What IMB 2026 Reveals About the Mortgage Industry’s Next Chapter

There is something uniquely clarifying about being on the ground at the Independent Mortgage Bankers Conference. IMB has always been a barometer for where this industry actually is, not where slide decks say it should be. This year, the signal was unmistakable. The mood is more optimistic than it has been in years, attendance is strong, and conversations have shifted from survival to execution. But that optimism is disciplined. Lenders are encouraged, not complacent, and the challenges in front of us are well understood.

What stood out most in conversations across the conference floor was not a single technology, product, or policy headline. It was a shared recognition that the industry is at an inflection point. The next phase will be defined less by bold proclamations and more by focused decisions, thoughtful adoption, and follow-through.

The Long Funnel Problem Is Still the Problem

One theme surfaced repeatedly in discussions with IMB leaders and originators alike: the growing distance between lead and loan. In today’s market, it is not uncommon for nine, twelve, or even eighteen months to pass between initial borrower engagement and a submitted application. This is not a failure of loan officers or marketing teams. It is the reality of constrained housing supply, competitive purchase markets, and borrowers who are ready financially but unable to transact immediately.

The implication is significant. Loan officers are being asked to nurture relationships for far longer than the industry was designed to support. Staying relevant over that time horizon requires more than occasional check-ins. It requires systems, strategies, and content that align with real borrower life events, not just rate triggers.

Many lenders are experimenting with AI-driven tools to support this nurturing process, and the technology is impressive. But the consensus among experienced operators is clear. There is no single solution that solves the entire funnel. Success will come from assembling the right combination of tools and processes, aligned to a clear strategy, rather than chasing a mythical end-to-end fix.

AI Is Moving From Concept to Use Case

Artificial intelligence dominated the vendor floor, but the tone of the conversation has matured. This year, lenders are no longer asking whether they should use AI. They are asking where it belongs.

Across multiple discussions, the same guidance emerged. Pick a specific problem. Apply AI narrowly. Execute. Then move to the next use case. The lenders seeing real results are not trying to automate everything at once. They are targeting high-friction, high-cost areas and deploying AI with clear guardrails.

There is also growing awareness that AI adoption is as much a change management challenge as a technical one. Teams need clarity about how tools will support their work, not replace it. Several leaders emphasized the importance of involving sales, operations, post-closing, compliance, and QC early in the process to avoid downstream resistance and unintended consequences. AI task forces are becoming a practical way to build alignment, surface risks, and create internal champions.

The message is straightforward. AI is not magic. It is leverage. Used thoughtfully, it can reduce cost, increase consistency, and free humans to focus on judgment-driven work. Used indiscriminately, it creates confusion and distrust.

Cost Remains the Gravity Well

Despite improved sentiment, the cost to produce a loan remains the industry’s most pressing structural issue. Leaders were candid about this reality. Volume improvements alone will not solve the problem. The traditional model of scaling headcount with demand is increasingly unsustainable.

What is changing is how lenders are thinking about automation. The conversation has moved beyond basic rules-based workflows. Many are now exploring hybrid models where deterministic automation handles known calculations and requirements, while AI flags anomalies, exceptions, and risk patterns that require human attention.

Underwriting, quality control, and post-closing were frequently cited as areas where this approach is already delivering measurable savings. The goal is not to remove humans from the process, but to redeploy them more effectively. That distinction matters, especially in an industry built on trust, accountability, and regulatory scrutiny.

Policy, Credit, and the Willingness to Confront Risk

Policy conversations were as animated as ever, particularly around credit reporting and the debate between tri-merge and single-score models. What was striking was not consensus, but engagement. Industry participants are no longer avoiding these discussions out of fear. They are grappling with the trade-offs openly.

A recurring argument was that progress requires accepting some level of uncertainty. Maintaining the status quo because change introduces risk ultimately leads to stagnation. At the same time, no one is advocating reckless shifts. The path forward lies in structured experimentation, transparent dialogue with investors, and a clear focus on consumer outcomes.

These conversations are also intersecting with broader affordability discussions, including LLPA reform and premium structures. Credit reporting is not an isolated issue. It is part of a larger ecosystem that determines who can access homeownership and at what cost.

Consolidation, Collaboration, and Consumer Transparency

Consolidation continues to reshape both mortgage and real estate, and IMB reflected that reality. The strategic imperative is becoming clearer. Scale alone is not the answer. Transparency, integration, and consumer trust are.

Several conversations emphasized the growing importance of tighter alignment between mortgage and real estate operations. When data flows more freely and responsibilities are clearer, the consumer experience improves. This is not about control. It is about coordination.

At the same time, legal and regulatory scrutiny around transparency is intensifying. The industry is being asked to explain its value more clearly and justify its structures more rigorously. Those who proactively address these expectations will be better positioned than those who wait to be forced.

A More Grounded Optimism

What makes this moment different from past cycles is not just improved volume projections or easing headwinds. It is the industry’s posture. Leaders are realistic about the work ahead. They are focused on execution, not slogans. They understand that technology is a means, not an end, and that sustainable progress comes from disciplined decisions made consistently over time.

IMB 2026 did not offer easy answers. What it offered was clarity. The path forward will be built through focused AI adoption, cost discipline, thoughtful risk-taking, and active participation in policy and advocacy. Above all, it will require lenders to stay engaged, use their voices, and take ownership of the industry’s future.

That, more than any single trend, is the signal worth paying attention to.