Who keeps the borrower? A deep dive into servicer retention

Recent mergers and acquisitions (M&A), regulatory changes and shifting market conditions have mortgage industry experts questioning whether servicers are better positioned than other competitors to capture the next wave of refinances. Data from ICE Mortgage Technology shared with HousingWire offers a deep dive into servicers’ performance at keeping a borrower in their books after a refinance transaction. It shows that, on average, servicers have retained about 30% of borrowers since the second quarter of 2010. Servicer retention, however, varies with market cycles. And, in the current landscape, competition is expected to intensify as Rocket Companies agreed to acquire Redfin and Mr. Cooper Group, and Bayview Asset Management has proposed a deal for Guild Mortgage. At the same time, a recent ban on abusive trigger leads — signed into law by President Trump in September — is expected to give servicers and lenders an additional edge by allowing them to contact current customers directly. The rule coincides with mortgage rates falling to their lowest levels in nearly a year, spurring fresh refinance activity. Beyond market conditions, structural characteristics such as product type, loan vintage, servicer profile and investor backing also shape retention outcomes, according to ICE. “This report primarily comes out of our MSP servicing system that flows over into what we call our McDash database. It’s like 35 million loans,” Andy Walden, ICE’s head of mortgage and housing market research, said in an interview. “We match that data anonymously to public records.” Overall retention trends ICE data shows that servicer retention recently peaked at 33% in Q4 2021, dropped to 20% in Q2 2024, and recovered modestly to 24% in Q2 2025. But servicer retention differs by refinance product. “When interest rates fall and refinances boom, companies become more traditional, going toward rate-and-term refis,” Walden said. “Lenders and servicers tend to do a better job of retaining borrowers in that environment.” ’’  ’