Top HUD Lenders in 2025

The 25 lenders that wrote the most HUD firm commitments in calendar 2025, ranked from HUD's own loan-level records, with the program mix, the deal sizes and the closing records a borrower actually has to choose on.

There are fewer HUD lenders than most borrowers expect. Originating an FHA-insured multifamily or healthcare loan means holding a HUD MAP or LEAN approval first, so the field is a few dozen firms rather than the thousands of banks, funds and credit unions a conventional commercial mortgage can be shopped to. Which firm you take a deal to therefore matters more here than it does almost anywhere else in commercial real estate.

What follows is built for someone who is choosing one. It is not only a league table. It answers three questions a table on its own cannot: who is active in the specific HUD program your deal needs, who writes loans at your deal size, and who actually gets a firm commitment to the closing table rather than merely issuing one.

How this ranking is built

Every figure on this page comes from HUD's own loan-level records: the department's database of FHA multifamily firm commitments and initial endorsements, together with the matching healthcare file. Four decisions shape what you are looking at, and each one changes the order.

Calendar year, not fiscal year. The main table covers firm commitments issued between January and December 2025. Most published HUD rankings, including our own on multifamily.loans, use HUD's fiscal year instead. Neither basis is more correct; they are simply two twelve-month windows three months apart, and a lender that had a strong autumn lands differently in each.

Firm commitments, not closings. A firm commitment is the point at which HUD agrees to insure a loan. It is dated, public and attributed to a named lender, which makes it the cleanest thing to count. Closings happen months later and some never happen at all, which is why the closing section below exists as its own table rather than being folded into the ranking.

Both sides of the house. HUD insures nursing homes, assisted living and skilled nursing under Section 232 alongside the apartment programs, and several of the largest lenders here do more healthcare business than apartment business. Leaving healthcare out would misrepresent what these firms actually do. Every row shows the split, so you can read either side on its own.

Affiliates combined, housing finance agencies excluded. Several lenders file with HUD under two names, one for apartments and one for healthcare, and the raw file treats them as unrelated companies. We add those halves back together. We also leave out state and city housing finance agencies. California Housing Finance Agency and New York City Housing Development Corporation both clear the dollar threshold and both appear in the fiscal-year table on multifamily.loans, but neither is a lender a borrower can approach. They lend through HUD's Section 542(c) risk-sharing program on their own affordable pipelines. Including them would pad a list whose entire purpose is telling you who to call.

One more thing worth saying plainly. Janover arranges HUD financing and works with lenders that appear on this list. The ranking is computed from HUD's records, not from who we transact with, and nothing below is placed or weighted by relationship.

The top 25 HUD lenders of calendar 2025

Ranked by total firm commitment dollars, apartments and healthcare combined.

Source: HUD firm-commitment data for calendar year 2025, apartment (MAP) and healthcare (ORCF) programs combined. Affiliates that file under more than one name are combined. State and city housing finance agencies are excluded, for the reason given above. Healthcare share is measured in dollars, not deal count. Added together, these 25 firms committed $18.4 billion across 799 loans in calendar 2025; that is the sum of the rows above and not a market total, because our published market totals are kept on HUD's fiscal-year basis to stay comparable with the department's own reporting.

Why our number one is not the fiscal-year number one

On this page Dwight Capital finishes first, at $2,159.1M across 93 loans. On our fiscal-year ranking Greystone finishes first, at $2,603.1M across 123 loans. Both statements are accurate, and the reason is the calendar, not the arithmetic.

HUD's fiscal year begins on 1 October, so the fiscal-2025 window captures the last quarter of 2024 and stops at the end of September 2025. The calendar window drops that 2024 quarter and picks up October, November and December 2025 instead. Three months in, three months out. A lender that closed heavily in late 2024 looks larger on the fiscal basis; a lender that finished 2025 strongly looks larger here.

We reconciled the two extractions against each other on 7 August 2026 before publishing this page. Thirteen of the fifteen lenders appear in both tables, and for the typical firm the two annual totals are close: the median ratio of calendar-year dollars to fiscal-year dollars is 0.985, so the middle of the pack differs by under two percent. Nine of the thirteen sit within eight percent either way. Armadale Capital's unusual two loans for $561.4M appear identically in both extractions, which is how we know that line is real rather than an aggregation artifact.

Four lenders moved much further than that, and those are worth naming rather than smoothing over, because the movement is the information. KeyBank booked only 66 percent as much in the calendar window as in the fiscal one, and Greystone 83 percent, so both did materially more of their year in late 2024 than in late 2025. Mason Joseph went the other way at 129 percent. VIUM Capital came in at 89 percent. If you are choosing between these firms on the strength of a single annual number, that is precisely the group where the number you happen to read decides the answer.

The practical reading: use the calendar table when you want the most recent full year, and the fiscal table when you want the basis HUD itself reports on. If a lender's own marketing cites a number that matches neither, it is probably counting closings rather than commitments, or counting only one side of its business.

The top 10, lender by lender

Dollar rank is the least interesting thing about most of these firms. What follows is what each one actually does, which programs it lives in, and who it is a sensible call for.

1. Dwight Capital

Dwight issued 93 firm commitments for $2,159.1M in calendar 2025, split $1,435.4M on the apartment side and $723.7M on healthcare. It is the most active refinance and acquisition lender in the market by a wide margin: over the twelve months to 30 June 2026 it wrote 128 loans in the 223(f) family for $2,609.7M, roughly 45% more dollars and 52% more loans than the second-place firm. Founded in 2014 by brothers Adam and Josh Sasouness, who still run it as co-chief executives, the New York firm bought Love Funding's HUD platform in August 2020 and has been at or near the top of the table ever since.

If your deal is a stabilized apartment or seniors property going into an FHA 223(f) refinance, this is the desk that has seen the most of them recently.

2. Berkadia

Berkadia matched Dwight on deal count at 93 and finished $5.4M behind on dollars, at $2,153.7M. The split is what distinguishes it: $1,675.7M of that was apartments, the largest apartment book of any lender in this table, with healthcare at 22%. Berkadia was formed in 2009 out of the Capmark bankruptcy as a joint venture between Berkshire Hathaway and what is now Jefferies, and it remains one of the largest non-bank commercial mortgage servicers in the country.

For a pure apartment deal, Berkadia wrote more HUD apartment dollars than anyone else in calendar 2025, including both firms that outrank it on the combined table.

3. Greystone Funding

Greystone wrote more individual loans than anyone, 105 of them, for $2,146.9M. Its book is healthcare-weighted: $1,343.7M through the Section 232 programs, the largest healthcare book here, against $803.2M of apartment lending. Founded in 1988 by Stephen Rosenberg, who still leads the firm, Greystone tops the fiscal-year table and has done so for several years running.

One caution from the closing data further down. Greystone converted 93 of 105 commitments, which is respectable, but only 79% of committed dollars reached closing, the weakest dollar conversion among the three largest books. On a big, complex healthcare deal that is worth a direct conversation about timing.

4. Walker & Dunlop

Walker & Dunlop committed $1,238.7M across 54 loans, $968.2M of it apartments. Founded in 1937 and led by Willy Walker since 2007, the firm was among the first in the country to write single-family loans using FHA insurance, and its HUD desk sits inside one of the largest agency lending platforms in the market.

That last point is the practical one. If you want HUD priced against Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac execution inside a single conversation rather than across three, a firm with all three licenses can do that. Several lenders on this list cannot.

5. KeyBank

KeyBank committed $1,046.8M across 44 loans, 65% of it healthcare. It is also the cleanest illustration of why affiliate combination matters: the bank files its apartment and healthcare business with HUD under two separate entity names, so any ranking built on a raw sort of the file places it far lower than it belongs.

KeyBank closed 41 of its 44 commitments, a 93% conversion that is the highest of any lender here with more than 20 commitments. For a borrower, a bank balance sheet alongside the HUD license also means bridge or construction debt can sit in front of the permanent loan without a second institution.

6. VIUM Capital

VIUM is a pure healthcare lender: 72 commitments, $998.2M, none of it apartments. Its average commitment of $13.9M is the second smallest in this table, which tells you how it reaches a billion dollars, by writing a great many mid-sized skilled nursing and seniors housing loans rather than a handful of large ones. The firm was launched in 2020 by Kass Matt and Steven Kennedy, both formerly of Lancaster Pollard, and it runs a bridge lending business alongside the HUD platform in a joint venture with Merchants Bank of Indiana.

That bridge capability is the reason it appears on shortlists for properties that are not yet seasoned enough for HUD. Our explainer on bridge-to-HUD financing covers when that route makes sense.

7. Gershman Investment

Gershman committed $834.5M across 31 loans, 94% of it on the apartment side, at an average of $26.9M. The St. Louis firm was founded on 23 June 1955 by Solon Gershman and marked its seventieth year in June 2025. Its book is construction-weighted, which the two tables on this page show between them: Gershman committed $834.5M in calendar 2025 but only $377.5M of 223(f) refinance and acquisition volume over the twelve months to June 2026.

Note the name carefully when you go looking. The HUD lender is Gershman Investment Corp. of St. Louis, which is a different business from Gershman Mortgage, the residential lender based in Chesterfield, Missouri.

8. Rockport Mortgage

Rockport did $833.4M on 19 loans, every dollar of it apartments, at an average commitment of $43.9M. That is the third largest average in this table and it is the whole story of the firm: the Gloucester, Massachusetts lender has concentrated on FHA since 1992 and does very little else, with affordable housing preservation as its signature work.

Nineteen loans a year is not a volume business. If you have a large, complicated, subsidized preservation deal, this is a specialist. If you have a $7 million garden-style refinance, it is not the right call.

9. NewPoint

NewPoint committed $752.3M across 46 loans, three quarters of it healthcare. Its average commitment of $16.4M puts it among the smaller-ticket lenders here, and it is one of the more reachable names on the list for a mid-sized seniors housing deal. The firm opened for business in 2021, and ownership changed during the period this table covers: Franklin BSP Realty Trust acquired it in a transaction that closed in July 2025, so anything written about the firm before mid-2025 describes a different company.

10. Mason Joseph

Mason Joseph rounds out the top ten with $710.9M on 17 loans, all apartments, at an average of $41.8M. It runs one of the most concentrated books in HUD lending, works nationally from offices in Texas and Oklahoma, and leans heavily toward ground-up work rather than refinancing.

For a HUD 221(d)(4) construction or substantial rehabilitation loan of real size, it belongs on the shortlist despite sitting tenth on dollars.

Which lenders are reachable at your deal size

This is the question the dollar ranking answers worst. A firm that commits $833M across 19 loans is not competing for the same business as a firm that commits $998M across 72. Grouping the same 25 lenders by their average 2025 commitment gives a much better first cut at who to call.

Average commitment size and loan count for calendar 2025, from the table above. An average is not a floor or a ceiling. A lender whose book averages $44M has written smaller loans and will write another one for the right sponsor; the bands describe where a firm's attention sits, not where its underwriting stops.

Armadale Capital is the entry that proves why this view is worth having. Its two loans at an average of $280.7M were supplemental improvement loans secured by hospitals, a corner of the FHA world that has nothing to do with an apartment or a nursing home. It clears a very high dollar threshold on almost no transaction volume, and its rank tells an apartment borrower nothing at all. We have left it in rather than quietly dropping the entries that complicate the list.

Refinance and acquisition: the 223(f) family, latest twelve months

Section 223(f) is the program most HUD borrowers are actually shopping. It is the refinance and acquisition route for existing stabilized property, running through Section 223(f) on the apartment side and Section 232/223(f) on the healthcare side. This table narrows to that family and moves the window forward, covering the twelve months from 1 July 2025 to 30 June 2026. It is the most current view on this site.

HUD 223(f) family firm commitments, 1 July 2025 through 30 June 2026, apartment and healthcare refinance and acquisition combined. Healthcare share is measured in dollars.

Three things move against the calendar table, and each one is a signal rather than noise. Dwight extends its lead when the view narrows to refinancing, which is the program it is built around. Capital Funding and Ikaria climb, because both are healthcare specialists whose entire book sits in this family. Mason Joseph falls to twentieth, which is exactly what you would expect from a firm whose business is 221(d)(4) construction rather than refinance. A construction sponsor should read that fall as a recommendation, not a warning.

Which lenders actually close

A firm commitment is a promise, not a loan. The gap between commitments issued and commitments closed is the single most useful statistic on this page and it is almost never published, because it is the one number that can make a lender look bad.

The table below covers the lenders that ran genuine dual platforms in calendar 2025: at least eight firm commitments, at least $150M of committed volume, and at least two commitments on both the apartment and the healthcare side. It is ranked by committed dollars, so it reads in the same order as the main table.

Calendar 2025 firm commitments and the share of them that reached closing, for lenders with at least 8 commitments, $150M of volume and at least 2 commitments on each side of the business. Ranked by closing rate, then by dollar conversion and volume.

Three lenders closed everything they committed in 2025: M&T Realty Capital 14 of 14, JLL Real Estate Capital 11 of 11, Bravo Capital 9 of 9. All three books are small enough that one broken deal would have changed the number, so read the counts alongside the percentage.

Read the other end of the table too. Greystone closed 89% of its commitments but only 79% of its committed dollars, which means the deals that fell away were the larger ones. Regions Bank shows the same pattern at 77% of dollars. On any large HUD deal, ask the lender what happened to the commitments it issued last year that did not close, and why.

Apartments or healthcare, and why the distinction matters

HUD's apartment and healthcare programs are underwritten by different teams, reviewed by different HUD offices, and staffed by different specialists. A firm can be excellent at one and inexperienced at the other, and the combined dollar ranking hides that completely.

Four of the 25 firms here did no apartment business at all in calendar 2025: VIUM Capital, Armadale Capital, Capital Funding and Ikaria Mortgage are entirely healthcare. Five did no healthcare business: Rockport Mortgage, Mason Joseph, Merchants Capital, Bellwether Enterprise and Highland Commercial Mortgage are entirely apartments. Between those poles, Greystone, KeyBank and NewPoint each run healthcare-weighted books above 60%, while Berkadia, Walker & Dunlop and Gershman are apartment houses that also write some healthcare.

The practical rule is simple. If you are financing skilled nursing, assisted living or memory care, a lender's apartment volume tells you very little; look at the healthcare columns and at the Section 232/223(f) experience behind them. If you are financing apartments, the reverse applies. And if you are doing ground-up work, neither column is the right one to read: check the 223(f) table, and treat a low position there as a sign the firm's business sits in construction instead.

How to use this list on an actual deal

Start with the program, not the rank. Work out whether you need 223(f) for a stabilized property, 221(d)(4) for construction or substantial rehabilitation, 223(a)(7) to streamline a loan HUD already insures, or 241(a) for a supplemental advance on an insured property. Our comparison of 223(f) against 221(d)(4) is the fastest way to settle that if you are unsure.

Then filter by deal size, then by platform, and only then by rank. Two or three names will survive. Talk to all of them, because HUD terms are set by the program rather than by the lender, which means the things that actually differ between firms are execution speed, credit judgment and whether they will still be answering the phone in month five.

That last point is worth dwelling on. HUD loans take months, not weeks, and the interval between firm commitment and closing is where deals are won and lost. It is the reason the closing table above exists, and it is a fair question to put to any lender before you sign an engagement.

If you would rather have the shortlist built for you, tell us about the property and the desk will come back with sizing, likely executions and the lenders that fit.

Related reading

• The top 15 HUD multifamily lenders, fiscal year basis, our sister site's ranking on HUD's own reporting year
• Top 10 HUD lenders of 2021, the record year, kept as a historical record
• Top 10 HUD multifamily lenders of 2018 and 2019, the last two pre-pandemic years
• FHA and HUD insured multifamily loans, every program in one place
• HUD multifamily basic statutory limits

Related questions

The questions we are asked most often about HUD lender rankings, answered from the data above.

Who is the largest HUD lender?

It depends on the window. On calendar year 2025, Dwight Capital led with $2,159.1M in firm commitments across 93 loans, narrowly ahead of Berkadia at $2,153.7M and Greystone Funding at $2,146.9M. On HUD's fiscal year 2025, which ended on 30 September 2025, Greystone led with $2,603.1M across 123 loans. Both are correct; they are twelve-month windows offset by three months.

What is the difference between a firm commitment and a closing?

A firm commitment is HUD's agreement to insure the loan. The closing, or initial endorsement, comes months later, once the remaining conditions are satisfied. Some commitments never close. That gap is why this page reports both, and why a lender's closing rate is worth as much attention as its volume.

Which HUD lender is the best?

It depends on the deal. Dwight Capital wrote the most volume in calendar 2025 at $2,159.1M. Greystone Funding wrote the most loans, 105, and led healthcare. Rockport Mortgage averaged $43.9M a loan and did nothing but apartments. On closings, M&T Realty Capital, JLL Real Estate Capital and Bravo Capital each closed every commitment they issued, on books of 14, 11 and 9 loans. Match the lender to your program and your loan size before you look at the league table.

Who are the largest HUD healthcare lenders?

On calendar 2025, Greystone Funding led the healthcare side at $1,343.7M across 79 loans, followed by VIUM Capital at $998.2M on 72 loans and Dwight Capital at $723.7M on 47. VIUM, Capital Funding, Ikaria Mortgage and Armadale Capital wrote no apartment business at all, so their combined ranks understate how large they are in Section 232 lending specifically.

Who does the most HUD 223(f) refinancing?

Dwight Capital, by a wide margin. Over the twelve months to 30 June 2026 it issued 128 firm commitments in the 223(f) refinance and acquisition family for $2,609.7M, ahead of Greystone Funding at 84 loans for $1,800.0M and Berkadia at 81 loans for $1,417.8M.

Why are state housing finance agencies not on this list?

Because a borrower cannot approach them the way they approach a mortgage bank. California Housing Finance Agency and New York City Housing Development Corporation both committed enough volume to place, and both appear in our fiscal-year table, but they lend through HUD's Section 542(c) risk-sharing program on their own affordable pipelines rather than competing for third-party business. Excluding them keeps this list to firms you can actually call.