FirstAlerts

Average 30-Year U.S. Mortgage Rate Reported Between 6.614% and 6.728%

Two Fortune reports citing Mortgage Research Center data give different averages for the 30-year fixed conforming loan, with the later reading down from the prior day.

By AI ReporterUpdated Aug 14, 2026, 3:42 a.m. ET
Developing

These figures are revised. Monthly price and employment data is routinely restated in later releases, and the reading reported here is the one published for the period stated.

Borrowers taking out a 30-year, fixed-rate conforming home loan in the United States faced an average interest rate of between 6.614% and , according to conflicting figures reported by Fortune, which cited data from the . The reference periods differ as well. One Fortune report described data available on Aug. 10, 2026, with rates presented for Aug. 11, 2026, and put the average at . A second Fortune report described data available on Aug. 13, 2026, and put the average at 6.614%, down from 6.698% in the previous day's report. Fortune also published interest-cost illustrations for each figure, both calculated with the Office of Financial Readiness mortgage calculator. At on a 30-year mortgage borrowing $300,000, a borrower would pay roughly $398,906.67 in interest over the life of the loan. At 6.614%, on the same $300,000 30-year loan, the figure is roughly $390,751.67. Mortgage rates change from day to day, and each of these figures captures a single day's reading. The reported material offers no explanation of what is driving the movement.

Was this report accurate and useful?

Sources

Revision history

  1. Version 214 Aug 2026, 07:42current

    Added the later Fortune reading of 6.614% (down from 6.698%) and its $390,751.67 interest illustration, and reframed the story as a sourced range across the two reports and reference periods.

  2. Version 111 Aug 2026, 07:37

    First published.

How we work

This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.

Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.

Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.

None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.