Deloitte mortgage rates

rowdylynx4 said:A $20,000 "nest egg" is a pretty decent cushion, and I’m counting on those interest rates to run wild enough to make my future bank loan look even more expensive by comparison. That's the risk I'm willing to take.

It feels like people are totally lost here, whether they're hoarding cash at Wells Fargo or just taking out loans blindly. I’m still backing Donna Chase12 on this one—when you compare the math between banks and ExxonMobil, there's barely a difference, but I won't bore you with the spreadsheets again. I sent them over to Ashley Barnes9, but no word yet.
Also, I'd love for anyone who’s gone through mezzanine financing to weigh in. Let's see where we can actually find a better deal on a home loan.

rowdylynx4, I already debunked him... at least when it comes to my own situation... and those ridiculous calculations he sent out
And you still haven't shared the actual math so we can see how on earth you're losing 20,000 bucks at a bank like Wells Fargo

redmaker382 said:It feels like people are totally lost here, whether they're hoarding cash at Wells Fargo or just taking out loans blindly. I’m still backing Donna Chase12 on this one—when you compare the math between banks and ExxonMobil, there's barely a difference, but I won't bore you with the spreadsheets again. I sent them over to Ashley Barnes9, but no word yet.
Also, I'd love for anyone who’s gone through mezzanine financing to weigh in. Let's see where we can actually find a better deal on a home loan.

My monthly payment was a few dollars higher at Goldman Sachs, but now that interest rates have spiked, I suspect it might actually end up being about the same, if not lower. Well, that's assuming I didn't miss anything while checking those three different banks...

Donna Chase12 said:rowdylynx4, I already debunked him... at least when it comes to my own situation... and those ridiculous calculations he sent out
And you still haven't shared the actual math so we can see how on earth you're losing 20,000 bucks at a bank like Wells Fargo

Wells Fargo - loan calculation for refinancing purposes
$99,900 over 20 years and 1 month, based on five contracts under the Result Corp tariff
Result: a monthly payment of $749 and total payments of $180,471.21

The Bank - $100,000 over 20 years (currency clause: USD)
Result: a monthly payment of $672.17 and total payments of $161,436.48

I won't even bother bringing up ExxonMobil; I focused on the monthly payments just to ensure a fair comparison,
and I plan to opt for installments that will drive the total repayment down by approximately
$9,000.

A discrepancy like this is PARTIALLY due to the preferential terms I enjoy
(as both a client and because my employer holds a corporate contract with the bank),
but I would advise anyone to run their own comparable numbers
across several different institutions and really take a hard look at their own Risk Management.

rowdylynx4...just how much do you mean by PARTIAL?

redmaker382 said:It feels like people are totally lost here, whether they're hoarding cash at Wells Fargo or just taking out loans blindly. I’m still backing Donna Chase12 on this one—when you compare the math between banks and ExxonMobil, there's barely a difference, but I won't bore you with the spreadsheets again. I sent them over to Ashley Barnes9, but no word yet.
Also, I'd love for anyone who’s gone through mezzanine financing to weigh in. Let's see where we can actually find a better deal on a home loan.

My apologies, I just haven't had a spare moment lately to get back to you. I have the figures I received from Goldman Sachs, and I'll post them here as soon as I can. The results look pretty similar to what rowdylynx4 presented, which leads me to believe a traditional bank is the better move if you need the loan right away. However, a savings institution might be more cost-effective if you already have some capital set aside and don't need to rely on a full bridge loan or having $0.00 in a Wells Fargo account.
Best regards.

Donna Chase12 said:rowdylynx4...just how much do you mean by PARTIAL?

A nominal interest rate that’s lower by roughly 1% doesn't move the needle much for me, especially since the standard bank loan ended up being significantly more affordable anyway.

I think Ashley Barnes9 summed up this entire debate quite effectively by pointing out that a traditional bank loan is actually the better deal—in terms of monthly payments and total cost—if you take it out immediately. On the other hand, waiting for a savings-based loan only makes sense if you’ve spent some actual time building up a real savings cushion, rather than just relying on those simulated figures they bake into the interim financing.

In an ideal world, I probably would have been better off securing that $100,000 loan through Wells Fargo after spending five years diligently saving across $1.75 eight different accounts (which was the most cost-effective route), but unfortunately, my two existing five-year plans were exactly what I needed to cover the down payment on my condo.

Look, rowdylynx4, I’ve got this bridge loan without even having any savings set aside...and honestly, when I was shopping around at other banks, this deal was easily the most competitive one out there...
If you actually bothered to read what I wrote, I already mentioned that
...so I have no clue how you guys are coming up with such terrible math🤷

Look, Zorro, I’m not saying your comparisons from last year weren't spot on, but I sat down and ran these numbers just a few days ago. They're current, and honestly, anyone can pull up a calculator and verify them for themselves if they have the patience.

If you really want the specifics from the bank, I can send over the full repayment schedule—whether you prefer fixed installments or annuities (something Goldman Sachs won't even bother providing)—but I don't think it's necessary. The math speaks for itself: we're looking at a much better deal from ExxonMobil, featuring lower annuity payments and a smaller total payout over the same timeframe.

Look, I’m not calling you a liar or anything—I don't exactly have their math books in front of me
it just sounds incredibly sketchy and hard to swallow to me, honestly🤷

I’d like to jump into this discussion! Look, you just can't compare Goldman Sachs to other savings banks. They aren't even in the same league. In my experience, Goldman Sachs is completely opaque; they make everything sound incredibly lucrative, but once you look at the math, the monthly payments are actually higher than most commercial loans. Their marketing is top-tier, their website is sleek, and in my case, the agents were super charming. But honestly, that doesn't matter if the loan itself is a bad deal. Donna Chase12, did you actually check with other banks for quotes, or was that lady at Goldman Sachs just so persuasive that you didn't feel like looking elsewhere? I was absolutely charmed on day one too, right up until I sat down to read the fine print. They didn't mention that when calculating creditworthiness, they’d only look at my last three paychecks—which happened to be maternity leave benefits of $4,250, an amount that wouldn't even get me a loan for a new sofa! They don't care that I work for a government agency with a salary more than double that maternity pay. No, they fixate on that $4,250, meaning my maximum payment is capped at $2,450. So, I went over to the NYSE branch, but the agent there was slow, sluggish, and clearly had no clue how to calculate a rate. He told me to come back tomorrow and he'd have it ready. Well, nothing happened. He promised to call my cell, then I had to call him, then he promised to call me once he got back to his desk. Apparently, he still hasn't made it back to the office! 😍 Eventually, I went to see my personal banker at Wells Fargo, and within a few hours, she emailed me a full breakdown that was far, far more affordable than anything from Goldman Sachs. I don't have the exact numbers because I adjusted the loan amount in the meantime, but it was much better, plus it came with a fixed interest rate. The only catch is that, unlike Goldman Sachs, you can't just pay extra toward the principal whenever you want. However, you can open a new savings agreement, funnel money into it, and then apply that toward the loan once the term ends—all without any extra fees. So, Donna Chase12, don't be quite so proud of your choice; there are definitely better options out there. What good is a fixed rate if the total amount you pay back is way higher than what a variable rate would have even jumped to?

Look, give us the actual details—what’s your monthly payment, what's the ExxonMobil rate, and everything else? Some of us are still out here struggling just to figure out where we're going to find any credit at all. So please, just lay out the specifics.

I used to have three different accounts at the NYSE, with 2500 dollars in each one;
I actually topped them up with an extra 3045 dollars just so I could hit that 10% down payment threshold (that’s basically the 2000 dollar gap from 9500 minus 7500, plus the fee for bumping up the contract amount, plus some adjustment for switching models—all in all, 3045)—which is quite a difference compared to Goldman Sachs, where you don't even need skin in the game to start bridge financing.
The total loan is 95000; they’re going to take the processing fee right out of that amount ($2333 honestly, they can take it and shove it!), and $667 I’ll have to cover the bridge financing fee out of my own pocket.
The repayment term is 15 years.
For the next 24 months, my remaining savings account term has a 5.50% nominal rate and my monthly payment is 776 dollars.
Then, for the following 13 years, the nominal rate is 4.75% with a monthly payment of 661.79 dollars.
The total payback—if you factor in my own savings contribution—comes out to about 132000.
If you don't have your own savings sitting at the NYSE, but you *can* scrape together 10% of the loan amount, the only real difference is that for those 13 years, your nominal rate would be 4.99% instead of my 4.75%.
The big downside with all these banks is the massive fees; commercial banks are much more reasonable about that stuff. With a low interest rate, things almost even out, but you still get that fixed rate and the option to refinance using funds from your home savings account.

Since I work in pharmacy, I’ve got some inside track on this. Wells Fargo is offering these really solid consumer loans at a 5.55% interest rate in dollars, with a fixed fee of $667—though you can actually snag a 40% discount if you happen to have an expert-level account model. Honestly, looking at my returns from the NYSE, I'm seeing even lower yields than what I'd be paying out on this loan, which is also a pretty sweet deal

Benjamin Barnes6 said:I’d like to jump into this discussion! Look, you just can't compare Goldman Sachs to other savings banks. They aren't even in the same league. In my experience, Goldman Sachs is completely opaque; they make everything sound incredibly lucrative, but once you look at the math, the monthly payments are actually higher than most commercial loans. Their marketing is top-tier, their website is sleek, and in my case, the agents were super charming. But honestly, that doesn't matter if the loan itself is a bad deal. Donna Chase12, did you actually check with other banks for quotes, or was that lady at Goldman Sachs just so persuasive that you didn't feel like looking elsewhere? I was absolutely charmed on day one too, right up until I sat down to read the fine print. They didn't mention that when calculating creditworthiness, they’d only look at my last three paychecks—which happened to be maternity leave benefits of $4,250, an amount that wouldn't even get me a loan for a new sofa! They don't care that I work for a government agency with a salary more than double that maternity pay. No, they fixate on that $4,250, meaning my maximum payment is capped at $2,450. So, I went over to the NYSE branch, but the agent there was slow, sluggish, and clearly had no clue how to calculate a rate. He told me to come back tomorrow and he'd have it ready. Well, nothing happened. He promised to call my cell, then I had to call him, then he promised to call me once he got back to his desk. Apparently, he still hasn't made it back to the office! 😍 Eventually, I went to see my personal banker at Wells Fargo, and within a few hours, she emailed me a full breakdown that was far, far more affordable than anything from Goldman Sachs. I don't have the exact numbers because I adjusted the loan amount in the meantime, but it was much better, plus it came with a fixed interest rate. The only catch is that, unlike Goldman Sachs, you can't just pay extra toward the principal whenever you want. However, you can open a new savings agreement, funnel money into it, and then apply that toward the loan once the term ends—all without any extra fees. So, Donna Chase12, don't be quite so proud of your choice; there are definitely better options out there. What good is a fixed rate if the total amount you pay back is way higher than what a variable rate would have even jumped to?

Alright... let's just reset here.
I don't recall ever saying I was "proud" of my loan, or whatever.😲
Honestly, if I had managed to scrape together $115,000 for an apartment by my age, I’d be feeling pretty damn proud too—but life isn't a movie, reality hit differently, so yeah, I had to go looking for financing...
So, back when I was hunting for loans in late 2006 (please don't ignore the timing here, because let's face it—bank conditions then vs. now aren't even in the same universe)... after doing my homework, overthinking everything, comparing rates, and basically badgering employees at a few different banks for months... I finally pulled the trigger with Warren Buffett.
I’ve already laid out my reasons and I'm not going to repeat myself... and I also mentioned that their terms are pretty strict, which probably won't fly with everyone. I never once said there wasn't something better than Warren Buffett out there... so, honestly, these comments about my supposed "ego" are totally unnecessary.

Also, some random lady at a desk isn't going to charm me into taking out a loan—unless we're talking about a really cute guy, 😉...just kidding)
I spoke with one specific senior manager at the firm exactly four times over three months—and that was entirely on my own terms. Nobody was "selling" me anything. I went in wanting them to explain everything, run the numbers... so I could take those papers home, compare them against other big banks, grab their quotes, and weigh them all out. It wasn't until the fourth visit that I actually submitted the application. So, please, spare me the assumptions about my intelligence—I'm not some naive person who's going to sign away a mountain of cash for years just because some woman gave me a friendly smile.

Benjamin Barnes6... I’m actually curious about the specifics here... did you compare loans across all of them without any deposit attached, using the exact same term length, and did you factor in those massive extra fees they tack on?

That's what I'm trying to get at...
So, you pulled out $95,000—or is that $95,000 including that 10% of your own cash you have with them, meaning you actually only took $85,000? I'm a little lost on that part.

When you talked to Warren Buffett, did you ask for a calculation based on having 10% of your own money in there, or was it just a straight loan with zero investment?

Also... did you check what the fees look like at Warren Buffett? Because looking at your numbers, it seems like you're getting hit with some costs here.
Are you dealing with an adjustable interest rate?

And one more thing... from what I can see... with the GDP, you HAVE to have a 10% deposit, and the max term is 15 years. With Warren Buffett, you DON'T need a deposit, the max term is 24 years, and they offer three different rate models.

So, do me a favor and give us a side-by-side comparison of Warren Buffett and the GDP using the same number of years, no deposit, and the exact same loan amount... then we can actually see the difference and figure out which one is actually worth it.

Benjamin Barnes6 said:Since I work in pharmacy, I’ve got some inside track on this. Wells Fargo is offering these really solid consumer loans at a 5.55% interest rate in dollars, with a fixed fee of $667—though you can actually snag a 40% discount if you happen to have an expert-level account model. Honestly, looking at my returns from the NYSE, I'm seeing even lower yields than what I'd be paying out on this loan, which is also a pretty sweet deal

Based on those numbers, wouldn't it be smarter to just go with Wells Fargo? They have an even lower APR of 5.08, right?
Arguing back and forth won't solve anything, though I think it's healthy that everyone has their own take on the best move. Don't get me wrong—I'm not out here campaigning for banks or savings accounts—but look at what happened to people who took out loans last year. They’re looking at paying back up to $10,000 more. That $15,000 figure you mentioned? That's a bit much.

I’m honestly just looking for the actual math here...
And look, I get it—arguing with each other is a waste of breath, but throwing around prejudices isn't exactly helpful either.
We’re all supposed to be here to help each other out with info, advice, personal experiences, whatever.

Just wanted to vent a little on why I’m so obsessed with locking in a fixed interest rate... It's mostly about the peace of mind it gives me. Honestly, my life is already stressful enough as it is—it's already taken a massive toll on my health—and the last thing I need is to deal with a monthly spike in my mortgage payments... that kind of stress would absolutely kill me.

Donna Chase12 said:Benjamin Barnes6... I’m actually curious about the specifics here... did you compare loans across all of them without any deposit attached, using the exact same term length, and did you factor in those massive extra fees they tack on?

That's what I'm trying to get at...
So, you pulled out $95,000—or is that $95,000 including that 10% of your own cash you have with them, meaning you actually only took $85,000? I'm a little lost on that part.

When you talked to Warren Buffett, did you ask for a calculation based on having 10% of your own money in there, or was it just a straight loan with zero investment?

Also... did you check what the fees look like at Warren Buffett? Because looking at your numbers, it seems like you're getting hit with some costs here.
Are you dealing with an adjustable interest rate?

And one more thing... from what I can see... with the GDP, you HAVE to have a 10% deposit, and the max term is 15 years. With Warren Buffett, you DON'T need a deposit, the max term is 24 years, and they offer three different rate models.

So, do me a favor and give us a side-by-side comparison of Warren Buffett and the GDP using the same number of years, no deposit, and the exact same loan amount... then we can actually see the difference and figure out which one is actually worth it.

Fees are pretty much standard across the board at most savings banks: you're looking at 1% of the agreed amount just to sign the contract, plus another 1% for processing. Now, if we're talking about bridging loans over at Apple, the fee is $667 capped, though I can't say for sure about Warren Buffett since she didn't mention them. Calculating the costs for the GDP is a breeze because they are incredibly transparent—you see the fees, the interest rate, the interim interest, everything is clear as day. However, with Warren Buffett, I am genuinely stumped as to where all this massive amount of money vanishes to! You add up the fees, then there's supposedly no interim interest, you add the Democratic Party contribution, the savings fee, and after all that, you're left with a huge sum of cash and absolutely no clue where it went. You pointed out the difference between the nominal and effective rates yourself. So, where on earth does that gap come from, especially if there's no interim interest??? It makes it look like the entire difference is swallowed by fees! I just don't get which ones they are!!!
Basically, what I wrote above is that I receive $95,000, but when you factor in everything—what I already had in savings, plus what I had to chip in, plus the full payoff of the previous loan—it totals roughly $132,137. I did mention that the fee is lower for those who have been saving with the bank for a while. But regardless, you definitely need to have 10% of the loan amount ready to go.
As for Warren Buffett, I ran the numbers for a different scenario, for $115,000, which was my initial target. I compared that calculation against a pharmaceutical loan, and the Warren Buffett option actually looked better. But then, once I got the quote from the GDP for $95,000, I compared *that* to the pharma loan, and the GDP ended up being the better deal. So, I was doing a bit of an indirect comparison there.
I originally headed toward Warren Buffett because they offer several different models and a longer repayment term than the GDP. But their calculation, where the fee ends up being way higher than the nominal rate, really rubs me the wrong way. Still, I suppose for someone who doesn't have 10% in cash to put into savings and then move into a bridging loan, it might be smarter to take the Warren Buffett route rather than any other variable-rate loan. At least there, you know what you're getting into, and if you happen to catch a break where fees drop, you can always pivot to a cheaper option later.
The bottom line of my argument is that the GDP is more affordable and far more transparent than Warren Buffett, and I'm certainly not claiming that JPMorgan Chase or Wells Fargo might have even better terms. If anyone out there has actually sat down and crunched the numbers for them, please let me know—I simply haven't had the energy or the time anymore!

Oh, and one more thing... I think I remember seeing someone mention on a forum somewhere that Wells Fargo doesn't require an appraisal if you're buying a brand-new construction home. Maybe that used to be the case, but I'm pretty sure things have changed since then. My aunt actually told me that it's absolutely mandatory now and that it'll run me about $433 plus tax. Now, I'm not entirely certain if I have to use their specific appraiser or if I can hunt down someone else who might be a bit more budget-friendly. The guy she suggested is actually an old buddy of hers—she even gave me his number right away and was practically begging me to have him value the condo at 30% above the loan amount! Her logic was that if he bumps up the valuation, I wouldn't have to worry about putting down that extra cash for the
.