Credit Card Delinquency at Banks Outside the Top 100
Share of credit card loan balances delinquent or in nonaccrual status
Where the Credit Card Delinquency at Banks Outside the Top 100 stands now
The Credit Card Delinquency at Banks Outside the Top 100 was 6.5% in the second quarter of 2026. Since 2010 it has ranged from 2.8% in the fourth quarter of 2015 to 7.9% in the fourth quarter of 2023.
What it means for households: Credit Card Default Statistics Behind on payments? Your Rights with Debt Collectors
How the Credit Card Delinquency at Banks Outside the Top 100 has moved since 1991
Credit Card Delinquency at Banks Outside the Top 100: down since 2023
Credit card delinquency rate, banks outside top 100: 6.5% in the second quarter of 2026, down from 7.0% a year earlier. Quarterly, 1991–2026.
What the Credit Card Delinquency at Banks Outside the Top 100 measures
Measurement basis: 30+ days past due or in nonaccrual status, per the Federal Reserve Board Charge-Off and Delinquency Rates release
A higher rate is worse for households.
In our research, changes in Delinquency Rate on Consumer Loans (ex credit card) have tended to show up in this measure about 13 quarters later. How we tested this
Credit Card Delinquency at Banks Outside the Top 100 by quarter, 1991 to 2026
Every quarter since 1991, newest first. The change compares each quarter with the same quarter a year earlier.
The source changed how it measures this in Q1 2001. Readings before the March 2001 Call Report are partly estimated by the Federal Reserve rather than reported in full detail. Smaller banks filed the FFIEC 033 and 034 forms and could report charged-off and delinquent loans under their own loan classifications instead of the regulatory ones, so the Federal Reserve adjusted and allocated those amounts to the published loan categories using estimated ratios that differed by loan category. The Board states that from the March 2001 Call Report the detail reported by all banks eliminated the need for those procedures. In February 2017 it updated the models used to estimate data not reported by small banks that filed the FFIEC 034 form and revised the pre-2001 rates for several series, so values on that side of the boundary have already moved once without any new bank report. Figures on either side are not directly comparable, so the change column stays blank where a comparison would cross that date. Source documentation.
The source changed how it measures this in Q1 2010. From the first quarter of 2010, credit card rates cover loans that banks had securitized and previously kept off their balance sheets. Accounting standards FAS 166 and 167 required banks to bring those loans back on, and the Board states the change is reflected in the 2010-Q1 Call Reports; one large credit card bank made the move in the fourth quarter of 2009. The Board's H.8 notes put the credit card and other revolving loans consolidated by domestically chartered commercial banks at about $335 billion as of March 31, 2010. Rates from 2010 on are measured over a different pool of loans than earlier readings. Figures on either side are not directly comparable, so the change column stays blank where a comparison would cross that date. Source documentation.
| Quarter | Rate (%) | Change from a year earlier (percentage points) |
|---|---|---|
| Q2 2026 | 6.5 | −0.5 |
| Q1 2026 | 6.4 | −0.8 |
| Q4 2025 | 6.6 | −0.5 |
| Q3 2025 | 6.8 | −0.7 |
| Q2 2025 | 7.0 | −0.8 |
| Q1 2025 | 7.2 | −0.6 |
| Q4 2024 | 7.1 | −0.8 |
| Q3 2024 | 7.5 | −0.1 |
| Q2 2024 | 7.8 | +0.4 |
| Q1 2024 | 7.8 | +0.6 |
| Q4 2023 | 7.9 | +1.0 |
| Q3 2023 | 7.6 | +0.7 |
| Q2 2023 | 7.4 | +1.4 |
| Q1 2023 | 7.2 | +2.0 |
| Q4 2022 | 6.9 | +2.3 |
| Q3 2022 | 6.9 | +2.6 |
| Q2 2022 | 6.0 | +1.8 |
| Q1 2022 | 5.2 | +0.6 |
| Q4 2021 | 4.6 | −0.4 |
| Q3 2021 | 4.3 | −0.8 |
| Q2 2021 | 4.2 | −1.4 |
| Q1 2021 | 4.6 | −2.6 |
| Q4 2020 | 5.0 | −1.7 |
| Q3 2020 | 5.1 | −0.9 |
| Q2 2020 | 5.6 | −1.0 |
| Q1 2020 | 7.2 | +1.7 |
| Q4 2019 | 6.7 | +1.1 |
| Q3 2019 | 6.0 | +0.1 |
| Q2 2019 | 6.6 | +0.4 |
| Q1 2019 | 5.5 | −0.6 |
| Q4 2018 | 5.6 | 0.0 |
| Q3 2018 | 5.9 | +0.5 |
| Q2 2018 | 6.2 | +2.2 |
| Q1 2018 | 6.1 | +2.6 |
| Q4 2017 | 5.6 | +2.3 |
| Q3 2017 | 5.4 | +2.3 |
| Q2 2017 | 4.0 | +0.9 |
| Q1 2017 | 3.5 | +0.5 |
| Q4 2016 | 3.3 | +0.5 |
| Q3 2016 | 3.1 | −0.4 |
| Q2 2016 | 3.1 | −0.4 |
| Q1 2016 | 3.0 | −0.4 |
| Q4 2015 | 2.8 | −0.5 |
| Q3 2015 | 3.5 | +0.2 |
| Q2 2015 | 3.5 | +0.2 |
| Q1 2015 | 3.4 | +0.1 |
| Q4 2014 | 3.3 | 0.0 |
| Q3 2014 | 3.3 | 0.0 |
| Q2 2014 | 3.3 | +0.1 |
| Q1 2014 | 3.3 | 0.0 |
| Q4 2013 | 3.3 | 0.0 |
| Q3 2013 | 3.3 | 0.0 |
| Q2 2013 | 3.2 | −0.1 |
| Q1 2013 | 3.3 | 0.0 |
| Q4 2012 | 3.3 | −0.1 |
| Q3 2012 | 3.3 | −0.3 |
| Q2 2012 | 3.3 | −0.4 |
| Q1 2012 | 3.3 | −0.7 |
| Q4 2011 | 3.4 | −0.8 |
| Q3 2011 | 3.6 | −1.1 |
| Q2 2011 | 3.7 | −1.4 |
| Q1 2011 | 4.0 | −1.2 |
| Q4 2010 | 4.2 | — |
| Q3 2010 | 4.7 | — |
| Q2 2010 | 5.1 | — |
| Q1 2010 | 5.2 | — |
| Q4 2009 | 5.1 | −0.5 |
| Q3 2009 | 4.1 | −0.8 |
| Q2 2009 | 4.6 | −0.5 |
| Q1 2009 | 4.6 | −0.5 |
| Q4 2008 | 5.6 | +1.1 |
| Q3 2008 | 4.9 | +0.7 |
| Q2 2008 | 5.1 | +1.5 |
| Q1 2008 | 5.1 | +1.5 |
| Q4 2007 | 4.5 | +1.1 |
| Q3 2007 | 4.2 | +1.0 |
| Q2 2007 | 3.6 | +0.5 |
| Q1 2007 | 3.6 | +0.4 |
| Q4 2006 | 3.4 | +0.5 |
| Q3 2006 | 3.2 | −1.1 |
| Q2 2006 | 3.1 | −1.1 |
| Q1 2006 | 3.2 | −1.2 |
| Q4 2005 | 2.9 | −2.6 |
| Q3 2005 | 4.3 | −1.3 |
| Q2 2005 | 4.2 | −1.8 |
| Q1 2005 | 4.4 | −0.9 |
| Q4 2004 | 5.5 | −0.9 |
| Q3 2004 | 5.6 | 0.0 |
| Q2 2004 | 6.0 | −0.1 |
| Q1 2004 | 5.3 | −1.2 |
| Q4 2003 | 6.4 | +0.4 |
| Q3 2003 | 5.6 | −0.6 |
| Q2 2003 | 6.1 | +0.6 |
| Q1 2003 | 6.5 | +0.8 |
| Q4 2002 | 6.0 | +0.5 |
| Q3 2002 | 6.2 | +0.2 |
| Q2 2002 | 5.5 | −0.4 |
| Q1 2002 | 5.7 | +0.2 |
| Q4 2001 | 5.5 | — |
| Q3 2001 | 6.0 | — |
| Q2 2001 | 5.9 | — |
| Q1 2001 | 5.5 | — |
| Q4 2000 | 5.0 | +0.1 |
| Q3 2000 | 4.7 | −0.2 |
| Q2 2000 | 4.7 | −0.2 |
| Q1 2000 | 4.7 | 0.0 |
| Q4 1999 | 4.9 | −0.2 |
| Q3 1999 | 4.9 | −0.1 |
| Q2 1999 | 4.9 | −0.2 |
| Q1 1999 | 4.7 | −0.5 |
| Q4 1998 | 5.1 | +0.1 |
| Q3 1998 | 5.0 | −0.3 |
| Q2 1998 | 5.1 | −0.2 |
| Q1 1998 | 5.2 | 0.0 |
| Q4 1997 | 5.0 | −0.1 |
| Q3 1997 | 5.3 | +0.4 |
| Q2 1997 | 5.3 | +1.0 |
| Q1 1997 | 5.2 | +1.2 |
| Q4 1996 | 5.1 | +1.2 |
| Q3 1996 | 4.9 | +1.2 |
| Q2 1996 | 4.3 | +0.7 |
| Q1 1996 | 4.0 | +0.6 |
| Q4 1995 | 3.9 | +0.8 |
| Q3 1995 | 3.7 | +0.6 |
| Q2 1995 | 3.6 | +0.5 |
| Q1 1995 | 3.4 | +0.2 |
| Q4 1994 | 3.1 | −0.2 |
| Q3 1994 | 3.1 | −0.3 |
| Q2 1994 | 3.1 | −0.5 |
| Q1 1994 | 3.2 | −0.5 |
| Q4 1993 | 3.3 | −0.5 |
| Q3 1993 | 3.4 | −0.5 |
| Q2 1993 | 3.6 | −0.2 |
| Q1 1993 | 3.7 | −0.6 |
| Q4 1992 | 3.8 | −0.9 |
| Q3 1992 | 3.9 | −0.9 |
| Q2 1992 | 3.8 | −1.0 |
| Q1 1992 | 4.3 | −0.4 |
| Q4 1991 | 4.7 | — |
| Q3 1991 | 4.8 | — |
| Q2 1991 | 4.8 | — |
| Q1 1991 | 4.7 | — |
Quarterly · Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System data retrieved via FRED (DRCCLOBS)
Counties with the highest delinquency scores
There's no county figure for this measure, so this list uses the delinquency part of our County Distress Index.
| Rank | County | Score (0–100) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Coahoma County, MS | 99.5 |
| 2 | Washington County, MS | 99.3 |
| 3 | Leflore County, MS | 99.3 |
| 4 | Williamsburg County, SC | 99.2 |
| 5 | Dillon County, SC | 98.9 |
| 6 | Clayton County, GA | 98.9 |
| 7 | Yazoo County, MS | 98.6 |
| 8 | Sunflower County, MS | 98.5 |
| 9 | Marlboro County, SC | 98.4 |
| 10 | Dallas County, AL | 98.3 |
Questions about the Credit Card Delinquency at Banks Outside the Top 100
What is the credit card delinquency rate at banks outside the top 100?
In the second quarter of 2026, 6.5% of credit card balances at commercial banks outside the 100 largest were 30 or more days past due or in nonaccrual status, down from 7% a year earlier. The Federal Reserve Board publishes it as FRED series DRCCLOBS.
Is this the national credit card delinquency rate?
No. The Fed publishes three size groups: all commercial banks, the 100 largest, and the rest. This is the rest, which holds only a few percent of commercial-bank card loans. The all-bank rate is the national bank figure.
Does the gap with the largest banks mean these banks lend to riskier borrowers?
The Fed does not say. It publishes the rates for each size group but gives no reason for the difference between them, and it does not describe the borrowers behind either rate.
Where does this data come from?
The Federal Reserve Board computes it from the Call Reports that every commercial bank files each quarter and publishes it about two months after the quarter ends, in its Charge-Off and Delinquency Rates on Loans and Leases at Commercial Banks release. FRED republishes it as DRCCLOBS.
Sources and method for the Credit Card Delinquency at Banks Outside the Top 100
- Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System data retrieved via FRED (DRCCLOBS) Measurement basis: 30+ days past due or in nonaccrual status, per the Federal Reserve Board Charge-Off and Delinquency Rates release We use the quarterly figures as published, from the first quarter of 1991 through the second quarter of 2026, with no adjustment of our own. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System’s report
We write with assistance from AI tools. Figures come from the data and sources named on this page.