The Federal Housing Finance Agency is studying whether mortgage lenders could rely on a single credit report instead of the industry’s traditional tri-merge, signaling that the agency’s mortgage-credit overhaul could extend well beyond the competition between FICO and VantageScore.
FHFA Director Bill Pulte said Wednesday that the agency was “studying using only a single credit report” as a way to reduce borrowing costs. Pulte also said FHFA expected to meet with Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion, the three nationwide credit bureaus.
A move away from tri-merge reports could reduce the upfront cost of evaluating applicants. It could also require lenders to revise credit-reporting contracts, underwriting systems, quality-control procedures, and processes for resolving debts or tradelines that appear in one bureau’s file but not another.
Pulte’s comments suggest FHFA is questioning not only which credit score lenders use, but how much credit data they need to obtain in the first place.
From Score Competition To Credit-Report Reform
Agency mortgage lenders generally rely on merged reports containing information from Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion. Because creditors do not always report identical information to all three bureaus, consumers can have different tradelines, balances, payment histories, and scores across their files.
Using fewer bureaus could lower the cost of pulling credit, particularly for applicants who never complete a mortgage. But it could also leave lenders with less information about an applicant’s obligations and raise new questions about representations and warranties when a loan is sold to a government-sponsored enterprise.
FHFA has not explained how Fannie and Freddie would address debts or other information missing from the selected bureau’s report, or whether lenders could face repurchase exposure if an obligation later emerged from a bureau that was not consulted.
The potential shift would go further than the bi-merge system FHFA previously considered. A bi-merge combines information from two of the three national bureaus, while a single-report structure would rely on one.
Pulte has not said whether lenders would choose the bureau. Allowing them to do so could force Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion to compete directly on price, data coverage, service, and relationships with mortgage credit resellers. An FHFA-selected bureau or allocation system would carry a different consequence by potentially redirecting substantial mortgage-related revenue among the three companies.
UWM Previously Backed One-Bureau Model
The one-report concept predates Pulte’s latest comments and has previously received support from United Wholesale Mortgage, the country’s largest wholesale mortgage lender.
“A one-bureau credit report model could help more consumers qualify for homeownership and save on upfront costs,” UWM said in a July 2025 social media post.
UWM has since promoted no-cost credit reports for its broker partners and the ability to run FICO and VantageScore simultaneously.
The lender’s position makes the issue particularly relevant for mortgage brokers. Credit expenses are often incurred early in the origination process, including on applicants who do not qualify, choose another lender, or otherwise fail to reach closing.
UWM’s support also shows that the industry has discussed reducing the number of required bureau reports separately from the debate over replacing FICO.
Pulte Targets FICO And Credit Bureaus
The cost of mortgage credit information has become increasingly contentious as lenders contend with compressed margins and consumers face higher transaction costs.
Pulte accused FICO of keeping those costs unnecessarily high, saying the company did not appear interested in offering competitive pricing.
“It seems that FICO is not interested in offering competitive costs but instead uses various means to increase price on the American people. So unnecessary,” Pulte wrote on X.
Pulte’s criticism has not been limited to FICO. Last week, he accused Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion of overcharging consumers and said FHFA was seriously considering bi-merge and other alternatives.
That creates an unusual dynamic. VantageScore 4.0 is being promoted as an alternative to FICO in the GSE mortgage market, but VantageScore is jointly owned by Equifax, Experian, and TransUnion, the same three credit bureaus Pulte has accused of overcharging consumers.
The regulatory pressure is therefore reaching every major participant in the mortgage credit-information chain, not simply the company whose score has historically dominated agency lending.
VantageScore Added To GSE Securities
The single-report review comes as FHFA moves VantageScore 4.0 deeper into the mortgage market, following its earlier decision to permit lenders to deliver eligible GSE loans evaluated with the model.
Mortgages securitized by Fannie and Freddie will now disclose a VantageScore 4.0 credit score in addition to a legacy score, VantageScore announced Thursday. The disclosure does not mean every mortgage was underwritten using VantageScore.
The company said its model was used to securitize approximately 9% of Fannie- and Freddie-backed mortgages from May 1 through Aug. 31.
Pulte said last week that 50 lenders had delivered loans using VantageScore during the initial rollout. He then directed Fannie and Freddie to approve all lenders to use VantageScore 4.0 effective immediately.
VantageScore identified Rocket Mortgage and UWM, the country’s two largest mortgage originators, among the companies adopting the model. The Federal Home Loan Banks and Department of Veterans Affairs have also moved to accept or use VantageScore 4.0, according to the company.
The securities disclosure takes the competition into the capital markets. Placing VantageScore and a legacy score alongside the same mortgage collateral could let investors, lenders, and the GSEs compare how the models evaluate loans that later prepay, become delinquent, or default.
That performance history could ultimately determine whether VantageScore becomes a broadly used FICO alternative or remains concentrated among a smaller group of lenders.
VantageScore’s reported 9% share represents a measurable foothold. It also indicates that approximately 91% of GSE-securitized mortgages during the company’s stated period were not originated using its model.
Savings Claims Remain Unclear
VantageScore said its implementation could unlock nearly $1 billion in annual savings across the mortgage market.
It is unclear how much of the projected savings would come from using a lower-cost score, reducing the number of bureaus consulted, eliminating duplicate fees, changing when credit is pulled, or some combination of those changes.
The company also said VantageScore 4.0 can score 33 million more consumers than traditional models and help identify qualified borrowers who might otherwise be overlooked.
The distinction between credit reports and credit scores is central to the developing debate. Changing the scoring model may reduce one component of the expense, while moving from three bureau reports to one could alter the underlying cost structure more substantially.
For originators, tri-merge is not going away yet. Pulte said a single-report model is "under study," but FHFA has not released a formal proposal or changed current credit-report requirements.
