2025 CDFI Survey: Does Older Mean Wiser for Mission-Driven Lenders

Regional Matters

March 26, 2026

Introduction

For over a century, community development financial institutions (CDFIs) have played a role in expanding credit access to consumers, small businesses, and communities that are underserved by traditional financial institutions. Every two years, the Federal Reserve conducts a survey of CDFIs to keep a pulse on the industry. The most recent survey was in 2025.

The purpose of this post is to understand if and how CDFIs differ based on how long they have provided mission-driven lending. Here are a few interesting takeaways when comparing CDFIs by age:¹

• Older CDFI loan funds are generally larger by asset size than younger loan funds, although the same relationship between age and asset size does not hold for depository CDFIs (banks and credit unions).
• Younger CDFIs were the most likely to report struggles with meeting demand, often citing significant challenges with operational funding.
• Older CDFIs reported that staffing and technology posed the most significant challenges.

Credit Unions and Cooperativas Are Often the Oldest CDFIs

As discussed in the 2025 Federal Reserve CDFI Survey Key Findings Report, the majority of loan funds fall between 11 and 50 years old. Conversely, around half of all credit union respondents were 51 years or older; there is a long history of community development-focused credit unions, and many were formed prior to the 1970s. The oldest institutions - some more than 100 years old - were all banks, but over a third of CDFI banks were between 11 and 25 years old.

The largest shares of Microenterprise Development Loan Funds and Community Development Corporations started providing mission-driven financing between 26 to 50 years ago. This makes sense given that the 1980s saw the rise of Microenterprise Development Organizations, and the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970 introduced the Community Development Corporation designation. Minority Depository Institutions, defined by Congress in 1989 as institutions where 51 percent or more of the stock is owned by one or more socially and economically disadvantaged individuals, were more spread out through the age groups. The younger a CDFI is, the less likely it is to have any of these three designations.

Native CDFIs tend to be slightly younger - under 25 years old - given that special charters and funding streams for Native American-serving CDFIs did not exist until 23 years ago, when the CDFI Fund created its Native Initiatives program. On the other hand, cooperativas (cooperative credit unions based in Puerto Rico) stand out as the oldest organizations represented above, with nearly 90 percent reporting that they've offered mission-driven financing for more than 51 years. Despite their long history, very few cooperativas were certified by the CDFI Fund prior to 2019.

Younger Loan Funds Have Fewer Total Assets Than Older Loan Funds

In general, CDFIs are smaller than traditional financial institutions, and CDFI loan funds tend to have fewer assets than depository CDFIs. CDFI loan funds cannot accept deposits. Instead, they must raise capital through public and private funding sources.

This could explain the clear relationship between the age of a CDFI loan fund and its asset size. Median assets for CDFI loan funds offering mission-driven financing for less than five years are $3 million, compared to a median asset size of $88 million for organizations that have been offering financing for 51 years or longer. It takes time for loan funds to raise capital and generate reliable funding streams. CDFI credit unions and banks did not have as strong of a relationship between age and asset size.

CDFIs of Different Ages Face Unique Challenges Meeting Demand

The 2025 CDFI Survey also asked about ability to meet demand and organizational challenges.

Around a third of CDFIs less than five years old reported that operational funding challenges were a significant factor that impacted their ability to meet demand, which was higher than other age groups. Compared to younger CDFIs, many older CDFIs reported technology and staffing challenges, especially with finding qualified candidates. The oldest CDFIs also struggled with current staff who left for higher-paid positions or other reasons, while the youngest CDFIs reported that their current staff lacked necessary skills.

The degree to which CDFIs struggled with technology varied between age groups, but there was not much differentiation between what technological issues were commonly reported: cost and integrating new technology with existing systems. The youngest CDFIs also reported difficulty with finding the right technology and vendors, possibly due to lack of experience, while the oldest CDFIs indicated that they faced more cybersecurity concerns.

Conclusion

Observing CDFIs by age reveals interesting patterns in special designations, asset sizes, and challenges. The oldest CDFIs that responded to the Federal Reserve CDFI Survey in 2025 were banks, credit unions, and cooperativas. They represented the largest share of CDFIs 51 years or older, and older CDFIs were more likely to carry special designations than younger CDFIs. Most loan funds were between 11 and 50 years old, and there was a distinct relationship between a loan fund's age and asset size that did not exist for other types of organizations. Young CDFIs were most likely to struggle with meeting demand, and they faced barriers related to operational funding. Older CDFIs, on the other hand, reported significant staffing and technology challenges.

CDFI coalitions, networks, and roundtables offer these organizations the opportunity to collaborate, exchange ideas, and overcome their unique challenges. Younger loan funds could lean on older CDFIs to explore new capitalization strategies to grow their asset sizes over time, and older CDFIs may need to draw on fresh ideas from younger CDFIs to help with staff retention and cybersecurity. Through strategic collaboration, CDFIs of all ages can work together to fulfill their missions and expand credit access in underserved markets.

Views expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect those of the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond or the Federal Reserve System.