Evidence summary

Payday Loan Use & Persistence

CFPB Making Ends Meet research suggests that use of payday, auto-title and pawn products can persist over time for some consumers, while also showing that access to lower-cost credit varies widely.

Research signal: CFPB found that consumers who used a payday, auto-title or pawn loan in one survey year were often still using that type of product a year later.

How the study was designed

The analysis used two waves of the CFPB Making Ends Meet survey, conducted in June 2019 and June 2020, linked to traditional credit-bureau information.

Why persistence matters

A short-term product can have very different economics when used once versus repeatedly. Repeat use can increase cumulative fees and may indicate that the underlying income/expense mismatch was not resolved by the first loan.

Credit access is not uniform

The research also found that some users had lower-cost credit available on credit cards, while others did not have access to traditional credit. That makes broad claims such as “everyone has a cheaper alternative” inaccurate.

Important limitation

Because the survey sample was drawn from traditional credit-bureau data, the study does not describe consumers who lack traditional credit records. The pandemic period also makes the second survey wave unusual.

Where this connects

See payday loan apps, total borrowing cost, missed payments and financial-resilience evidence.

Primary sources

Moderate evidence · Survey + credit-record-linked research

Consumer Use of Payday, Auto Title, and Pawn Loans

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau · 2021

Analyzes two waves of the Making Ends Meet survey; useful for persistence and financial-shock context, with limits for consumers outside traditional credit records.

Open primary source ↗

How to use this page: This is a structured evidence summary, not a substitute for the original source. Read the source when precise methodology, definitions, tables, legal interpretation or current regulatory status matters.