Science
How Rising Home Insurance Costs Are Linked to Credit Scores
Two friends bought nearly identical homes last year, in the same northern Minnesota neighborhood, for the same price.
But Tara Novak pays more than twice as much for home insurance as Petra Rodriguez. The only difference? Ms. Novak has a lower credit score.
Across the country, people with weaker credit histories are paying far more for home insurance than owners with spotless records.
Where the home insurance rate gap between “fair” and “excellent” credit is higher
Home insurance premiums have risen rapidly in recent years, fueled by climate change, building costs and inflation. The price shock has rippled into the real estate market, dragging down home prices in areas vulnerable to disasters and leading insurers to abandon homeowners in risky places.
But these dynamics obscure another problem: The home insurance market has cleaved in two along a boundary defined more by a customer’s personal history than by the risk of a disaster hitting their home.
Americans with weaker credit histories, usually from missed payments or high amounts of debt, now pay significantly more for insurance, regardless of where they live, two new studies have found. While those with poor credit histories often can’t purchase homes at all, people with “fair” scores, which range from around 580 to 669, are paying twice as much in some places as people with “excellent” scores of about 800 or higher. And the gap is growing.
Insurers use a metric based on credit history known as an insurance score to set rates, and the figure tracks closely with a customer’s credit score.
The penalty for having a “fair” credit history versus an “excellent” one
States with the biggest pricing gaps
That can mean owners of identical homes, like Ms. Novak and Ms. Rodriguez, pay wildly different rates to insure them. For most people, it’s now just as expensive to have a credit score of “fair” as it is to live in an area likely to experience a disaster like a hurricane or wildfire. About 29 percent of consumers have credit scores that are categorized as “fair” or “poor.”
“There’s so many reasons people have bad credit,” Ms. Novak said. “It’s not like I’ve ever not paid a bill on time. I’m a stickler on my bills, I’m a stickler on my rent, never been late. This is not fair.”
“The choice to use credit scores in pricing means that those lower-credit home owners in risky areas are effectively subsidizing more affluent high-credit homeowners who also live in risky areas,” said Nick Graetz, assistant professor of sociology at the University for Minnesota, who wrote one of the recent papers. “So in a lot of ways, you can keep your insurance price down if you’re high income, high credit — even if you live on the coast of Florida.”
A handful of states have banned insurers from using credit data because of concerns about fairness and the potential for discrimination against low-income people and people of color, but the majority allow it.
For those with both weaker credit and high disaster risk, the combination can set them up for a downward spiral: disasters tend to be followed by decreases in credit scores as people use credit cards and bank loans to recover. That can lead to higher insurance rates, pushing monthly housing costs further out of reach.
“When a disaster hits, there’s a loss of income that occurs, and then that can impact someone’s credit score because they can’t pay their debt, they can’t pay their rent, they can’t pay their mortgage,” said Lance Triggs, executive vice president at Operation HOPE, a financial literacy nonprofit. “And now they’re faced with higher insurance premiums post-disaster.”
A working paper released today by the National Bureau of Economic Research found that homeowners with the lowest credit scores paid, on average, $550 more in 2024 for home insurance than those with the highest scores.
The findings broadly track with data from Quadrant Information Services analyzed by The New York Times, which found that, on average, lower credit scores meant higher premiums across every state that allowed the practice. Dr. Graetz used the same data set for his research, which he did in collaboration with the Consumer Federation of America and the Climate and Community Institute.
When a windstorm last year hit the home of Audrey Thayer, a city council member in Bemidji, Minn., it ripped the siding off her house and stripped shingles from her roof.
Ms. Thayer’s insurance did not cover all the damage. As she fought her insurer for more money, she opened new credit cards and bank loans to repair her home. Her credit score dropped as she tried to find a new insurance plan.
Ms. Thayer, a member of the White Earth Nation, said she was not aware that her credit score could affect her home insurance rates, even though she teaches about credit ratings at a nearby tribal college. “Most of the folks here do not have good credit,” said Ms. Thayer, whose community is one of the poorest in the state. “I did not know what a credit score was until I was 35 or so.”
In Texas, the advocacy group Texas Appleseed found that some insurers charge people with poor credit up to 12 times as much as people with excellent credit for certain policies, said Ann Baddour, the director of the nonprofit’s Fair Financial Services Project.
Higher costs have serious implications for low-income homeowners who live in the path of hurricanes, said Nadia Erosa, the operations manager at Come Dream Come Build, a nonprofit community housing development organization. After the Brownsville, Texas, region saw intense flooding last spring, some residents turned to companies offering high-interest loans to fund repairs, she said, raising the risk of the disaster-credit spiral.
“Delinquencies are going up because people cannot afford their payment,” she said.
The price of risk
Before they can get a mortgage, homebuyers are usually required by lenders to purchase home insurance.
“Households with insurance have fewer financial burdens, fewer unmet needs, they recover faster, they’re more likely to rebuild,” said Carolyn Kousky, an economist and founder of Insurance for Good, a nonprofit that focuses on finding new approaches to risk management. “Yet the people who need insurance the most are the least able to afford it.”
Insurance companies consider a variety of factors when setting the premium for a property. They might examine the age of the roof, or the area’s vulnerability to hurricanes or wildfires. They factor in how much it would cost to rebuild the house if it were damaged.
Insurers have argued that credit history is also worth considering because people with low scores tend to file more claims than those with excellent scores, an assertion that is backed up by the working paper published in the National Bureau of Economic Research today. This likely happens because people with weaker credit histories tend to have less income, and when their home is damaged, they file insurance claims for smaller fixes that a wealthier homeowner might pay for out of pocket.
Paul Tetrault, senior director at the American Property Casualty Insurance Association, a trade organization, said credit scores are a valid way to price premiums.
But others argue that using credit information to price insurance doesn’t make sense.
Because a homeowner pays for insurance upfront, “it’s not like you’re really extending a loan to the customer where you would be worried about the risk of repayment,” Ms. Kousky said. She points out that insurance companies can opt not to renew a homeowner’s policy if they believe it is too risky — a tactic they have been using with increasing frequency.
The NBER analysis found that homeowners who want to pay less for insurance should pay off debt to raise their credit score rather than replace roofs and make other improvements to avoid damage when disaster strikes.
Others believe that even if credit scores are accurate predictors of future claims, they shouldn’t be used to set premiums because that can perpetuate or worsen disparities. For example, people in their mid-20s who are Black, low-income, or grow up in impoverished regions have significantly lower credit scores than their peers, a July working paper from Opportunity Insights, a not-for-profit organization at Harvard University, found.
“When the government and the financial system mandate that we buy a product, there’s a special obligation to make sure the pricing is fair,” said Doug Heller, director of insurance at the Consumer Federation. “To me that is an absolutely solid reason, just like we don’t allow pricing based on race or income or ethnicity or religion.”
A natural experiment
A handful of states, including California and Massachusetts, have banned or limited the use of credit scores in setting home insurance premiums, despite opposition from the insurance industry.
In Nevada, where a temporary pandemic-related rule prevented insurers from using credit history to increase premiums for existing customers from 2020 to 2024, companies refunded approximately $27 million to nearly 200,000 policyholders, said Drew Pearson, a spokesman for the Nevada Division of Insurance.
Perhaps the clearest example of the effects of these bans comes from Washington State, which banned the use of credit information in setting home insurance premiums starting in June 2021. The rule immediately faced legal challenges, and was in effect for just a few months until it was overturned in court.
But the episode allowed researchers to evaluate the effect of credit factors on insurance premiums. When the rule took effect, people with the lowest credit scores saw a decrease in premiums of about $175 annually while those with the highest scores saw an increase of about $100, the NBER analysis found.
“We could see the dynamics of insurance pricing for the same households over time,” said Benjamin Keys, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, who co-authored the paper.
What homeowners paid before and after a ban on credit-based pricing in Washington State
Values compared with premiums paid by homeowners with “medium” credit scores (717 to 756)
In Minnesota, where Tara Novak, Petra Rodriguez and Audrey Thayer live, a state task force looked at ways to lower insurance costs for residents. It recently considered a ban or limit on the use of credit scores to set rates, but did not move forward with a recommendation.
Ms. Rodriguez said she doesn’t think it’s fair that her friend Ms. Novak should have to pay so much more for insurance to live in an identical house.
A credit score doesn’t capture anything about a person’s habits, or what they’re like as a tenant, or even years of on-time rent payments, she said. “It’s not who you are,” she said.
Methodology
Home insurance policy rates were supplied by Quadrant Information Services, an insurance data solutions company. The rates shown are representative of publicly sourced filings and should not be interpreted as bindable quotes. Actual individual premiums may vary.
‘States with the biggest pricing gaps’Rates shown are based on a home insurance policy with $400,000 of dwelling coverage and a $100,000 liability limit on a new home, for a homeowner age 50 or younger. Rates are averaged for all the individual company filings represented in the sample, which add up to a majority of the market share in each state but do not cover all active insurers in the state. Rates are also averaged to the state level from zip code level data.
‘The credit penalty in each state’Each insurance company incorporates credit history information differently, often using proprietary methods, so the scores do not map directly to FICO credit scores.
‘What homeowners paid before and after a ban on credit-based pricing in Washington State’Data shown are based on observations of real home insurance policies and homeowner credit scores from ICE McDash analyzed by the researchers of Blonz, Hossain, Keys, Mulder and Weill (2026). The price comparisons across credit score tiers controlled for variance in disaster risk, insurance policy characteristics, geography, and other year to year fluctuations.
Science
Here’s why the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool went green so fast
Just days after the Trump administration completed millions of dollars in renovations on the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool to make it American flag-blue, residents and online users noted it had turned a phosphorescent green.
Here’s why:
The calm, still waters of the Reflecting Pool make it an ideal nursery for algae growth. Algae need nitrogen and phosphorus to grow, and the Reflecting Pool is primarily fed by the Potomac River, which gets heavy doses of those nutrients from nearby urban and agricultural lands.
The Potomac also absorbed one of the largest sewage spills in U.S. history earlier this year when a pipe burst five miles upstream of Washington, although that event probably happened too long ago to contribute to the algal bloom today.
Untreated sewage is high in nitrogen and phosphorus. When nutrient levels are high, feasting algae can quickly reproduce.
The Department of the Interior said when the algae first appeared that it was “residual,” from the supply lines to the pool.
Experts also speculate that the darker blue color may be helping the Reflecting Pool absorb more heat. The higher temperatures promote algae growth by allowing their metabolisms to shift into overdrive.
Summer temperatures in D.C. aren’t helping. This week, temperatures are as high as 95 degrees in the city, prompting a heat alert.
The combination probably explains the excessive growth, turning the water surface an opaque green and preventing onlookers from seeing the new blue hue of the concrete basin.
Algae are important and beneficial organisms when the ecosystem is in balance. They’re the base of the aquatic food chain, fed on by herbivores of all shapes and sizes, including shrimp and juvenile fish, which in turn feed organisms higher up the food chain. The single-celled organisms use the power of the sun to produce energy through photosynthesis, similar to houseplants on your balcony.
In an effort combat the algae in the Reflecting Pool, employees of the National Park Service were seen pouring in gallons of hydrogen peroxide, a chemical commonly used in pool maintenance.
The Department of the Interior also is employing a “high-tech nanobubble ozone technology” to destroy the cells of the algae.
Ozone — yes, the same irritant that is in smog — is a gas composed of three oxygen molecules, and the small size of the bubbles allow the most gas transfer into the water, where it can damage algal cells, similar to how it irritates our lungs.
This only treats the symptoms, however. Generally, ozone nanobubbling is effective as a temporary solution for algae blooms. Longer-term fixes would have to address what makes the Reflecting Pool so ideal for algae, such as its depth, darker color and inflow of nitrogen and phosphorus.
In California, ozone nanobubbles also have been used in a project to improve water quality in the Tijuana River. The 120-mile river that runs near the border in northern Mexico and Southern California was the site of a pilot study in 2025. The U.S. section of the International Boundary and Water Commission reported that the nanobubbling reduced “odors and bacteria,” but the project concluded prematurely after a flood swept some of the instrumentation into the river.
Science
This plant extract can make a lethal drug cocktail. Can it also treat opioid addiction?
A plant extract that’s gaining popularity as a pain cure-all and has been associated with multiple California deaths in its concentrated, synthetic form has been approved for research as a treatment for opioid addiction by the federal government.
Kratom is derived from the leaves of Mitragyna speciosa, a tree native to Southeast Asia, and is commonly made into a powder or pill.
Researchers say people in the U.S. are using kratom to alleviate anxiety, treat chronic pain or as a remedy for the symptoms associated with quitting opioids, due to its ability to bind with opioid receptors in the body. But recently, public health officials have raised alarms about a component of the leaf called 7-hydroxymitragynine, also known as 7-OH, an alkaloid that has the potential for abuse and addiction in high doses.
Last year, the Los Angeles County Public Health Department linked the deaths of six county residents to the use of 7-OH mixed with other substances. The toxicology screens for some of the deceased revealed both kratom and 7-OH, leading to a countywide crackdown of products with either compound because they’re unregulated.
Although there is no scientific consensus on whether kratom has therapeutic value, the Food and Drug Administration has recommended that its potent 7-OH form be classified as a controlled substance. Consumers who use 7-OH as a pain reliever expecting an experience similar to consuming kratom are at risk, said Dr. Mason Turner, president-elect of the California Society of Addiction Medicine.
“I have a couple of patients that I work with who use 7-OH for chronic pain management, not realizing the potential of the medication, and then developed an opioid use disorder,” Turner said. “I think in that case it was very clear they were seeking it for the chronic pain, not to get high, not to have some kind of experience, but really to reduce their pain.”
About two decades ago, Turner said, the healthcare industry started acknowledging the limits and risks of prescribing opioids for chronic pain. Some doctors pulled back on prescriptions, recognizing the potential for abuse.
That led some patients to find alternative solutions, he said.
“Maybe they don’t get a good benefit, or maybe the benefit from some of the other treatments is not as robust as what they got from opioids,” Turner said. “So they seek out some of these illicit products … or they look for kratom or 7-OH to be able to mitigate the pain.”
Turner said he supports further research into kratom and regulation because “it could be worth exploring as a treatment for chronic pain.”
On June 1, the National Institutes of Health announced that researchers from the University of Florida would begin the first phase of clinical trials on kratom to evaluate it as a potential treatment for opioid addiction. The research would be done with the FDA’s approval, according to officials.
“This … is a major step toward expanding treatment options for the millions of Americans struggling with opioid use disorder, which has contributed to historically high overdose mortality rates,” said Dr. Nora Volkow, director of NIH’s National Institute on Drug Abuse, in a statement.
Interest in kratom surged in the last couple of years as users have reported consuming the compound in the form of a pill, powder or tea to treat various ailments. A John Hopkins survey conducted in 2020 reported that 91% of respondents used kratom to treat chronic pain, 67% to treat anxiety, 64% for depression and 41% to treat opioid dependence.
A more recent study by the University of Michigan and Texas State University found that more than 5 million people in the U.S., including more than 100,000 children ages 12 to 17, have used kratom, the compound experts say is growing in popularity with young adults.
In the study, which analyzed data from the National Survey on Drug Use and Health collected between 2021 and 2024, researchers say that despite numerous state-level bans on kratom across the nation, its use is at an all-time high and is increasing.
People between the ages of 21 and 34 said they used kratom at least once and 1% said they used it in the last year. The share of children ages 12 and older who said they had used kratom increased from 1.6% in 2021 to 1.9% in 2024.
The FDA has stated that neither kratom nor 7-OH are approved as drug products, dietary supplements or food additives, but that hasn’t stopped storefronts and companies from selling them as such.
Up until November you could find kratom and 7-OH products in smoke shops and specialty stores in California, but that has stopped.
“Until kratom and its pharmacologically active key ingredients mitragynine and 7-OH are approved for use, they will remain classified as adulterants in drugs, dietary supplements and foods,” the California Department of Public Health told The Times via email.
Kratom “Feel Free Classic” liquid products are displayed at a smoke shop in Los Angeles in 2024 before they were banned.
(Michael Blackshire / Los Angeles Times)
In May, the California Department of Public Health and Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta filed a complaint against Ashlynn Marketing Group Inc., accusing the company of repeatedly flouting the state’s regulations on kratom products.
The filing, submitted in the San Diego County Superior Court, seeks a judge’s order to condemn and destroy the embargoed kratom products, halt ongoing unlawful manufacturing and impose civil penalties.
The California Department of Public Health “is pursuing legal action because Ashlynn’s continued manufacture and sale of these products pose a clear and preventable public‑health risk and violates state and federal law,” said Dr. Erica Pan, the department’s director and state public health officer. “7-OH and kratom-derived products have been associated with addiction, serious health harms, overdose and death.”
The state is alleging its inspectors visited Ashlynn Marketing Group’s facility in Santee in May 2025 and found kratom powders, capsules, liquids and chewable tablets being manufactured and held for sale.
During the visit, inspectors issued an embargo to prohibit the sale and distribution of all kratom-related materials on-site, according to the complaint.
Public health inspectors conducted follow-up visits at the facility in October and April, “collecting evidence at both inspections that indicated embargoed kratom products had been moved, tampered with and repackaged,” according to public health officials.
“In addition, investigators observed evidence of continued manufacturing and distribution of kratom materials,” officials said. “The firm’s owner continues to manufacture kratom products and ships orders weekly.”
To date, the California Department of Public Health has seized more than $5 million worth of kratom and 7-OH products, a spokesperson for the department told The Times.
California and Los Angeles County are considering whether to tighten regulations or ban the compounds altogether.
Science
Scientists find a whale graveyard in the Indian Ocean that’s millions of years old
NEW YORK — Scientists have unearthed communities of marine life — including jellyfish, tubeworms and brittle stars — thriving on a whale graveyard that is millions of years old.
These graveyards form when whale carcasses fall to the sea floor, becoming a sustaining snack for nearby critters. This one, located up to 23,000 feet below the surface of the southeastern Indian Ocean, spans the largest area and is so far the deepest and oldest found.
A whale’s sheer size and the unique chemistry of its bones are the keys to forming these unique underwater neighborhoods, said Xikun Song, a biologist with the Chinese Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Deep-sea Science and Engineering.
“At the same time, the very nature of the deep ocean makes these sites exceptionally difficult for scientists to locate,” Song, who was involved with the latest find, wrote in an email.
Researchers explored the remains during multiple deep-sea submersible trips in 2023, collecting samples and mapping the extent of the necropolis. They found five carcass sites and fossils, including skulls belonging to beaked and baleen whales. The oldest bones date back 5.3 million years.
Feeding and living on the carcasses were myriad creatures, large and small, including sea cucumbers, squat lobsters and saltwater clams. Many of them are likely species that have never been documented, according to findings published Wednesday in the journal Nature.
“The potential number of specimens is just astounding,” said paleontologist Stephen Godfrey with the Calvert Marine Museum in Maryland, who wasn’t involved in the research.
Many factors likely conspired to preserve the bones for millions of years, according to the study authors. They’re dense enough to outlast attacks from bone-eating worms, and located deep enough in the ocean to avoid getting buried by dust and loose particles. The bones also were coated with a light layer of minerals from the surrounding seawater, which may have prevented them from degrading.
Why did so many whales die here? Maybe they were already living in the area and died of natural causes. A few could have perished from exhaustion or illness caused by deep-sea diving. The area’s shape, akin to the letter V, could also have funneled the remains to their resting spot, the authors wrote.
Such discoveries are important because they clue scientists into the vibrant communities that find a way to live even in remote, hard-to-reach environments.
Studying the whale graveyards “is important for understanding how life can adapt to such extreme conditions, not only due to the lack of light and oxygen but also to the incredibly high pressure,” said study co-author and paleontologist Giovanni Bianucci with the University of Pisa in Italy in an email.
Ramakrishnan writes for The Associated Press.
The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
-
North Dakota3 minutes agoFor North Dakota producers, ‘death by a thousand paper cuts’
-
Ohio10 minutes agoRestrictions on social media use among children restored in Ohio
-
Oklahoma13 minutes agoScouting the Oklahoma Sooners ahead of UNC matchup
-
Oregon18 minutes agoOregon county prioritizes housing for ‘LGBTQIA2S+’ and BIPOC residents | Fox News Video
-
Pennsylvania25 minutes ago7 Off-The-Grid Pennsylvania Towns To Visit In 2026
-
Rhode Island28 minutes agoR.I. Democratic Committee issues no endorsement for governor or lieutenant governor – The Boston Globe
-
South-Carolina33 minutes agoWith 77 days until South Carolina football kicks off 2026 season, a look back at No. 77 George Schecterly
-
South Dakota40 minutes agoSaturday Boredom Busters: June 20