a small group — perhaps two or three people with genuine cross-functional exposure — then run through real decisions fast. What you’re looking for are the questions that surface every single time you evaluate an opportunity. Those recurring questions become the foundation of the evaluation framework. As CEO, your job is to help make sure that framework exists and that the team is working within it, not to be in every room where decisions get made.

For example, a two-person team at a software development company might discover that every feature discussion comes back to one question: “Will our enterprise clients’ legal teams actually approve this?” Surfacing issues like this early and building them into the evaluation framework saves weeks of wasted effort. 

Or consider a consumer app team that kept building features users said they wanted in surveys, only to see flat adoption at launch. This could be because they never validated whether each feature fit the actual usage context and wasn’t just answers to a survey.

The goal is a process blueprint you can pressure-test and evolve as needed.

2. Put cross-functional generalists at the center of the process

From a founder’s perspective, one of the most consequential hiring and organizational decisions you’ll make is who sits at the center of your product process. Product teams naturally play a connector role between engineering, client success, legal, marketing and operations. But that role only works if the people filling it have genuine exposure across those domains, not just a passing familiarity. 

The most valuable contributors in your product process aren’t necessarily the most senior people in a function. Instead, the people who wear enough hats and can represent multiple perspectives, anticipate friction from teams they don’t officially belong to and make judgment calls that account for a fuller picture are the ones you want driving the conversation.

Be intentional about identifying those types of team members. They’re often not the ones with the most obvious titles. But they are often the ones identifying early issues in your roadmap.

3. Front-load validation

Runway is finite, and every build decision is actually a capital allocation decision. One of the most expensive mistakes is a well-built feature that nobody wants. By the time teams discover a post-launch product-market fit problem, they’ve already spent the time building it, absorbed the opportunity cost and potentially confused target customers.

Before committing serious build time, pressure-test every idea against a few essential questions: Does this solve a real problem your customer actually has and not just one they described in a survey? Is there a plausible path to revenue generation? And relative to the level of effort, does it have meaningful revenue potential?

Rank ideas by impact divided by effort. It doesn’t need to be a sophisticated formula; a simple high/medium/low estimate on both axes can get you most of the way there. And complete the customer validation before you build, not after. By the time the product ships, you should already know who will want it.

4. Measure the machine, not just the output

CEOs monitor revenue. But if you’re only measuring what ships and what it earns, you’re seeing the outcome without understanding the process behind it. The health of your product function shows up earlier in the pipeline. If you’re not watching those signals, problems compound before they show up in the P&L. 

The most useful process signal to track is adoption rate at launch. If validation was done correctly upfront, customers should already be lined up when it ships. A feature with no adoption is basically just sitting in a “warehouse;” unsold and unused. 

Earlier in the product pipeline, track the volume and quality of ideas moving through each product validation stage. A well-functioning product team should be like a machine, consistently outputting impact. And as CEO, you should be able to see how well this machine is running before it impacts your financials.

5. Process should accelerate throughput, not create bureaucracy

The word “process” makes founders cringe, because processes can often be bureaucracy in disguise.

The only process worth keeping is one that makes your team faster at value creation. Every checkpoint in a process should exist because it demonstrably reduces wasted effort downstream. If it doesn’t, cut it. And trust your team to interpret process frameworks intelligently. Empower them to skip a step when it’s warranted, as long as it’s flagged so everyone stays aligned. 

The common thread

The common thread across all five of these principles is intentionality: being intentional about who’s in the room, what gets built, in what order and why. Most product teams struggle because the structure around ideas and team talent isn’t optimized for impact. As CEO, it’s ultimately your responsibility to get structure right. 

A framework is a set of best practices, not an ironclad rulebook. The teams that get this right understand why each step exists, but also know when to use judgment instead. Orient everything toward impact because that’s the only metric that actually matters.

Key Takeaways

  • Most product teams struggle because the structure around ideas and team talent isn’t optimized for impact.
  • A framework is a set of best practices, not an ironclad rulebook. The teams that get this right understand why each step exists, but also know when to use judgment instead.
  • Orient everything toward impact because that’s the only metric that actually matters.

The most common way startups burn through financial runway isn’t a bad hire or a botched launch. It’s building the right product, but for the wrong reason, at the wrong time and without enough validation that customers will actually want it. I’ve seen it happen at companies with great teams, strong funding and real market opportunity. 

Here’s what we’ve learned about keeping a product team oriented toward impact and away from the kind of well-intentioned “busywork” that can kill off startups.

1. Prototype the process itself

Most founders are rigorous about validating products before launching them. Fewer apply that same discipline to how their product team actually operates. They convene large groups, whiteboard a process, roll it out… and then watch it fall apart under real conditions because nobody pressure-tested it first.

Calendar of Deals Ordered by End Date


🛍️ Support DDG

Enjoying the deals and content? When you shop through our Amazon affiliate links, we may earn a small commission — at no extra cost to you. Your support helps keep the deals, bank bonuses, and giveaways coming. Thank you!


Shop Amazon & Support Us

UC Covers Tuition For California Families Earning Under $100,000


The University of California’s Blue and Gold Opportunity Plan covers systemwide tuition and fees for California residents with family incomes under $100,000 who qualify for financial aid.

For students entering UC in 2026-27, that’s worth $15,588 a year, made up of $14,202 in tuition and a $1,386 student services fee, according to UC’s 2026-27 fee schedule.

The plan applies at every undergraduate UC campus, including Berkeley and UCLA, and puts UC on the list of colleges offering free tuition below set income limits.

Why It Matters

Blue and Gold covers tuition and the student services fee, but not room and board, books or transportation. UC says eligible students receive “an average aid package including up to $22,000 in grants and scholarships,” which can go toward some of those other costs, according to the Blue and Gold page.

Families should look at the full net price of college rather than the tuition line alone.

Families earning more than $100,000 still have state aid available. California’s Middle Class Scholarship served families with income and assets up to $234,000 in 2025-26, according to a UC financial aid presentation for counselors.

That program depends on state funding each year, and a recent California budget proposal would have reduced middle-class financial aid.

The Fine Print

Eligibility rules come from UC Merced’s Blue and Gold page and UC Admissions, and most of them overlap with the Cal Grant application process:

  • Residency: Students must be California residents
  • Income: Under $100,000, using parent income for dependent students and student plus spouse income for independent students
  • Need: Students must show financial need and meet UC’s basic grant requirements
  • Applications: File the FAFSA or California Dream Act Application and the Cal Grant GPA Verification Form by March 2, with no separate application
  • Time limit: Coverage lasts four years for freshmen and two years for transfer students
  • Award label: It won’t appear as “Blue and Gold” on an aid offer, since grants show up under the campus’s own grant name

How This Connects

UC’s $100,000 cutoff sits well below the thresholds at wealthy private universities. Harvard covers tuition for families earning under $200,000, and UChicago raised its free tuition threshold to $250,000.

Public universities tend to set lower bars, and Pitt’s new program covers Pennsylvania families earning under $75,000.

What’s Next

Families applying for fall 2027 need the 2027-28 FAFSA or Dream Act Application and the Cal Grant GPA form in by March 2, 2027 to be considered. Checking your Student Aid Index now gives a quick read on whether you’ll show financial need.

Editor: Colin Graves

The post UC Covers Tuition For California Families Earning Under $100,000 appeared first on The College Investor.

Which Global Real Estate ETF Is the Better Buy: State Street’s RWO or Xtrackers’ HAUZ?


The primary distinction between State Street SPDR Dow Jones Global Real Estate ETF (RWO +0.52%) and Xtrackers International Real Estate ETF (HAUZ +0.76%) lies in their geographic mandates and cost structures.

Real estate investment trusts (REITs) offer a way to gain property exposure without the burden of managing physical buildings. These two funds approach the asset class differently: one provides a broad look across the entire globe, while the other specifically targets markets outside the U.S. to help investors diversify away from domestic concentrations and capture international growth.

RWO & HAUZ: Performance Comparison

Key Financial Metrics

SPDR Index Shares Funds - State Street SPDR Dow Jones Global Real Estate ETF Stock Quote

RWO – SPDR Index Shares Funds – State Street SPDR Dow Jones Global Real Estate ETF

$46.28

+0.52% (+$0.24)

52wk Range

$44.31 – $52.26

Dividend & Yield

$1.63 (3.52%)

Dbx ETF Trust - Xtrackers International Real Estate ETF Stock Quote

HAUZ – Dbx ETF Trust – Xtrackers International Real Estate ETF

$21.07

+0.76% (+$0.16)

52wk Range

$20.71 – $25.73

Dividend & Yield

$0.82 (3.88%)

Snapshot (cost & size)

Metric HAUZ RWO
Issuer Xtrackers SPDR
Share price $21.38 (as of 2026-09-28) $47.08 (as of 2026-09-28)
Expense ratio 0.1% 0.5%
1-yr return (as of 2026-09-28) (5.3%) 7.6%
Dividend yield 3.9% 3.5%
Beta 0.74 0.89
AUM $1.0B $1.2B

Beta measures price volatility relative to the S&P 500; beta is calculated from monthly returns over the available fund history (up to five years). The 1-yr return represents total return over the trailing 12 months. Dividend yield is the trailing-12-month distribution yield.

The Xtrackers fund is significantly more affordable, carrying an expense ratio of 0.1% compared to 0.5% for the SPDR fund. While the Xtrackers fund provides a slightly higher payout for income-seeking investors, the yield gap between the two is relatively narrow at 0.37 percentage points.

Performance & risk comparison

Metric HAUZ RWO
Max drawdown (5 yr) (33.6%) (32.9%)
Growth of $1,000 over 5 years (total return) $920 $1,092

What’s inside

State Street SPDR Dow Jones Global Real Estate ETF targets publicly traded real estate companies that own and manage commercial or residential properties. The portfolio leans heavily toward real estate at 90%, with cash and others at 7%, and consumer cyclicals at 1%. Its largest positions include Welltower (WELL +1.09%) at 10.34%, Prologis (PLD +0.15%) at 7.75%, and Equinix (EQIX +1.47%) at 6.15%. Launched in 2008, the fund manages 224 holdings and carries $1.2 billion in assets under management (AUM). State Street SPDR Dow Jones Global Real Estate ETF has paid $1.63 per share over the trailing 12 months, which on its recent ~$47.08 share price works out to a 3.5% yield.

Xtrackers International Real Estate ETF seeks to track developed and emerging markets excluding the U.S., offering a diverse mix of 410 holdings to help investors diversify away from domestic property exposure. The fund is concentrated almost exclusively in real estate at 96%, with industrials and communication services each representing 1%. Top holdings include Goodman Group (ASX:GMG) at 4.20%, Mitsubishi Estate at 3.11%, and Mitsui Fudosan (TSE:8801) at 2.84%. Launched in 2013, it provides a low-cost entry into international property sectors and manages $1.0 billion in AUM. Xtrackers International Real Estate ETF has paid $0.82 per share over the trailing 12 months, which on its recent ~$21.38 share price works out to a 3.9% yield.

For more guidance on ETF investing, check out the full guide at this link.

Which looks like the better buy

Real estate has bounced back in 2026 as interest rates ease and income-seeking investors return to property markets. Both RWO and HAUZ offer a way into that recovery, but they are not fishing in the same waters.

RWO markets itself as a global real estate fund, but more than half of its portfolio is U.S. real estate, consisting of the same domestic REITs that most American investors already own through broader funds. If you’re looking to truly diversify beyond U.S. property markets, that overlap raises a practical question about what you are actually adding.

HAUZ invests entirely outside the United States, holding more than 400 real estate companies across Japan, Australia, Europe, and beyond. That focus on international markets gives it a much different return profile from funds concentrated in domestic REITs.

RWO charges quite a high fee that can be difficult to justify when HAUZ has delivered comparable long-term returns and maximum drawdown. For most long-term investors who want actual international real estate diversification at the lowest possible cost, HAUZ is the more purposeful and efficient choice. RWO makes more sense only for those who want a single fund covering both U.S. and international property in one package and are comfortable paying significantly more for that convenience.

Home prices resist the pressure of high rates and weak sales


Sellers with substantial equity have largely declined to cut prices enough to revive buyer participation at scale, so recorded sale prices in closed transactions have held firmer than underlying demand conditions might suggest.

A divided housing market beneath the headline

The markets forecast to see the strongest price growth are concentrated in the Northeast and Midwest. Rockford, IL leads the 324-MSA forecast at 4.7% projected appreciation, followed by Norwich-New London-Willimantic, CT (4.3%), and Hartford, CT; Racine, WI; and Erie, PA (each at 4.0%).

Binghamton, NY; Lancaster, PA; Milwaukee, WI; South Bend, IN; and Reading, PA complete the top ten, with gains ranging from 3.5% to 4.7%. These markets share favorable income-to-price dynamics and supply conditions that have not been overwhelmed by inventory growth.

Texas dominates the bottom of the forecast. Six of the ten weakest-performing markets are in the state — Corpus Christi at -1.1%, Tyler at -1.0%, Sherman-Denison at -0.9%, Austin at -0.9%, Houston at -0.7%, and San Antonio at -0.5%.

Stockton, CA (-1.0%), Boulder, CO (-0.5%), Colorado Springs, CO (-0.5%), and Tucson, AZ (-0.5%) also appear among the underperformers.

A Frozen-Pizza Icon Has Been Shelved, Ending a 60-Year Run



Celeste was once a staple in freezers nationwide. Now Conagra is ending the brand as it focuses on faster-growing, more profitable businesses, including Slim Jim and Healthy Choice.

[KY, TN, IL, IN, MO] CFSB $100 Checking Bonus, Direct Deposit Not Required


Offer at a glance

  • Maximum bonus amount:
  • Availability: We are only able to open Checking and Savings accounts for existing clients or applicants who live in KY, TN, IL, IN, MO
  • Direct deposit required: No
  • Additional requirements: 25 debit card transactions
  • Hard/soft pull: Soft
  • ChexSystems: Unknown
  • Credit card funding: Unknown
  • Monthly fees: None 
  • Early account termination fee: Unknown
  • Household limit: None listed
  • Expiration date:  November 1, 2026

The Offer

Direct link to offer

  • CFSB is offering a $100 bonus when you open a new Community Classic Checking account and complete the following requirements: 
    • Complete 25 debt card purchase transactions by November 30, 2026

The Fine Print

  • : This $100 checking account incentive is only available for new accounts opened between October 1, 2026, through November 1, 2026.
  • To qualify, the account holder must complete at least 25 debit card purchase transactions during the promotional period which is October 1, 2026 through November 30, 2026.
  • The account must remain open and be in good standing when the incentive is paid. Qualifying incentives, the $100 deposit, will be credited to the account by December 31, 2026.
  • All criteria must be met before receiving incentive.
  • Limit to one new account per social security number.
  • Additional terms and conditions may apply.
  • All bank account bonuses are treated as income/interest and as such you have to pay taxes on them

Avoiding Fees

Monthly Fees

This account has no monthly fees to worry about

Early Account Termination Fee

I wasn’t able to find a fee schedule so unsure if there are any EATFs. 

Our Verdict

Simple bonus, you can find some ideas for meeting debit card requirements here. The terms do say that the debit cards must be purchases though so keep that in mind. We will add this to our list of the best bank account bonuses. 

Hat tip to reader Bockrr

Useful posts regarding bank bonuses: